Sermons on Evil-Speaking — Key Ideas to Explore

The Structure of Barrow's Argument

The excerpts reveal a methodical progression. Barrow first establishes that certain forms of reproach are permissible: those uttered by God's authority, by private persons in charity, in defense of truth, or against notorious wickedness. He supports each point with scriptural examples, such as Paul calling Elymas "thou child of the devil" and Christ calling Peter "Satan." This structure—laying out exceptions before defining the rule—suggests that the full work likely builds a comprehensive taxonomy of speech acts. Readers should note how Barrow uses biblical figures as both models and warnings, grounding his ethical distinctions in narrative rather than abstract principle.

Voice and Rhetorical Strategy

Barrow's voice is learned and precise, weaving Greek phrases (νουθετειν ατακτους, επαγωνιζεσθαι τη πιστει) into his English prose. He assumes an audience familiar with Scripture and patristic tradition, yet his sentences are carefully balanced, qualifying each claim. For instance, he notes that reproof must proceed "out of holy zeal for God's honour, and from earnest charity towards men." This rhetorical caution reflects the sermon's purpose: to persuade without inflaming. The excerpts show a preacher who anticipates objections, distinguishing between "culpable reproach" and necessary admonition. Readers should attend to how Barrow's syntax mirrors his moral reasoning—each clause hedged, each exception noted.

Recurring Scriptural Anchors

Barrow repeatedly returns to a handful of biblical episodes: Christ's denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees, Peter's rebuke of Simon Magus, Paul's confrontation with Elymas, and Christ's calling Peter "Satan." These examples serve as touchstones, illustrating when harsh language is justified. Notably, Barrow does not merely cite these passages but analyzes their context—the motive, the authority, the outcome. This pattern suggests that the sermons function as a kind of applied hermeneutics, teaching readers how to interpret Scripture's own rhetorical extremes. For a first reading, tracking these recurring references offers a key to Barrow's ethical framework.

The Editor's Role and the Text's Provenance

Henry Morley's introduction, though brief, frames the sermons within Barrow's biography: his royalist sympathies, his academic career, his study of the Greek Fathers in Constantinople. This context matters because Barrow's arguments about speech and authority were not abstract—they emerged from a life shaped by political and religious conflict. The edition itself, prepared by Les Bowler for Project Gutenberg, presents the text with minimal annotation, leaving Barrow's 17th-century prose to speak directly. Readers should consider how the sermons' original audience—likely a learned, Anglican congregation—might have heard these distinctions differently than a modern reader.

As you read, note how Barrow's careful distinctions between permissible and sinful speech build a practical ethics of communication. The sermons reward attention to his use of Scripture, his rhetorical qualifications, and the historical context of religious controversy. Let the excerpts guide your expectations: this is not a simple condemnation of gossip, but a nuanced exploration of when words wound and when they heal.

I remember how Barrow’s sermons warn that careless words can erode a soul, much like stone worn by water. It made me think of that quiet volume, Peter's Rock in Mohammed's Flood, from St. Gregory the Great to St. Leo III — Text and Context, where speech itself becomes a bulwark against the tide of history. Both, in their own way, keep watch.