SERMON 288 lll

could think he was the Christ. John could have taken advantage of people's
mistake, and he wouldn’t have had to work hard to persuade them he was the
Christ, because those who heard and saw him had already thought this without
his saying it. There was no need for him to sow the seeds of the error; all he
would have to do would be to confirm it.
He, however, is the bridegroom’s friend, jealous for the bridegroom; and he
doesn’t put himself forward as an adulterer in the bridegroom’s place, but bears
witness to his friend, and commends the one who really was the bridegroom to
the bride. He wants to be loved in" him, hates the idea of bem'g loved instead of
him. The one who has the bride, he says, is the bridegroom. And as though you
were to say, “What about you?"—But the friend, he says, of the bridegroom
stands, and hears him, andjoyfidly rejoices because ofthe bridegroom ’s voice
(Jn 3:29). Stands and hears; the disciple hears the master; because he hears, he
stands; because if he doesn’t hear, he falls. It’s here that John’s greatness is
supremely brought to our notice; that when he could be thought to be the Christ,
he preferred to bear witness to the Christ, to bring him to our notice; to humble
himself rather than to be taken for him, and taken in by himself.
Rightly was he called more than a prophet (Lk 7:26). About the prophets,
you see, who lived before the coming of the Lord, the Lord himself speaks as
follows: Many prophets andjust men have wished t0 see what you see, and have
not seen it (Mt 13:17). Yes m'deed, those who were filled with the Spirit of God
to proclaim that the Christ was going to come, longed, if it could possibly
happen, to see him present on earth. That’s why that man Simeon’s departure
from the world was put off, so that he might see him bom through whom the
world was established.“ And he did indeed see the Word of God in the flesh as
an infant. But he wasn’t yet teaching, hadn’t yet taken on the role of master,
though with the Father he was already the master of the angels. So Simeon saw
him, but as an infant. John, however, saw him already preaching, already
choosing disciples.
Where? At the river Jordan. That, you see, is where Christ’s work of teachm’g
began.’ It was there that the baptism of Christ that was to come° was commended
to us, because the previous kind of baptism was received there, and the one
preparing the way, and saym'g, Prepare a wayfor the Lord, make straight his
paths (Mk 1:3). The Lord, you see, wished t0 be baptized by the servant, so that
those who are baptized by the Lord might appreciate what it is they receive.7 So
he began from the very place where prophecy had very properly preceded him:
He will have dominionfrom sea t0 sea, andfrom the River to the Iimits ofthe
whole wide world (Ps 72:8). At the very river where Christ began to have
dominion,8 John saw Christ, recognized him, bore witness to him.
He humbled himself before the great one, so that being humble he might be
exalted by the great one. And he called himself Ihefriend ofthe bridegroom (Jn
3:29); and what sort of friend? His equal, perhaps? Perish the thought! Far, far,
below him. How far? I am not worthy, he said, t0 undo the strap ofhis sandal
(Mk 1:7). This prophet, or rather this one more than a prophet, was found worthy
t0 be foretold by a prophet. It was of him, after all, that Isaiah said what has been
112 SAINTAUGUSTINE —— SERMONS

read to us today: The voice ofone crying in the desert: Prepare the way ofthe
Lord, make straight hls' paths. Every valley shall befilled in, and every mountain
and hill shall be brought low, and the crooked shall become straight, and the
rough places smooth ways; and allflesh shall see the salvation ofGod. Cry out!
What shall I cry out? Allflesh ls' grass, and all its glory as the flowers in the
grass; the grass has withered, the flowers have drooped; but the Word ofthe
Lord abidesfor ever (Is 4023-8).
Would your graces please pay close attention. John was asked who he was,
whether he was the Christ, whether Elijah, whether the prophet:9 I am not, he
said, the Christ, nor Elji'ah‚ nor the prophet. And they said, So who are you? I
am a voice crying in the desert (In 1:22-23). He called himself a voice. You
have John as a voice; what have you got Christ as, if not as a word? The voice
is sent on ahead, so that the Word later on may be understood. And what sort of
Word? Listen to him Showing you that very clearly: In the beginning, he says,
was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; this was in
the beginning with God. All lhings were made through him, and without him
was made nothing (In 1:1-3). If all thln'gs, John as well. Why be surprised if the
Word made himself a voice? See, just see, whether at the river you have both
voice and Word; the voice John, the Word Christ.

The dzfl'erence between voice and ward

3. Let's inquire what the difference is between a voice and a word; let’s
inquire attentively, it’s no small matter, and it calls for n0 small measure of
attention. The Lord will grant that I don’t grow tired explam’m’g, nor you
listening. Here we have two thm'gs, a voice and a word. What's a voice? What's
a word? What are they? Listen to what you can confirm in yourselves, and what
you can give yourselves as the answer to the question you ask yourselves. A
word; if it hasn’t got a significant meaning, it isn’t called a word. A voice, on
the other hand, even if it’s just a sound, and makes a meaningless noise, like the
sound of someone yelling, can be called a voice, can’t be called a word.
Someone or other has groaned; it’s a voice. They’ve wailed; it’s a voice. It’s a
k1n'd of formless sound, beann'g or carrying a noise to the ears, without any
meaning to the in'telligence.10 A word, however, unless it signifies something,
unless it carries something to the ears and something else further in to the mind,
is not called a word. So as I was saying, if you yell, it’s a voice; if you say “Man”
it’s a word; if you say “Beast,” or “God," or “World,” or anything else. These,
you see, are all significant voices that I uttered, not empty ones, not ones makm'g
a sound and saying nothing.
So if you’ve now got the distinction between voice and word, listen to what
ought to astonish you in these two, John and Christ. A word has full value, even
without a voice; a voice is worthless without a word. Let me balance the account,
and explain, if I can, this proposition. Here you are, you’ve been wanting to say
somethm'g; this very thing you want to say has already been conceived m' the
heart, it’s being held by the memory, got ready by the will, kept alive in the
 SERMON 288 113

m'telligence. And this very thing you want to say is not yet in any language. The
thing itself that you want to say, that has been conceived in the heart, is not in
any language, neither French, nor English, nor Welsh,“ nor Hebrew, nor the
language of any nation. The thm’g has simply been conceived m' the heart, ready
to come out.
So, as I said, it’s some point, some opinion, an idea conceived m' the heart,
ready to come out, to be put to a listener. Thus, insofar as it’s known to the
person m' whose heart it is, it’s a word, already known to the one who’s gom’g
to say it, not yet to the one who’s going to hear it. So there you have a word,
already formed, already complete, abiding in the heart; it seeks to come out, in
order t0 be uttered to the hearer. The one who has conceived the word to be
spoken, and has it in his heart, known to himself, considers the person he is
going to say it to. Let me speak in the name of Christ to ears well taught in the
Church, and I will make so bold as to suggest something that is already rather
more profound to those who are not entirely uneducated. So would your graces
please pay close attention?
Observe the word conceived m’ the heart, it’s seeking to come out, m' order
to be spoken. It considers the person to whom it is to be spoken. Does it discover
he’s French? It looks for a French voice with which to present itself to a
Frenchman. Does it discover he’s English? It looks for an English voice with
which to present itself to an Englishman. Does it discover he’s Welsh? It looks
for a Welsh voice with which t0 present itself t0 a Welshman. Set aside the
diversity of listeners, and that word that has been conceived in the heart is neither
French, nor English, nor Welsh, nor m' any language.12 It looks for the sort of
voice to come out with that will help the listener.
Now, brothers and sisters, to give you a definite proposition, so that you can
understand: I have conceived in my heart, so as t0 say, “God.” This thing I have
conceived m" my heart is something great; I mean, a single syllable isn’t what
God is;l3 I mean this short voice isn’t God. I want to say “God,” I consider the
person I am t0 say it to. Is he English? I say “God.” Is he French? I say, “Dieu. ”
To someone English I say “God,” t0 someone French I say “Dieu.” Between
“God” and “Dieu” there’s a difference of sound; there’s one set of letters here,
another there. But in my heart, in" the thing I want to say, in the thing I’m thinking
about, there is no diversity of letters, n0 variously sounding syllables; it is what
it is. In order to express it to an Englishman, one voice is used, for a Frenchman
another. If I wanted to express it t0 a Welshman, I would make use of another;l4
if to a Hebrew, another; if t0 an Egyptian another; if to an Indian another. How
many voices the word of the heart would make, with the change of persons,15
without any change or variation in itself! It reaches an Englishman with an
English voice, a Frenchman with a French one, a Hebrew with a Hebrew one.
It reaches the hearer, it doesn’t depart from the speaker. D0 I myself, I mean,
lose what I produce in another person by speaking? That sound employed as a
means has given rise t0 something in you, it hasn’t removed it from me. Just
now I was thinking about God; you hadn’t yet heard my voice; once you heard
it, you too began t0 have what I was thinking about, but I didn’t lose what I had.

A—mm»l
 114 SAINTA UG USHNE — SERMONS

So in me, as though on the threshold of my heart, as though in the cabinet room

of my mm'd, the word preceded my voice. No voice has yet sounded in my
mouth, and the word is already m' my heart. But m' order that what I have
conceived in my heart may come out t0 you, it requires16 the service of the voice.

How Christ the Wordpreceded John the voice

4. If I am able, with the help of your attention and your prayers, to say what
I wish to, I thm'k that those who understand will be delighted; but those who
don’t understand must please pardon this man as he struggles, and plead with
God to show mercy. Indeed, what I’m saym'g comes from there too.l7 What I
am to say is in my heart; but providing the service of the voices needed to bring
it t0 your ears is hard work. So what’s the Situation, brothers and sisters? What’s
the Situation? You have certainly paid close attention, you certainly understand
now that the word was in my heart, before it provided itself with a voice in which
to reach your ears. I thm'k everyone understands that, because what happens
with me happens with everyone who talks. Here I am, already knowing what I
wish to say, I’m keepm'g it in my heart, I’m seekm'g the service of the voice;
before the voice sounds m' my mouth, the word is already being held in my heart.
So the word has preceded my voice, and in me is first the word, afterward the
voice; to you, however, for you to understand, first comes the voice to your ear,
so that the word may be introduced into your heart. After all, you would be
unable to understand what was in me before it found a voice, unless it were m'
you after you heard the voice.
So if John is a voice, Christ a word, Christ comes before John, but with God;
Christ comes after John, but with us. It’s a great mystery, brothers and sisters.
Pay close attention, open your minds to the greatness of the matter agam’ and
again. You see, your grasp of it delights me, and makes me much bolder in my
approach to you, with the help of the one whom I am preaching, such a little
one preachm'g such a great one, any sort of man preaching the Word who is God.
So with his help I am becomln'g much bolder in my approach to you, and after
first outlm'ing this idea of the distinction between voice and word, I am going
on to suggest what follows from it.
John was cast in the role of the voice, but symbolically, in a mystery; because
he wasn’t the only one to be the voice. Everybody, you see, who proclaims the
Word is the voice of the Word. What the sound from our mouths is, you see, to
the word we carry in our hearts, that every devout soul that proclaims it, is t0
that Word, of which it is said, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God; this was in the beginning with God (Jn 121-2).
How many words, or rather how many voices,18 are produced by the word
conceived in the heart! How many preachers were produced by the Word
abiding with the Father! He sent the patriarchs, he sent the prophets, he sent so
many and such great ones to proclaim him in advance. The Word abiding sent
voices, and after many voices sent in advance, the one Word himself came as
in his vehicle, in his voice, in his flesh.19 So gather together all the voices which
 SERMON 288 115

preceded the Word as into one man, and lump them all together 1n' the person
of John. He was cast in the symbolic role of all of them, he alone was the sacred
and mystical representative or person of them all. That's why he is properly
called the voice, as the sign and sacrament of all voices.

He must grow, I must dimims‘h

5. So now observe the significance of, He must grow, while I must dimim’sh
(Jn 3:30). Observe, if I am able to express it; may I be capable, if I may not say
of suggesting, then at least of thinkm'g in what way, on what principle, with what
m'tention, for what reason, according to the distinction I have stated between
voice and word, the voice itself said, John himself, He must grow, while I must
diminish. Oh, what a great and wonderful sacrament! Notice the person of the
voice, the person in which all the voices were represented, saying about the
person of the Word, He must grow, while I must dimz'nish. Why? Just think. The
apostle says, We know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when what ispefrect
comes, what is in part shall be laid aside (1 Cor 13:9—10). What is perfect? In
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God (Jn 1:1). That’s perfect. Let the apostle Paul also tell us: Who, since he was
in the form of God, did not think it robbery t0 be equal to God (Phil 2:6). It is
this one, equal to God the Father, this Word of God with God, through which
all things were made, that we shall see as he is, but at the end.
Because now it’s what the evangelist John says: Beloved, we are children of
God, and it has not yet appeared what we shall be. Beloved, we know that when
he appears we shall be like him, since we shall see him as he is (l Jn 3:2). This
is the Vision promised us, it is for this Vision that we are being trained, for this
Vision that we are purifying our hearts. Blessed, he says, after all, are the pure
in heart, since they shall see God (Mt 5:8). He showed his flesh, showed it to
his servants; but it was theform ofa servant (Phil 2:7); like his own voice, among
the many voices he had sent m" advance, he also showed them his own flesh.
The Father was being asked for, as though the Son himself, who is equal to
the Father, could already be seen as he is; he was talkm'g to his servants, 1n' the
form of a servant.20 Lord, Philip said to him, show us the Father, and it is enough
for us. He was looking for the end of all his aims, the goal of the progress he
was making, which, when he reached it, would leave nothing further to be
required. Show us, he says, the Father, and it is enough for us. Good, Philip,
good; you understand perfectly that the Father is enough for you. What’s the
meaning of is enough? You will look for nothing further; he will fill you, satisfy
you, perfect you. But see whether this one you are listening to might not also,
perhaps, be enough for you. But hardly all on his own, since he never departs
from the Father. So let him answer Philip, who wants to see: Have I been with
you all this time, and you d0 not know me? Philip, whoever has seen me, has
also seen the Father (Jn 14:8-9). What can be the meaning of Philip, whoever
has seen me has also seen the Father, but, “Haven’t you seen me? Is that why
you are asking for the Father? Philip, whoever has seen me, has also seen the

J______„m„
. _______„__„
116 SAINTA UG USTINE — SERMONS

Father. You, though, can see me, and you don’t see me. I mean, you don’t see
me as the one who made you; but you can see what I was made on your account. "
Whoever has seen me, he says, has also seen the Father. How, if not because in
the form of God he did not think it robbery to be equal to God? So what was
Philip seem'g? That he emptied himself, taking theform ofa servant, made into
the Iikeness ofmen, and beingfound in condition as a man (Phil 2:6-7). That’s
what Philip was seem'g, the form of a servant, Philip who was gom'g t0 be free
to see the form of God.
So John is the person, plays the role, of all voices. Christ is the person of the
Word. All voices must necessarily dimm’ish, when we are promoted to seein'g
Christ. The more, after all, you make progress toward seeing wisdom, the less
need you have of a voice. A voice in the prophets, a voice 1n' the apostles, a voice
1n' the psalms, a voice in" the gospel.21 Let this come: In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God and the Wora' was God (Jn 1:1); when we
see him as he is (1 Jn 3:2), you don’t suppose, do you, the gospel will be chanted
then? You don’t imagine, do you, we are going to hear the prophecies, going to
read the letters of the apostles? Why not? Because the voices fall away, as the
Word grows; because he must grow, while I must diminish (Jn 3:30).
And the Word, indeed, neither grows in itself, nor falls away in itself. In us,
however, it can be said to grow, when we grow by making progress in it; just
as light grows in the eyes, when it is seen more fully as their sight improves,
while it was seen less, of course, when their sight was failing. And there was
less light in the sick eyes, there’s more light in the healthy eyes; while m' itself
the light neither diminished earlier on, nor grew later. So the service provided
by the voice diminishes, when the mind makes progress toward the Word. Thus
it is necessary for Christ to grow, for John, on the other hand, to diminish. This
is indicated by their respective deaths. John, you see, was diminished, when his
head was cut off, while Christ was exalted, he grew, as it were, on the cross. It
is also indicated by their respective birthdays, because from John’s birthday22
the days begin to be shortened, while from Christ’s they are once again in'-
creased.

NOTES

l. So Fischer, Kunzelmann and Perler. The sermon was preached in Carthage the day after
Sennon 279 on the conversion of Saint Paul, and of the local man Faustinus. On the same day, in
the aftemoon, he also preached, it would scem, Sermon 293B.
2. See Is 9:6.
3. I think he is refem'ng to John leaping in his mother's womb, when Mary came to visit Eliza-
beth, Lk 1:41.
4. See Lk 2225-26.
5. His magisterium.
6. He means Christian baptism.
 SERMON 288 117

7. It was his main point agams't the Donatists that in Christian baptism it is not the mmi"ster‚ but
Christ who baptizes—that is, who confers the grace of regeneration; and therefore the moral obliq-
uity of the mim'ster, if there be such, cannot affect the validity of the sacrament.
8. The n'ver which the psahnist had in mind was not, m' fact, the Jordan, but the Euphrates, nearly
always referred to in the 01d Testament simply as “the River."
9. The special prophet, as he had become in the popular messiam'c expectation, who is foretold
m' Dt 18: 15. The New Testament does sometlm'es apply this text to John the Baptist, for example
when Jesus calls him' more than a prophet, Lk 7:26; see also Lk 1:76. The Johannine tradition,
however, applies it to Christ, and denies it, as here, to John the Baptist.
10. Reading intellectui in the dative case, to match the aun'bus of the first half of the sentence,
ms'tead of the text‘s genitive intellectus: without any intelligible meaning.
From now on I will often be obliged to use the word “voice“ in ways in which we don't really
employ it m' English; I think Augustine too was probably stretching the Latin vox beyond its ordinary
lum"ts.
ll. He says, “neither Greek nor Latin nor Pum’c," and I would nonnally have kept these names
m' the translation. But in due and leisurely course he is going to illustrate with the particular word
Deus, Theos, in Latin and Greek respectively; and I, surely, must at least translate Deus by “God";
and “God" of course, is not a Latin word. As I am translating a sermon for the benefit of English
speakers, I have to indulge in the fiction that the preacher was preaching in English—at least I
usually have to. Very occasionally the fiction has to be on the other foot, and we make believe we
are listening to the preacher in Latin.
Punic in North Africa rather had the status then that Welsh (and Gaelic) has in the Bn'tish Isles
now. French for the educated English speaker, even if, as Augustine equivalently was, he is a
Welshman living in Wales, or a Scotsman living in Scotland, has something of the status that Greek
had for Latin speakers then; and most educated English, Welsh, and Scots people are as little at ease
with French as Augustine was with Greek.
12. Is he right here? I for my part am conscious ofthinking inmy own language; and it is because
I am not very quick at thmk1"ng in other languages, that I am not very good at speakm'g them. I
strongly suspect that Augustine very definitely thought—conceived words—in Latin. Even if one
has concepts that are, if you like, beyond any language, they are bound at least to be infected, so to
say, by the language you habitually think in.
13. He actually says “Two syllables aren't what Deus is.”
14. His Welshman, I remind the reader, was a Punic speaker, one of his own countrymen, who
were in a majority, at least in the rural areas. Why didn't he give the Punic for “God,” as he had
just given the Greek? I fear it was because he didn't know what it was, just as 90% of English people
who know that the French for God is Dieu haven't the slightest idea what the Welsh for God is. I
am relieved that Augustine did not enunciate God in Pum'c, because if he had, I would have had t0
find out how to enunciate lum' in Welsh.
15. Personarum mutan’one; so the edited text. But the Maurists admit that the manuscripts—or
some manuscripts; they are not very precise in their footnotes—read per sonorum mutationes;
through changes of sound. He could have said either; the first is rather more original.
16. Treating inquirit as if it could mean the same as requirit—or else emending it to that.
l7. From where? From God, I suppose. But it does not seem to have much to do with what he
is saying. The next sentence continues: Inde unde loquor, inest corde quod dicam. It seems over-
loaded. I suggest the first three words should be excised, and have so translated.
18. Here he is admitting that he is using the word voice in a rather strained sense, as suggested
in note 10 above.
19. Yes; but his flesh is not John the Baptist! Augustine‘s preferred and mature application of
the word/voice analogy is precisely to the mystery of the incarnation, to the Word taking, or becom-
ing, flesh, in the same sort of way as the verbum mentis, the inner word of the mind, takes or becomes
voice, or rather voiced word. This is a very early sermon; so he is still stuck with John as the voice,
and drops this maturer idea as soon as he mentions it, though he does allude to it again a little later
on.
20. The sentence could also be divided, and taken, as follows: The Father was being asked for,
118 SAINTA UGUSTINE — SERMONS

as though he himself could already be seen as he is; the Son, who is equal to the Father, was talkm'g
to his servants in the form of a servant.
21. All sections of the holy scriptures; the apostles being the New Testament letters.
22. Conventionally the summer solstice, whereas Christmas represents the Winter solstice.
\.«-\7”ß._ zu ..>oxz'„\/"'«"<..x

THE WORKS 0F SAINTAUGUSTINE

A Translation for the 215t Century

SERMONS

III/8
(27 3-305A)
on the Sam'ts

translation and notes

Edmund Hill, O.P.

editor
John E. Rotelle, O.S.A.

New City Press

Hyde Park, New York
 Published m' the United States by New City Press
202 Cardm'al Rd.‚ Hyde Park, New York 12538
©1994 Augustinian Heritage Institute

Cover design by Ben D'Angio

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data:

Augustine, Saint, Bishop of Hippo.

The works of Saint Augustine.

“Augustuu"an Heritage Institute”

Includes bibliographical references and m'dexes.
Contents: — pt. 3., v. 1. Sermons on the Old Testament, 1-19.
— pt. 3, v. 2. Sermons on the Old Testament, 20—50 —— pt. 3, v. 3. Sermons
on the New Testament, 51-94 [etc.] — pt. 3, v. 8 Sermons on the
sam'ts, 273—305A.
l. Theology — Early church, ca. 30-600. I. Hill,
Edmund. II. Rotelle, John E. III. Augustuu"an
Heritage Institute. IV. Title.
BR65.A5E53 1990 270.2 89-28878
ISBN 1-56548-055-4 (series)
ISBN 1-56548—060-0 (pt. 3, v. 8)

Nihil Obstat: John E. Rotelle, O.S.A.‚ S.T.L.

Censor Deputatus
Imprimatur: + Patrick Sheridan, D.D.
Vicar General
Archdiocese of New York, February 28, 1994

The Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur are official declarations that a book or pamphlet is free of doc—
trinal or moral enor. No lm'plication is contained therein that those who have granted the Nihil
Obstat and Imprimatur agree with the contents, opinions or statements expressed.

‚1 I m, ‚ a

k Lizr L? ",4 QM
Printed in the United States