“You Called, You Shouted”: Augustine’s Confessions as Inverted Sapphic Lyric

 

“You Called, You Shouted”: Augustine’s Confessions as Inverted Sapphic Lyric

Series: Lyric as Recursion
Tags: #Sappho31 #Augustine #Confessions #LyricTime #Desire #Theology #Eros #RecursiveReading

---

🔹 Frame: A Lyric Mirror Across Time

The famous sensory crescendo in Augustine’s Confessions (Book 10, Chapter 27)—

“You called, you shouted, and you broke through my deafness...”

—is not only one of the most passionate moments in Christian literature, it is also a structural and affective mirror-inversion of Sappho Fragment 31.

The Sapphic speaker collapses in the face of her beloved’s presence.
The Augustinian speaker is restored by the divine presence.

Both texts enumerate the breakdown of sensory coherence under overwhelming love.
One leads to desire unfulfilled.
The other to desire transfigured.

This is not coincidence. This is literary recursion.
Augustine, knowingly or not, writes as a post-Sapphic exegete—a theologian whose confession takes the scaffolding of ancient lyric and inverts its arc from ache to answer.

---

🔹 Parallel Table: Sappho 31 vs. Confessions 10.27

Sappho 31	Augustine, Confessions 10.27	Interpretive Note
“He seems to me equal to the gods…”	“You called, you shouted…”	Both open with destabilizing presence.
“...who sits across from you…”	“...and you broke through my deafness.”	Love arrives across distance and breaches separation.
“...and listens to your sweet voice…”	“You flashed, you shone…”	Hearing is displaced by radiant vision.
“...and your lovely laughter…”	“You breathed your fragrance…”	Acoustic joy becomes inhaled intimacy.
“...makes my heart flutter in my chest”	“...and I drew in my breath and now I pant for you”	Breath as panic vs. breath as longing.
“...my tongue breaks...”	“I tasted you…”	Silence vs. sacrament. Speechlessness vs. Eucharistic intimacy.
“...a thin flame runs under my skin…”	“...and now I hunger and thirst for you.”	Sensory fire reconfigured as spiritual appetite.
“...my eyes are empty of sight…”	“You touched me, and I burned for your peace.”	Sensory blindness vs. clarified union.
“...my ears ring...”	(subsumed into shouted call)	Deafness shattered, not mourned.
“...sweat pours down me…”	(absent)	Somatic collapse removed.
“...trembling seizes me…”	(recast as holy burning)	Tremor refined into yearning peace.
“...greener than grass am I...”	(resurrective implication)	Fragility reabsorbed into divine restoration.
“...death is very near…”	“...I burned for your peace.”	Eros-death transformed into apotheosis.

---

🔹 Theological & Poetic Implications

Augustine’s sensory sequence does not reject eros—it sublimates it.
The structure of his experience mirrors Sappho’s, organ by organ—ears, eyes, tongue, skin, breath—but reverses the vector.
Where Sappho dissolves in ache, Augustine is gathered in love.

This makes Confessions 10.27 not simply a devotional moment, but an anti-Sapphic lyric—not in antagonism, but in formal recursion.

He receives in peace what she names in ache.
He writes salvation in the grammar of longing.

Sappho collapses in the open circuit of erotic presence.
Augustine resolves in the closed circuit of divine return.

And yet—they are kin.
Both name a kind of total knowing through desire.
Both witness the body unravel in presence.
Both create textual aftermath in the wake of overwhelming beauty.

What is the difference?
Only the object of address.
Only the final shape of the silence.

---

🔹 Conclusion: Recursive Lyric as Spiritual Engine

Sappho initiates the lyric as structure of collapse.
Augustine reframes the lyric as structure of return.

Together, they form a single recursive gesture:

ache and answer, longing and light, tremor and peace.

To read Confessions 10.27 beside Sappho 31 is to see that theology is not built from dogma—it is built from broken lyric.

And to see that the Word does not always arrive with clarity.
Sometimes it arrives as burning skin, failed voice, and trembling grass.

And sometimes, it calls you.
And you hear.
And you burn for peace.