Itttrrs to t4t Ettitur.
STREET-PREACHING.
SM—It struck me in reading your article on street-preaching, that you took up two contradictory grounds-1st, That the auditors are intently lis- tening, and so are good objects for the pickpocket; 2d, That the preachers are ill-qualified. I believe the experience of those connected with street- preaching is, that except a man be thoroughly in earnest, and have really something to say, he gets no audience. The better therefore, the preacher, the more the hearer will become like Fagin's doll. I am acquainted by repu- tation with the usual preacher at one of the stations you mention ; he is a lawyer of some repute, has published a work (on Patents) which I have seen highly spoken of, and is certainly well-qualified for his self-imposed office as far as eloquence goes. In your article you make little of the masses of thb town population who are ignorant of Cluistisnity, and would seem to think that open-air preach- ing belongs properly to rural districts with deficient church accommodation. But it is notorious from Mr. H. Mann's Report, (which I have often seen alluded to in the Spectator,) that something like nine-tenths or more of the poor population of our large towns scarcely ever attend church; and further, that they are utterly ignorant and careless about religion, uncon- scious secularists, who would not care to enter a church if there were abundance of room. The only hope of bringing religion home to them is by open-air preaching ; the only day Sunday, when they are not at work ; the only agents laymen, since the clergy are on that day engaged in their regular work. Everything which occasions a crowd and draws attention, from Sunday bands to Sunday preaching, gives a chance to the pickpocket. The extra trouble to the police might, one would think, be as well borne when the oc- casion is an attempt to convert souls as when the object is only to give amusement.
Might I recommend to you and your readers, if interested in this ques- tion, a pamphlet newly published, with the title "Should Laymen Preach?" by a member of the 'University of Cambridge. . I remain your constant reader, W. H. FREMANTLE.
[Mr. Fremantle overlooks two facts in our paper, and one in his own. The " grounds " which he mentions are not "contradictory," for a mob will listen intently to bad preaching. The two points which he has over- looked in our paper are, that we referred to better arrangements in churches as one mode of reducing the number of those who do not attend church ; and that we did not in any degree discountenance out-door preaching, any- where, by qualified men. Such men are the very persons to use most dis- cretion in avoiding occasion for secular disorders. In the mean time, the police have distinct duties to perform ; and beneficial street-preaching can- not consist with an obstruction of efficient police-administmtion.—En.]
Previous page
