Now, what young priest, even the most brilliant of his class, going on the mission can pretend to the hundredth part of the advantages that enabled Manning to dispense with the written page?  Therefore, to conclude that because he, under such privileged circumstances, succeeded, you can do the same under a very different set of conditions, is to ignore the hard logic of facts and pay a poor compliment to your reason.

[Side note:  Father Burke and O’Connell]

Then, we are confronted not with opinions but names—­the two names that will stand for all time in the forefront of Irish orators are those of O’Connell and Father Burke.  O’Connell wrote but one speech—­his first.  The orations delivered by Father Burke in America, by which he achieved a European reputation, were not written.  What, then, it is asked, becomes of the advocacy of the written sermon?  The answer to this argument is evident.  If the question is reduced to one of great names, into the other side of the scales may be thrown not two but dozens of the most illustrious men who not only wrote, but became famous mainly because they wrote.

Passing by the great pagan orators, Cicero and Demosthenes, and the Doctors of the Church, Saints Augustine, John Chrysostom, &c.—­these all wrote, polished and elaborated—­we come to the four names that have flung a deathless glory around the French pulpit, that created a golden era of sacred eloquence which has never been surpassed:  Bourdaloue, Bossuet, Massillon, and Fenelon.  I will not labour the argument by showing how much of their strength and fame rested on the construction of their sermons.  But, to return to the intrinsic merits of the statement—­yes, O’Connell and Father Burke were great orators in spite of, and not because of, the fact that they spoke extemporarily.  So crude were some of O’Connell’s speeches, so careless was he of their dress, that Shiel complained:  “He flung a brood of young, sturdy ideas upon the world, with scarce a rag to cover them.”

If ever there was a case when the man made the sermon instead of the sermon making the man, it was the case of Father Burke.  How little he owed to his sermons and how much they owed to his delivery is left on record by a capable judge.  Sir Charles Gavan Duffy says:  “Father Burke was a born orator; the charm of voice, eye and action combined to produce his wonderful effects.  When his words were printed much of the spell vanished.  One rejoiced to hear him over and over again, but re-read him rarely, I think."[1] The greatest tribute that can be paid to the genius of these two orators is that compositions, wordy, loose, abounding in repetitions, in their mouths enthralled multitudes.  Every defect disappeared; the mastery, the dazzling brilliancy of their oratory swept all hearts and blinded criticism.  We well may pause before answering the question:  What effects would they have produced had they time to write masterpieces of finished beauty like those of Grattan and of Bourdaloue? where each link in the chain of argument hangs in glittering strength, and each thought shows the flash of the gem and its solidity too.