The anti-monopolist. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1874-1878, 1875-07-19

fectly logical human beings, Affected
equally BY the same argument, whatever
its origin, the case would DO different.
But the very theory Of oratory is found
ed on the fact that We are not logical.
Oratory is the art of enforcing argument
by personal sympathy and anything
which breaks the rule is fatal to its sue
cess. The preacher should be allowed
to become sometimes q reader; but in
being a reader he necessarily adopts .
radically different position in regard to
bis audience. and loses half his power.
There remains a method which Ger
tainly seems more to the purpose. Tho
best remedy for bad oratory is to silence
the orator If the preachers who cannot
preach were allowed to hold their
tongues, and ifthose who can preach had
greater opportunities, there can be no
doubt that the general level of sermons
might be raised. If, in short, the duty
of preaching were made . separate branch
of the clerical profession, we should
speedily find an improvement in sermons.
To teach . man oratory by a series Of
lectures is, as we have said, q hopeless
task; but there is q way in which . man
Of natural capabilities may be encouraged
to bring them to greater perfection. That
is, by allowing him to devote himself to
oratory as q profession, and to feel that
his success in life depends upon it. An
art which cannot be taught in the schools
may be perfected in the great school Of
life. A lawyer or a politician learns
what is the most effective way of employ
ing his talents as a speaker, because his
rise to the Bench or the Cabinet is mate.
rally affected by his success. A clergy
man may have higher motives, though
the lower need not be entirely excluded.
If preaching were a distinct clerical func-
ton, to which those clergymen only were
toled off who showed some natural apti.
tude, mt would not only be deliv.
cred by ADLER speakers, but the preach
ers themselves would be able to bring
their art to greater perfection. They
would make the delivery of sermons their
main object, instead of ~intercalating the
composition of q sermon into the spare
half hours which intervene between other
duties. Persons to whom nature had de-
MED the faculty would not be forced to
infict themselves upon drowsy audiences.
By such 3 system there can be no doubt
that the average merits Of Sermon might
be considerably improved. Whether il
would ON other grounds be desirable is =
question far too wide for discussion here.
We need only observe that there is some-
thing to be set against the obvious adj
vantages. There is an advantages within
certain limits, in forcing sll clergymen to
preach, and we have already indicated it's
nature. The weekly sermon, however
feeble it may be, does produce . certain
personal relation between the clergyman
and his congregation which can be gained
in no other way. The discipline may be
good for the preacher, if not for the aud.
fence. 1t forces him to ask himself regu-
larly what he has to say that ordinary
people will care to hear, and to consider
what are the tonics which will move the
mass of mankind to share the opinions
and adopt the practices which he recon-
mends. These are very important con-.
siderations, and, though the necessity Of
preaching may sometimes make him cal
lous instead of sensitive to his response
bilities, perhaps the average result may
be to force upon the clergy a keener
than they would otherwise have of the
necessity of being provided with > plain
answer to some very plain questions.