Book 1 is excellent, as he lays out the order of loves as the interpretive key of the Scriptures. Book 2 and 3 are a strange mixed bag, and book 4 is an extended application of rhetoric to Christian preaching.

Skip that Intro!

I've just read this book for my Intro to Theology class. While the publisher and the comments on the back of the book seems to cherish the 100 pages of introduction by other scholars, I have to say reading through the first 50 pages makes me want to pull my hair out or stop reading this book altogether.

I finally took the advice of my wife (who got an earful about the Intro) and skipped the last 50 pages of it. Suddenly, I found myself enjoying Augustine, which is simple and reflective. With all due respect for all the scholars who wrote the intro, which I am sure are much more educated than I and the reason I could not appreciate their writing is no doubt my fault, I think it is a tragedy that in setting the stage, they only obstructed and frustrated the readers. Nor am I alone in this, most of my class disliked the intro. Maybe it is not meant for 1st year seminary student, I don't know.

I don't really feel comfortable rating a book from Saint Augustine, so I intend my rating to relate to the translation done by D.W. Robertson, Jr. For readers who need to carefully understand Augustine's argument, this translation is far superior to the more recent one done by R.H.P. Green, though Green's introductory material and notes are quite helpful.

One way to understand this book is as a project of replacing the 'corpus' of classical literature that Augustine and other Roman citizens were raised on with a Christian library. Because Augustine considers the church to be the site of this new education, the book focuses on the study and preaching of the Scriptures.

Augustine's 'hermeneutic' (or 'science of interpretation') is striking. One of his fundamental claims is that our distance from the message of the Bible is not primarily historical in nature but moral. He asserts that the purpose of studying and preaching the Scriptures is to increase a proper love in the heart. The Scriptures are a world of love, and to understand them is to be filled with the same love. Augustine claims that one has not properly understood a given portion of the Bible until their heart is filled with greater love; and a sermon has not preached 'the Bible' until the hearers leave with hearts burning for love with God and each other.

Augustine describes this approach to interpretation in Book 1, and then moves to discuss various difficulties of interpretation in Books 2-3, and ends in Book 4 with a long discussion on preaching. Because Augustine wrote in a day when a large percentage of the congregation was illiterate and when even the literate had difficulty accessing books/scrolls, he fuses biblical interpretation and preaching in ways that might seem odd to contemporary readers.

Aside from the book's general approach to interpretation which I tried to summarize above, I was completely taken with his 'crowd psychology' of Book 4. I also was struck by a quote from Ambrose that he includes in Book 4 about cosmetics, in which the great Milanese bishop claims that the cosmetic industry is based on a woman's derision of her own body as made by God. The industry offers an image for her to love in the stead of her own person, and the cosmetics are merely the means of redemption to attaining that image. She offers this image to her husband and the world instead of her true self. There are limits to this depiction of cosmetic usage, but I found it to be an incredibly insightful analysis of contemporary make-up culture.

This book has become one of the three most well-known and widely studied books of the great bishop - it sits alongside Confessions and City of God as a classic of western Christianity. If you seriously want to engage with this text, I would highly recommend reading it alongside Confessions, which Brian Stock has argued is an extended tale about the morally potent practice of reading. Stock's book 'Augustine the Reader' is a vital companion to making sense of Augustine's views on reading and its significance in his vision of moral formation.

I had entirely forgotten that I read this book, but Dr. Edwards insisted it was very good, and I agree.

So, before I get into the meat of the book, a note about this translation by Oxford's World Classics. This is a terrible translation. It tries to be dynamic, but ends up being anachronistic and feeling way too informal (for instance, "junk food" ends up in here). I am no pedant (my favorite translation right now is the NIV), but this was a register too low for me, and often made Augustine sound stretched.

Okay, the basic point of this book is that exegeting and teaching the Bible should make us love God and our neighbor. To make this point, Augustine says that we have signs and things, and we should not get bogged down in signs, but rather be poined to things--with the ultimate "thing" being God. This is something so simple and yet easily forgotten, that I want to be a better Christian because of it. This is the point of book 1.

In book 2, Augustine gives a careful understanding of signs and things signified and offers some very wise and timeless truths on how to read carefully. He says that we should let context determine meaning, both in terms of words and passages. He also has recourse to multiple translations and thinks that the Septuagint is the authoritative text (a point I differ with but that's a controversy for another time). He says Christian teachers should have a good generalized knowledge of the world and of the different fields of knowledge (music, math, etc.) and explains how it's helpful in understanding the Scriptures. You might call it the "historical" of the "historical-grammatical."

In book 3, Augustine explains the importance of not confusing the literal with the spiritual, or the literal with the metaphorical. It's interesting because Augustine is quite sensible: he says that we should not make the Scriptures that are ambiguous mean anything that is not thoroughly agreed upon. He also says that we should not be confused by the different morality in the Old Testament, since customs and societies change, though right and wrong do not change. But then it's clear that he finds a bunch of allegorical meanings that are not in the text at all, and so it's clear we're in another planet. One interesting little tidbit is that Augustine says that in the Old Covenant there were a lot of signs, but that in the New Covenant there are only two--the sacraments. In all of this, we are to look past the physical to the spiritual. It shows how fluid these categories were for Augustine.

I differ with his allegorical interpretations, but as someone who spends a lot of time in Biblical Horizons-like readings of Scripture, it made me realize how easy it is for me to become captive to an idea. So maybe there's cause for humility about meanings in texts which are just "obvious." Augustine may have been too ascetic, but we are definitely too luxurious and libertine.

In book 4, Augustine offers a long discussion of fruitful rhetoric in teaching, which it seems clear to me focuses on pastors. He says that rhetoric is not to be despised and points to the rhetoric in the Bible. Like Socrates, he warns against letting rhetoric distract us from the truth. He says that different styles are fitting for different times, and that simple styles are best for teaching about the Trinity. More fancy, or emotional styles, though sometimes suitable, are not to be maintained for very long. Remember, says Augustine, the point is to make people do things, not to make them look at you.

So, all in all, very good. Augustine was a great church father, and I was encouraged to hear him giving advice that I myself have heard in the modern era before. Augustine says not to worry about what you will say before you preach: the Spirit will give you what you need. As someone who worries a lot about what he says, I found this comforting, pastor or no pastor.

The first three books are extremely interesting in how to read and interpret the Bible, and indeed how to think: there's a good amount of discussion on what is a thing, what is a sign, how signs are things and things are signs, but you can get mixed up if you interpret a sign as merely a thing and vice versa-- pretty profound stuff, as you might expect from the saint.
Book four, on how Christians ought to try to sound good while speaking truth, is much less interesting.

This book is not so much an exposition of Christian Doctrine as a guide to those who would teach doctrine. In 391, Emperor Theodosius issued a law making pagan worship illegal. During the Golden Age of Athens, politics and man-made laws guided human conduct, and the city-state was viewed as a manifestation of the highest human values, giving rise to political philosophy. Christianity effected a change in the course of Western society, requiring a new cultural identity and a new educational curriculum. With this in mind, Augustine attempted to create an approach to the teaching of scripture that matched the sophistication of the classical inheritance. He wrote the first three books in 396, just before he started work on The Confessions, and then added the fourth book in 426 just after completing The City of God. It is not nearly so deep or compelling as those works, but will be of interest to anyone who wants to gain a fuller understanding of Augustine's thought.
In the first book he treats of things, which he divides into three classes,--things to be enjoyed, things to be used, and things we both use and enjoy. The only object which ought to be enjoyed is the triune God, who is our highest good and our true happiness. We are prevented by our sins from enjoying God; and that our sins might be taken away, "the word was made flesh," our lord suffered, and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, taking to himself as his bride the church, in which we receive remission of our sins. And if our sins are remitted and our souls renewed by grace, we may await with hope the resurrection of the body to eternal glory; if not, we shall be raised to everlasting punishment. These matters relating to faith having been expounded, the author goes on to show that all objects, except God, are for use; for, though some of them may be loved, yet our love is not to rest in them, but to have reference to god. And we ourselves are not objects of enjoyment to God; he uses us, but for our own advantage. He then goes on to show that love--the love of God for his own sake and the love of our neighbor for God's sake--is the fulfillment and the end of all scripture. After adding a few words about hope, he shows, in conclusion, that faith, hope, and love are graces essentially necessary for him who would understand and explain the holy scriptures.
Having completed his exposition of things, in Book II the author proceeds to discuss the subject of signs. He first defines what a sign is, and shows that there are two classes of signs, the natural and the conventional. Of conventional signs (which are the only class here noticed), words are the most numerous and important, and are those with which the interpreter of scripture is chiefly concerned. The difficulties and obscurities of scripture spring chiefly from two sources, unknown and ambiguous signs. Book II deals only with unknown signs, the ambiguities of language are reserved for treatment in Book III. The difficulty arising from ignorance of signs is to be removed by learning the Greek and Hebrew languages, in which scripture is written, or if this can't be done, by comparing the various translations, and by attending to the context. In the interpretation of figurative expressions, knowledge of things is as necessary as knowledge of words; and the various sciences and arts of the heathen, so far as they are true and useful, may be turned to account in removing our ignorance of signs, whether these be direct or figurative. Whilst exposing the folly and futility of many heathen superstitions and practices, (there is a digression at this point, which I found amusing, expressing disdain at women painting their faces) the author points out how all that is sound and useful in heathen science and philosophy may be turned to a Christian use. And in conclusion, he shows the spirit in which it behooves us to address ourselves to the study and interpretation of the sacred books. This book also includes a chapter, which as a student of early Christianity I found to be of great interest, in which he lists all the books of the Old and New Testaments that are canonical. It is interesting to note that as early as the time this was written the New Testament canon had been fixed as the same books regarded as canonical today.
The author, having discussed in the preceding book the method of dealing with unknown signs, goes on in the third book to treat of ambiguous signs. Such signs may be either direct or figurative. In the case of direct signs ambiguity may arise from the punctuation, the pronunciation, or the doubtful signification of the words, and is to be resolved by attention to the context, a comparison of translations, or a reference to the original tongue. In the case of figurative signs, we need to guard against two mistakes:--i. Interpreting literal expressions figuratively; 2. Interpreting figurative expressions literally. The author lays down rules by which we may decide whether an expression is literal or figurative; the general rule being, that whatever can be shown to be in its literal sense inconsistent either with purity of life or correctness of doctrine must be taken figuratively. He then goes on to lay down rules for the interpretation of expressions that must be taken figuratively; the general principle being, that no interpretation can be true that does not promote the love of God and the love of man. Here is where I might have a quibble with Augustine.
There are passages of scripture that when read literally are far from being expressions of love. By forcing them to be interpreted as figurative expressions of love, at times it seemed to me that virtually anything could be interpreted as anything else in order to force the passage to comply with Augustine's interpretation. The author concludes this book by expounding and illustrating the seven rules of Tichonius the Donatist, which he commends to the attention of the student of holy scripture.
I found Book IV to be the least interesting. It is an explication of the oratorical qualities necessary for a preacher. After detailing with much care and minuteness the various qualities of an orator, he recommends the authors of the holy scriptures as the best models of eloquence, far excelling all others in the combination of eloquence with wisdom. He points out that perspicuity is the most essential quality of style, and ought to be cultivated with special care by the teacher, as it is the main requisite for instruction, although other qualities are required for delighting and persuading the hearer. All these gifts are to be sought in earnest prayer from God, though we are not to forget to be zealous and diligent in study. He describes three species of style, the subdued, the elegant, and the majestic; the first serving for instruction, the second for praise, and the third for exhortation: and of each of these he gives examples, selected both from scripture and from early teachers of the church, Cyprian and Ambrose. He shows that these various styles may be mingled, and when and for what purposes they are mingled; and that they all have the same end in view, to bring home the truth to the hearer, so that he may understand it, hear it with gladness, and practice it in his life. Finally, he exhorts the Christian teacher himself, pointing out the dignity and responsibility of the office he holds to lead a life in harmony with his own teaching, and to show a good example to all.

This book is available to read for free on CCEL. It's better entitled 'On Biblical interpretation'.
On my first way through, I didn't really understand what Augustine was doing or why it was significant. Trying second time round a bit later was a completely different story! I think I needed some context of the early church fathers in general, but especially of patristic *exegesis* in particular to see the power of what he's doing.
Peter Leithart's assessment really resonated with me: "[It] has an almost postmodern feel at certain points; it is a text in theological hermeneutics. Augustine’s answers are sometimes (in my view) deeply wrong; but he asks all the right questions. Or most. de doctrina deserves every bit of the scrutiny and commentary it has received over the past millennium and a half." Read his full (and very insightful) notes here:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/leithart...

Mostly genius series of books on how to interpret the Bible; the genius portions being a solid declaration of Christian doctrine and advice on understanding difficult passages; the terrible portion mostly concerning the allegorical interpretation of the Bible (for which Augustine is infamous).

Good guy, good book.

Imagine being one of the most prolific writers in Church history, and a second year seminary student gives your hermeneutic books a 4/5 stars on good reads nearly 1500 years later.

While that would be ironic for you, I am giving “On Christian Teaching” a 4/5 stars as a third year seminary student.

I wish I would have read this book earlier in my Christian life. It would have helped my Bible reading habits years ago. Albeit, this work in antiquated and some of Augustine’s convictions are not grounded in anything but his own thoughts.

I would like to see another theologian make a spiritual successor to this work.

St Augustine of Hippo here gives advice on preaching. 3/4 of said advice is a discussion of how to read Scripture so that one understands it and is this able to preach. I read this in preparation for my own homiletics course this coming semester, and even though St Augustine doesn't give as much practical preaching advice as one might desire, his run down of scriptural analysis is I think must read for anyone who plans to preach the Gospel, especially in light of our modern urge to separate Scripture into little microcosms.

This is a slow and dense read, but man! St. Augustine is clever and funny. This is something to read academically, or at least to talk about with someone with expertise.

Disclaimer: I only listened to this one.

Don’t be deceived by the title, the book has little to do with Christian doctrine. In the work, Augustine outlines grammatical principles for interpreting the Scriptures as well as guidelines for teaching. This is not a book on theologically or historically understanding the Scriptures, but focuses on issues like the allegorical interpretations springing forth in Augustines day.

If you lived around 400 AD and were a Christian who had a profession in rhetoric then this book is for you, but if you want Christian Doctrine as the title would have you believe, you’ve got the wrong book. I wouldn’t recommend it. Not on the basis of anything false, but on the basis of the idea that if your reading Augustine you’re probably not interested in principles for grammar and oration.