Presbyterian Church -- Sermons; Sermons, English; Theology -- Early works to 1800; Theology -- History -- 17th century
One of the distinguishing peculiarities of Binning is his rejection of the
endless divisions and subdivisions which, along with their subtle
distinctions, were borrowed from the schoolmen, and which disfigured and
incumbered the sermons of that age. In Scotland, as well as in England,
before his time, sermons were formed as Dr. Watts expresses it, “upon the
model of doctrine, reason, and use.”(50) Those sermons often contained
much excellent theology, which was faithfully and aptly applied to the
heart and life. But the numerous parts into which they were divided, must
have marred their effect, and operated as a restraint upon the eloquence
of the preacher. This was plainly the opinion of Binning. “Paul speaks,”
says he, “of a right dividing of the word of truth, (2 Tim ii. 15) not
that ordinary way of cutting it all in parcels, and dismembering it, by
manifold divisions, which I judge makes it lose much of its virtue, which
consists in union. Though some have pleasure in it, and think it
profitable, yet I do not see that this was the apostolic way.”(51)
Binning, accordingly, had the courage and the good taste to adopt in
conjunction with Leighton, a more simple and natural manner of preaching.
After a building was completed, he did not think it added either to its
beauty or convenience, to retain the scaffolding. For this, he was
censured at the time, by Robert Baillie. But whoever will read the sermon
of that learned divine, entitled “Errors and Induration,” which was
preached by him in Westminster Abbey, in the month of July, 1645, will not
be astonished to find, that Baillie disapproved of a mode of preaching,
which was so completely at variance with his own. “He has the new guise of
preaching,” said Baillie, speaking of Mr. Andrew Gray, who was the son of
Sir James Gray, and one of the ministers of the High Church of Glasgow,
“which Mr. Hugh Binning and Mr. Robert Leighton began, [not] containing
the ordinary way of expounding and dividing a text, of raising doctrines
and uses, but runs out on a discourse on some common head, in a high,
romancing, and unscriptural style, tickling the ear for the present, and
moving the affections in some, but leaving, as he confesses, little or
nought to the memory and understanding. This we must misken, for we cannot
help it.”(52)
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account