He Too Was “Unbroken”

Mark Twain once wrote the following metaphor on forgiveness: 

"Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heel that has crushed it."

Many of us have read the book, or seen the newly released movie, “Unbroken” which describes the incredible story of determination and forgiveness from Louis Zamporini as a prisoner of Japan in World War 2. The prison camps and death marches, the mistreatment of soldiers and natives and countless war crimes--all of this created deep wakes of sorrow felt by the nations that comprised the Allies. Thousands of American soldiers, like Zamporini, went missing in action and weren't rescued until after the war was over and after they had been made to endure extreme and cruel conditions. My Granddad, John Allen Knox was one of these soldiers who found it within themselves to not only survive the brutal conditions of several German P.O.W. camps, but also to display complete forgiveness toward the Germans that captured, tortured, and starved him and his comrades.

My granddad left a pattern for his progeny to follow. Raised in North Carolina on a large dairy and agriculture farm owned by the Knox family, my Granddad was taught from a young age to develop three things: a strong back, a stronger work ethic, and an even stronger will. Those three things served him well as he endured a horrible situation that no one should have to encounter. 

When I find myself despondent or negative about a challenge or circumstance that rises in my life, I often reflect back on his example of determination and forgiveness in World War 2. It’s a part of my family history that I keep in the fore-front of my mind. 

High-low Balance

In an effort to persuade the audience, Augustine relies heavily on the testimony and documentation of the prophets of old to fuel his main rhetorical function of teaching. The fast majority of his discourse relies on his ability to instruct the audience on the nature and intricacies of repentance and forgiveness. Augustine goes to great length to implement the Lord’s Prayer as median to instruct the people. He quotes the line “forgive us our debts” from the that Prayer implying that none in attendance could sincerely utter that line to the Lord if he has not already at least attempted to repentant to those whom we have wronged and forgive those who have wronged us. Furthermore, Augustine makes meticulous work of teaching the need to forgive those who have wronged us and then let go. He makes it abundantly clear that once we have forgiven those who have offended, we need not be concerned with that act any more. He ingrains his point into the reader with effective use of anaphora.

Though his main rhetorical function is a low level of just teaching, he definitely amps up his speech by calling to action. Inherent in teaching about repentance and forgiveness is an appeal to be repentant and be forgiving. Though this high level of style was in the vast minority for the bulk of the sermon, I think the ratio seems appropriate. One would be hard pressed to sustain such a high level of style for an extended period of time. Furthermore, it would be extremely stressful for the audience to be called to action, either directly or indirectly, for an overly extended period. At the end of the day, Augustine does an excellent job teaching the people why they need to repent and helping motivate everyone to do so.

Where Would We Be Without Instructors?

     Due to the fact that the strong majority of the class seems to agree that all three styles were displayed by St. Augustine in the reading, I am going to argue that his style was used for the sole purpose of to simply instruct. Though there may be hints of trying to move the audience, the overall effect was to teach and to instruct as he used the low style. Throughout the entire reading, he would describe and explain specific principles about forgiveness, love, and so forth and then he would continue to back up his teachings with scriptures and biblical references. More than anything, he teaches us to forgive like Christ forgave. I really liked Macey Richardson's post about this principle and how he exploited the kairos to make this point even stronger.

     Kelly's blog post brought up legitimate points about how St. Augustine just seemed a little too intense and memorable to just be part of the low style. However, I would absolutely argue that all of the great teachers and instructors of the world are incredible and memorable. They instruct with passion! Teaching can be fun and exciting and I am sure that if love truly is what is motivating St. Augustine, there is a fire within him to motivate and teach passionately.

     Lastly, in a way, I think I would very much agree with Austin Pena to a certain extent in the fact that if St. Augustine really desired to make something more of his speech and make it a moving, life-changing ordeal he definitely would have bore a personal testimony to conclude. He could have done it in so many better ways if he really wanted to. However, I think it's clear that he uses a very low tone and simply explains things to the audience as he instructs them on biblical history and examples. Overall, I think that St. Augustine was very much capable of making the speech more "moving" if he really want to yet he made it very distinct that his purpose was to instruct.

A cry of repentance

 Several members of the class have already made remarks on the separations that St. Augustine makes when giving his sermon. He makes each one in order to reach to all those within his audience. I think that there is more to be said on the grand speech in his sermon

While some note that St. Augustine's sermon is pretty cut and dry in regards to where he puts his style, I would like to add the fact that the entire sermon is entwined with high speech designated at everyone to move them for one single purpose of reminding them of the struggle that it is to forgive and be forgiven. He takes several scriptures, all focusing on the universality of brotherly love, and seeds them through to make his point. For example, early on in the speech, he quotes from the Savior's sermon on the mount and reminds us of the beams in our own eyes. He then compares the pride and anger to a sapling or twig that will grow into a tree blooming in hatred if we do not uproot it ourselves. He uses such eloquent words and phrases to inspire the people to work for their own forgiveness from God and from others.

Now, St. Augustine may not have pulled out any of his own life experiences in his sermon, which would've theoretically won him points in the pathos and ethos categories, but he does retain a symbol of a servant of God and official, which also pulls up his ethos. I think though that he does include himself in his sermon. For one, he never claims exemption, and second, he makes the point that it applies to everyone by using "we". He seems to consider himself part of the group and does not exclude himself at all.

Lend a hand of forgiveness, won't you?

Indeed, I wondered about that confusing last paragraph that Macey mentioned in her post. St. Augustine was really good about anticipating and addressing the questions of his audience otherwise (like Joseph talked about in his post), but this last part seems to be less than clear. Surely he wasn't trying to obscure things, right? That was exactly what he argued against doing in De Doctrina Christiana. Perhaps this is just one of those moments where it is the "difficulty and subtilty of the matter [he is] trying to explain" that makes this confusing for me, and not his expression.

Since others have obviously gone into more depth about that stuff, though, I wanted to note the kairos of St. Augustine's sermon. As the title says, it is "for Lent." I admit, I'm not an expert on Lent--especially not the differences between the Lent of our day and the Lent of St. Augustine's--so I had to look up some stuff about it. As far as I can tell, however, this sermon would have been significantly more powerful because of the circumstances of this holy time. Here the congregation was, remembering the Savior's life, how Judas betrayed Him, and how He suffered in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross...and then, after everything, how He asked the Father to forgive His persecutors. St. Augustine really capitalizes on their situation. "Remember how Christ forgave?" he seems to be saying. "That is how you should forgive." (The picture in Thomas's post depicts this rather strikingly.)

In doing this, St. Augustine really shows that he applied a mix of rhetorical and spiritual preparation. By taking notice of the kairos and alluding to the similarity/difference topic of invention (forgiving like the Savior forgives), he was clearly using his rhetorical knowledge. By concentrating on the good word of God, though, he plainly shows his spiritual preparation (the most important of the two, he tells us in De Doctrina Christiana).

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.

Preaching! ..with Style

I saw mostly low and high style in Augustine's speech as he both taught about forgiveness and motivated people to act on his teachings by giving them the guilt trip. There were a few instances of moderate style but they were few and far between.

The Grand Darkness
Augustine's description of the darkness that people who refuse to forgive must walk through he was definitely using a grand level of style. While reading his description you can almost hear his voice drop in suspense and rise in energy. He quotes the scripture in 1 John 3:15 that compares hating a brother to murder, and of course the entire audience knows what happens to murderers.




The Low-ly Father
There were many times that Augustine used low style, but my favorite was the example of the father correcting his son; used to teach the difference between anger and hatred. I have a little brother who assumed that if he was punished it meant our parents no longer loved him. Of course as he got older he learned this was not the case and it really was his fault he was in trouble. I think any parent or older child in the audience would be able to understand this piece of Augustine's teaching.


The Moderate Comfort
Each of the groups that Augustine presented had a task they were given; except for the group that would forgive if their transgressor ever got around to asking them to. Now if Augustine is not asking that group to do anything it can't be grand style (unless you consider him telling them not to do something an exhortation) and he really isn't trying to teach them anything, so it isn't low. That leaves moderate; and I think that makes sense. Moderate style is an attempt to please your audience and I see this section as Augustine trying to comfort that group of people. He tells them that he knows that they have done all that they can I the forgiveness process. That is probably one of the most reassuring things he could say to that group of people after they sat through a lecture about forgiveness without being able to forgive.

Some Days You are the Pigeon . . . Others the Statue

As I read St. Augustine's sermon, I was reminded of this poster. (Specifically as I analyzed the various audiences addressed throughout.) Sometimes, Augustine is talking to the servant, other times the master, and yet in the end he is talking to everyone throughout the whole sermon because we all, at one time or another, find ourselves playing the role of servant or master (we even fulfill these roles simultaneously, much how we can be a child, parent, and sibling all at the same time). This really is a beautiful correlation to religion and how it is designed to be for ALL of us. In regards to audience, Augustine did an excellent job of making his sermon applicable to everyone at any stage of their life. We can be the one needing forgiveness and the one giving forgiveness in the same moment. In this effort to apply to everyone, I felt that the whole style was relatively low and focused on teaching.

The part I liked best in the sermon is where Augustine teaches us how to identify the enemy in paragraph 7. All mankind is "our brother" so he would appear to contradict himself in that section. What would happen if you pray for your enemy to be killed and your brother spared if they are the same person? As I read, I interpreted this to mean that the enemy is an action or feeling. the enemy is a part of the person, not the whole individual. I'm not sure if this is a correct interpretation, but it added insight to the Christian theme of all necessitating forgiveness and opportunity to forgive (even those whom we can't readily perceive as our "brothers").