This article explores an understudied aspect of Jewish rhetoric—restrictions against speaking lashon hara (evil speech, libel, gossip)—to contribute to the field’s understanding of Jewish rhetorical traditions. In reading Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan’s (1838-1933) treatise Chafetz Chaim (1873), this article shows how Jewish speech laws function as an ontological, nonagonistic, and ethical community-oriented rhetoric. In reading the Chafetz Chaim, this article shows that Kagan’s exigency in compiling the speech laws was in response to anti-Semitism and Enlightenment era Haskalah Judaism. The dialogic rhetoric found in Chafetz Chaim provides ethical and methodological lessons for contemporary rhetorical scholars, lessons that resonate with important twentieth century Jewish rhetorics.

Few would argue with the notion that teachers play an important role in shaping student learning. Best practices suggest we do so by positively influencing affect (motivation based on perceived relevance/utility), cognition (comprehension/ understanding), and behavior (performance/application). Grounded in the theoretical paradigms of Freire, Greenleaf, and Bandura, we contend that teachers have a moral obligation to influence not only students' minds, but also their hearts in ways that encourage them to grow into morally grounded servant-leaders as they interact in the world beyond the academy. We recommend several pedagogical strategies based on Greenleaf’s ten servant leadership principles and propose potential implications.

This essay considers the use of the word “I” in Christian sermons. Preachers commonly use “I” in three ways: 1) in reference to themselves; 2) as they stand in for the listener or share the stories of others; and 3) as they stand in for God. The essay examines why the word should be employed in each voice and how these uses and stances offer rhetorical risks and benefits. An ethical framework of love and liberty is developed as a series of norms by which uses of “I” can be guided. The ethical uses of “I” are examined in turn, inviting preachers to use the power of this small word to help identify with hearers rather than to coerce belief or action.

Using the epideictic as a hermeneutic entrance, this paper argues that Pope Francis’ rhetoric of conciliation during his visit to the United States in September 2015 resonated with a majority of Americans because he identified and consubstantiated with American society, American values, and American people in both word and deed. Casting himself as a brother and friend with profound knowledge of American history and cultural realities, the Holy Father refrained from pontificating and criticizing; rather, he chose the path of fearless dialogue amplified with performative rhetoric.