THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
of the Home hand; A Study of Home Missions, ib. 1906; A. M. Guernsey, Citizens of Tomorrow, ib. 1907. Further literature is to be discovered in the histories of the separate denominations, most of which deal with the home mission work of the respective denominations.
HOMILETICS.
The Terms Employed (§ 1).
Theory of Homiletics (§ 2).
Edification the Object of the Sermon (§ 3).
Relation of the Sermon to Scripture and the Creeds
(§ 4). Subject and Basis of the Sermon (§ 5). Varieties of Sermons (§ 6). The Structure of the Sermon (§ 7). Preparation and Delivery (§ 8). The Occasional Address (§ 9). History of the Occasional Address (§ 10). Homiletics in Great Britain and America (§ 11). Definition and Treatment (§ 12).
Homiletics as the name of a discipline is of late origin, since only in recent times have theologians
begun to treat in special works the
i. The theory of the sermon. Gregory of
Terms Em- Nazianzen, Chrysostom, Ambrose, and
ployed. Gregory the Great offer only occasional
remarks on the subject. Augustine, in the fourth book of his De doctrina Christiana, first treated the subject explicitly, and he was followed by Rabanus Maurus, who, in the third book of De institutione clericorum treated the liberal arts as related to ecclesiastics. Humbertus de Romanis (fl. c. 1275) dealt with the subject more extensively in his Eruditio religiosorum pradicatorum. Finally, toward the end of the Middle Ages Ulrich Surgant wrote a Manuale curatorum which treats the sermon especially with reference to technique, structure, and delivery. The transition to the homiletics of the churches of the Reformation was formed by the Ecclesiastes of Erasmus (1535). Of the works of Protestant theologians on homiletics from the sixteenth century may be mentioned: Andreas Gerhard Hyperius, De formandis concionibus sacris (1553); Lucas Osiander, De ratione concionandi (1597); Jacob Andrea, Methodus concionandi, ed. P. Lyser (1594); and iEgidius Hunnius, Methodus concionandi (1596). The term " homiletics " as the designation of a special discipline seems to have originated with the Methodologia homiletica (1672) of Sebastian Gobel and the Compendium theologies homiletica (1677) by J. W Bajer; but other names retained their authority, and new names were chosen; thus Mosheim in his Anweisung erbaulich zu predigen (1771) used the term " spiritual eloquence " which is still employed in H. Bassermann, Handbuch der geistlichen Beredsamkeit (Stuttgart, 1885). There is no doubt that the terms homilein and homilia were used of the sermon in the earliest times (cf . Eusebius, Hist, eccl., VI. xix.). The word homilia passed over into the Occident; but in the Middle Ages the terms sermo and prcedicare with its derivatives were frequently used. For the churches of the Reformation Predigt and " sermon " became the established designations in the church orders. In modern times " sermon " has become the collective name, while " homily " is restricted to a special kind of sermons.
Homiletics treats of the discourse or address customarily delivered in the church service of the Christian congregation. There was early mani-
fested a tendency to incorporate homiletics in the theory of rhetoric; even Augustine was governed
by the classical theories of rhetoric, 2. Theory of and the medieval custom of subordi- Homiletics. nating the liberal arts to the service of
theology brought about a still closer union with rhetoric. Melanchthon established in the interest of the sermon a new rhetorical genus, the genus didascalicum, but the opportunity to raise homiletics to the rank of an independent discipline was not seized. Hyperius, in his attempt to base the theory of the sermon upon Scripture, found no imitators and successors. It is impossible to arrive at a worthy treatment of this theological discipline until the starting-point is sought within systematic theology and in the churchly community. Thus considered, homiletics branches off as a special discipline. The Christian community has come into being, is in a state of growth and therefore of imperfection, consequently exposed to the influences of sin and evil. Since now the possession of spiritual blessings in the congregation must be continually kept alive and the influences of sin and evil combated, the Word adapted to the needs of the congregation is the means to accomplish the one as well as the other. The mere possession of Holy Scripture is not sufficient; it must be used and applied to the needs of the congregation; hence the necessity for preaching. Even if the congregation could ever leave behind its imperfection, the very possession of Christian truth would still necessitate a continual presentation of the Word (cf. Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube, § 134, 3, Berlin, 1821). This presentation originates therefore in the pedagogical and practical needs of the congregation, and is an essential factor in its upbuilding. Alexander Schweizer distinguished between general or theoretical, material and formal, homiletics, a division which correctly designates the course which homiletics must take, and the writers on homiletics adhere to it, treating first the conception of the sermon, then its content, and finally its diction and delivery.
The teachers of the primitive church cared little for theoretical questions concerning the conception
and purpose of the sermon. Preaching
3. Edifica- was usually considered as teaching,
tion the even by Augustine and throughout the
Object of Middle Ages. Melanchthon's concep-
the tion of the sermon was essentially the
Sermon, same, and even later writers adhered
to this idea. This conception may be explained easily from the fact that until the time of the Reformation, and even far beyond it, only imperfect means of religious instruction existed. The Protestants, indeed, had a higher conception of the congregation of Christ; Luther, for instance, speaks of a congregation of pure saints, under one head Christ, called together by the Holy Spirit, in one faith, sense, and understanding, but this new conception had as yet no influence upon the problem of the sermon. Only in modern times have theologians rightly concluded from this higher estimation of the congregation that it can be in no way the exclusive or principal task of the sermon to teach the ignorant and punish sinners. The actual con-