iah as the
representative of the prophetic spirit in the same way as St. Paul is
to represent for us the apostles. But here again my aim is neither
that of the commentator nor that of the biographer. It is the soul of
the man I wish to depict and the spirit of his work.

It may be thought that, by taking up the subject in this way, I am
missing the opportunity of dealing with the practical work of to-day.
But I do not think so. There are, indeed, some details nearly always
discussed in lectures on preaching which I do not care to touch. There
is, for instance, the question of the delivery of sermons--whether the
preacher should read, or speak _memoriter_, or preach _extempore_.
This can be discussed endlessly, and the discussion is always
interesting; but, if it were discussed every year for a century, it
would be as far from being settled as ever. Besides, it is my duty to
remember what others have handled exhaustively here before me. Indeed,
the Senate mentioned to me that it was desirable that the subject
should be taken up from a new point of view. They have been good
enough to express their approbation of the way in which I mean to
treat it; but it is not in deference to their instructions that I take
it up in this way, but in accordance with the bent of my own mind; and
I think I see my way to bring to bear on it all the practical
experience which I may be in possession of; for I quite recognise that
the value of such a course of lectures largely depends on its being,
from beginning to end, what in literature is called a Confession, that
is, a record of experiences. Although I am to go back to the ages of
the apostles and the prophets, I do not intend to stay there. My wish
is to bring down from thence fire which will kindle your hearts, as
you face the world and the tasks of to-day.

There is another objection, which may have already occurred to some of
you, and would doubtless occur to many, as I went along, if I did not
anticipate it. It may be felt, that both apostles and prophets were so
differently situated from us, especially through the possession of the
gift of inspiration, that they can be no example for us to follow. To
this I will not reply by seeking in any way to minimise their
inspiration. It is, indeed, difficult to say exactly how their
inspiration differed from that which is accessible and indispensable
to us; for we also are entirely dependent for the power and success of
our work on the same