by Scott McGill
Jerome makes a similar point about the desired response to a sermon when giving advice to a young priest: “Let the tears of those who hear you sound your praises.” He warns against verbosity and overreliance on style rather than substance:
Reeling off words and speaking briskly to win admiration from the unwashed masses are the ploys of ignorant men. The shameless man often explains what he does not know, and after convincing others he asserts for himself a possession of knowledge. (Ep. 52.8; trans. Cain 2013, p. 47)
Showing off rhetorical skill was not just in bad taste; it was also a cause for suspicion. Jerome implies that relying on style rather than on substance could be an intentional way to mislead the laity: “There is nothing as easy as deceiving the illiterate rabble with a slick style of speaking, for whatever they do not understand they admire all the more” (Ep. 52.8; trans. Cain 2013, p. 47; cf. Rousseau 1998, p. 393).
Overall, this advice about preaching aimed to steer Christian authors toward the development of a new approach to eloquence when addressing a heterogeneous group of listeners, with the sermo humilis as their ideal (Auksi 1995, pp. 164‐170; Kaster 1988, pp. 83–84; MacMullen 1966). But striving for a plain style was not simple for educated men: The advocates for the Christian plain style did not always follow their own advice. They condemned their rivals for seeking popularity and profit from their eloquence, but they continued to draw on these skills themselves. Peter Van Nuffelen (2015, p. 203) has noted that despite their protests to the contrary, bishops knew that rhetorical skill was the key to their popularity with the laity and the respect from their peers, “even when such ambitions were covered under the cloak of humility.” The contradiction between a stated wish for simplicity and the actual use of rhetorical techniques was a part of the larger cultural transition that brought together conflicting elements of the classical world and Christianity, which put educated men in the strange position of denouncing education (Kaster 1988, pp. 77–89; Oberhelman 1991, pp. 121–124; Hartney 2004, p. 50; Cameron 1997, p. 27).
John Chrysostom’s advice to preachers in his treatise On the Priesthood centered on the congregation’s reactions to sermons. He describes the laity as eager for entertainment: “The power of eloquence is more desired in church than when professors of rhetoric are made to contend against each other” (De sac. 5.1). In this context, preachers should avoid seeking popularity by ignoring both positive and negative feedback. Despite his concerns about preachers being treated as public orators, Chrysostom himself had become famous as an eloquent speaker, earning his nickname “Goldenmouth.”
Although he was one of the most famous preachers of the time, he was clearly uncomfortable with his own popularity. In one of his sermons, he discussed how easily an acclaimed orator could think too highly of himself. Applause was a dangerous temptation (Hom, in Acts 30):
Many take a deal of pains to be able to stand up in public, and make a long speech: and if they get applause from the multitude, it is to them as if they gained the very kingdom (of heaven); but if silence follows the close of their speech, it is worse than hell itself, the dejection that falls upon their spirits from the silence! (trans. NPNF series 1, vol. 11, p. 193)
He then uses the first person plural for the perspective of the vainglorious speaker:
This has turned the Churches upside down, because both you desire not to hear a discourse calculated to lead you to compunction, but one that may delight you from the sound and composition of the words, as though you were listening to singers and minstrels and we too act a preposterous and pitiable part in being led by your lusts, when we ought to root them out. (trans. NPNF series 1, vol. 11, p. 193)
He compares this situation to a father who allows his unhealthy child to eat as much cake as he pleases, against the doctor’s orders, because he does not want him to cry. In the preacher’s case, he finds himself busy trying to please his listeners and receive their applause. Chrysostom confesses that he is guilty of this:
Believe me, I speak not other than I feel – when as I discourse I hear myself applauded, at the moment indeed I feel it as a man (for why should I not own the truth?): I am delighted, and give way to the pleasurable feeling…(trans. NPNF series 1, vol. 11, p. 193)
He suggests setting a rule against applause during the sermon, only to have his suggestion met with…applause: “What means that noise again? I am laying down a rule against this very thing.” After he goes into more detail about the importance of silence for learning, he pleads, “I will not be tempted by praise and honor, or to delight you…it should be quiet like a painter’s studio…How now? Applauding again?” (Hom in Acts 30; Olivar 1991, pp. 834–867). This fascinating example of an eloquent speaker rejecting (or claiming to reject) applause provides another glimpse of how the transformation of culture and values played out in complicated ways.
21.5 The Preachers and their Audiences
Whom were the preachers addressing in these sermons? As we have seen, the preachers themselves as well as the church historians remarked on the popular enthusiasm for sermons and for individual preachers. But the sermons themselves, as they have been preserved, often appear to be more complex or more tedious than what we imagine the ordinary, uneducated Christian laity might have clamored for. In his work on this question, Ramsay MacMullen emphasizes the economic, social, and cultural gulf between educated preachers and ordinary Christians and argues that sermons were meant for upper‐class Christians. Moreover, most of the population lived in the countryside and often did not speak Greek or Latin (MacMullen 1966, 1989). Even in the case of the urban Christians, MacMullen argues, the devotion of ordinary Christians was geared more toward the martyrs’ shrines than the churches (MacMullen 2009, pp. 14–32, 104–111). Moreover, sermons focus on the problems and concerns of the wealthy rather than on the poor, and wealthier people were the ones who had leisure time that could be spent at church. When “the poor” are mentioned, in many cases it is clear that the relatively poor, the non‐rich, are meant rather than the destitute (Brown 2012, pp. 342–347).
Countering this view, Wendy Mayer (1998) and others (Rousseau 1998; Maxwell 2006) have interpreted late antique sermons as addressing a broader audience. Although the wealthy do receive a disproportionate amount of attention, numerous sermons provide evidence of the diversity of urban Christian congregations. For example, John Chrysostom’s 34 homilies on Hebrews refer to the presence of the following groups in the congregation: baptized and unbaptized Christians, men and women, ascetics, rich widows, married women, the wealthy, the moderately wealthy, and the poor. The congregation included the literate and illiterate, some who lacked knowledge of Scriptures, some who were learning, others who were not, and some who were distracting themselves and others by laughing and chatting. In some cases Chrysostom remarked about the presence of a large crowd or especially low attendance (Allen 1996, pp. 408–415). A similar analysis of the audience in sermons by the bishop Quodvultdeus of Carthage shows that he preached in the 430 s to a congregation of Berber‐Punic artisans, farmers, fishermen, and wealthy people (Finn 1997, p. 49).
Although it is true that workers had less free time, there are indications that they still attended church and that the preachers were aware of their time constraints. John Chrysostom recognized that many Christians had work to do following church: “Let each one leave the church and take up his daily tasks: one hastening to work with his hands, another hurrying to his military post, and still another to his position in government” (Catech. 8.17; Mayer 1998, p. 132). Basil of Caesarea also described the pressure on him to accommodate his sermons to his congregation’s needs: “Many artisans, employed in manual labors and who earn just enough at their daily work to provide for their own nourishment, are surrounding me and obliging me to be brief, so I will not keep them too long from their jobs” (Hex. 3.1).
MacMullen’s caveats about linguistic divides and the numbers of people who could fit into any given church are important, but, at the same time, the advice they gave about
preaching (see above) points to the broad appeal of sermons, and, at times, late antique authors directly describe the popularity of sermons. In his treatise On the Priesthood, Chrysostom remarks, “Do you not know what a passion for sermons has burst in upon the minds of Christians nowadays?” (De sac. 5.8). Gregory of Nazianzus makes a similar comment in a more negative tone, suggesting that the people of Constantinople wanted a crowd‐pleasing bishop rather than a serious and virtuous one: “They are not seeking priests, but rhetors” (Or. 42.24). Gregory of Nyssa corroborates this view in his remarks about the widespread participation in theological discussions in Constantinople, which, he claimed, included food and clothing vendors, moneylenders, and bath attendants (De deitate, 120–121; cf. Gr. Naz. Or. 27.2). In these cases, late antique authors seem to be describing urban congregations as excessively enthusiastic about sermons and theological discussions. As Richard Lim (1995, pp. 149–180) has demonstrated, church authorities began to discourage public discussions of certain theological questions because it was too easy for controversy to arise. Moreover, the moral exhortations found in many sermons addressed issues that were broadly relevant to Christians of any social level who were aiming to live according to their religion’s teachings. Sermons were one part of an exchange of knowledge and values across social and cultural lines taking place in this period; these instructions, along with the liturgy, Christian artwork, and visits to pilgrimage sites all played a role in transforming the worldviews of the laity (Cameron 1997, pp. 31–33).
21.6 Shorthand Writers and the Preservation of Sermons
Only a fraction of the sermons presented in late antiquity were preserved – even in the case of Augustine, we only have around 10% of the sermons he gave during his long career (Brown 2012, p. 339; cf. Müller 2012, p. 301). The sermons that survive were recorded by shorthand writers, notarii, and sometimes edited by the preacher before circulation (Deferrari 1922, pp. 105–109; Lienhard 1989, p. 39; Liparov‐Chicheren 2013). In other cases, sermons were dictated and sent as letters to be read out loud in church (Deferrari 1922, pp. 101–103). Augustine kept shorthand transcripts of his sermons in an archive, which he cataloged in response to requests from other bishops (Müller 2012, pp. 299–304). Members of the congregation could also take their own notes: Gregory of Nazianzus remarks (negatively) on scribes “seen and unseen” (Or. 42.26; Hill 1998, p. 304). Sermons from preachers known for their eloquence and theological insight were preserved and used as models (or crib sheets) for later preachers. Socrates Scholasticus refers to John Chrysostom’s sermons being available in the form that he published and also from the notes taken by shorthand writers. He states that both versions convey the preacher’s eloquence and persuasiveness (H.E. 6.4). Socrates’s description of the bishop Atticus, who became bishop of Constantinople soon after John Chrysostom was sent into exile, provides additional insight into the process of shorthand writing and preservation of sermons. Atticus started off by reciting sermons he had memorized beforehand and then later became confident enough to preach extemporaneously. Despite this progress, “His discourses, however, were not such as to be received with much applause by his auditors, nor to deserve to be committed to writing” (Soc. H.E. 7.2). This seems to have been the fate of the majority of sermons preached during this time.
As we have seen, the key difference between commentaries and sermons was the oral presentation of biblical exegesis and exhortation to listeners, in contrast to written treatises meant for a small circle of literate friends. In some cases, sermons had an afterlife as written texts and reached additional audiences of readers. Some of these readers then modeled (or cribbed) their own sermons from the texts. Augustine endorsed the practice of other preachers doing this if they were not rhetorically gifted: They could “take something eloquently and wisely written by others, memorize it, and offer it to the people in the person of the author” (Doc. Chr. 4.29.62). Later, in the sixth century, Caesarius of Arles took the process a step further by drawing on collections of sermons by Augustine, Ambrose, and others and composing sermons to share with bishops in Gaul, Italy, and Spain (Bailey 2010).
REFERENCES
Allen, Pauline. (1996). The homilist and the congregation: A case study of Chrysostom’s homilies on Hebrews. Augustinianum 36: 397–421.
Ameringer, Thomas E. (1921). The Stylistic Influence of the Second Sophistic on the Panegyrical Sermons of St. John Chrysostom. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America.
Auerbach, Erich. (1965. repr. 1993). Literary Language and its Public in Late Latin Antiquity and in the Middle Ages (trans. Ralph Manheim). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Auksi, Peter. (1995). Christian Plain Style: The Evolution of a Spiritual Ideal. Montreal: McGill‐Queen’s University Press.
Bailey, Lisa Kaaren. (2010). Christianity’s Quiet Success: The Eusebius Gallicanus Sermon Collection and the Power of the Church in Late Antique Gaul. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
Brown, Peter. (2012). Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350–550 AD. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Cain, Andrew. (2013). Jerome and the Monastic Clergy: A Commentary on Letter 52 to Nepotian, with an Introduction, Text, and Translation, Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 119. Leiden: Brill.
Cameron, Averil. (1997). Christianity and communication in the fourth century: The problem of diffusion. In: Aspects of the Fourth Century: Proceedings of the Symposium Power & Possession: State, Society, and Church in the Fourth Century A.D. (ed. H.W. Pleket and A.M.F.W. Verkoogt), 23–42. Leiden: Agape.
Campbell, James. (1983). The Influence of the Second Sophistic on the Style of the Sermons of St. Basil the Great, Cleveland, OH: J.T. Zubai.
Cunningham, Mary. (1995). Andreas of Crete’s homilies on Lazarus and Palm Sunday: The preacher and his audience. Studia Patristica 31: 22–41.
Cunningham, Mary and Allen, Pauline. ed. (1998). Preacher and Audience: Studies in Early Christian and Byzantine Homiletics, Leiden: Brill.
Deferrari, Roy J. (1922). St. Augustine’s method of composing and delivering sermons. American Journal of Philology 43.2: 97–123; 43.3: 193–219.
Dodd, C.H. (1960). The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Dunn‐Wilson, David. (2005). A Mirror for the Church: Preaching in the First Five Centuries. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
Elm, Susanna. (2012). Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church: Emperor Julian, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Vision of Rome. Transformation of the Classical Heritage 49. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Finn, Thomas. (1997). Quodvultdeus: Preacher and the audience. The homilies on the Creed. Studia Patristica 31: 42–58.
Fitzmyer, Joseph. (1989). Preaching in the apostolic and subapostolic age. In: Preaching in the Patristic Age: Studies in Honor of Walter J. Burghardt, S.J. (ed. David Hunter), 19–35. New York: Paulist.
Gleason, Maud W. (1995). Making Men: Sophists and Self‐Presentation in Ancient Rome. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Graumann, Thomas. (1997). St. Ambrose on the art of preaching. In: Vescovi e Pastori in Epoca Teodosiana. XXV Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana, Roma, 8–10 maggio, 1996, Studia Ephemeridis “Augustinianum,” 58.2, 587–600. Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustnianum.
Hällström, Gunnar af. (1984). Fides Simpliciorum according to Origen of Alexandria. Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 76. Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.
Hartney, Aideen. (2004). John Chrysostom and the Transformation of the City. London: Duckworth.
Hill, Charles. (1998). Chrysostom’s homilies on the Psalms: Homilies or tracts? In: Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church (ed. Pauline Allen, Raymond Canning, and Lawrence Cross), 301–317. Queensland: Centre for Early Christian Studies.
Kaster, Robert. (1988). Guardians of Language: The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
&nb
sp; Lienhard, John. (1989). Origen as homilist. In: Preaching in the Patristic Age: Studies in Honor of Walter J. Burghardt, S.J. (ed. David Hunter), 36–52. New York: Paulist.
Lim, R. (1995). Public disputation, power, and social order in late antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lipatov‐Chicheren, Nikolai. (2013). Preaching as the audience heard it: Unedited transcripts of patristic homilies. Studia Patristica 44: 277–297.
MacMullen, Ramsay. (1966). A Note on Sermo Humilis. Journal of Theological Studies 17: 108–112.
MacMullen, Ramsay. (1989). The preacher’s audience (AD 350–400). Journal of Theological Studies 40: 503–511.
MacMullen, Ramsay. (2009). The Second Church: Popular Christianity AD 200‐400. Writings from the Greco‐Roman World Supplement Series 1. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature.
Maxwell, Jaclyn. (2006). Christianization and Communication in Late Antiquity: John Chrysostom and his Congregation in Antioch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, Wendy. (1998). John Chrysostom: Extraordinary preacher, ordinary audience. In: Preacher and Audience: Studies in Early Christian and Byzantine Homiletics (ed. Mary Cunningham and Pauline Allen), 105–137 Leiden: Brill.
Mayer, Wendy. (2008). Homiletics. In: The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Studies (ed. Susan Ashbrook Harvey and David Hunter), 565–583. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
