Newspaper Page Text
(Iltfistiai Mel
J. S. L&Aov
eiir CftrCstCan fcutrey
will be edited by the publisher, assisted by several brethren, and
published oa every Thursday in the year, except
mini net. ‘
Alt Iv'Mi't iq in IhoffiflogriauiMkra
torr i*” VVjffif, its Tietr respective oflamif*
No one siioyU bo ;v.’freclUed, as a tr Ailing agfitf, unices h pro
duces a c.munfo i >h fawn, the publi.-hor
‘ * tjjnts prone:- w.e and pay for tho same in ad
are entitled to the Bixtli copy gratis.
‘Premium s will be allowed on original articles, furnished for our!
columns, which possess sufficient merit to justify their repubficotion
i book form.
Advertisements are not desired—for snob ns we admit we slin.ll i
charge at the rates charged by the publishers of secular pn : j
pers. A simple address will is? published twelve months for $5 00.
if paid in advance, or fjlO if not paid till the close of the year.—
Obituary and Matrimonial notices, not exceeding twelve luie.-
will be published gratuitously. ,
Qftj™ We invite the attention of our young brethren to the
following article. We have had two reasons for pub
lishing it—one, the intrinsic value of the article, the impor
tance of the subject of wlncll it treats —and the other, to rep
resent again the long tried friend of the whole Baptist de
nomination. The initials of the article we have published
clearly point to the author of the distinguished commen
tary on the Gospels and Acts, now iu use in most of tile
•unday Schools of the land.
[From the Christian Review.]
It H ETOR IC A L S T IJDIES.
Without tire formality of a definition, we sli 11 here
consider rhetoric as aiming to produce good public dis-i
courses—good ns to their matter, their structure, aml|
their delivery. This view of tiie design of rhetoric is]
sufficiently near, lor all practical purposes, to the defi
nition which Quinctilian prefers ; namely, rhetoric is
the science of speaking well; or, if we may expandj
the deflation in order to show the full meqningm the
pkiUolpai foe;v itrdp ia y- -
tion and the proper delivery of a good oration. It
’’agrees sufficiently, also, with Campbell's definition of
eloquence : “ Eloquence is that art, or talent, by which
a discourse is fitted to produce its end.”
The design of rhetoric, as here expressed, renders
it unnecessary to discuss the utility of this department
of study to a candidate for the ministry. All w.ll
agree as to the utility of the end proposed by sacred
rhetoric. A judicious system of instruction in the
forming period of life, with direct reference to this
end, will evidently contribute to its attainment, and
must therefore be pronounced useful.
Objections against the Study of Rhetoric..
Objections have very gravely been urged against
rhetoric, ns a department of study, both by the unlearn
ed and the learned. These objections arise, however
in part, from misconceptions of the study itself. It
has been supposed that its main design is to teach a
writer how to marshal his words and sentences n the
anost elegant manner, and particularly to form a flowe
ry style of writing th ;t may please, without solid bene
fit. This is a misconception ; for, while rhetoric seeks
to cultivate style, and to produce an agreeable and at
tractive mode of writing, it also enjoins, as of far high
er value—indeed, as the only foundation of a truly
good style—sound sense and solid argument. The
style which rhetoric enjoins on a public speaker, is pre
cisely that which nature, in earnest operation, prompts
as most surely, most readily, and most impressively
conveying his thoughts to an audience—a style far re
mote from that which often calls forth the praise of
being a beautiful one. Let a man honestly set him
self in real sell'-forgetfulness, and in deep solicitude for
the one object of “communicating important truihs to
others, in tire best, simplest, strongest, briefest mode,”
and he is, in that way, conforming to the precepts of
genuine rhetoric.
An objection has arisen, also, from the fact that
men, who had the credit of much rhetorical power,
have not unlrequently succeeded, by this power, in
vanquishing a good cause and making error and false
hood triumphant. This objection involves the idea of
an intimate connection between rhetoric and logic, and
this connection it is well to observe. The fact, stated
as a ground of objection, must certainly be conceded.
But it only illustrates the abuse of a goo.J tiling, or the
mischievous misapplication of a most salutary power.
On the other hand, it may be said that, while rhetori
cal power may “ make the worse appear the better
Teason,” it is able also to delect the perversion, and
may secure an ultimate triumph for virtue and truth.
THE TRUTH [N LOVE.
FEXFJLLIQ, u|wct. U, \WI.
The forces of rhetoric .tci W-v ; ’ freely and ell'-mi .vly
in behalfoHruth ninLof^rtKcnnso.: and it is no solid
objection against it, that / ufoy may often so con
ceal circumstances, or so c|Vi- them, as to give mi uu
kilif i"’ ndvaj.tmapo error. In almost every
actwnlffinfs v T/sfc ruth has to conflict witltj
{error.* Now this simple “faVment implies that emu
lias powers at its command’!’’ It, is no wonder, then,
that rhetoric shares (he coiino>i lot. It is one of the
facts which we must meet, mid for which we must
become prepared by putting on the whole armor, with
which our nature and divine providence have furnished
us. A truly philosophical training in rhetoric mate
rially increases a person’s ability to expose error in
its deformities, and to strip the unfair writer,or speak
er, of his unlawful advantage?,
It is very obvious, however, that a rhetorical train
ing is not justly chargeable with the impositions which
have been practised on the unwary ; for such a train
ing is far from being necessary, in order that one may!
learn the modes of deception, or oC concealing truth.-
or of wrhngly coloring circumstances. The truth is
the elements with which rhctprjc deals, and by which
she would form able writers rfi.d speakers, and which
may be made, according to men’s dispositions or prin-i
ciples, subservient to a righteous or an unrighteous!
cause, are originally in our constitution ; they are ex
hibited by the uneducated as well as the educated, in
private hie as well ns in public. So true is this, that
we shall probably only express what has been a mat
ter of observation to out finders as well as to our
selves, when we say that onq of the most crafty public
speakers vve ever heard wasW man who could make
no pretensions to rhetorical culture.
An objection lias also arises from the fact, that rhe
toricians have given ru|es for the express purp se of
showiii'’ Imvvy twiJoftwi agi.’OtfcKffse, and to secure tri
—H i-M • fjouJ one. Justice does not permit an at
tempt to vindicate those who professedly arm an oppo
nent ol truth and right for the purpose of securing his
own, or others’, selfish ends. It deserves, however,
to be remarked, that, those who aid called to plead, a
good cause ought also to be clad irf armor, and be able
to defeat dishonest artifices, and ought not to allow any
legitimate means to be neglected vvhich the author of
their nature has given them for carrying a goorl point.
It error may be promoted by a skilful reasnner or ad
vocate, shall trutli be allowed to be overborne through
the failure ol its tricn Is to cultivate or to employ their
natural or acquired endowments in the best manner?
It ought also, as an offset to tics objection, to be con
sidered that an adequate acquaintance with the most
promising modes of approaching men’s neinds for a
good purpose involves, from, the nature-of the case, a
knowledge ot the most promising modes of approach
for an opposite purpose, provided a man hag the dispo
sition to attempt such a purpose. A good course of
training and instruction for a physician, makes him ac
quainted with the nature of poisons as well as of reme
dies, ami with the mode of using the sanie article for a
good purpose or a bad one ; so ffiat the very skill
which makes him a preserver of lira may, if. he be so
disposed, make him a destroyer of it. But where is
jthe blame in such a case ? In the art or iu the man ?
;In the knowledge, or iu the application of it ? In medi
cal principles, or in the individual practitioner? And
j who would wish his physician to bedgtiorant of the
human constitution, and ot the principles which are in
dispensable to his practice, but which can be most ea
sily abused ?
We have thus far looked at the subject generally;
and that the rather, because the opportunity could thus
be employed to correct some of the partial and false
conceptions which are current concerning this depart-;
ment ot study. When we take a view of sacred rhe
toric specifically, it would seem as it scarcely any spe
cious objection can be raised against it. For we place
before our minds a pious man, engaged in preaching’
the gospel, and in vindicating its principles from error
and perversion. Such a man’s object is, not to de
ceive on any occasion, but to exhibit and enforce di
vine truth, to forestall or to correct errors and misap
prehensions concerning it, and to form a holy charac
ter in Ins hearers. ISacred rhetoric designs to help
bun present religious truth intelligently, attractively,!
convincingly, persuasively; and tins not for accom-j
pLshing a present or merely temporary purpose, nor:
tor producing a single act, or series of acts, under
kind ol irresistible impulse ; but to make men righteous!
INEYY SfcUIES -Y OL. \Y XO. Vi.
n heart and life towards one another and towards
God, and to prepare tliem tor heaven. If, now, bv
instructions having spe’citic reference to preaching,
men can be qualified to preach the gospel in a more
effective manner, there can be no hesitation in con
cluding that such instructions are too important to U*
dispensed with. It need scarcely be added that sa
cred rhetoric proposes as its special object to cultivate
in candidates for the ministry the power of being in
telligible, convincing, persuasive preachers.
Relation of Rhetoric to other Studies.
While, however, the object of rhetoric in general,
and of sacred rhetoric in particular, is thus confessedly
important, it will not be gained unless (his study beai
; lowed to occupy its appropriate place. Now rhetoric
does not undertake to furnish the materials of a dis
course; it teaches how to employ materials which
have been gained from other sources. It does not de
sign to make a man learned, but to direct him how to
[use his learning and his natural skill. It does not dc
j'sign to increase a person’s knowledge, as theology, for
j instance, does, or history, or the sciences in general,
it takes for granted that stores of learning have alrea
|dy been acquired and will bo increased, and that the
mind lias become disciplined ; so that the person,
whom it would aid in preparing to address public as
semblies, is regarded us having all the substantial quali
fications for ibis service, and as needing instruction
and preparatory practice in reference to the proper
manner of using his materials. Should a person,
therefore, enter on this branch of study with the ex
pectation of its adding to his knowledge, or of its be
ing able alone, or. mainly, to make him a good writer
;aud an orator, he will necessarily be disappointed ; for
j lie is expecting from it what it does not promise to give.
| mid vvliat, from its very nature, it lias not the capacity
of giving. But let it occupy its proper place, audit
(will greutly aid him in making ins acquisitions aVaifo
ible to the purpose for which he has sought those ac
quisitions.
j Such, indeed, is the nature of rhetoric, that the inter
ests of a person who is destined to some department
of public oratory would by no ..cans suffer, should his
rhetorical training be deterred until his general educa
tion is far advanced, and lie has secured its substantial
parts. Avery early, and especially at the commen
cing point of a literary course, a disproportionate at
tention to rhetoric—such ns seeks its benefits directly
and mainly, rather than indirectly and incidentally—
is in danger of making a showy, superficial writer, in
stead ol a solid one, and of terming habits in writing
which must be corrected in order to produce efficient
public,speaking, but which will most strenuously n
-to yield to the maturer judgment of the man. A
mere lad, who learns somewhat concerning figures of
speech, and contemplates some choice specimens of
what is called line writing, and exercises his skill in
presenting his thoughts in various pretty forms of ex
pression, is apt to conceive of this as studying and
practising rhetoric: and it may be that be will not,
through Ins whole life, be disabused of this idea.
A due consideration of the nature, the proper rela
tive position, and the purpose of this department of
study, at once explains how it happens that men may
die very useful in the ministry who have not attended
| to it; though clearly, if w.lli their attainments in reli
gion and general knowledge, and with their industrious”
habits, they had enjoyed rhetorical culture also, tliev
might have been far more useful.
This view also explains why a mere, or a chief at
tention to style, or phraseology, may terminate in pro
ducing only a shallow or a feeble, though, it mav be,
[a showy writer. If a man’s aim is to write in a bem
tiful style, without a just regard to copious and exact
(knowledge, to weight of thought and vigor of concep
tion, it is surely not surprising that he is not an instruc
tive, or influential, or permanently interesting writer
or speaker.
ii hese remarks are specially applicable, to condidates
for the ministry, in whose expected calling solid use
fulness, rather than reputation for any external graces,
■is the real and the proposed aim. They, above all
men, should avoid the mistake of valuing light and tri
cing ornaments of language; while, at tide same time,
‘they cannot, if truly wise, neglect as of no value a
‘branch of study which may so directly subserve the
‘end and aim of their intellectual discipline and of the.r
•literary acquisitions, both general and sacred; name
ly, the increased ability to proclaim tho word ofiins
jclearly, attractively, forcibly.