High and dry...not really

Courtney noted the high style of the darkness metaphor: I want to explore what makes it high style.

The extended metaphor (conceit) equates spiritual darkness to the darkness "that is suffered by those who are shut up in prisons." Characteristic of high style, this comparison presents a strong pathetic appeal in order to move to action. The image of a dank, gloomy prison instills fear in the audience that scares them away from hating their brother. Hating a brother would allocate them in a spiritual place that was equally dark.

In addition to the metaphor, Augustine racks the listeners' conscience with fear by using two back-to-back rhetorical questions that catch the guilty in their sins: "Do you hate your brother? Are you unwilling to be reconciled?" Every listener who secretly hates his or her brother or who refused to be reconciled in some way or another feels a sudden guilt or godly sorrow because his or her own sins are exposed through the question. They do not have to verbally respond to the question, but surely they must respond inwardly to themselves. By so responding, people feel guilt for any act of sin towards a brother, and eventually feel persuaded to change the situation and repent in order to be free from sin.

By first instilling fear of spiritual darkness, then stirring up guilt with rhetorical questions, St. Augustine's high style moves sinners to repentance.

Spencer pointed out the middle style that St. Augustine used at the beginning of "Sermon 211 for Lent" in order to capture his audience's attention. Which rhetorical figures are used to create a middle-styled balance between pathos and logos?

Murder and Chiasmus

I can just picture Augustine at the pulpit, breathing down repentance and pronouncing blessings upon the faithful.  Can you imagine him in General Conference?  First off, I’d like to identify his audience as I see it.  The people he is addressing are just like you and me.  Overall, we know the scriptures.  We know we should be good.  We know we should not be bad.  How many talks have you heard on forgiving others?  I think that these people know they should forgive each other’s trespasses, and I think Augustine thinks the same way. 

This leads me to his style of approach.  While much is very instructive, I don’t necessarily feel that this sermon is a low style of preaching.  It has a somewhat grander flair to it.  I feel that he is trying to present the topic in a way that is new to the audience, or at least more appealing, or memorable.  For instance, his use of chiasmus in his introductory and second paragraphs is an incredible tool often found in the scriptures, which is pleasing to the mind and directs the flow of thoughts to specific ideas.  (Read it again, it starts and ends with “Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors.”)  Augustine breaks down the door when he throws out the words of St. John.  If you were sitting in the audience and had a particular person in mind who you wanted to get even with, how would you respond if you were suddenly called a murderer by one of the early apostles?  I tend to think of this sermon as somewhere between the middle and grand styles, due to his intensity and fervor.

A good orator is his audience... sort of.

"Confessions" by Augustine contains
a lot of his story, this is mostly what
we read from in my Freshman class.

In a class that I had at the University of Utah my freshman year we studied Augustine briefly, but instead of focusing on rhetoric, we focused on philosophy and the intellectual tradition of western civilization, so we read his memoirs and treatises, but none of his sermons. I remember the memoirs most clearly, because in them it seemed like Augustine was putting more trust in his audience by writing about details of his life; I gained a lot of respect for the man because he went through a lot of repentance and had to experience a lot of forgiveness on his path to becoming a Christian, and it seemed like his conversion was as complete as any other I've heard of, he was a changed man. Augustine's sermon for lent would have been more powerful if he would have shared some of those personal experiences that he had. I'm not saying that he needed to confess any of his specific past transgressions, but sharing that he had personally experienced in a real, tangible way what the scriptures had taught him would have added so much power.

The act of personally relating to an audience through personal testimony of his or her experience seems like it could be a part of all three categories of style (high, low, middle). All of you have done a great job describing how all three categories were present in the sermon, I agree, and it was cool to see the arrangement of the sermon and how it effected flow of the oratory style. One interesting part that stood out to me was when he included himself as the audience, "... do not be ashamed to seek pardon. In the same manner I speak to all, men and women, young and old, lay persons and clerics, and to myself, also. Let us all hearken; let us all fear." He puts us all on the same level! But at the same time utilizes high style to try and inspire action.

Most of us think of a good leader as one who works a long side those he leads. My mind turns to Jesus Christ; a great deal of the love and respect that many have for Him stems from the fact that He, the single greatest being in the Universe has been through everything that we go through, He's descended to our level, so that He can lift us up to His level. Augustine kind of does the same when he uses the pronoun "us", but could have done it to a greater extent by sharing relevant personal experiences, which, when effectively done, is done in all three styles: high, low, and middle.

He's our best friend!

Practice What You Preach

In thinking back to Book IV of De Doctrina Christiana, I felt that St. Augustine stayed true to many of the things that he talked about and said were necessary for a Christian Teacher in his sermon around the time of Lent. In his teachings Augustine says that it is the duty of the teacher to “rouse the hearers” so that the listeners are attentive or intrigued enough in the speech before delivering what they want their audience to learn. Augustine accomplishes this well in the first paragraph of the sermon using intriguing thoughts and ending on a metaphor, comparing the differences of anger and hatred. This really gets his audience, as I did me, interested in what he is about to teach. This pleasing style of speech is aimed at getting an audience interested before heaping on the instruction or exhortation.

...St. Augustine would agree.

Another point St. Augustine made in De Doctrina Christiana, which he felt was important for the Christian teacher, was that clarity was of utmost importance, but not at the cost of giving up eloquence. From my own experience, this can be a very difficult thing to do. Often times the cost to be very clear is to cut out much of the “fluff” and decorum of speech. All throughout his speech, Augustine accomplishes a wonderful middle ground, with clear ideas and thoughts backed up by powerful scriptures and beautiful language. One example of this is found in paragraph 6 where Augustine addresses people whose offenders have chosen not to apologize. With the use of a story like scenario that anyone in his audience could apply to themselves he walks them through their situation, eloquently teaching the doctrine and what should be done in this situation. This method of moving the audience is really effective as Augustine attempts to put his listeners into the topic of discussion right then and there.

Wronged, Yet Seeking to Forgive

*I could not figure out how to fix my words being split between lines, so sorry in advance.

Reading through St. Augustine's sermon, I noticed that he was mostly addressing (or at least referring to) forgiveness among masters and servants, but also between brother to brother.  In addition, he called out to those in the audience that have not trespassed against another, but have been trespassed against.  These are the people St. Augustine exhorts to not seek forgiveness for a wrong not done, but to ask God to forgive your brother, to be ready to forgive when the time comes, and to prompt your brother to seek forgiveness.  With this last statement in particular, St. Augustine is most definitely using the high/grand style, as I even used the word "exhort," in order to produce a movement in the audience. 

In so doing, however, does this point of discussion not also encompass the low—and even middle—style?  Advice is given to the audience in a manner of teaching, but is not the middle style also present in that St. Augustine seeks in his sermon to find ways to address and connect to everyone he possibly can?  Such effort to make his words touching and applicable to all, while not inherently pleasing, does to some degree please readers.  

I, for one, read St. Augustine's words and saw the merit in them, but it was not until the very end of the sermon when he said, "Say to the Lord in your prayer: 'Lord, You know that I have not sinned against my brother and that he has sinned against me. You know, too, that his having sinned against me is harmful for him if he does not seek pardon from me. With a good intention, then, I beg You to pardon him.'"  Recently having been wronged through no deserving of my own, these words pleased me in that I was personally spoken to, taught me as to how to react in this situation, and moved me to action.