Such unwarrantable behaviour as I have described among Christians in the house of God in a solemn assembly, while their faith and duty are explained and delivered, have put those who are guilty upon inventing some excuses to extenuate their fault; this they do by turning the blame either upon the particular preacher or upon preaching in general.  First, they object against the particular preacher:  his manner, his delivery, his voice, are disagreeable; his style and expression are flat and slow, sometimes improper and absurd; the matter is heavy, trivial, and insipid, sometimes despicable and perfectly ridiculous; or else, on the other side, he runs up into unintelligible speculation, empty notions, and abstracted flights, all clad in words above usual understandings.

Secondly, They object against preaching in general.  It is a perfect road of talk; they know already whatever can be said; they have heard the same a hundred times over.  They quarrel that preachers do not relieve an old beaten subject with wit and invention, and that now the art is lost of moving men’s passions, so common among the ancient orators of Greece and Rome.  These and the like objections are frequently in the mouths of men who despise the foolishness of preaching.  But let us examine the reasonableness of them.

The doctrine delivered by all preachers is the same:  “So we preach, and so ye believe.”  But the manner of delivering is suited to the skill and abilities of each, which differ in preachers just as in the rest of mankind.  However, in personal dislikes of a particular preacher, are these men sure they are always in the right?  Do they consider how mixed a thing is every audience, whose taste and judgment differ, perhaps, every day, not only from each other, but themselves?  And how to calculate a discourse that shall exactly suit them all, is beyond the force and reach of human reason, knowledge, or invention.  Wit and eloquence are shining qualities that God hath imparted in great degrees to very few, nor any more to be expected in the generality of any rank among men than riches and honour.  But further, if preaching in general be all old and beaten, and that they are already so well acquainted with it, more shame and guilt to them who so little edify by it!  But these men, whose ears are so delicate as not to endure a plain discourse of religion, who expect a constant supply of wit and eloquence on a subject handled so many thousand times, what will they say when we turn the objection upon themselves, who, with all the rude and profane liberty of discourse they take upon so many thousand subjects, are so dull as to furnish nothing but tedious repetitions, and little paltry, nauseous commonplaces, so vulgar, so worn, or so obvious, as, upon any other occasion but that of advancing vice, would be hooted off the stage?  Nor, lastly, are preachers justly blamed for neglecting human oratory to move the passions, which is not the