It's a Hard Knock Life

In 1982, little orphan Annie introduced to the world the idea of a “hard-knock life.” But would one be willing to endure if you knew it meant glory on high? In the 1530s, John Calvin left the Catholic Church following the path of many reformers of his day and professed the importance of suffering for the salvation of the soul.

Given as one of his weekly addresses, the sermon “On Suffering Persecution” was given to Christians in the streets of Geneva to expound upon the verses in the scriptures. This particular address was given in reference to Hebrews 13:13. This passage in helps reader to understand both why we suffer persecution and how it is beneficial to Christians as it helps them become like God. Like many writers of his day, this particular writing emphasizes the field of Christian apologetics, a theological field which seeks to present the rational basis for the faith and a defense against the obligation.  This rationality comes through the use of continual scriptural references along with rhetorical questions. His mild tone as well not only shows his rational nature, but emphasizes the humility and the sensitivity that comes along with exploring new religions.

In a time of great persecution for religious exploration, proposing that suffering brings strength would provide great comfort to those who came to hear the service. Calvin’s sermons were given on the streets on a weekly basis which adds to the credibility of Calvin. The audience has an opportunity to hear Calvin’s opinions on a variety of subjects which emphasizes his knowledge. The subject of persecution also provides an emotional tie for those who listen. Everyone has suffered persecution! Calvin’s words allow Christians to see that suffering in a "hard knock life" is not in vain, but in fact, brings us closer to God.  

In Hell by Tomorrow Morning

Imagine going into church one day and hearing someone give a talk in which they compare you to a spider being held over a fire. Then they tell you that the person holding you over the fire is intensely offended by your sins, and there is no reason that they are still holding on to you.

This is the way Jonathan Edwards was able to grab the attention of his congregation, and make Hell feel like a real place to them. 

Rhetorical Analysis of a Sermon: Twelve Steps

The sermon has been a mainstay of public address in Christian history and beyond. As such, it is open to rhetorical analysis as much as to an assessment of its religious content or role. How does one analyze a sermon rhetorically? Here is a set of questions to ask when analyzing a written sermon. (Some additional categories would be used if one is viewing or participating as an original audience member.)

1. What is the rhetorical situation?
2. What is the genre?
3. Who is the speaker? What is his/her character (ethos)?
4. What about the audience?
5. What are the speaker's intentions?
6. What are the main ideas?
7. How are the ideas arranged? What is the organization of the sermon?
8. How does the speaker support his ideas?
9. How does the speaker appeal to emotion (the persuasive appeal of pathos)?
10. How does the speaker use language?
11. What is the style and tone?
12. How does the medium affect the message?

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).

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.

Does St. Augustine like Anthypophora? Yes, he does.

Anthypophora is when you ask a question and then immediately answer it, or raise an objection and then resolve it. In De Doctrina Christiana St. Augustine states that “the speaker ought to be especially careful to give assistance to those who cannot ask [their questions]” (Book IV, Paragraph 25]. The reason for this is because when giving a speech it is inappropriate for the audience to ask questions, so the speaker must take care of that for them.

In his “Sermon 211 for Lent” he points this out by saying this is his time to speak and their time to listen in silence. As such he raises many objections/questions and then resolves them. Among them are

1.   Paragraph 2: Perhaps we think darkness is like being shut in prison.
2.   Paragraph 3: Perhaps you want to forgive your brother, but he won’t accept it. 
3.    Paragraph 6: There are many here, one example is “Am I going to say ‘go…beg pardon of him?’ no.”

An unanswered question could leave someone feeling left out

 

By raising these issues and then answering them he is doing his audience a favor. He is following his own rule for addressing large crowds. The effect is to ensure that everyone is learning, for if someone is stuck and cannot get past an issue, that person will not be able to follow along as the speaker continues for he will have a bad taste in his mouth and will sour at the speech being given. This would be a lament for the speaker. For his desire is to teach, and if he is turning them off by not answering their questions then they cannot learn what he is there to teach them.

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").