Stuk 136 - Letter from Julius Charles Hare

8 pp.

Herstmonceux - JCH is upset to find that he is the only one who thinks John F. D. Maurice should be the next Principal of King's College, London - 'almost everybody else says he is unfit for the post, and no one so vehemently as himself'. JCH is unsure what competitors Blakesley [Joseph W. Blakesley] will have for the position: 'He will certainly possess many valuable qualifications for the post'. JCH notes that Leopold von Ranke's book has found a translator in Mrs Austin [presumably Sarah Austin, see also JCH to WW, 21 Oct. 1843]: 'When I wrote last, Bunsen had told me that there was a dispute between Mrs Austin & Longman about terms, which I suppose has been adjusted, & that Ranke himself rather wanted a translator of more masculine intellect & learning'. It must have been both a burthen and great honour for WW to have had the Queen of England as his guest [see JCH to WW, 21 Oct. 1843]. JCH was 'quite unconscious of anything Schleiermacher [Friedrich E.D. Schleiermacher] in my sermon; and knowing how totally different his calm abstract philosophical, almost image-less style is from mine, I was startled at first by what you said. But I dare say there is some foundation for it in some of my later sermons'. JCH has often been struck at the lack of structure in some modern British sermons by people like Arnold [Thomas Arnold], Newman [John H. Newman] and Manning [Henry E. Manning] - 'they seemed to be a series of paragraphs strung together, often excellent in themselves, but with no organic connexion. On the other hand the dialectic development of the fundamental thought in Schleiermacher is almost always exquisite, & in Hofsbach often singularly happy. Our preachers have other high merits, but, except Maurice [John F. D. Maurice], few have this; and of course the defect may be accounted for by our different education & habits of thought. But a natural effect of these observations has been that I myself have of late given more thought to the structure, & less to the details of my sermons, though I was hardly conscious till today that Schleiermacher had had any influence in occasioning this change. I merely fancied I had gained a better insight into what a sermon ought to be'.