The Influence of Theology on the Rhetorical Theory of Austin Phelps

Abstract

Studies in the history of rhetoric can be enriched by paying more attention to the relationship between theological belief and rhetorical theory. This article describes ways in which theology shaped the rhetorical theory of Austin Phelps (1820–1890), the fifth Bartlet professor of sacred rhetoric at Andover Theological Seminary, America's first graduate school of theology and a premiere institution for rhetorical education during the nineteenth century.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my friend and mentor Merrill Whitburn for his wisdom, generosity, enthusiasm, and tremendous example as a dedicated scholar and leader in our profession.

Notes

1. See, for example, Burke's Rhetoric of Religion (1961), Kennedy's New Testament Interpretation Through Rhetorical Criticism (1983), and Kinneavy's Greek Rhetorical Origins of Christian Faith (1987).

2. Relationships between rhetoric and religion/theology are being explored even by historians not specializing in rhetorical history. For example, Jeffrey Suderman's (2001) book on George Campbell demonstrates at length his thesis that “Campbell's entire body of work [both “secular” and sacred] … was governed by a unified purpose that sought to join the realm of natural knowledge with that of Christian revelation” (5). Actually, Suderman (2001) expanded to the larger assertion that scholarship had “not gone nearly far enough in giving the Scottish Enlightenment its proper religious coloring,” and that a proper study of Campbell would help to “restore religious thought to its rightful place at the very centre of eighteenth-century Scottish concern” (7).

3. See publications by Michael-John DePalma (2008,2012), Brian Fehler (2007), and Russel Hirst (1993, 1994, 1995a, 1995b).

4. A well-known episode in rhetorical scholarship illustrates: a quarter century after writing his first introduction to George Campbell's Philosophy of Rhetoric, Lloyd Bitzer (1988) reconsidered the influence of religious beliefs upon Campbell's rhetorical theory:

During the more than two decades since the 1963 edition of Campbell's Rhetoric, I have become aware that my survey of his philosophy and theory of rhetoric in the accompanying introductory essay needs a description of his religious views and an assessment of their relevance to his theory of rhetoric. The present essay corrects that defect, and consequently provides a more accurate introduction to his philosophical and rhetorical principles. (xviii)

5. For more detailed biographical information on Phelps I point the reader to some of my earlier scholarship but more especially to Elizabeth Stewart Phelps's (1892) biography of her father.

6. For a book-length treatment of Bartlet professors, see Fehler (2007); for histories of the seminary, see Woods (1885); Rowe (1933); Williams (1970); and Bendroth (2008).

7. Quoted by Phelps's publisher under heading Critical Notices at end of Men and Books, p. 355.

8. Phelps expounds these ideas throughout his lectures collected as Men and Books. The first six (of twenty-two) lectures deal with the study of men (pp. 1–95). In lecture one, Phelps explains, “I propose, in this and the succeeding Lectures, to speak of a preacher's STUDY OF MEN and of his STUDY OF BOOKS as sources of oratorical discipline” (3).

9. Any reference to “laws of mind” or “laws of reason” conjures up a host of thinkers from at least Francis Bacon onward through Descartes, Locke, Hume and many others, including the common-sense philosophers of the Scottish Enlightenment. These phrases come associated with notions of universality and consistency, throughout time, of natural laws, including laws governing the human mind. During the general European Enlightenment, and thereafter, the idea of such consistency and universality in the laws of nature was widely appropriated—with adjustments in relation to other elements of one's philosophy, including theological convictions. In Men and Books and elsewhere, Phelps recommends to his students such themes and authors for general philosophical and literary education—though he seldom refers to authors directly in his major work (The Theory of Preaching).

10. Phelps (1891) uses the term non-intervention throughout the three sections of his Fragmentary Studies in Theology (1–78).

11. The belief that humans, because their moral faculties are fallen and damaged, are utterly incapable, on their own, of choosing and following God. This is also referenced as the doctrine of “total depravity.”

12. I do not find in Phelps's writings a distinction between terms such as free agency, free will, ability, free choice, etc. So far as I can tell, all his references in this direction endorse the Taylorite position of “ability.” I note, however, that although Phelps did not believe some people are predestined for Hell and so lack the ability to choose God, he did believe in election, the positive side of predestination—and certainly he recognized the advantages of believing in this. He wrote of the great encouragement and strength that comes from believing God has predestined one to Heaven (1891, 54–55). And he believed that God predestines some people for greatness—in missions, in the arts, in public leadership, in everything—and that they need to perceive (must choose to believe in!) that predestination:

This faith in personal predestination is a necessity to the normal working of the very first order of public men. Without it, both leaders and forerunners do not climb to the summit of their faculties. They do not otherwise grow into the inspiration and the conscious ownership of their supreme prerogatives. (1891, 56)

13. Meaning of course a moral outrage in the human dimension of things; this does not reference Christ's suffering to atone for humanity's sins.

14. “The most philosophical [that is, reasonable] solution of the paradox is the Christian disclosure of a remedial system which brings supernatural powers into secret alliance with men in the execution of the purposes of God. Our mundane atmosphere is thronged by them. But our eyes are holden that we may not see them” (Phelps 1891, 38).

15. This line from a letter to a friend is quoted by Phelps's daughter Elizabeth Stuart Phelps; it appears in the front matter under “Note,” page viii, of My Note-Book (1891). Phelps's daughter added this Note to her father's book after his death.

16. Since Phelps believed that God did occasionally intervene—recognizably—in human affairs, he sometimes used the careful phrase “partial non-intervention” (1891, 14).

17. Phelps was, however, an ardent promoter of foreign missions—but this is another topic.

18. Although Phelps, along with most of his contemporaries in conservative Christian denominations, believed the Bible commissioned only men to be ecclesiastical leaders and preachers, he was prominent as a supporter of higher education for women and of broadening the range of career opportunity (especially literary careers) and social function for women. For example, we find his name associated with Wellesley College (a college for women) in its original 1870 charter of incorporation and then as a trustee of the college from 1875 to 1882 (Miller 1964, 27). Andover Seminary itself was progressive in women's education, having established Abbot Female Seminary (later Abbot Academy) in 1828.

19. “Growth in character is always growth of thinking power” (Phelps 1891, 50).

20. The Theory of Preaching, Introduction through Lecture II.

21. Phelps's basic structure for a sermon—though much freedom is available within the structure—is this: scripture text, explanation, introduction, proposition, division, development, and conclusion. Each of these major structural elements may consist of multiple elements. For example, the conclusion may contain recapitulation, inference, remark, application, and appeals.

22. This idea appears frequently in Men and Books; Phelps also devoted the last lecture (40: Ministerial Culture) of The Theory of Preaching to this theme. “The ideal of a preacher which I have uniformly had in view is that of a Christian scholar using his scholarship with the aim of a Christian orator” (1881, 576).

23. See also Hirst (1994) on ethos.

24. Meaning literary, scripted, nonenthusiastic, traditional, conservative of rhetorical heritages. I am not using conservative in the modern senses of “conservative denominations” or “conservative politics.”

25. Poster, in her 2006 Rhetorica article “An Organon for Theology: Whately's Rhetoric and Logic in Religious Context,” shows that most contemporary scholars have vastly underestimated, or even ignored, the influence of Whately's theology upon his rhetorical theory—whereas in fact, “Whately's religious beliefs were the central organizing principle of his rhetorical work. They affected not only the ends for which he argued, but also the way he thought about and practiced argumentation and interpretation” (38).