Preaching theories and classical rhetorical theories. Their mutual enrichment, as observed in some paradigmatic treatises.

Abstract

The aim of this essay is to review the links between theories of preaching and classical rhetorical theories by comparing some paradigmatic treatises. It is proposed that such a link exists and that it consists of a mutual enrichment, since classical theories of rhetoric strengthen preaching, and the peculiar tools of preaching in turn enhance the persuasive power of what would otherwise remain mere rhetoric of parliaments and courts. The analysis begins with the apparent impossibility of subjecting faith to rhetorical theorization or discourse because this faith is not open to a menu of possibilities from which to choose, as occurs in debates in parliaments and courts of justice. However, it is recognized that, although there is only one faith in the Church, this faith admits persuasion for people to embrace it, among other reasons because there are 1) different ways to expound the faith, 2) different ways to understand it, and, above all, 3) different ways to live it. A review of some treatises on preaching reveals that, although rhetoric is an art first theorized by “Pagans” for civil decision-making, preachers turn to it to strengthen their preaching abilities. It is also noticed that the special tasks required for their preaching illustrate the enrichment of rhetoric itself to the extent that these particular demands go beyond the initial “Pagan” ambition of speaking in parliaments and courts. These preaching treatises from different centuries, reviewed here because they are to some degree paradigmatic, illustrate how rhetoric both serves to and is enriched by the theories of ecclesiastical orators.