to speak right across the church with more ease and self-command.
It is curious to notice how few pulpits are well placed or adequately fitted. As a rule they are pushed too far back against the chancel, and too much at the side of the church. Often they are half under a pier-arch, and the preacher as a consequence has to strain his voice in order to be heard, or is not heard by half the congregation. The old architects seldom made this mistake ; they placed their pulpits well into the nave, and the preacher stood high enough to have a good command of his hearers.
Generally, too, of late years, expensive and very ugly stone pulpits have been set up. Of course, there is nothing wrong in itself about a stone pulpit ; but a wooden one has these great advantages that it is warm, smooth, and clean to the preacher's hand ; that it furnishes a church, giving it warmth and colour ; and that it can be easily moved.
If an immovable stone pulpit is to be set up, a small platform should first be knocked together, and carefully tried in different positions ; it should be moved about until the spot is found, where (1) the voice rings truest and clearest with least effort, (2) gesture becomes most easy and unstrained, (3) the largest part of the congregation can be seen. It will generally be found that the same place will be best for all three purposes. In the case, for instance, of a church with two aisles ; if the pulpit be brought well away from the pier-arches, it will be found not only that the acoustics are much improved, but also that he can see (and consequently be seen by) a far larger proportion of those who sit in the aisles. Or again, in a church with no aisles, if, instead of the pulpit being stuck against the wall, it project into the church, the preacher will not only find it easier to speak, but also to move, having no longer the fear of hitting the wall.
