RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Preaching'
Hofacker (q.v.); and J. E. F. Sander (q.v.), careful in the exegesis of his text, rather learned than forceful. Also Biblical in his basis 3. His kut conceI1trating his thought upon Scnoo . gjn an(j grace wag Lucl^-jg Hofacker (q.v.)- Preachers of another type were equally Biblical in their sphere of thought, but more confessional in their development. Such a man was Claus Harms (q.v.), a man of kindly, serene, and poetic sensibilities and fresh humor which made him acceptable to all classes. His originality lay in the plasticity of his diction and in richness and weight of thought. Pathos was sometimes unpleasantly abundant. His subjects were suggestive and catchy; while his arrangement is philosophical, it is not determined always by the text. He had numerous followers, of whom may be named here Martin Stephan and A. G. Rudelbach (qq.v.). Biblical and confessional in type were the two Krummachers, Gottfried Daniel and Friedrich Wilhelm (qq.v.). Of the latter it may be said that he was an artist in the use of words, supported by a tangible realism and an uncommonly lively power of construction, by which he was able to make real the characters of the Bible story. Yet in his word pictures he did not always adhere to the historically true. The New Testament was frequently read back into the Old, while his use of the typical and allegorical was rather excessive. In this group belong also Hermann Friedrich Kohlbrilgge and the Reformed preacher Friedrich Ludwig Mallet (qq. v.) . While between Claus Harms and Bernhard Draeseke (q.v.) certain connections existed, in general they are of different types. The latter's sermons can not be characterized accurately as prevailingly either Biblical or confessional; they were more general in type. Related to him in style was the important Bishop Ruhlemann Friedrich Eylert (q.v.), in whom buoyancy became extravagance and freshness unction. Other preachers, while supernatural in trend, were not of the narrow supernatural school; such were the Konigsberg preacher Ludwig August Kahler (q.v.), and Heinrich Leonhard Heubner of Wittenberg (q.v.). Franz Theremin (q.v.) was akin to this group in the expression which he gave to his piety.
Another group may be designated as the stragglers of rationalistic preaching. Belonging here is the celebrated Christoph Friedrich von Ammon (q.v.). In his earlier sermons he appears as a Kantian moralist; in a later period he devoted himself to the exposition of ecclesiastical de^Tof11" doctrine- Finally. in his third period Ration- ^e returned to practically his first alism. position. Gifted in the matter of form, diplomatically clever in expression, of courtly fluency, and often of lofty and witty flow of thought, his sermons were especially adapted to the educated. The most important representative of the popular rationalism in these times was Johann Friedrich Rohr (q.v.). In clarity and logical coordination he followed Reinhard. In general his sermons escape many of the inherent weaknesses of the rationalistic discourse, though the basis is thoroughly rationalistic. Here belongs also Moritz Ferdinand Schmalz (d. 1860), who served pastorates
in Vienna, Dresden, and Hamburg; prolific and lively in thought, he recalled Reinhard in the careful and often comprehensive disposition of his material. Of like prominence were the Hamburg pastors J. K. W- Alt and C. U. A. Krause.
The decades after the wars for freedom, in which on one side rationalism was one of the forces and on the other the influence of Schleiermacher and of the awakening was potent, constitute a period
of ferment for the pulpit. Strong indi- TrendGW dualists hke those already described
broke away from the rationalistic, emotional- judicious, stirring-pathetic method, and a type gained the ascendency corresponding to the new influences. The result was not unlike that produced by Schleiermacher, though the resemblance was not due to dialectic trenchancy nor to depth of thought. The new preaching became often a preaching of repentance under the stimulus of the emphasis upon the significance of Christ for salvation. But the fine lines of Schleiermacher's dialectic, due to his dogmatic system, were hidden behind the grosser outlines of ecclesiastical confessions. In sum the new preaching was a return to Christ and the Bible. Hence the relation of the sermon to the text was recast. Rationalism formally allowed the authority of the Bible, but interpreted as it chose. The new understanding of Christianity caused the employment of the text in its original meaning as the guiding principle of the sermon. Of course traces of the earlier usage remained here and there, and the Word was sometimes misconstrued, especially the Old Testament, into which the New Testament was read. But the pulpit was essentially Biblical, the pericopes retained their importance, although the use of fiee texts was not unknown, while sometimes whole books of the Bible were the occasion of courses of sermons. The diction of the sermon was also influenced by that of the Bible, sometimes so strongly as to have an archaic sound. Similarly, the content of the sermon underwent change. Rationalism had chosen ethical themes, and these fell into discredit. Religious or religious-dogmatic themes were the rule, with a polemic against rationalism, the Friends of Light, liberalism, the new theology, and especially against the unchristian spirit of the times. Standard themes, of course with infinite variation, were repentance, grace, judgment, the person of Christ, the atonement. Consequently there was danger of the sermon becoming stereotyped. The way in which text and sermon contents were bound together was controlled by the ruling analytic-synthetic method. The text furnished the chief suggestions or themes; the thoughts furnished by the analysis of the text were united in a theme and then put in order according to the divisions, and these latter were prevailingly threefold— more than four divisions are rare. The length of the sermon gradually became shorter, from thirty to forty minutes. Here and there other ttian a Biblical text was chosen, while catechetical sermons were not unknown, as were those on the Apostles' Creed.
A considerable proportion of pulpit orators laid emphasis upon Christ and Scripture, after the forms
Preaching-