On Christian Doctrine 4.13–4.20

But for the sake of those who are fastidious and are not pleased by truth if it is said in any other way than such that the speaker's discourse also pleases, no small place has been given in eloquence to delight as well. Yet when it is added, it is not enough for the hard-hearted, whom it has profited nothing to have understood or to have been delighted by the teacher's style. For what do these two things bestow on a person who both confesses what is true and praises the eloquence, yet does not bend his assent, for the sake of which alone the speaker's attention is fixed on the things said when he urges something? For if such things are taught as it is enough to believe or know, to agree with them is nothing else than to confess that they are true. But when what is to be done is taught, and is taught so that it may be done, it is in vain that a person is persuaded that what is said is true, in vain that the very manner in which it is said pleases, if it is not so learned that it is done. The eloquent churchman, then, when he urges something that is to be done, must not only teach so as to instruct and delight so as to hold, but also move so as to win. For there remains to be moved to consent by the grandeur of eloquence the one in whom the truth, demonstrated to the point of his confessing it, even with the addition of charm of style, has not done so.

So much effort has been spent by people on this charm that not only things not to be done, but even so many great evils and shameful things to be fled and abhorred, which have been most eloquently urged by evil and shameful men, are read over and over, not in order to agree with them, but only for the sake of delight. But may God keep from his Church what the prophet Jeremiah records of the synagogue of the Jews, saying: “Fear and horrible things have come to pass in the land: the prophets prophesied iniquity, and the priests clapped their hands, and my people loved it so. And what will you do in the time to come?” O eloquence, the more terrible the purer it is, and the more vehement the more solid! O truly an axe cutting rocks! For God himself said through this same prophet that his word, which he made through the holy prophets, is like this. Far be it, then, far be it from us that priests should applaud those who speak iniquity, and that the people of God should love it so. Far from us, I say, be such madness; for what shall we do in the time to come? And certainly let what is said be less understood, less pleasing, less moving; yet let it be said; and let just things, not iniquitous ones, be gladly heard. And this certainly would not happen unless they were said with charm.

But among a serious people, of whom it was said to God, “Among a serious people I will praise you,” not even that charm is delightful by which iniquitous things are not indeed said, but small and fragile goods are adorned with a frothy circuit of words, such as would not fittingly and seriously adorn even great and stable goods. There is something of this kind in a letter of the most blessed Cyprian, which I think either happened, or was done on purpose, so that posterity might know how the soundness of Christian teaching called his tongue back from that excess and restrained it to a weightier and more modest eloquence, such as is safely loved, devoutly sought, but with great difficulty achieved in his later writings. He says, then, in one place: “Let us seek this seat; the neighboring retreats give seclusion, where, while the wandering trailings of the vine shoots creep in pendent intertwinings through the supporting reeds, the leafy roofs have made a portico of vines.” These things are said with a wonderfully abundant fertility of fluency, but by their excessive profusion they displease seriousness. But those who love these things surely think that those who do not speak so, but speak in a more chastened way, cannot speak so, not that they avoid it by judgment. Therefore that holy man showed both that he could speak so, because he spoke so somewhere, and that he would not, because he never did so afterwards.

So this eloquent man of ours, when he says things that are just, holy, and good (for he ought not to say anything else), strives as much as he can, when he says them, to be heard with understanding, with pleasure, and with obedience; and let him not doubt that he is able to do this, if he is able, and to the extent he is able, more by the piety of his prayers than by the skill of orators; so that by praying for himself and for those he is about to address, he is a pray-er before he is a speaker. At the very hour when he comes forward to speak, before he puts forth his tongue to speak, let him lift up his thirsting soul to God, so that he may pour forth what he has drunk and give out what he has been filled with. For since, on each matter that is to be treated according to faith and love, there are many things that could be said and many ways in which they could be said by those who know them, who knows what is expedient for us to say at the present time, or for them to hear through us, except he who sees the hearts of all? And who makes it so that what ought to be said, and in the way it ought, is said by us, except he in whose hand are both we and our words? And therefore let one who wishes both to know and to teach learn all that is to be taught, and acquire the ability to speak, as befits a churchman; but at the hour of speaking itself, let him think rather that what the Lord says befits a good mind: “Do not think how or what you will speak; for it will be given you in that hour what you are to speak; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.” If, then, the Holy Spirit speaks in those who are handed over to persecutors for Christ's sake, why not also in those who hand over Christ to learners?

But whoever says that people need not be taught what or how to teach, if the Holy Spirit makes teachers, may as well say that we need not pray either, because the Lord says, “Your Father knows what you need before you ask him”; or that the apostle Paul ought not to have instructed Timothy and Titus what or how they should instruct others. These three apostolic letters ought to be kept before the eyes of anyone on whom the role of teacher in the Church has been laid. Is it not read in the first to Timothy: “Proclaim and teach these things”? What these things are was said above. Is it not said there: “Do not rebuke an elder, but entreat him as a father”? Is it not said to him in the second: “Hold the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me”? Is it not said to him there: “Strive to present yourself approved to God, a workman who need not be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth”? There too is this: “Preach the word, be urgent in season, out of season; reprove, entreat, rebuke, with all patience and teaching.” Likewise to Titus, does he not say that a bishop ought to hold fast to the faithful word according to the teaching, so that he may be able both to exhort in sound teaching and to refute those who contradict? There too he says: “But you, speak the things that befit sound teaching: that the old men be sober,” and what follows. There too is this: “Speak these things, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you. Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities,” and so on.

What, then, are we to think? Is the Apostle contradicting himself, when, though he says that teachers are made by the working of the Holy Spirit, he himself instructs them what and how they should teach? Or is it to be understood that, though the Holy Spirit himself bestows it, the offices of human beings ought not to cease even in teaching the teachers themselves; and yet that “neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase”? Hence, even when holy men, or even holy angels, work as ministers, no one rightly learns what pertains to living with God unless he is made teachable by God, to whom it is said in the psalm: “Teach me to do your will, for you are my God.” Hence the same apostle says to Timothy himself, speaking as teacher to disciple: “But continue in the things you have learned and that have been entrusted to you, knowing from whom you learned them.” For just as the medicines of the body which are applied by human beings to human beings profit only those to whom God gives health, who can heal even without them, while they cannot without him, and yet they are applied, and if this is done dutifully it is counted among the works of mercy or beneficence; so too the aids of teaching applied to the soul through a human being profit it only when God works so that they profit, who could have given the Gospel to man even not from men nor through man.

One, then, who strives by speaking to persuade of what is good, despising none of these three, that is, to teach, to delight, and to move, should pray and strive, as we said above, to be heard with understanding, with pleasure, and with obedience. When he does this aptly and fittingly, he may not undeservedly be called eloquent, even if the hearer's assent does not follow him. For the same author of Roman eloquence seems to have wished those three other things also to belong to these three, that is, to teach, to delight, to move, when he likewise said: “He, then, will be eloquent who can say small things in a subdued style, moderate things in a temperate style, and great things in a grand style”; as if he were to add those three as well and so explain one and the same idea by saying: “He, then, will be eloquent who, in order to teach, can say small things in a subdued style; in order to delight, moderate things in a temperate style; in order to move, great things in a grand style.”

He could have shown these three as he stated them in legal cases; but not here, that is, in ecclesiastical questions, with which discourse of the kind we wish to shape is concerned. For in those, the things called small are where money matters are to be judged; great, where people's safety and life are at stake; and those where nothing of this is to be judged, and nothing is done to make the hearer act or decide, but only to delight him, they called intermediate between the two, as it were, and therefore modica, that is, moderate. For modus (“measure”) gave its name to modica: for we use modica for “small” loosely, not properly. But in these matters of ours, since we must refer everything, especially what we say to the people from the higher place, to the salvation of human beings, and not temporal but eternal salvation, where eternal ruin too is to be avoided, everything we say is great; so much so that not even what the church teacher says about money matters themselves, whether gaining or losing it, should seem small, whether the sum is great or small. For justice is not small, which we must certainly keep even with a small sum of money, as the Lord says: “He who is faithful in what is least is faithful also in much.” What is least, then, is least; but to be faithful in what is least is great. For just as the nature of roundness, that is, that all lines drawn from the center to the circumference are equal, is the same in a great disk as in a tiny coin, so where small things are done justly, the greatness of justice is not diminished.

Finally, when the Apostle was speaking of secular lawsuits (and what were they about but money?), he says: “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels, how much more secular things? If, then, you have secular lawsuits, appoint those who are despised in the Church to judge. I say this to your shame. Is there not among you anyone wise who can judge between his brothers? But brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers. Already it is altogether a fault in you that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? But you do wrong and defraud, and that your brothers. Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God?” Why is the Apostle so indignant, why does he so rebuke, so reproach, so upbraid, so threaten? Why does he testify to the feeling of his mind by such frequent and such harsh changes of voice? Why, finally, does he speak so grandly about such very small matters? Did secular business deserve so much from him? Far from it. But he does this for the sake of justice, love, and piety, which, as no sober mind doubts, are great even in the very smallest matters.

Certainly, if we were advising people how they should conduct secular business itself, for themselves or their own, before church judges, we would rightly advise them to conduct it in a subdued style, as small matters. But since we are discussing the eloquence of that man whom we wish to be a teacher of the things by which we are freed from eternal evils and reach eternal goods, wherever these are treated, whether to the people or privately, to one or to many, to friends or to enemies, in continuous discourse or in conversation, in treatises or in books, in letters very long or very short, they are great. Unless perhaps, because a cup of cold water is a very small and very cheap thing, the Lord said something very small and very cheap when he said that whoever gives it to one of his disciples will not lose his reward; or else, when this teacher in the Church makes a sermon on it, he should think he is saying something small, and therefore should speak not in a temperate or grand style, but a subdued one. When it has happened that we spoke on this matter to the people, and God was present so that we spoke not unfittingly, did not a kind of flame, as it were, rise from that cold water, which kindled even the cold hearts of men to do works of mercy in hope of a heavenly reward?

And yet, though this teacher ought to be a speaker of great things, he ought not always to speak of them in the grand style, but in the subdued style when something is being taught; in the temperate style when something is being blamed or praised; but when something is to be done, and we are speaking to those who ought to do it and yet are unwilling, then great things must be spoken in the grand style, and in a way suited to moving minds. And sometimes one and the same great matter is spoken of in the subdued style, if it is being taught; in the temperate, if it is being proclaimed; and in the grand, if a mind turned away from it is being driven to turn back. For what is greater than God himself? Is he therefore not to be learned about? Or ought one who teaches the unity of the Trinity to treat it otherwise than by subdued discussion, so that a matter difficult to discern may be understood as far as is granted? Are ornaments sought here, and not proofs? Must the hearer be moved to do something, and not rather instructed to learn? But when God is praised, whether for himself or for his works, how great a vision of beautiful and splendid speech arises for one who can praise, as far as he can, him whom no one praises fittingly and no one fails to praise in some way! But if he is not worshiped, or if idols, or demons, or any creature are worshiped with him or even above him, how great an evil this is must certainly be said in the grand style, so that people may be turned away from this evil.

An example of the subdued style is in the apostle Paul, to mention something plainer, where he says: “Tell me, you who wish to be under the Law, have you not heard the Law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and one by the free woman. But the one by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, and the one by the free woman through the promise. These things are an allegory. For these are the two covenants: one from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery, which is Hagar. For Sinai is a mountain in Arabia, which corresponds to the present Jerusalem, and is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother,” and so on. Likewise where he reasons and says: “Brothers, I speak in human terms: even a man's covenant, once ratified, no one annuls or adds to. The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, ‘And to seeds,’ as of many, but as of one, ‘And to your seed,’ which is Christ. This I say: a covenant ratified by God, the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years after, does not weaken so as to make the promises void. For if the inheritance is from the Law, it is no longer from promise; but God gave it to Abraham through promise.” And because the thought could occur to the hearer, “Why, then, was the Law given, if the inheritance is not from it?”, he raised the objection himself and says as if asking: “What then is the Law?” Then he answered: “It was added because of transgressions, until the seed should come to whom the promise was made, ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not of one, but God is one.” And here occurred what he put to himself: “Is the Law then against the promises of God?” And he answered, “Far from it,” and gave the reason, saying: “For if a law had been given that could give life, righteousness would indeed be from the Law. But Scripture has shut up all things under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe,” and so on; or anything else of this kind.

It belongs, then, to the care of teaching not only to open what is closed and to untie the knots of questions, but also, while this is being done, to meet other questions that may perhaps arise, lest what we say be disproved or refuted by them; provided, however, that their solution also occurs to us, lest we stir up what we cannot remove. But it happens that when other questions arising from the question, and others again arising from those, are discussed and resolved, the train of reasoning is extended to such length that, unless his memory is very strong and vigorous, the disputant cannot return to the point from which he set out. But it is very good that whatever can be objected, if it occurs to us, should be refuted, lest it occur where there will be no one to answer it, or occur to someone present but silent, and he go away less than healed.

In these apostolic words the style is temperate: “Do not rebuke an older man, but entreat him as a father, younger men as brothers, older women as mothers, younger women as sisters.” And in these: “I beseech you, therefore, brothers, by the mercy of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing to God.” And nearly the whole passage of that exhortation has the temperate kind of style; where those parts are the more beautiful in which proper things, as if due to proper things, run on fittingly in return, such as: “Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us: if prophecy, according to the rule of faith; if ministry, in ministering; he who teaches, in teaching; he who exhorts, in exhortation; he who gives, in simplicity; he who presides, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without pretense; hating evil, clinging to good; loving one another with brotherly affection, outdoing one another in honor; not slothful in zeal, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord; rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, persevering in prayer; sharing in the needs of the saints, pursuing hospitality. Bless those who persecute you; bless, and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep; be of the same mind toward one another.” And how beautifully all these, poured out in this way, are concluded by a circuit of two members: “Not minding high things, but consenting to the lowly!” And a little later: “Persevering in this very thing,” he says, “render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute, tax to whom tax, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.” These, poured out member by member, are also closed by a circuit which two members weave together: “Owe no one anything, except to love one another.” And a little after: “The night is far gone,” he says, “and the day is at hand. Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light; let us walk honestly as in the day, not in reveling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and wantonness, not in strife and jealousy; but put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in its lusts.” If anyone were to say it thus, “and for the flesh make no provision in its lusts,” he would no doubt soothe the ears with a more rhythmic close; but the more serious translator preferred to keep even the order of the words. How this sounds in the Greek language in which the Apostle spoke, let those see who are more learned in that language down to such details; to me, however, what has been translated for us in the same order of words does not seem to run rhythmically there either.

Certainly it must be admitted that the ornament of style which comes from rhythmic closes is lacking in our authors. Whether this was done by the translators, or whether (which I think more likely) they deliberately avoided these crowd-pleasing things, I dare not affirm, since I confess that I do not know. But I know this: that if anyone skilled in this rhythm were to compose their closes according to the law of the same rhythms, which is very easily done by changing some words that have the same meaning, or by changing the order of those he finds, he will recognize that none of the things he learned as great in the schools of the grammarians or rhetoricians was lacking to those divine men; and he will find many kinds of expression of such grace, which are graceful indeed in our language too, but most of all in their own, none of which is found in the writings on which these people pride themselves. But care must be taken lest, while rhythm is added, weight is taken from divine and serious sentences. For that musical discipline, in which this rhythm is most fully learned, was so far from lacking to our prophets that that most learned man Jerome mentions even the meters of some of them, at least in the Hebrew language; though to preserve truth in the words he did not translate these from it. For my part, to speak from my own feeling, which is certainly better known to me than to others, and than the feeling of others is to me: just as in my own speaking, as far as I think it can be done with moderation, I do not neglect these rhythms of closes, so in our authors I am the more pleased that I find them there very rarely.

The grand style differs from this temperate style chiefly in this, that it is not so much adorned with verbal ornaments as made forceful by the emotions of the mind. For it admits nearly all those ornaments too; but if it does not have them, it does not seek them. For it is carried along by its own impetus, and if beauty of style comes in its way, it seizes it by the force of its subject, and does not take it up out of concern for grace. For it is enough for it, for the sake of what is being done, that fitting words are not chosen by the industry of the mouth, but follow the ardor of the heart. For if a brave man is armed with a sword adorned with gold and gems, and is wholly intent on the fight, he does what he does with those arms, not because they are precious, but because they are arms; yet he is the same man, and very powerful, even when anger makes a weapon for him as he searches. The Apostle is urging that, for the sake of the ministry of the Gospel, all the evils of this time should be patiently endured, with the comfort of God's gifts. It is a great matter, and it is treated in the grand style, and the ornaments of speech are not lacking: “Behold,” he says, “now is the acceptable time; behold, now is the day of salvation. Giving no offense in anything, so that our ministry may not be blamed; but in all things commending ourselves as ministers of God, in much patience, in tribulations, in necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in prisons, in tumults, in labors, in watchings, in fastings, in chastity, in knowledge, in long-suffering, in kindness, in the Holy Spirit, in love unfeigned, in the word of truth, in the power of God; by the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, through glory and dishonor, through ill 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 always rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and possessing all things.” See him still burning: “Our mouth is open to you, O Corinthians; our heart is enlarged,” and the rest, which it would take long to go through.

Likewise to the Romans he urges that the persecutions of this world be overcome by love, with sure hope in God's help. And he does it both grandly and ornately: “We know,” he says, “that all things work together for good for those who love God, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how has he not also with him given us all things? Who will bring a charge against the elect of God? God who justifies? Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus who died, yes, rather, who rose again, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us? Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written: ‘For your sake we are put to death all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter.’ But in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor power, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, will be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

And to the Galatians, although the whole letter itself is written in the subdued kind of speech, except in the last parts where the style is temperate, yet he inserts a passage with such emotion that, though without any of the ornaments that are in the passages we have just set down, it could only be spoken in the grand style: “You observe days,” he says, “and months, and years, and seasons. I fear for you, lest perhaps I have labored among you in vain. Be as I am, for I also am as you are: brothers, I beg you; you did me no wrong. You know that through weakness of the flesh I preached the Gospel to you formerly; and your trial in my flesh you did not despise or reject, but received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus. What then was your blessedness? For I bear you witness that, if it had been possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me. Have I then become your enemy by telling you the truth? They court you not rightly, but they wish to shut you out, so that you may court them. But it is good to be courted in a good thing always, and not only when I am present with you. My little children, of whom I am again in labor until Christ is formed in you, I would like to be present with you now and to change my voice, for I am perplexed about you.” Are contrary words set against contraries here, or are they linked one to another by some gradation, or do clauses and members and circuits sound here? And yet the great emotion with which we feel the speech glowing has not grown lukewarm on that account.