Parrhesia, or Christian and Ministerial Freedom of Speech [pp. 312-336]

Freedom of Speech.,
the other hand, there is a sense in which, or a point beyond
which, boldness is unlawful, then it is no less certainly the right
of the hearers to condemn such boldness, and withhold their
countenance and even tacit approbation from it. It is there fore no official or professional inquiry, but one of general
interest and importance, wherein the legitimate boldness of the
pulpit, or freedom of speech in the promulgation of the gospel,
does or does not consist.
This is one of those cases where the trth can be most fully
ascertained by a joint use of the positive and negative methods
of investigation, or at least of statement. And in deference to
the rights of Christian people, we begin by stating negatively,
wherein this apostolic boldness or parrhesita does not consist.
And first, it might appear almost insulting to our readers if
we should appear to think it necessary to announce, as a dis tinct and formal proposition, that this apostolical boldness does
not consist in any thing external, such as loudness of voice, or
violence of gesture, or severity of countenance. All this is
perfectly compatible with radical deficiency in boldness or liberty
of speech, such as Paul approved and practised. Nay, it may
even be adopted as a mask to conceal that very deficiency.
Men may assume the look and language of defiance, not only
when courageous, but when most afraid. And even when this
is not the case, and when they really are bold, their boldness,
so far as it resembles that of the Apostles, does not lie in any
thing corporeal or external. Experience shows that those are
not always the most searching and effective strokes at the conscience or the heart which are given with most violence of
manner; and that saving truth is just as frequently conveyed
by the still small voice as by the fire or the earthquake. The
boldness, then, of which we speak, is not mere boldness of
delivery.
Nor is it boldness of expression or of language, the investing
of familiar thoughts in new and startling forms of speech. Besides the confusion of mind, and the perversion of the truth
arising from this practice, it is utterly devoid of any tendency
to vanquish or conciliate the adversaries of the gospel, and
without the slightest countenance or warrant in the doctrine or
example of the apostolic ministry. In the pregnant dialect of
VOL. XXIV. —NO. II. 41
1852.]
817