ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE

St. Augustine

Book Four

Argument—Passing to the second part of his work, that which treats of expression, the author premises that it is no part of his intention to write a treatise on the laws of rhetoric.  These can be learned elsewhere, and ought not to be neglected, being indeed specially necessary for the Christian teacher, whom it behoves to excel in eloquence and power of speech.  After detailing with much care and minuteness the various qualities of an orator, he recommends the authors of the Holy Scriptures as the best models of eloquence, far excelling all others in the combination of eloquence with wisdom.  He points out that perspicuity is the most essential quality of style, and ought to be cultivated with especial care by the teacher, as it is the main requisite for instruction, although other qualities are required for delighting and persuading the hearer.  All these gifts are to be sought in earnest prayer from God, though we are not to forget to be zealous and diligent in study.  He shows that there are three species of style, the subdued, the elegant, and the majestic; the first serving for instruction, the second for praise, and the third for exhortation:  and of each of these he gives examples, selected both from scripture and from early teachers of the church, Cyprian and Ambrose.  He shows that these various styles may be mingled, and when and for what purposes they are mingled; and that they all have the same end in view, to bring home the truth to the hearer, so that he may understand it, hear it with gladness, and practise it in his life.  Finally, he exhorts the Christian teacher himself, pointing out the dignity and responsibility of the office he holds to lead a life in harmony with his own teaching, and to show a good example to all.

Chapter 1.—This Work Not Intended as a Treatise on Rhetoric.

1.  This work of mine, which is entitled On Christian Doctrine, was at the commencement divided into two parts.  For, after a preface, in which I answered by anticipation those who were likely to take exception to the work, I said, “There are two things on which all interpretation of Scripture depends:  the mode of ascertaining the proper meaning, and the mode of making known the meaning when it is ascertained.  I shall treat first of the mode of ascertaining, next of the mode of making known, the meaning.”[1]  As, then, I have already said a great deal about the mode of ascertaining the meaning, and have given three books to this one part of the subject, I shall only say a few things about the mode of making known the meaning, in order if possible to bring them all within the compass of one book, and so finish the whole work in four books.

2.  In the first place, then, I wish by this preamble to put a stop to the expectations of readers who may think that I am about to lay 575 down rules of rhetoric such as I have learnt, and taught too, in the secular schools, and to warn them that they need not look for any such from me.  Not that I think such rules of no use, but that whatever use they have is to be learnt elsewhere; and if any good man should happen to have leisure for learning them, he is not to ask me to teach them either in this work or any other.

It is Lawful for a Christian Teacher to Use the Art of Rhetoric.

Chapter 2.—It is Lawful for a Christian Teacher to Use the Art of Rhetoric.

3.  Now, the art of rhetoric being available for the enforcing either of truth or falsehood, who will dare to say that truth in the person of its defenders is to take its stand unarmed against falsehood?  For example, that those who are trying to persuade men of what is false are to know how to introduce their subject, so as to put the hearer into a friendly, or attentive, or teachable frame of mind, while the defenders of the truth shall be ignorant of that art?  That the former are to tell their falsehoods briefly, clearly, and plausibly, while the latter shall tell the truth in such a way that it is tedious to listen to, hard to understand, and, in fine, not easy to believe it?  That the former are to oppose the truth and defend falshood with sophistical arguments, while the latter shall be unable either to defend what it true, or to refute what is false?  That the former, while imbuing the minds of their hearers with erroneous opinions, are by their power of speech to awe, to melt, to enliven, and to rouse them, while the latter shall in defence of the truth be sluggish, and frigid, and somnolent?  Who is such a fool as to think this wisdom?  Since, then, the faculty of eloquence is available for both sides, and is of very great service in the enforcing either of wrong or right, why do not good men study to engage it on the side of truth, when bad men use it to obtain the triumph of wicked and worthless causes, and to further injustice and error?

The Proper Age and the Proper Means for Acquiring Rhetorical Skill.

Chapter 3.—The Proper Age and the Proper Means for Acquiring Rhetorical Skill.

4.  But the theories and rules on this subject (to which, when you add a tongue thoroughly skilled by exercise and habit in the use of many words and many ornaments of speech, you have what is called eloquence or oratory) may be learnt apart from these writings of mine, if a suitable space of time be set aside for the purpose at a fit and proper age.  But only by those who can learn them quickly; for the masters of Roman eloquence  themselves did not shrink from saying that any one who cannot learn this art quickly can never thoroughly learn it at all.[1]  Whether this be true or not, why need we inquire?  For even if this art can occasionally be in the end mastered by men of slower intellect, I do not think it of so much importance as to wish men who have arrived at mature age to spend time in learning it.  It is enough that boys should give attention to it; and even of these, not all who are to be fitted for usefulness in the Church, but only those who are not yet engaged in any occupation of more urgent necessity, or which ought evidently to take precedence of it.  For men of quick intellect and glowing temperament find it easier to become eloquent by reading and listening to eloquent speakers than by following rules for eloquence.  And even outside the canon, which to our great advantage is fixed in a place of secure authority, there is no want of ecclesiastical writings, in reading which a man of ability will acquire a tinge of the eloquence with which they are written, even though he does not aim at this, but is solely intent on the matters treated of; especially, of course, if in addition he practise himself in writing, or dictating, and at last also in speaking, the opinions he has formed on grounds of piety and faith.  If, however, such ability be wanting, the rules of rhetoric are either not understood, or if, after great labor has been spent in enforcing them, they come to be in some small measure understood, they prove of no service.  For even those who have learnt them, and who speak with fluency and elegance, cannot always think of them when they are speaking so as to speak in accordance with them, unless they are discussing the rules themselves.  Indeed, I think there are scarcely any who can do both things—that is, speak well, and, in order to do this, think of the rules of speaking while they are speaking.  For we must be careful that what we have got to say does not escape us whilst we are thinking about saying it according to the rules of art. Nevertheless, in the speeches of eloquent men, we find rules of eloquence carried out which the speakers did not think of as aids to eloquence at the time when they were speaking, whether they had ever learnt them, or whether they had never even met with them.  For it is because they are eloquent that they exemplify these rules; it is not that they use them in order to be eloquent.

5.  And, therefore, as infants cannot learn to speak except by learning words and phrases from those who do speak, why should not 576 men become eloquent without being taught any art of speech, simply by reading and learning the speeches of eloquent men, and by imitating them as far as they can?  And what do we find from the examples themselves to be the case in this respect?  We know numbers who, without acquaintance with rhetorical rules, are more eloquent than many who have learnt these; but we know no one who is eloquent without having read and listened to the speeches and debates of eloquent men.  For even the art of grammar, which teaches correctness of speech, need not be learnt by boys, if they have the advantage of growing up and living among men who speak correctly.  For without knowing the names of any of the faults, they will, from being accustomed to correct speech, lay hold upon whatever is faulty in the speech of any one they listen to, and avoid it; just as city-bred men, even when illiterate, seize upon the faults of rustics.

The Duty of the Christian Teacher.

Chapter 4.—The Duty of the Christian Teacher.

6.  It is the duty, then, of the interpreter and teacher of Holy Scripture, the defender of the true faith and the opponent of error, both to teach what is right and to refute what is wrong, and in the performance of this task to conciliate the hostile, to rouse the careless, and to tell the ignorant both what is occurring at present and what is probable in the future.  But once that his hearers are friendly, attentive, and ready to learn, whether he has found them so, or has himself made them so, the remaining objects are to be carried out in whatever way the case requires.  If the hearers need teaching, the matter treated of must be made fully known by means of narrative.  On the other hand, to clear up points that are doubtful requires reasoning and the exhibition of proof.  If, however, the hearers require to be roused rather than instructed, in order that they may be diligent to do what they already know, and to bring their feelings into harmony with the truths they admit, greater vigor of speech is needed.  Here entreaties and reproaches, exhortations and upbraidings, and all the other means of rousing the emotions, are necessary.

7.  And all the methods I have mentioned are constantly used by nearly every one in cases where speech is the agency employed.

Wisdom of More Importance Than Eloquence to the Christian Teacher.

Chapter 5.—Wisdom of More Importance Than Eloquence to the Christian Teacher.

But as some men employ these coarsely, inelegantly, and frigidly, while others use them with acuteness, elegance, and spirit, the work that I am speaking of ought to be undertaken by one who can argue and speak with wisdom, if not with eloquence, and with profit to his hearers, even though he profit them less than he would if he could speak with eloquence too.  But we must beware of the man who abounds in eloquent nonsense, and so much the more if the hearer is pleased with what is not worth listening to, and thinks that because the speaker is eloquent what he says must be true.  And this opinion is held even by those who think that the art of rhetoric should be taught; for they confess that “though wisdom without eloquence is of little service to states, yet eloquence without wisdom is frequently a positive injury, and is of service never.”[1]  If, then, the men who teach the principles of eloquence have been forced by truth to confess this in the very books which treat of eloquence, though they were ignorant of the true, that is, the heavenly wisdom which comes down from the Father of Lights, how much more ought we to feel it who are the sons and the ministers of this higher wisdom!  Now a man speaks with more or less wisdom just as he has made more or less progress in the knowledge of Scripture; I do not mean by reading them much and committing them to memory, but by understanding them aright and carefully searching into their meaning.  For there are who read and yet neglect them; they read to remember the words, but are careless about knowing the meaning.  It is plain we must set far above these the men who are not so retentive of the words, but see with the eyes of the heart into the heart of Scripture.  Better than either of these, however, is the man who, when he wishes, can repeat the words, and at the same time correctly apprehends their meaning.

8.  Now it is especially necessary for the man who is bound to speak wisely, even though he cannot speak eloquently, to retain in memory the words of Scripture.  For the more he discerns the poverty of his own speech, the more he ought to draw on the riches of Scripture, so that what he says in his own words he may prove by the words of Scripture; and he himself, though small and weak in his own words, may gain strength and power from the confirming testimony of great men.  For his proof gives pleasure when he cannot please by his mode of speech.  But if a man desire to speak not only with wisdom, but with eloquence also (and assuredly he will prove of greater service if 577 he can do both), I would rather send him to read, and listen to, and exercise himself in imitating, eloquent men, than advise him to spend time with the teachers of rhetoric; especially if the men he reads and listens to are justly praised as having spoken, or as being accustomed to speak, not only with eloquence, but with wisdom also.  For eloquent speakers are heard with pleasure; wise speakers with profit.  And, therefore, Scripture does not say that the multitude of the eloquent, but “the multitude of the wise is the welfare of the world.”[1]  And as we must often swallow wholesome bitters, so we must always avoid unwholesome sweets.  But what is better than wholesome sweetness or sweet wholesomeness?  For the sweeter we try to make such things, the easier it is to make their wholesomeness serviceable.  And so there are writers of the Church who have expounded the Holy Scriptures, not only with wisdom, but with eloquence as well; and there is not more time for the reading of these than is sufficient for those who are studious and at leisure to exhaust them.

The Sacred Writers Unite Eloquence with Wisdom.

Chapter 6.—The Sacred Writers Unite Eloquence with Wisdom.

9.  Here, perhaps, some one inquires whether the authors whose divinely-inspired writings constitute the canon, which carries with it a most wholesome authority, are to be considered wise only, or eloquent as well.  A question which to me, and to those who think with me, is very easily settled.  For where I understand these writers, it seems to me not only that nothing can be wiser, but also that nothing can be more eloquent.  And I venture to affirm that all who truly understand what these writers say, perceive at the same time that it could not have been properly said in any other way.  For as there is a kind of eloquence that is more becoming in youth, and a kind that is more becoming in old age, and nothing can be called eloquence if it be not suitable to the person of the speaker, so there is a kind of eloquence that is becoming in men who justly claim the highest authority, and who are evidently inspired of God.  With this eloquence they spoke; no other would have been suitable for them; and this itself would be unsuitable in any other, for it is in keeping with their character, while it mounts as far above that of others (not from empty inflation, but from solid merit) as it seems to fall below them.  Where, however, I do not understand these writers, though their eloquence is then less apparent, I have no doubt but that it is of the same kind as that I do understand.  The very obscurity, too, of these divine and wholesome words was a necessary element in eloquence of a kind that was designed to profit our understandings, not only by the discovery of truth, but also by the exercise of their powers.

10.  I could, however, if I had time, show those men who cry up their own form of language as superior to that of our authors (not because of its majesty, but because of its inflation), that all those powers and beauties of eloquence which they make their boast, are to be found in the sacred writings which God in His goodness has provided to mould our characters, and to guide us from this world of wickedness to the blessed world above.  But it is not the qualities which these writers have in common with the heathen orators and poets that give me such unspeakable delight in their eloquence; I am more struck with admiration at the way in which, by an eloquence peculiarly their own, they so use this eloquence of ours that it is not conspicuous either by its presence or its absence:  for it did not become them either to condemn it or to make an ostentatious display of it; and if they had shunned it, they would have done the former; if they had made it prominent, they might have appeared to be doing the latter.  And in those passages where the learned do note its presence, the matters spoken of are such, that the words in which they are put seem not so much to be sought out by the speaker as spontaneously to suggest themselves; as if wisdom were walking out of its house,—that is, the breast of the wise man, and eloquence, like an inseparable attendant, followed it without being called for.[1]

Examples of True Eloquence Drawn from the Epistles of Paul and the Prophecies of Amos.

Chapter 7.—Examples of True Eloquence Drawn from the Epistles of Paul and the Prophecies of Amos.

11.  For who would not see what the apostle meant to say, and how wisely he has said it, in the following passage:  “We glory in tribulations also:  knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope:  and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us”?[1]  Now were any man unlearnedly learned (if I may use the expression) to contend that the apostle had here followed the rules of rhetoric, would not every Christian, learned or unlearned, laugh 578 at him?  And yet here we find the figure which is called in Greek ?????? (climax,) and by some in Latin gradatio, for they do not care to call it scala (a ladder), when the words and ideas have a connection of dependency the one upon the other, as we see here that patience arises out of tribulation, experience out of patience, and hope out of experience.  nother ornament, too, is found here; for after certain statements finished in a single tone of voice, which we call clauses and sections (membra et cæsa), but the Greeks ???? and ???????,[1] there follows a rounded sentence (ambitus sive circuitus) which the Greeks call ????????,[1] the clauses of which are suspended on the voice of the speaker till the whole is completed by the last clause.  For of the statements which precede the period, this is the first clause, “knowing that tribulation worketh patience;” the second, “and patience, experience;” the third, “and experience, hope.”  Then the period which is subjoined is completed in three clauses, of which the first is, “and hope maketh not ashamed;” the second, “because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts;” the third, “by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”  But these and other matters of the same kind are taught in the art of elocution.  As then I do not affirm that the apostle was guided by the rules of eloquence, so I do not deny that his wisdom naturally produced, and was accompanied by, eloquence.

12.  In the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, again, he refutes certain false apostles who had gone out from the Jews, and had been trying to injure his character; and being compelled to speak of himself, though he ascribes this as folly to himself, how wisely and how eloquently he speaks!  But wisdom is his guide, eloquence his attendant; he follows the first, the second follows him, and yet he does not spurn it when it comes after him.  “I say again,” he says, “Let no man think me a fool:  if otherwise, yet as a fool receive me, that I may boast myself a little.  That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting.  Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also.  For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise.  For ye suffer, if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face.  I speak as concerning reproach, as though we had been weak.  Howbeit, whereinsoever any is bold (I speak foolishly), I am bold also.  Are they Hebrews? so am I.  Are they Israelites? so am I.  Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I.  Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool), I am more:  in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft.  Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one, thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness.  Besides those things which are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches.  Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not?  If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern my infirmities.”[1]  The thoughtful and attentive perceive how much wisdom there is in these words.  And even a man sound asleep must notice what a stream of eloquence flows through them.

13.  Further still, the educated man observes that those sections which the Greeks call ???????, and the clauses and periods of which I spoke a short time ago, being intermingled in the most beautiful variety, make up the whole form and features (so to speak) of that diction by which even the unlearned are delighted and affected.  For, from the place where I commenced to quote, the passage consists of periods:  the first the smallest possible, consisting of two members; for a period cannot have less than two members, though it may have more:  “I say again, let no man think me a fool.”  The next has three members:  “if otherwise, yet as a fool receive me, that I may boast myself a little.”  The third has four members:  “That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting.”  The fourth has two:  “Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also.”  And the fifth has two:  “For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise.”  The sixth again has two members:  “for ye suffer, if a man bring you into bondage.”  Then follow three sections (cæsa):  “if a man devour you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself.”  Next three clauses (membra):  if 579 “a man smite you on the face.  I speak as concerning reproach, as though we had been weak.”  Then is subjoined a period of three members:  “Howbeit, whereinsoever any is bold (I speak foolishly), I am bold also.”  After this, certain separate sections being put in the interrogatory form, separate sections are also given as answers, three to three:  “Are they Hebrews? so am I.  Are they Israelites? so am I.  Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I.”  But a fourth section being put likewise in the interrogatory form, the answer is given not in another section (cæsum) but in a clause (membrum):[1]  “Are they the ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool.)  I am more.”  Then the next four sections are given continuously, the interrogatory form being most elegantly suppressed:  “in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft.”  Next is interposed a short period; for, by a suspension of the voice, “of the Jews five times” is to be marked off as constituting one member, to which is joined the second, “received I forty stripes save one.”  Then he returns to sections, and three are set down:  “Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck.”  Next comes a clause:  “a night and a day I have been in the deep.”  Next fourteen sections burst forth with a vehemence which is most appropriate:  “In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren, in weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness.”  After this comes in a period of three members:  “Besides those things which are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches.”  And to this he adds two clauses in a tone of inquiry:  “Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not?”  In fine, this whole passage, as if panting for breath, winds up with a period of two members:  “If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern mine infirmities.”  And I cannot sufficiently express how beautiful and delightful it is when after this outburst he rests himself, and gives the hearer rest, by interposing a slight narrative.  For he goes on to say:  “The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.”  And then he tells, very briefly the danger he had been in, and the way he escaped it.

14.  It would be tedious to pursue the matter further, or to point out the same facts in regard to other passages of Holy Scripture.  Suppose I had taken the further trouble, at least in regard to the passages I have quoted from the apostle’s writings, to point out figures of speech which are taught in the art of rhetoric?  Is it not more likely that serious men would think I had gone too far, than that any of the studious would think I had done enough?  All these things when taught by masters are reckoned of great value; great prices are paid for them, and the vendors puff them magniloquently.  And I fear lest I too should smack of that puffery while thus descanting on matters of this kind.  It was necessary, however, to reply to the ill-taught men who think our authors contemptible; not because they do not possess, but because they do not display, the eloquence which these men value so highly.

15.  But perhaps some one is thinking that I have selected the Apostle Paul because he is our great orator.  For when he says, “Though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge,”[1] he seems to speak as if granting so much to his detractors, not as confessing that he recognized its truth.  If he had said, “I am indeed rude in speech, but not in knowledge,” we could not in any way have put another meaning upon it.  He did not hesitate plainly to assert his knowledge, because without it he could not have been the teacher of the Gentiles.  And certainly if we bring forward anything of his as a model of eloquence, we take it from those epistles which even his very detractors, who thought his bodily presence weak and his speech contemptible, confessed to be weighty and powerful.[1]

I see, then, that I must say something about the eloquence of the prophets also, where many things are concealed under a metaphorical style, which the more completely they seem buried under figures of speech, give the greater pleasure when brought to light.  In this place, however, it is my duty to select a passage of such a kind that I shall not be compelled to explain the matter, but only to commend the style.  And I shall do so, quoting principally from the book of that prophet who says that he was a shepherd or herdsman, and was called by God from that occupation, and sent to prophesy to the people of God.[1]  I shall not, however, follow the Septuagint translators, who, being themselves under the guidance of the Holy Spirit in their 580 translation, seem to have altered some passages with the view of directing the reader’s attention more particularly to the investigation of the spiritual sense; (and hence some passages are more obscure, because more figurative, in their translation;) but I shall follow the translation made from the Hebrew into Latin by the presbyter Jerome, a man thoroughly acquainted with both tongues.

16.  When, then, this rustic, or quondam rustic prophet, was denouncing the godless, the proud, the luxurious, and therefore the most neglectful of brotherly love, he called aloud, saying:  “Woe to you who are at ease in Zion, and trust in the mountain of Samaria, who are heads and chiefs of the people, entering with pomp into the house of Israel!  Pass ye unto Calneh, and see; and from thence go ye to Hamath the great; then go down to Gath of the Philistines, and to all the best kingdoms of these:  is their border greater than your border?  Ye that are set apart for the day of evil, and that come near to the seat of oppression; that lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch yourselves upon couches that eat the lamb of the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the herd; that chant to the sound of the viol.  They thought that they had instruments of music like David; drinking wine in bowls, and anointing themselves with the costliest ointment:  and they were not grieved for the affliction of Joseph.”[1]  Suppose those men who, assuming to be themselves learned and eloquent, despise our prophets as untaught and unskillful of speech, had been obliged to deliver a message like this, and to men such as these, would they have chosen to express themselves in any respect differently—those of them, at least, who would have shrunk from raving like madmen?

17.  For what is there that sober ears could wish changed in this speech?  In the first place, the invective itself; with what vehemence it throws itself upon the drowsy senses to startle them into wakefulness:  “Woe to you who are at ease in Zion, and trust in the mountains of Samaria, who are heads and chiefs of the people, entering with pomp into the house of Israel!”  Next, that he may use the favors of God, who has bestowed upon them ample territory, to show their ingratitude in trusting to the mountain of Samaria, where idols were worshipped:  “Pass ye unto Calneh,” he says, “and see; and from thence go ye to Hamath the great; then go down to Gath of the Philistines, and to all the best kingdoms of these:  is their border greater than your border?”  At the same time also that these things are spoken of, the style is adorned with names of places as with lamps, such as “Zion,” “Samaria,” “Calneh,” “Hamath the great,” and “Gath of the Philistines.”  Then the words joined to these places are most appropriately varied:  “ye are at ease,” “ye trust,” “pass on,” “go,” “descend.”

18.  And then the future captivity under an oppressive king is announced as approaching, when it is added:  “Ye that are set apart for the day of evil, and come near to the seat of oppression.”  Then are subjoined the evils of luxury:  “ye that lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch yourselves upon couches; that eat the lamb from the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the herd.”  These six clauses form three periods of two members each.  For he does not say:  Ye who are set apart for the day of evil, who come near to the seat of oppression, who sleep upon beds of ivory, who stretch yourselves upon couches, who eat the lamb from the flock, and calves out of the herd.  If he had so expressed it, this would have had its beauty:  six separate clauses running on, the same pronoun being repeated each time, and each clause finished by a single effort of the speaker’s voice.  But it is more beautiful as it is, the clauses being joined in pairs under the same pronoun, and forming three sentences, one referring to the prophecy of the captivity:  “Ye that are set apart for the day of evil, and come near the seat of oppression;” the second to lasciviousness:  “ye that lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch yourselves upon couches;” the third to gluttony:  “who eat the lamb from the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the herd.”  So that it is at the discretion of the speaker whether he finish each clause separately and make six altogether, or whether he suspend his voice at the first, the third, and the fifth, and by joining the second to the first, the fourth to the third, and the sixth to the fifth, make three most elegant periods of two members each:  one describing the imminent catastrophe; another, the lascivious couch; and the third, the luxurious table.

19.  Next he reproaches them with their luxury in seeking pleasure for the sense of hearing.  And here, when he had said, “Ye who chant to the sound of the viol,” seeing that wise men may practise music wisely, he, with wonderful skill of speech, checks the flow of his invective, and not now speaking to, but of, these men, and to show us that we must distinguish the music of the wise from the 581 music of the voluptuary, he does not say, “Ye who chant to the sound of the viol, and think that ye have instruments of music like David;” but he first addresses to themselves what it is right the voluptuaries should hear, “Ye who chant to the sound of the viol;” and then, turning to others, he intimates that these men have not even skill in their art:  “they thought that they had instruments of music like David; drinking wine in bowls, and anointing themselves with the costliest ointment.”  These three clauses are best pronounced when the voice is suspended on the first two members of the period, and comes to a pause on the third.

20.  But now as to the sentence which follows all these:  “and they were not grieved for the affliction of Joseph.”  Whether this be pronounced continuously as one clause, or whether with more elegance we hold the words, “and they were not grieved,” suspended on the voice, and then add, “for the affliction of Joseph,” so as to make a period of two members; in any case, it is a touch of marvelous beauty not to say, “and they were not grieved for the affliction of their brother;” but to put Joseph for brother, so as to indicate brothers in general by the proper name of him who stands out illustrious from among his brethren, both in regard to the injuries he suffered and the good return he made.  And, indeed, I do not know whether this figure of speech, by which Joseph is put for brothers in general, is one of those laid down in that art which I learnt and used to teach.  But how beautiful it is, and how it comes home to the intelligent reader, it is useless to tell any one who does not himself feel it.

21.  And a number of other points bearing on the laws of eloquence could be found in this passage which I have chosen as an example.  But an intelligent reader will not be so much instructed by carefully analysing it as kindled by reciting it with spirit.  Nor was it composed by man’s art and care, but it flowed forth in wisdom and eloquence from the Divine mind; wisdom not aiming at eloquence, yet eloquence not shrinking from wisdom.  For if, as certain very eloquent and acute men have perceived and said, the rules which are laid down in the art of oratory could not have been observed, and noted, and reduced to system, if they had not first had their birth in the genius of orators, is it wonderful that they should be found in the messengers of Him who is the author of all genius?  Therefore let us acknowledge that the canonical writers are not only wise but eloquent also, with an eloquence suited to a character and position like theirs.

The Obscurity of the Sacred Writers, Though Compatible with Eloquence, Not to Be Imitated by Christian Teachers.

Chapter 8.—The Obscurity of the Sacred Writers, Though Compatible with Eloquence, Not to Be Imitated by Christian Teachers.

22.  But although I take some examples of eloquence from those writings of theirs which there is no difficulty in understanding, we are not by any means to suppose that it is our duty to imitate them in those passages where, with a view to exercise and train the minds of their readers, and to break in upon the satiety and stimulate the zeal of those who are willing to learn, and with a view also to throw a veil over the minds of the godless either that they may be converted to piety or shut out from a knowledge of the mysteries, from one or other of these reasons they have expressed themselves with a useful and wholesome obscurity.  They have indeed expressed themselves in such a way that those who in after ages understood and explained them aright have in the Church of God obtained an esteem, not indeed equal to that with which they are themselves regarded, but coming next to it.  The expositors of these writers, then, ought not to express themselves in the same way, as if putting forward their expositions as of the same authority; but they ought in all their deliverances to make it their first and chief aim to be understood, using as far as possible such clearness of speech that either he will be very dull who does not understand them, or that if what they say should not be very easily or quickly understood, the reason will lie not in their manner of expression, but in the difficulty and subtilty of the matter they are trying to explain.

How, and with Whom, Difficult Passages are to Be Discussed.

Chapter 9.—How, and with Whom, Difficult Passages are to Be Discussed.

23.  For there are some passages which are not understood in their proper force, or are understood with great difficulty, at whatever length, however clearly, or with whatever eloquence the speaker may expound them; and these should never be brought before the people at all, or only on rare occasions when there is some urgent reason.  In books, however, which are written in such a style that, if understood, they, so to speak, draw their own readers, and if not understood, give no trouble to those who do not care to read them and in private conversations, we must not shrink from the duty of bringing the truth which we ourselves have reached within the comprehension of others, however difficult it may be to understand it, and whatever labor in the way of argument it may cost us.  Only two conditions are to be insisted upon, that our hearer 582 or companion should have an earnest desire to learn the truth, and should have capacity of mind to receive it in whatever form it may be communicated, the teacher not being so anxious about the eloquence as about the clearness of his teaching.

The Necessity for Perspicuity of Style.

Chapter 10.—The Necessity for Perspicuity of Style.

24.  Now a strong desire for clearness sometimes leads to neglect of the more polished forms of speech, and indifference about what sounds well, compared with what clearly expresses and conveys the meaning intended.  Whence a certain author, when dealing with speech of this kind, says that there is in it “a kind of careful negligence.”[1]  Yet while taking away ornament, it does not bring in vulgarity of speech; though good teachers have, or ought to have, so great an anxiety about teaching that they will employ a word which cannot be made pure Latin without becoming obscure or ambiguous, but which when used according to the vulgar idiom is neither ambiguous nor obscure, not in the way the learned, but rather in the way the unlearned employ it.  For if our translators did not shrink from saying, “Non congregabo conventicula eorum de sanguinibus,”[1] because they felt that it was important for the sense to put a word here in the plural which in Latin is only used in the singular; why should a teacher of godliness who is addressing an unlearned audience shrink from using ossum instead of os, if he fear that the latter might be taken not as the singular of ossa, but as the singular of ora, seeing that African ears have no quick perception of the shortness or length of vowels?  And what advantage is there in purity of speech which does not lead to understanding in the hearer, seeing that there is no use at all in speaking, if they do not understand us for whose sake we speak?  He, therefore, who teaches will avoid all words that do not teach; and if instead of them he can find words which are at once pure and intelligible, he will take these by preference; if, however, he cannot, either because there are no such words, or because they do not at the time occur to him, he will use words that are not quite pure, if only the substance of his thought be conveyed and apprehended in its integrity.

25.  And this must be insisted on as necessary to our being understood, not only in conversations, whether with one person or with several, but much more in the case of a speech delivered in public:  for in conversation any one has the power of asking a question; but when all are silent that one may be heard, and all faces are turned attentively upon him, it is neither customary nor decorous for a person to ask a question about what he does not understand; and on this account the speaker ought to be especially careful to give assistance to those who cannot ask it.  Now a crowd anxious for instruction generally shows by its movements if it understands what is said; and until some indication of this sort be given, the subject discussed ought to be turned over and over, and put in every shape and form and variety of expression, a thing which cannot be done by men who are repeating words prepared beforehand and committed to memory.  As soon, however, as the speaker has ascertained that what he says is understood, he ought either to bring his address to a close, or pass on to another point.  For if a man gives pleasure when he throws light upon points on which people wish for instruction, he becomes wearisome when he dwells at length upon things that are already well known, especially when men’s expectation was fixed on having the difficulties of the passage removed.  For even things that are very well known are told for the sake of the pleasure they give, if the attention be directed not to the things themselves, but to the way in which they are told.  Nay, even when the style itself is already well known, if it be pleasing to the hearers, it is almost a matter of indifference whether he who speaks be a speaker or a reader.  For things that are gracefully written are often not only read with delight by those who are making their first acquaintance with them, but re-read with delight by those who have already made acquaintance with them, and have not yet forgotten them; nay, both these classes will derive pleasure even from hearing another man repeat them.  And if a man has forgotten anything, when he is reminded of it he is taught.  But I am not now treating of the mode of giving pleasure.  I am speaking of the mode in which men who desire to learn ought to be taught.  And the best mode is that which secures that he who hears shall hear the truth, and that what he hears he shall understand.  And when this point has been reached, no further labor need be spent on the truth itself, as if it required further explanation; but perhaps some trouble may be taken to enforce it so as to bring it home to the heart.  If it appear right to do this, it ought to be done so moderately as not to lead to weariness and impatience.

The Christian Teacher Must Speak Clearly, But Not Inelegantly.
583

Chapter 11.—The Christian Teacher Must Speak Clearly, But Not Inelegantly.

26.  For teaching, of course, true eloquence consists, not in making people like what they disliked, nor in making them do what they shrank from, but in making clear what was obscure; yet if this be done without grace of style, the benefit does not extend beyond the few eager students who are anxious to know whatever is to be learnt, however rude and unpolished the form in which it is put; and who, when they have succeeded in their object, find the plain truth pleasant food enough.  And it is one of the distinctive features of good intellects not to love words, but the truth in words.  For of what service is a golden key, if it cannot open what we want it to open?  Or what objection is there to a wooden one if it can, seeing that to open what is shut is all we want?  But as there is a certain analogy between learning and eating, the very food without which it is impossible to live must be flavored to meet the tastes of the majority.

The Aim of the Orator, According to Cicero, is to Teach, to Delight, and to Move.  Of These, Teaching is the Most Essential.

Chapter 12.—The Aim of the Orator, According to Cicero, is to Teach, to Delight, and to Move.  Of These, Teaching is the Most Essential.

27.  Accordingly a great orator has truly said that “an eloquent man must speak so as to teach, to delight, and to persuade.”[1]  Then he adds:  “To teach is a necessity, to delight is a beauty, to persuade is a triumph.”[1]  Now of these three, the one first mentioned, the teaching, which is a matter of necessity, depends on what we say; the other two on the way we say it.  He, then, who speaks with the purpose of teaching should not suppose that he has said what he has to say as long as he is not understood; for although what he has said be intelligible to himself it is not said at all to the man who does not understand it.  If, however, he is understood, he has said his say, whatever may have been his manner of saying it.  But if he wishes to delight or persuade his hearer as well, he will not accomplish that end by putting his thought in any shape no matter what, but for that purpose the style of speaking is a matter of importance.  And as the hearer must be pleased in order to secure his attention, so he must be persuaded in order to move him to action.  And as he is pleased if you speak with sweetness and elegance, so he is persuaded if he be drawn by your promises, and awed by your threats; if he reject what you condemn, and embrace what you commend; if he grieve when you heap up objects for grief, and rejoice when you point out an object for joy; if he pity those whom you present to him as objects of pity, and shrink from those whom you set before him as men to be feared and shunned.  I need not go over all the other things that can be done by powerful eloquence to move the minds of the hearers, not telling them what they ought to do, but urging them to do what they already know ought to be done.

28.  If, however, they do not yet know this, they must of course be instructed before they can be moved.  And perhaps the mere knowledge of their duty will have such an effect that there will be no need to move them with greater strength of eloquence.  Yet when this is needful, it ought to be done.  And it is needful when people, knowing what they ought to do, do it not.  Therefore, to teach is a necessity.  For what men know, it is in their own hands either to do or not to do.  But who would say that it is their duty to do what they do not know?  On the same principle, to persuade is not a necessity:  for it is not always called for; as, for example, when the hearer yields his assent to one who simply teaches or gives pleasure.  For this reason also to persuade is a triumph, because it is possible that a man may be taught and delighted, and yet not give his consent.  And what will be the use of gaining the first two ends if we fail in the third?  Neither is it a necessity to give pleasure; for when, in the course of an address, the truth is clearly pointed out (and this is the true function of teaching), it is not the fact, nor is it the intention, that the style of speech should make the truth pleasing, or that the style should of itself give pleasure; but the truth itself, when exhibited in its naked simplicity, gives pleasure, because it is the truth.  And hence even falsities are frequently a source of pleasure when they are brought to light and exposed.  It is not, of course, their falsity that gives pleasure; but as it is true that they are false, the speech which shows this to be true gives pleasure.

The Hearer Must Be Moved as Well as Instructed.

Chapter 13.—The Hearer Must Be Moved as Well as Instructed.

29.  But for the sake of those who are so fastidious that they do not care for truth unless it is put in the form of a pleasing discourse, no small place has been assigned in 584 eloquence to the art of pleasing.  And yet even this is not enough for those stubborn-minded men who both understand and are pleased with the teacher’s discourse, without deriving any profit from it.  For what does it profit a man that he both confesses the truth and praises the eloquence, if he does not yield his consent, when it is only for the sake of securing his consent that the speaker in urging the truth gives careful attention to what he says?  If the truths taught are such that to believe or to know them is enough, to give one’s assent implies nothing more than to confess that they are true.  When, however, the truth taught is one that must be carried into practice, and that is taught for the very purpose of being practiced, it is useless to be persuaded of the truth of what is said, it is useless to be pleased with the manner in which it is said, if it be not so learnt as to be practiced.  The eloquent divine, then, when he is urging a practical truth, must not only teach so as to give instruction, and please so as to keep up the attention, but he must also sway the mind so as to subdue the will.  For if a man be not moved by the force of truth, though it is demonstrated to his own confession, and clothed in beauty of style, nothing remains but to subdue him by the power of eloquence.

Beauty of Diction to Be in Keeping with the Matter.

Chapter 14.—Beauty of Diction to Be in Keeping with the Matter.

30.  And so much labor has been spent by men on the beauty of expression here spoken of, that not only is it not our duty to do, but it is our duty to shun and abhor, many and heinous deeds of wickedness and baseness which wicked and base men have with great eloquence recommended, not with a view to gaining assent, but merely for the sake of being read with pleasure.  But may God avert from His Church what the prophet Jeremiah says of the synagogue of the Jews:  “A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land:  the prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests applaud them with their hands;[1] and my people love to have it so:  and what will ye do in the end thereof?”[1]  O eloquence, which is the more terrible from its purity, and the more crushing from its solidity!  Assuredly it is “a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces.”  For to this God Himself has by the same prophet compared His own word spoken through His holy prophets.[1]  God forbid, then, God forbid that with us the priest should applaud the false prophet, and that God’s people should love to have it so.  God forbid, I say, that with us there should be such terrible madness!  For what shall we do in the end thereof?  And assuredly it is preferable, even though what is said should be less intelligible, less pleasing, and less persuasive, that truth be spoken, and that what is just, not what is iniquitous, be listened to with pleasure.  But this, of course, cannot be, unless what is true and just be expressed with elegance.

31.  In a serious assembly, moreover, such as is spoken of when it is said, “I will praise Thee among much people,”[1] no pleasure is derived from that species of eloquence which indeed says nothing that is false, but which buries small and unimportant truths under a frothy mass of ornamental words, such as would not be graceful or dignified even if used to adorn great and fundamental truths.  And something of this sort occurs in a letter of the blessed Cyprian, which, I think, came there by accident, or else was inserted designedly with this view, that posterity might see how the wholesome discipline of Christian teaching had cured him of that redundancy of language, and confined him to a more dignified and modest form of eloquence, such as we find in his subsequent letters, a style which is admired without effort, is sought after with eagerness, but is not attained without great difficulty.  He says, then, in one place, “Let us seek this abode:  the neighboring solitudes afford a retreat where, whilst the spreading shoots of the vine trees, pendulous and intertwined, creep amongst the supporting reeds, the leafy covering has made a portico of vine.”[1]  There is wonderful fluency and exuberance of language here; but it is too florid to be pleasing to serious minds.  But people who are fond of this style are apt to think that men who do not use it, but employ a more chastened style, do so because they cannot attain the former, not because their judgment teaches them to avoid it.  Wherefore this holy man shows both that he can speak in that style, for he has done so once, and that he does not choose, for he never uses it again.

The Christian Teacher Should Pray Before Preaching.

Chapter 15.—The Christian Teacher Should Pray Before Preaching.

32.  And so our Christian orator, while he says what is just, and holy, and good (and he ought never to say anything else), does all he can to be heard with intelligence, with pleasure, and with obedience; and he need not doubt that if he succeed in this object, 585 and so far as he succeeds, he will succeed more by piety in prayer than by gifts of oratory; and so he ought to pray for himself, and for those he is about to address, before he attempts to speak.  And when the hour is come that he must speak, he ought, before he opens his mouth, to lift up his thirsty soul to God, to drink in what he is about to pour forth, and to be himself filled with what he is about to distribute.  For, as in regard to every matter of faith and love there are many things that may be said, and many ways of saying them, who knows what it is expedient at a given moment for us to say, or to be heard saying, except God who knows the hearts of all?  And who can make us say what we ought, and in the way we ought, except Him in whose hand both we and our speeches are?  Accordingly, he who is anxious both to know and to teach should learn all that is to be taught, and acquire such a faculty of speech as is suitable for a divine.  But when the hour for speech arrives, let him reflect upon that saying of our Lord’s as better suited to the wants of a pious mind:  “Take no thought how or what ye shall speak; for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.  For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.”[1]  The Holy Spirit, then, speaks thus in those who for Christ’s sake are delivered to the persecutors; why not also in those who deliver Christ’s message to those who are willing to learn?

Human Directions Not to Be Despised, Though God Makes the True Teacher.

Chapter 16.—Human Directions Not to Be Despised, Though God Makes the True Teacher.

33.  Now if any one says that we need not direct men how or what they should teach, since the Holy Spirit makes them teachers, he may as well say that we need not pray, since our Lord says, “Your Father knoweth what things ye have need of before ye ask Him;”[1] or that the Apostle Paul should not have given directions to Timothy and Titus as to how or what they should teach others.  And these three apostolic epistles ought to be constantly before the eyes of every one who has obtained the position of a teacher in the Church.  In the First Epistle to Timothy do we not read:  “These things command and teach?”[1]  What these things are, has been told previously.  Do we not read there:  “Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father?”[1]  Is it not said in the Second Epistle:  “Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me?”[1]  And is he not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth?”[1]  And in the same place:  “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffering and doctrine.”[1]  And so in the Epistle to Titus, does he not say that a bishop ought to “hold fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers?”[1]  There, too, he says:  “But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:  that the aged men be sober,” and so on.[1]  And there, too:  “These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority.  Let no man despise thee.  Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers,”[1] and so on.  What then are we to think?  Does the apostle in any way contradict himself, when, though he says that men are made teachers by the operation of the Holy Spirit, he yet himself gives them directions how and what they should teach?  Or are we to understand, that though the duty of men to teach even the teachers does not cease when the Holy Spirit is given, yet that neither is he who planteth anything, nor he who watereth, but God who giveth the increase?[1]  Wherefore though holy men be our helpers, or even holy angels assist us, no one learns aright the things that pertain to life with God, until God makes him ready to learn from Himself, that God who is thus addressed in the psalm:  “Teach me to do Thy will; for Thou art my God.”[1]  And so the same apostle says to Timothy himself, speaking, of course, as teacher to disciple:  “But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned, and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them.”[1]  For as the medicines which men apply to the bodies of their fellow-men are of no avail except God gives them virtue (who can heal without their aid, though they cannot without His), and yet they are applied; and if it be done from a sense of duty, it is esteemed a work of mercy or benevolence; so the aids of teaching, applied through the instrumentality of man, are of advantage to the soul only when God works to make them of advantage, who could give the gospel to man even without the help or agency of men.

Threefold Division of The Various Styles of Speech.
586

Chapter 17.—Threefold Division of The Various Styles of Speech.

34.  He then who, in speaking, aims at enforcing what is good, should not despise any of those three objects, either to teach, or to give pleasure, or to move, and should pray and strive, as we have said above, to be heard with intelligence, with pleasure, and with ready compliance.  And when he does this with elegance and propriety, he may justly be called eloquent, even though he do not carry with him the assent of his hearer.  For it is these three ends, viz., teaching, giving pleasure, and moving, that the great master of Roman eloquence himself seems to have intended that the following three directions should subserve:  “He, then, shall be eloquent, who can say little things in a subdued style, moderate things in a temperate style, and great things in a majestic style:”[1]  as if he had taken in also the three ends mentioned above, and had embraced the whole in one sentence thus:  “He, then, shall be eloquent, who can say little things in a subdued style, in order to give instruction, moderate things in a temperate style, in order to give pleasure, and great things in a majestic style, in order to sway the mind.”

The Christian Orator is Constantly Dealing with Great Matters.

Chapter 18.—The Christian Orator is Constantly Dealing with Great Matters.

35.  Now the author I have quoted could have exemplified these three directions, as laid down by himself, in regard to legal questions:  he could not, however, have done so in regard to ecclesiastical questions,—the only ones that an address such as I wish to give shape to is concerned with.  For of legal questions those are called small which have reference to pecuniary transactions; those great where a matter relating to man’s life or liberty comes up.  Cases, again, which have to do with neither of these, and where the intention is not to get the hearer to do, or to pronounce judgment upon anything, but only to give him pleasure, occupy as it were a middle place between the former two, and are on that account called middling, or moderate.  For moderate things get their name from modus (a measure); and it is an abuse, not a proper use of the word moderate, to put it for little.  In questions like ours, however, where all things, and especially those addressed to the people from the place of authority, ought to have reference to men’s salvation, and that not their temporal but their eternal salvation, and where also the thing to be guarded against is eternal ruin, everything that we say is important; so much so, that even what the preacher says about pecuniary matters, whether it have reference to loss or gain, whether the amount be great or small, should not seem unimportant.  For justice is never unimportant, and justice ought assuredly to be observed, even in small affairs of money, as our Lord says:  “He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in much.”[1]  That which is least, then, is very little; but to be faithful in that which is least is great.  For as the nature of the circle, viz., that all lines drawn from the centre to the circumference are equal, is the same in a great disk that it is in the smallest coin; so the greatness of justice is in no degree lessened, though the matters to which justice is applied be small.

36.  And when the apostle spoke about trials in regard to secular affairs (and what were these but matters of money?), he says:  “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?  Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?  Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?  If, then, ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the Church.  I speak to your shame.  Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?  But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.  Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another:  why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?  Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.  Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?”[1]  Why is it that the apostle is so indignant, and that he thus accuses, and upbraids, and chides, and threatens?  Why is it that the changes in his tone, so frequent and so abrupt, testify to the depth of his emotion?  Why is it, in fine, that he speaks in a tone so exalted about matters so very trifling?  Did secular matters deserve so much at his hands?  God forbid.  No; but all this is done for the sake of justice, charity, and piety, which in the judgment of every sober mind are great, even when applied to matters the very least.

37.  Of course, if we were giving men ad 587 vice as to how they ought to conduct secular cases, either for themselves or for their connections, before the church courts, we would rightly advise them to conduct them quietly as matters of little moment.  But we are treating of the manner of speech of the man who is to be a teacher of the truths which deliver us from eternal misery and bring us to eternal happiness; and wherever these truths are spoken of, whether in public or private, whether to one or many, whether to friends or enemies, whether in a continuous discourse or in conversation, whether in tracts, or in books, or in letters long or short, they are of great importance.  Unless indeed we are prepared to say that, because a cup of cold water is a very trifling and common thing, the saying of our Lord that he who gives a cup of cold water to one of His disciples shall in no wise lose his reward,[1] is very trivial and unimportant.  Or that when a preacher takes this saying as his text, he should think his subject very unimportant, and therefore speak without either eloquence or power, but in a subdued and humble style.  Is it not the case that when we happen to speak on this subject to the people, and the presence of God is with us, so that what we say is not altogether unworthy of the subject, a tongue of fire springs up out of that cold water which inflames even the cold hearts of men with a zeal for doing works of mercy in hope of an eternal reward?

The Christian Teacher Must Use Different Styles on Different Occasions.

Chapter 19.—The Christian Teacher Must Use Different Styles on Different Occasions.

38.  And yet, while our teacher ought to speak of great matters, he ought not always to be speaking of them in a majestic tone, but in a subdued tone when he is teaching, temperately when he is giving praise or blame.  When, however, something is to be done, and we are speaking to those who ought, but are not willing, to do it, then great matters must be spoken of with power, and in a manner calculated to sway the mind.  And sometimes the same important matter is treated in all these ways at different times, quietly when it is being taught, temperately when its importance is being urged, and powerfully when we are forcing a mind that is averse to the truth to turn and embrace it.  For is there anything greater than God Himself?  Is nothing, then, to be learnt about Him?  Or ought he who is teaching the Trinity in unity to speak of it otherwise than in the method of calm discussion, so that in regard to a subject which it is not easy to comprehend, we may understand as much as it is given us to understand?  Are we in this case to seek out ornaments instead of proofs?  Or is the hearer to be moved to do something instead of being instructed so that he may learn something?  But when we come to praise God, either in Himself, or in His works, what a field for beauty and splendor of language opens up before man, who can task his powers to the utmost in praising Him whom no one can adequately praise, though there is no one who does not praise Him in some measure!  But if He be not worshipped, or if idols, whether they be demons or any created being whatever, be worshipped with Him or in preference to Him, then we ought to speak out with power and impressiveness, show how great a wickedness this is, and urge men to flee from it.

Examples of the Various Styles Drawn from Scripture.

Chapter 20.—Examples of the Various Styles Drawn from Scripture.

39.  But now to come to something more definite.  We have an example of the calm, subdued style in the Apostle Paul, where he says:  “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?  For it is written, that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond maid, the other by a free woman.  But he who was of the bond woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise.  Which things are an allegory:  for these are the two covenants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Hagar.  For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.  But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all;”[1] and so on.  And in the same way where he reasons thus:  “Brethren, I speak after the manner of men:  Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.  Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made.  He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.  And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.  For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise:  but God gave it to Abraham by promise.”[1]  And because it might possibly occur to the hearer to ask, If there is no inheritance by the law, why then was the law given? he himself anticipates this objection and asks, “Wherefore then 588 serveth the law?”  And the answer is given:  “It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.  Now a mediator is not a mediator of one; but God is one.”  And here an objection occurs which he himself has stated:  “Is the law then against the promises of God?”  He answers:  “God forbid.”  And he also states the reason in these words:  “For if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.  But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.”[1]  It is part, then, of the duty of the teacher not only to interpret what is obscure, and to unravel the difficulties of questions, but also, while doing this, to meet other questions which may chance to suggest themselves, lest these should cast doubt or discredit on what we say.  If, however, the solution of these questions suggest itself as soon as the questions themselves arise, it is useless to disturb what we cannot remove.  And besides, when out of one question other questions arise, and out of these again still others; if these be all discussed and solved, the reasoning is extended to such a length, that unless the memory be exceedingly powerful and active the reasoner finds it impossible to return to the original question from which he set out.  It is, however, exceedingly desirable that whatever occurs to the mind as an objection that might be urged should be stated and refuted, lest it turn up at a time when no one will be present to answer it, or lest, if it should occur to a man who is present but says nothing about it, it might never be thoroughly removed.

40.  In the following words of the apostle we have the temperate style:  “Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren; the elder women as mothers, the younger as sisters.”[1]  And also in these:  “I beseech you, therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is you reasonable service.”[1]  And almost the whole of this hortatory passage is in the temperate style of eloquence; and those parts of it are the most beautiful in which, as if paying what was due, things that belong to each other are gracefully brought together.  For example:  “Having then gifts, differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation:  he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that showeth mercy, with cheerfulness.  Let love be without dissimulation.  Abhor that which is evil, cleave to that which is good.  Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one another; not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord; rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer; distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality.  Bless them which persecute you:  bless, and curse not.  Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep.  Be of the same mind one toward another.”[1]  And how gracefully all this is brought to a close in a period of two members:  “Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate!”  And a little afterwards:  “Render therefore to all their dues:  tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.”[1]  And these also, though expressed in single clauses, are terminated by a period of two members:  “Owe no man anything, but to love one another.”  And a little farther on:  “The night is far spent, the day is at hand:  let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light.  Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying:  but put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof.”[1]  Now if the passage were translated thus, “et carnis providentiam ne in concupiscentiis feceritis,”[1] the ear would no doubt be gratified with a more harmonious ending; but our translator, with more strictness, preferred to retain even the order of the words.  And how this sounds in the Greek language, in which the apostle spoke, those who are better skilled in that tongue may determine.  My opinion, however, is, that what has been translated to us in the same order of words does not run very harmoniously even in the original tongue.

41.  And, indeed, I must confess that our authors are very defective in that grace of speech which consists in harmonious endings.  Whether this be the fault of the translators, or whether, as I am more inclined to believe, the authors designedly avoided such ornament, I dare not affirm; for I confess I do 589 not know.  This I know, however, that if any one who is skilled in this species of harmony would take the closing sentences of these writers and arrange them according to the law of harmony (which he could very easily do by changing some words for words of equivalent meaning, or by retaining the words he finds and altering their arrangement), he will learn that these divinely-inspired men are not defective in any of those points which he has been taught in the schools of the grammarians and rhetoricians to consider of importance; and he will find in them many kinds of speech of great beauty,—beautiful even in our language, but especially beautiful in the original,—none of which can be found in those writings of which they boast so much.  But care must be taken that, while adding harmony, we take away none of the weight from these divine and authoritative utterances.  Now our prophets were so far from being deficient in the musical training from which this harmony we speak of is most fully learnt, that Jerome, a very learned man, describes even the metres employed by some of them,[1] in the Hebrew language at least; though, in order to give an accurate rendering of the words, he has not preserved these in his translation.  I, however (to speak of my own feeling, which is better known to me than it is to others, and than that of others is to me), while I do not in my own speech, however modestly I think it done, neglect these harmonious endings, am just as well pleased to find them in the sacred authors very rarely.

42.  The majestic style of speech differs from the temperate style just spoken of, chiefly in that it is not so much decked out with verbal ornaments as exalted into vehemence by mental emotion.  It uses, indeed, nearly all the ornaments that the other does; but if they do not happen to be at hand, it does not seek for them.  For it is borne on by its own vehemence; and the force of the thought, not the desire for ornament, makes it seize upon any beauty of expression that comes in its way.  It is enough for its object that warmth of feeling should suggest the fitting words; they need not be selected by careful elaboration of speech.  If a brave man be armed with weapons adorned with gold and jewels, he works feats of valor with those arms in the heat of battle, not because they are costly, but because they are arms; and yet the same man does great execution, even when anger furnishes him with a weapon that he digs out of the ground.[1]  The apostle in the following passage is urging that, for the sake of the ministry of the gospel, and sustained by the consolations of God’s grace, we should bear with patience all the evils of this life.  It is a great subject, and is treated with power, and the ornaments of speech are not wanting:  “Behold,” he says, “now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.  Giving no offence in anything, that the ministry not blamed:  but in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, in strifes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labors, in watchings, in fastings; by pureness, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, by the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, by honor and dishonor, by evil report and good report:  as deceivers, and yet true; as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed; as sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things.”[1]  See him still burning:  “O ye Corinthians, our mouth is opened unto you, our heart is enlarged,” and so on; it would be tedious to go through it all.

43.  And in the same way, writing to the Romans, he urges that the persecutions of this world should be overcome by charity, in assured reliance on the help of God.  And he treats this subject with both power and beauty:  “We know,” he says, “that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose.  For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren.  Moreover, whom He did predestinate, them He also called; and whom He called, them He also justified; and whom He justified, them He also glorified.  What shall we then say to these things?  If God be for us, who can be against us?  He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?  Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect?  It is God that justifieth; who is he that condemneth?  It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.  Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?  (As it is written, For Thy sake we are killed all the 590 day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.)  Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors, through Him that loved us.  For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”[1]

44.  Again, in writing to the Galatians, although the whole epistle is written in the subdued style, except at the end, where it rises into a temperate eloquence, yet he interposes one passage of so much feeling that, notwithstanding the absence of any ornaments such as appear in the passages just quoted, it cannot be called anything but powerful:  “Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.  I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.  Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as ye are:  ye have not injured me at all.  Ye know how, through infirmity of the flesh, I preached the gospel unto you at the first.  And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.  Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.  Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?  They zealously affect you, but not well; yea, they would exclude you, that ye might affect them.  But it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing, and not only when I am present with you.  My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you, I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you.”[1]  Is there anything here of contrasted words arranged antithetically, or of words rising gradually to a climax, or of sonorous clauses, and sections, and periods?  Yet, notwithstanding, there is a glow of strong emotion that makes us feel the fervor of eloquence.

Examples of the Various Styles, Drawn from the Teachers of the Church, Especially Ambrose and Cyprian.

Chapter 21.—Examples of the Various Styles, Drawn from the Teachers of the Church, Especially Ambrose and Cyprian.

45.  But these writings of the apostles, though clear, are yet profound, and are so written that one who is not content with a superficial acquaintance, but desires to know them thoroughly, must not only read and hear them, but must have an expositor.  Let us, then, study these various modes of speech as they are exemplified in the writings of men who, by reading the Scriptures, have attained to the knowledge of divine and saving truth, and have ministered it to the Church.  Cyprian of blessed memory writes in the subdued style in his treatise on the sacrament of the cup.  In this book he resolves the question, whether the cup of the Lord ought to contain water only, or water mingled with wine.  But we must quote a passage by way of illustration.  After the customary introduction, he proceeds to the discussion of the point in question.  “Observe” he says, “that we are instructed, in presenting the cup, to maintain the custom handed down to us from the Lord, and to do nothing that our Lord has not first done for us:  so that the cup which is offered in remembrance of Him should be mixed with wine.  For, as Christ says, ‘I am the true vine,’[1] it follows that the blood of Christ is wine, not water; and the cup cannot appear to contain His blood by which we are redeemed and quickened, if the wine be absent; for by the wine is the blood of Christ typified, that blood which is foreshadowed and proclaimed in all the types and declarations of Scripture.  For we find that in the book of Genesis this very circumstance in regard to the sacrament is foreshadowed, and our Lord’s sufferings typically set forth, in the case of Noah, when he drank wine, and was drunken, and was uncovered within his tent, and his nakedness was exposed by his second son, and was carefully hidden by his elder and his younger sons.[1]  It is not necessary to mention the other circumstances in detail, as it is only necessary to observe this point, that Noah, foreshadowing the future reality, drank, not water, but wine, and thus showed forth our Lord’s passion.  In the same way we see the sacrament of the Lord’s supper prefigured in the case of Melchizedek the priest, according to the testimony of the Holy Scriptures, where it says:  ‘And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine:  and he was the priest of the most high God.  And he blessed Abraham.’[1]  Now, that Melchizedek was a type of Christ, the Holy Spirit declares in the Psalms, where the Father addressing the Son says, ‘Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.’[1]”[1]  In this passage, and in all of the letter that follows, the subdued style is maintained, as the reader may easily satisfy himself.

46.  St. Ambrose also, though dealing with a question of very great importance, the equality of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the 591 Son, employs the subdued style, because the object he has in view demands, not beauty of diction, nor the swaying of the mind by the stir of emotion, but facts and proofs.  Accordingly, in the introduction to his work, we find the following passage among others:  “When Gideon was startled by the message he had heard from God, that, though thousands of the people failed, yet through one man God would deliver His people from their enemies, he brought forth a kid of the goats, and by direction of the angel laid it with unleavened cakes upon a rock, and poured the broth over it; and as soon as the angel of God touched it with the end of the staff that was in his hand, there rose up fire out of the rock and consumed the offering.[1]  Now this sign seems to indicate that the rock was a type of the body of Christ, for it is written, ‘They drank of that spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ;’[1] this, of course, referring not to Christ’s divine nature but to His flesh, whose ever-flowing fountain of blood has ever satisfied the hearts of His thirsting people.  And so it was at that time declared in a mystery that the Lord Jesus, when crucified, should abolish in His flesh the sins of the whole world, and not their guilty acts merely, but the evil lusts of their hearts.  For the kid’s flesh refers to the guilt of the outward act, the broth to the allurement of lust within, as it is written, ‘And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a lusting; and the children of Israel also wept again and again and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat?’[1]  When the angel, then, stretched out his staff and touched the rock, and fire rose out of it, this was a sign that our Lord’s flesh, filled with the Spirit of God, should burn up all the sins of the human race.  Whence also the Lord says ‘I am come to send fire on the earth.’”[1]  And in the same style he pursues the subject, devoting himself chiefly to proving and enforcing his point.[1]

47.  An example of the temperate style is the celebrated encomium on virginity from Cyprian:  “Now our discourse addresses itself to the virgins, who, as they are the objects of higher honor, are also the objects of greater care.  These are the flowers on the tree of the Church, the glory and ornament of spiritual grace, the joy of honor and praise, a work unbroken and unblemished, the image of God answering to the holiness of the Lord, the brighter portion of the flock of Christ.  The glorious fruitfulness of their mother the Church rejoices in them, and in them flourishes more abundantly; and in proportion as bright virginity adds to her numbers, in the same proportion does the mother’s joy increase.[1]  And at another place in the end of the epistle, ‘As we have borne,’ he says, ‘the image of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.’[1]  Virginity bears this image, integrity bears it, holiness and truth bear it; they bear it who are mindful of the chastening of the Lord, who observe justice and piety, who are strong in faith, humble in fear, steadfast in the endurance of suffering, meek in the endurance of injury, ready to pity, of one mind and of one heart in brotherly peace.  And every one of these things ought ye, holy virgins, to observe, to cherish, and fulfill, who having hearts at leisure for God and for Christ, and having chosen the greater and better part, lead and point the way to the Lord, to whom you have pledged your vows.  Ye who are advanced in age, exercise control over the younger.  Ye who are younger, wait upon the elders, and encourage your equals; stir up one another by mutual exhortations; provoke one another to glory by emulous examples of virtue; endure bravely, advance in spirituality, finish your course with joy; only be mindful of us when your virginity shall begin to reap its reward of honor.”[1]

48.  Ambrose also uses the temperate and ornamented style when he is holding up before virgins who have made their profession a model for their imitation, and says:  “She was a virgin not in body only, but also in mind; not mingling the purity of her affection with any dross of hypocrisy; serious in speech; prudent in disposition; sparing of words; delighting in study; not placing her confidence in uncertain riches, but in the prayer of the poor; diligent in labor; reverent in word; accustomed to look to God, not man, as the guide of her conscience; injuring no one, wishing well to all; dutiful to her elders, not envious of her equals; avoiding boastfulness, following reason, loving virtue.  When did she wound her parents even by a look?  When did she quarrel with her neighbors?  When did she spurn the humble, laugh at the weak, or shun the indigent?  She is accustomed to visit only those haunts of men that pity would not blush for, nor modesty pass by.  There is nothing haughty in her eyes, nothing bold in her words, nothing wanton in her gestures:  her bearing is not voluptuous, nor her gait too free, nor her voice petulant; so that her outward appearance is an image of her mind, and a picture of purity.  For a good house ought to be known for such at the very thres 592 hold, and show at the very entrance that there is no dark recess within, as the light of a lamp set inside sheds its radiance on the outside.  Why need I detail her sparingness in food, her superabundance in duty,—the one falling beneath the demands of nature, the other rising above its powers?  The latter has no intervals of intermission, the former doubles the days by fasting; and when the desire for refreshment does arise, it is satisfied with food such as will support life, but not minister to appetite.”[1]  Now I have cited these latter passages as examples of the temperate style, because their purpose is not to induce those who have not yet devoted themselves to take the vows of virginity, but to show of what character those who have taken vows ought to be.  To prevail on any one to take a step of such a nature and of so great importance, requires that the mind should be excited and set on fire by the majestic style.  Cyprian the martyr, however, did not write about the duty of taking up the profession of virginity, but about the dress and deportment of virgins.  Yet that great bishop urges them to their duty even in these respects by the power of a majestic eloquence.

49.  But I shall select examples of the majestic style from their treatment of a subject which both of them have touched.  Both have denounced the women who color, or rather discolor, their faces with paint.  And the first, in dealing with this topic, says:  “Suppose a painter should depict in colors that rival nature’s the features and form and complexion of some man, and that, when the portrait had been finished with consummate art, another painter should put his hand over it, as if to improve by his superior skill the painting already completed; surely the first artist would feel deeply insulted, and his indignation would be justly roused.  Dost thou, then, think that thou wilt carry off with impunity so audacious an act of wickedness, such an insult to God the great artificer?  For, granting that thou art not immodest in thy behavior towards men, and that thou art not polluted in mind by these meretricious deceits, yet, in corrupting and violating what is God’s, thou provest thyself worse than an adulteress.  The fact that thou considerest thyself adorned and beautified by such arts is an impeachment of God’s handiwork, and a violation of truth.  Listen to the warning voice of the apostle:  ‘Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened.  For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us:  therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.’[1]  Now can sincerity and truth continue to exist when what is sincere is polluted, and what is true is changed by meretricious coloring and the deceptions of quackery into a lie?  Thy Lord says, ‘Thou canst not make one hair white or black;’[1] and dost thou wish to have greater power so as to bring to nought the words of thy Lord?  With rash and sacrilegious hand thou wouldst fain change the color of thy hair:  I would that, with a prophetic look to the future, thou shouldst dye it the color of flame.”[1]  It would be too long to quote all that follows.

50.  Ambrose again, inveighing against such practices, says:  “Hence arise these incentives to vice, that women, in their fear that they may not prove attractive to men, paint their faces with carefully-chosen colors, and then from stains on their features go on to stains on their chastity.  What folly it is to change the features of nature into those of painting, and from fear of incurring their husband’s disapproval, to proclaim openly that they have incurred their own!  For the woman who desires to alter her natural appearance pronounces condemnation on herself; and her eager endeavors to please another prove that she has first been displeasing to herself.  And what testimony to thine ugliness can we find, O woman, that is more unquestionable than thine own, when thou art afraid to show thyself?  If thou art comely why dost thou hide thy comeliness?  If thou art plain, why dost thou lyingly pretend to be beautiful, when thou canst not enjoy the pleasure of the lie either in thine own consciousness or in that of another?  For he loves another woman, thou desirest to please another man; and thou art angry if he love another, though he is taught adultery in thee.  Thou art the evil promptress of thine own injury.  For even the woman who has been the victim of a pander shrinks from acting the pander’s part, and though she be vile, it is herself she sins against and not another.  The crime of adultery is almost more tolerable than thine; for adultery tampers with modesty, but thou with nature.”[1]  It is sufficiently clear, I think, that this eloquence calls passionately upon women to avoid tampering with their appearance by deceitful arts, and to cultivate modesty and fear.  Accordingly, we notice that the style is neither subdued nor temperate, but majestic throughout.  Now in these two authors whom 593 I have selected as specimens of the rest, and in other ecclesiastical writers who both speak the truth and speak it well,—speak it, that is, judiciously, pointedly, and with beauty and power of expression,—many examples may be found of the three styles of speech, scattered through their various writings and discourses; and the diligent student may by assiduous reading, intermingled with practice on his own part, become thoroughly imbued with them all.

The Necessity of Variety in Style.

Chapter 22.—The Necessity of Variety in Style.

51.  But we are not to suppose that it is against rule to mingle these various styles:  on the contrary, every variety of style should be introduced so far as is consistent with good taste.  For when we keep monotonously to one style, we fail to retain the hearer’s attention; but when we pass from one style to another, the discourse goes off more gracefully, even though it extend to greater length.  Each separate style, again, has varieties of its own which prevent the hearer’s attention from cooling or becoming languid.  We can bear the subdued style, however, longer without variety than the majestic style.  For the mental emotion which it is necessary to stir up in order to carry the hearer’s feelings with us, when once it has been sufficiently excited, the higher the pitch to which it is raised, can be maintained the shorter time.  And therefore we must be on our guard, lest, in striving to carry to a higher point the emotion we have excited, we rather lose what we have already gained.  But after the interposition of matter that we have to treat in a quieter style, we can return with good effect to that which must be treated forcibly, thus making the tide of eloquence to ebb and flow like the sea.  It follows from this, that the majestic style, if it is to be long continued, ought not to be unvaried, but should alternate at intervals with the other styles; the speech or writing as a whole, however, being referred to that style which is the prevailing one.

How the Various Styles Should Be Mingled.

Chapter 23.—How the Various Styles Should Be Mingled.

52.  Now it is a matter of importance to determine what style should be alternated with what other, and the places where it is necessary that any particular style should be used.  In the majestic style, for instance, it is always, or almost always, desirable that the introduction should be temperate.  And the speaker has it in his discretion to use the subdued style even where the majestic would be allowable, in order that the majestic when it is used may be the more majestic by comparison, and may as it were shine out with greater brilliance from the dark background.  Again, whatever may be the style of the speech or writing, when knotty questions turn up for solution, accuracy of distinction is required, and this naturally demands the subdued style.  And accordingly this style must be used in alternation with the other two styles whenever questions of that sort turn up; just as we must use the temperate style, no matter what may be the general tone of the discourse, whenever praise or blame is to be given without any ulterior reference to the condemnation or acquittal of any one, or to obtaining the concurrence of any one in a course of action.  In the majestic style, then, and in the quiet likewise, both the other two styles occasionally find place.  The temperate style, on the other hand, not indeed always, but occasionally, needs the quiet style; for example, when, as I have said, a knotty question comes up to be settled, or when some points that are susceptible of ornament are left unadorned and expressed in the quiet style, in order to give greater effect to certain exuberances (as they may be called) of ornament.  But the temperate style never needs the aid of the majestic; for its object is to gratify, never to excite, the mind.

The Effects Produced by the Majestic Style.

Chapter 24.—The Effects Produced by the Majestic Style.

53.  If frequent and vehement applause follows a speaker, we are not to suppose on that account that he is speaking in the majestic style; for this effect is often produced both by the accurate distinctions of the quiet style, and by the beauties of the temperate.  The majestic style, on the other hand, frequently silences the audience by its impressiveness, but calls forth their tears.  For example, when at Cæsarea in Mauritania I was dissuading the people from that civil, or worse than civil, war which they called Caterva (for it was not fellow-citizens merely, but neighbors, brothers, fathers and sons even, who, divided into two factions and armed with stones, fought annually at a certain season of the year for several days continuously, every one killing whomsoever he could), I strove with all the vehemence of speech that I could command to root out and drive from their hearts and lives an evil so cruel and inveterate; it was not, however, when I heard their applause, but when I saw their tears, that I thought I had produced an effect.  For the applause showed that they were instructed and de 594 lighted, but the tears that they were subdued.  And when I saw their tears I was confident even before the event proved it, that this horrible and barbarous custom (which had been handed down to them from their fathers and their ancestors of generations long gone by and which like an enemy was besieging their hearts, or rather had complete possession of them) was overthrown; and immediately that my sermon was finished I called upon them with heart and voice to give praise and thanks to God.  And, lo, with the blessing of Christ, it is now eight years or more since anything of the sort was attempted there.  In many other cases besides I have observed that men show the effect made on them by the powerful eloquence of a wise man, not by clamorous applause so much as by groans, sometimes even by tears, finally by change of life.

54.  The quiet style, too, has made a change in many; but it was to teach them what they were ignorant of, or to persuade them of what they thought incredible, not to make them do what they knew they ought to do but were unwilling to do.  To break down hardness of this sort, speech needs to be vehement.  Praise and censure, too, when they are eloquently expressed, even in the temperate style, produce such an effect on some, that they are not only pleased with the eloquence of the encomiums and censures, but are led to live so as themselves to deserve praise, and to avoid living so as to incur blame.  But no one would say that all who are thus delighted change their habits in consequence, whereas all who are moved by the majestic style act accordingly, and all who are taught by the quiet style know or believe a truth which they were previously ignorant of.

How the Temperate Style is to Be Used.

Chapter 25.—How the Temperate Style is to Be Used.

55.  From all this we may conclude, that the end arrived at by the two styles last mentioned is the one which it is most essential for those who aspire to speak with wisdom and eloquence to secure.  On the other hand, what the temperate style properly aims at, viz., to please by beauty of expression, is not in itself an adequate end; but when what we have to say is good and useful, and when the hearers are both acquainted with it and favorably disposed towards it, so that it is not necessary either to instruct or persuade them, beauty of style may have its influence in securing their prompter compliance, or in making them adhere to it more tenaciously.  For as the function of all eloquence, whichever of these three forms it may assume, is to speak persuasively, and its object is to persuade, an eloquent man will speak persuasively, whatever style he may adopt; but unless he succeeds in persuading, his eloquence has not secured its object.  Now in the subdued style, he persuades his hearers that what he says is true; in the majestic style, he persuades them to do what they are aware they ought to do, but do not; in the temperate style, he persuades them that his speech is elegant and ornate.  But what use is there in attaining such an object as this last?  They may desire it who are vain of their eloquence and make a boast of panegyrics, and such-like performances, where the object is not to instruct the hearer, or to persuade him to any course of action, but merely to give him pleasure.  We, however, ought to make that end subordinate to another, viz., the effecting by this style of eloquence what we aim at effecting when we use the majestic style.  For we may by the use of this style persuade men to cultivate good habits and give up evil ones, if they are not so hardened as to need the vehement style; or if they have already begun a good course, we may induce them to pursue it more zealously, and to persevere in it with constancy.  Accordingly, even in the temperate style we must use beauty of expression not for ostentation, but for wise ends; not contenting ourselves merely with pleasing the hearer, but rather seeking to aid him in the pursuit of the good end which we hold out before him.

In Every Style the Orator Should Aim at Perspicuity, Beauty, and Persuasiveness.

Chapter 26.—In Every Style the Orator Should Aim at Perspicuity, Beauty, and Persuasiveness.

55.  Now in regard to the three conditions I laid down a little while ago[1] as necessary to be fulfilled by any one who wishes to speak with wisdom and eloquence, viz., perspicuity, beauty of style, and persuasive power, we are not to understand that these three qualities attach themselves respectively to the three several styles of speech, one to each, so that perspicuity is a merit peculiar to the subdued style, beauty to the temperate, and persuasive power to the majestic.  On the contrary, all speech, whatever its style, ought constantly to aim at, and as far as possible to display, all these three merits.  For we do not like even what we say in the subdued style to pall upon the hearer; and therefore we would be listened to, not with intelligence merely, but with pleasure as well.  Again, why do we enforce what we teach by divine testimony, except that we wish to carry the hearer with us, that is, to com 595 pel his assent by calling in the assistance of Him of whom it is said, “Thy testimonies are very sure”?[1]  And when any one narrates a story, even in the subdued style, what does he wish but to be believed?  But who will listen to him if he do not arrest attention by some beauty of style?  And if he be not intelligible, is it not plain that he can neither give pleasure nor enforce conviction?  The subdued style, again, in its own naked simplicity, when it unravels questions of very great difficulty, and throws an unexpected light upon them; when it worms out and brings to light some very acute observations from a quarter whence nothing was expected; when it seizes upon and exposes the falsity of an opposing opinion, which seemed at its first statement to be unassailable; especially when all this is accompanied by a natural, unsought grace of expression, and by a rhythm and balance of style which is not ostentatiously obtruded, but seems rather to be called forth by the nature of the subject: this style, so used, frequently calls forth applause so great that one can hardly believe it to be the subdued style.  For the fact that it comes forth without either ornament or defense, and offers battle in its own naked simplicity, does not hinder it from crushing its adversary by weight of nerve and muscle, and overwhelming and destroying the falsehood that opposes it by the mere strength of its own right arm.  How explain the frequent and vehement applause that waits upon men who speak thus, except by the pleasure that truth so irresistibly established, and so victoriously defended, naturally affords?  Wherefore the Christian teacher and speaker ought, when he uses the subdued style, to endeavor not only to be clear and intelligible, but to give pleasure and to bring home conviction to the hearer.

57.  Eloquence of the temperate style, also, must, in the case of the Christian orator, be neither altogether without ornament, nor unsuitably adorned, nor is it to make the giving of pleasure its sole aim, which is all it professes to accomplish in the hands of others; but in its encomiums and censures it should aim at inducing the hearer to strive after or avoid or renounce what it condemns.  On the other hand, without perspicuity this style cannot give pleasure.  And so the three qualities, perspicuity, beauty, and persuasiveness, are to be sought in this style also; beauty, of course, being its primary object.

58.  Again, when it becomes necessary to stir and sway the hearer’s mind by the majestic style (and this is always necessary when he admits that what you say is both true and agreeable, and yet is unwilling to act accordingly), you must, of course, speak in the majestic style.  But who can be moved if he does not understand what is said? and who will stay to listen if he receives no pleasure?  Wherefore, in this style, too, when an obdurate heart is to be persuaded to obedience, you must speak so as to be both intelligible and pleasing, if you would be heard with a submissive mind.

The Man Whose Life is in Harmony with His Teaching Will Teach with Greater Effect.

Chapter 27.—The Man Whose Life is in Harmony with His Teaching Will Teach with Greater Effect.

59.  But whatever may be the majesty of the style, the life of the speaker will count for more in securing the hearer’s compliance.  The man who speaks wisely and eloquently, but lives wickedly, may, it is true, instruct many who are anxious to learn; though, as it is written, he “is unprofitable to himself.”[1]  Wherefore, also, the apostle says:  “Whether in pretence or in truth Christ is preached.”[1]  Now Christ is the truth; yet we see that the truth can be preached, though not in truth,—that is, what is right and true in itself may be preached by a man of perverse and deceitful mind.  And thus it is that Jesus Christ is preached by those that seek their own, and not the things that are Jesus Christ’s.  But since true believers obey the voice, not of any man, but of the Lord Himself, who says, “All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do:  but do not ye after their works; for they say and do not;”[1] therefore it is that men who themselves lead unprofitable lives are heard with profit by others.  For though they seek their own objects, they do not dare to teach their own doctrines, sitting as they do in the high places of ecclesiastical authority, which is established on sound doctrine.  Wherefore our Lord Himself, before saying what I have just quoted about men of this stamp, made this observation:  “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.”[1]  The seat they occupied, then, which was not theirs but Moses’, compelled them to say what was good, though they did what was evil.  And so they followed their own course in their lives, but were prevented by the seat they occupied, which belonged to another, from preaching their own doctrines.

60.  Now these men do good to many by preaching what they themselves do not perform; but they would do good to very many 596 more if they lived as they preach.  For there are numbers who seek an excuse for their own evil lives in comparing the teaching with the conduct of their instructors, and who say in their hearts, or even go a little further, and say with their lips:  Why do you not do yourself what you bid me do?  And thus they cease to listen with submission to a man who does not listen to himself, and in despising the preacher they learn to despise the word that is preached.  Wherefore the apostle, writing to Timothy, after telling him, “Let no man despise thy youth,” adds immediately the course by which he would avoid contempt:  “but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.”[1]

Truth is More Important Than Expression.  What is Meant by Strife About Words.

Chapter 28.—Truth is More Important Than Expression.  What is Meant by Strife About Words.

61.  Such a teacher as is here described may, to secure compliance, speak not only quietly and temperately, but even vehemently, without any breach of modesty, because his life protects him against contempt.  For while he pursues an upright life, he takes care to maintain a good reputation as well, providing things honest in the sight of God and men,[1] fearing God, and caring for men.  In his very speech even he prefers to please by matter rather than by words; thinks that a thing is well said in proportion as it is true in fact, and that a teacher should govern his words, not let the words govern him.  This is what the apostle says:  “Not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.”[1]  To the same effect also is what he says to Timothy:  “Charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.”[1]  Now this does not mean that, when adversaries oppose the truth, we are to say nothing in defence of the truth.  For where, then, would be what he says when he is describing the sort of man a bishop ought to be:  “that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and convince the gainsayers?”[1]  To strive about words is not to be careful about the way to overcome error by truth, but to be anxious that your mode of expression should be preferred to that of another.  The man who does not strive about words, whether he speak quietly, temperately, or vehemently, uses words with no other purpose than to make the truth plain, pleasing, and effective; for not even love itself, which is the end of the commandment and the fulfilling of the law,[1] can be rightly exercised unless the objects of love are true and not false.  For as a man with a comely body but an ill-conditioned mind is a more painful object than if his body too were deformed, so men who teach lies are the more pitiable if they happen to be eloquent in speech.  To speak eloquently, then, and wisely as well, is just to express truths which it is expedient to teach in fit and proper words,—words which in the subdued style are adequate, in the temperate, elegant, and in the majestic, forcible.  But the man who cannot speak both eloquently and wisely should speak wisely without eloquence, rather than eloquently without wisdom.

It is Permissible for a Preacher to Deliver to the People What Has Been Written by a More Eloquent Man Than Himself.

Chapter 29.—It is Permissible for a Preacher to Deliver to the People What Has Been Written by a More Eloquent Man Than Himself.

If, however, he cannot do even this, let his life be such as shall not only secure a reward for himself, but afford an example to others; and let his manner of living be an eloquent sermon in itself.

63.  There are, indeed, some men who have a good delivery, but cannot compose anything to deliver.  Now, if such men take what has been written with wisdom and eloquence by others, and commit it to memory, and deliver it to the people, they cannot be blamed, supposing them to do it without deception.  For in this way many become preachers of the truth (which is certainly desirable), and yet not many teachers; for all deliver the discourse which one real teacher has composed, and there are no divisions among them.  Nor are such men to be alarmed by the words of Jeremiah the prophet, through whom God denounces those who steal His words every one from his neighbor.[1]  For those who steal take what does not belong to them, but the word of God belongs to all who obey it; and it is the man who speaks well, but lives badly, who really takes the words that belong to another.  For the good things he says seem to be the result of his own thought, and yet they have nothing in common with his manner of life.  And so God has said that they steal His words who would appear good by speaking God’s words, but are in fact bad, as they follow their own ways.  And if you look closely into the matter, it is not really themselves who say the good things they say.  For how can they say in words what they deny in 597deeds?  It is not for nothing that the apostle says of such men:  “They profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him.”[1]  In one sense, then, they do say the things, and in another sense they do not say them; for both these statements must be true, both being made by Him who is the Truth.  Speaking of such men, in one place He says, “Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works;”—that is to say, what ye hear from their lips, that do; what ye see in their lives, that do ye not;—“for they say and do not.”[1]  And so, though they do not, yet they say.  But in another place, upbraiding such men, He says, “O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things?”[1]  And from this it would appear that even what they say, when they say what is good, it is not themselves who say, for in will and in deed they deny what they say.  Hence it happens that a wicked man who is eloquent may compose a discourse in which the truth is set forth to be delivered by a good man who is not eloquent; and when this takes place, the former draws from himself what does not belong to him, and the latter receives from another what really belongs to himself.  But when true believers render this service to true believers, both parties speak what is their own, for God is theirs, to whom belongs all that they say; and even those who could not compose what they say make it their own by composing their lives in harmony with it.

The Preacher Should Commence His Discourse with Prayer to God.

Chapter 30.—The Preacher Should Commence His Discourse with Prayer to God.

63.  But whether a man is going to address the people or to dictate what others will deliver or read to the people, he ought to pray God to put into his mouth a suitable discourse.  For if Queen Esther prayed, when she was about to speak to the king touching the temporal welfare of her race, that God would put fit words into her mouth,[1] how much more ought he to pray for the same blessing who labors in word and doctrine for the eternal welfare of men?  Those, again, who are to deliver what others compose for them ought, before they receive their discourse, to pray for those who are preparing it; and when they have received it, they ought to pray both that they themselves may deliver it well, and that those to whom they address it may give ear; and when the discourse has a happy issue, they ought to render thanks to Him from whom they know such blessings come, so that all the praise may be His “in whose hand are both we and our words.”[1]

Apology for the Length of the Work.

Chapter 31.—Apology for the Length of the Work.

64.  This book has extended to a greater length than I expected or desired.  But the reader or hearer who finds pleasure in it will not think it long.  He who thinks it long, but is anxious to know its contents, may read it in part.  He who does not care to be acquainted with it need not complain of its length.  I, however, give thanks to God that with what little ability I possess I have in these four books striven to depict, not the sort of man I am myself (for my defects are very many), but the sort of man he ought to be who desires to labor in sound, that is, in Christian doctrine, not for his own instruction only, but for that of others also.

Return to the Table of Contents
Return to the List of Authors and Books of the Classics Library