Antioch and Constantinople
of the IV Century - The Cities, Their Life and Their Unfortunates
The Times and the Cities
The timeline of the life of Chrysostom have been a turbid period in
the new Byzantine Empire in the religious and political respect. Arianism was
the religion of Constantius II and he promoted it between 337 and 359 when the
Arianism was declared official religion in the Empire[1].
Then Julian the Apostate was trying for a short time (361 -363) to revive the
pagan cults. The next eastern emperors, Valens, Theodosius and Arcadius were promoting
Orthodoxy, (Council of Constantinople 281) and even a too zealous persecution
of the pagans.
Externally, the Empire and especially the province of Syria with
Chrysostom’s Antioch as Capital were witnessing an continuous war between
Romans and Sassanid Persia (337 – 363)[2].
The war was never completely pinned during the lifespan of Chrysostom as the
Emperors continually won or lost territories in the eastern provinces.
Economically, the privileged aristocracy that held large estates, the
military and the administrative officials[3]
were the institutions of dominance that kept the poverty and inequality in
place and secured privileges just for the rich. These institutions were
promoted by the more autocratic Emperors which transformed the Senates in Rome
and Constantinople in nothing more than administrative councils. Regarding the
relief of poverty, patronage was the only social protection system in place.
Antioch is estimated to have had a population of around 300 000,
divided equally in terms of religion: a third Christian, a third Jews and a
third Pagans[4] or more probable just
around 150 000[5]. This does not include the
population that was spread in the villages auxiliary to the City.
John Chrysostom mentions several issues that are inclusive to the City
of Antioch that constitute reasons for much philanthropic work: “earthquakes,
droughts, wars, migrations, riots and changes of imperial laws on families and
property that resulted in a large group of destitute people.” [6]
Although the city of Constantinople was founded just in 330 by the
Emperor Constantine, it is reported that He gave a ratio of 80 000 free bread
to the poor of the City. This suggests the magnitude of the poverty in the City
at at population of 150 000.[7]
The “New Rome” was in this sense inheriting the old ills of the old Rome.
The Everyday Life in the
Cities of Chrysostom’s Time
Because Antioch was first founded as a fortress, there was a subhuman
density of the population in between its walls. Historians estimate an density
of about 195 persons per acre, in comparison with Manhattan Island that has 100
persons per acre and is spread out vertically.[8] We
should not forget here the livestock that a normal person will own and host in
the same space where she lived.
“Most people lived in cubicles in multistoried tenements[9]”.
An estimate of perhaps 1 house at around 30-40 blocks of apartments. Apartments
of one room in which “entire families were herded together”[10].
The limited space in these cities was extreme. Antioch’s thoroughfare, admired
in the Greco-Roman world, was only 30 feet wide.[11]
At such a density, sanitation would have been a problem for the modern
system of sewerage. The inhabitants were living their lives in filth. The water
had to be carried for drinking and food, there was not much left for hygiene or
washing. Water was very contaminated. Pliny advised that all water is better
for being boiled.[12]
Worse yet, the excrements were collected in pots and some ditches served
as sewers. “Tenement cubicles were smoky, dark, often damp, and always dirty.
The smell of sweat, urine, feces, and decay permeated everything... bugs ran
riot...the streets: mud, open sewers, manure, and crowds... and human corpses –
adult and infant were sometimes pushed into the street and abandoned.”[13]
Disease was running rampant. In the cities the life expectancy at
birth was less than thirty years. “The majority of those living in the Greco –
Roman cities suffered from chronic health conditions”[14]
Sickness was seen everywhere in the cities: swollen eyes, skin rashes, and lost
limbs.[15]
Because of these conditions, the cities depended on a permanent influx
of immigrants because of the highly death rates. The cities were thus filled
with “social chaos and chronic urban misery” (Stark 156) which produced high
rate of criminality. Besides this, there were approximately eighteen
identifiable ethnic quarters within Antioch (Stark 158) most of them walled and
separated from the others. These ethnic separation resulted regularly in riots
and ethnic fights.
Also there were a lot of natural and social disasters that repeatedly
struck the city: epidemics, fires, attacks of the enemies, earthquakes and
famines. Antioch modern excavation prove that the city was repeatedly turned to
ruins.
A portrait of the city in antiquity is “a city filled with misery,
danger, fear, despair and hatred. A city where average family lived a squalid
life in filthy and cramped quarters, where at least half of the children died
at birth or during infancy, and where most of the children who lived lost at
least one parent before reaching maturity.[16]”
Christian Response and Action
to the Plight of the Cities
The Evolution of the Early Fathers
Thinking Regarding the Attitudes toward Wealth and Poverty
There are authors that suggest that Early Christians Thinkers
inherited the Platonic and Stoic ideas regarding the practice of philanthropy.
There are examples in the philosophic writings of Plato, Aristotle, Epictetus
and Diogenes of the teachings about the philanthropy of these thinkers. For
them the greatest good was not material, but the virtue and the one of the
virtues was the philanthropy.[17]
Sure there are accents in the early Fathers thinking about
philanthropy that are reflecting the Greek thinking that was ingrained for many
of them in the formal education they received, but the Scriptures and the
Jewish culture which was the bedrock of early Christianity were much more
specific to the thinking of the early Fathers.
Friesen sees an evolution of thinking in time of four different models
that he draws from three canonical writings and then one from an early writing
of the Early Church. (Revelation, James, Acts and the Sheperd of Hermas) In
each of the sources he identifies he observes different sources the wealth
(imperial system, local elites, not stated and God) and then different actions
required from the poor: denunciation of wealth, toleration, embracing of the
rich and dependence of the rich. The rich should: divest wealth, correct problems
with it, support the church, earn his of her own salvation.[18]
A certain trend can be seen in the practice and thinking of the church
by the fourth century when John Chrysostom was on the scene of history. Most of
the the more difficult teachings of Jesus were relegated to allegorical
interpretations.[19] The case of “Which Rich man will be saved” of
Clement of Alexandria is notable because ‘the renunciation of one’s possessions’
is made to signify the Neo-Platonist ideal of mastering passions rather than the
actual abandonment of the goods.[20]
Also, at Nazianzen, the rich are compelled to provide for their poor neighbors[21],
but not to divest.
Ascetics appeared as a correction of the course in which the things
were headed before, but especially after Constantine. The covenant of simplicity
and poverty of the hermits and cenobite communities and the examples of monks
like Anthony, Macarius and Evgarius and many others were a new impulse for the
Christian to divest the earthly goods and serve the fellow human. Theologians,
like the Cappadocians and Augustine were influenced toward godliness and
personal devotion to God directly by the ascetic perspective in the fight with
the ‘demon of money’. [22]
A tradition of self
sacrifice and love
Stark, a sociologist of religion in his books [23] [24]relating
to the growth of Christianity underlines the fact of Christian mercy toward the
poor and the sick of the Roman World. There were two major plagues that struck
the Roman Empire. One around 165 AD and the other about one hundred years
later. Christians showed mercy by caring about their sick and also the sick of
the pagans. Pagans would threw their contaminated in the streets for fear of
infection, and then would flee the cities. Even the Emperor Julian the Apostate
recognizes the superior charity and service of the Christians to that of the
pagan religion.[25]
In the process of caring for the sick the best of the Christians died[26],
but also the level of survival was rising with more than two thirds. When we
consider that one quarter to a third of the whole populace of the Roman World
died during those plagues the charitable actions of the Christians were one of
the reasons that Christianity grew during those times when the populace
generally drastically dwindled.
Early Christian writers and even the famous pagan physician Galen
recognize the philanthropy that the early Christians practiced: ”they
contributed money to a common fund to support orphans, widows, the sick, and
the destitute”, they brought food and medicines to needy people, bought
coffins, dug graves to bury the strangers, poor and criminals.[27]
John Chrysostom on Wealth
and Poverty
Chrysostom’s definition of
wealth and poverty
Chrysostom’s view of wealth and poverty is rich and complex. He
addresses either directly or indirectly this issue in many of his works. There
are thinkers like Rudolf Brändle that suggest that the central thought that is
woven into all the thinking of Chrysostom has to do with the way Christians
relate to the poor as the lively representation of their Lord.
At the question about the source of inequality and of poverty the
response Chrysostom gives is multifaceted. Ultimately,”... in the present life
poverty and wealth are only masks... when death arrives and the theatre is
dissolved, everyone puts off the masks of wealth or poverty ...”[28].
Thus the source of poverty and wealth can be God in the sense of the
role that God allotted to a specific actor in His great drama of history.
Because the purpose in life is not wealth, but Christlikeness. This is aligned
with the great trend of thinking of the most Eastern Theologians in which the
ultimate purpose[29] of man and the goal of
salvation is union with God through deification[30] [31]. “Rich
is not the one who possesses much, but the one who gives much.”[32] –
the one that imitate God better and who is affluent in spiritual wealth toward
God: “If one cannot control his own greed, even if he has appropriated
everyone’s property, how can he ever be affluent?”[33]
God is the source of wealth. God has His own specific purposes when He
entrusts wealth: growth into imitation Christi and realization of one’s
salvation – which in the deification view is not “works salvation”, but
participation with God in the process of deification: ”This is why God has allowed you to have
more; not for you..., but ... to distribute to those in need.”[34]
“God made you rich... to help those in need and so to unbind your sins too. He
gave you money not to store them for your destruction, but to pour them toward
your salvation.”[35]
The righteous suffer and poverty is one of the afflictions, but in the
calculus that Chrysostom[36]
invites the hearer to make, poverty is the superior stance, because it offers a
better perspective for deification: “... we should not wail because of
poverty... it makes the almsgiving more accessible... (the poor) goes easier to
those in prison and is quicker to visit those that are sick, but (the rich)
does not humble himself to these.”[37]
At the human level, “... the root and the reason for wealth is pride...
It is not necessity, it is pride.”[38]
That is why with this greatest of temptations wealth can be good or bad in
accordance with the usage of the one who owns it: “... wealth is not an evil in
itself, but its improper usage is from the Evil one. Also the poverty in itself
is not something good, but the right usage of it. The Rich man in Lazarus
story, was not punished for being rich, but for being cruel and unmerciful and
Lazarus, the poor... was not praised for being poor, but for enduring his
poverty with an grateful spirit.”[39]
The solution for the rich is to walk in “voluntary poverty” that
consists of “... control of his stomach, his dismissal of excess, and his
despisal of a luxurious diet...”[40]
and to accompany it with the almsgiving.
Christian responsibilities
to the poor
Almsgiving as the Main
Responsibility of the Christian
For Chrysostom the plight that the daily scene of the poor of the
cities pose to the Christian impose action. There are several ways in which Christians
need to react immediately to the common reality of poverty. The first of them
is almsgiving. It is something immediate as the need is.
Almsgiving is portrayed to be more than an economic empowerment for a
person in need. For John, “eleemosyne” “includes far more than alms... it is a
behavior of loving openness to fellow humans and can be expressed in varying
acts of compassion. “[41]
Also, almsgiving represent an exchange, “an material and spiritual
transaction between the rich and poor”[42]
In his plea for alms, John “creates an appeal to self – interest designed to
catch the attention of the rich and turn their gaze... to the poor”[43]
Are the donors of Chrysostom placed in fixed categories? Are just the
rich expected to give? Or everybody?[44] John believes the responsibility of almsgiving
falls on the shoulder of every Christian: “... we should not wail because of
poverty... it makes the almsgiving more accessible... (the poor) goes easier to
those in prison and is quicker to visit those that are sick, but (the rich) does
not humble himself to these.”[45]
and: “Almsgiving ...needs wealth more in order to be expressed, but if it is
done in poverty it is more glorious and illustrious... the poor widow exceeded
all the rich men”[46]
Should one give irrespectively if he knows the person or not? Denise
Kimber Buell[47], explains that the
tradition of the early Christian practice toward poor was in a way marked by
the definition of the “deserving poor” as a person who is worthy of the
almsgiving. Didache, assumed then by Augustine contain urges to give with
wisdom.
Chrysostom built his case for almsgiving against this tradition and is
adamant about giving irrespectively to any who asks: “... if you wish to show
kindness, you must not require an accounting of a person’s life, but merely
correct his poverty and fill his need... Be like your Father in heaven, for He
makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good”. “when you see on earth the man
who has encountered the shipwreck of poverty, do not judge him, do not seek an
account of his life, but free him from his misfortune... Charity is so called
because we give it even to the unworthy.”[48]
Streaming from his conviction that the poor are the “incarnation” of
Christ in our midst (Matt 25.34-35), John is advocating giving without
objecting and judging ahead. He is not swerving from this conviction even if he
– as we will see later – faced disdain from his congregation. He is a real
advocate for the poor in many passages he describes very visually their plight,
their wounds, their deep need: “Need alone is the poor man’s worthiness... we
show mercy on him, not because of his virtue, but because of his misfortune...
if we are going to investigate the worthiness of our fellow servants, and
inquire exactly, God will do the same for us... for with the judgment you
pronounce, you will be judged.”[49]
He is even excusing the poor for the daring behavior that offended many and
convince them to stop the giving: ” (the poor) seeing that the day has passed
and he doesn’t have the money for food... is compelled to dare more ... doing
innumerable other improper gestures...”[50]
Christian houses of mercy
In the Roman cities where the density of the populace was
indescribable and the families were usually horded in one room cubicle in a
multi leveled building we can imagine that the situation of the poor was not
first of all relating to housing. Poor could be anyone who would not have the possibility
to work: Mainly widows, orphans, sick and disabled. They could own a house
(room), but that would not provide the means to live. There was no middle class
in today’s understanding. 40% of the populace was at the subsistence level and
28% under it. The next level comprised of 22 % of the populace was barely above
the subsistence level[51]
There are left just around 8-9 % of people who would detain moderate to large
resources for living. Sometimes the poor were those who temporarily were left
without work or possibility to work. The category of the poor was more
interchangeable then than today and it was the expectation of the New Testament
and of leadership of the Early Church that poor people would help the poor that
were temporarily in more severe lack.[52]
Besides widows and orphans, there were sick people, strangers, new
immigrants and people in transit that would benefit hospitality and food.
Hospitality was a capital virtue for the Roman world and it was specifically
instructed by Jesus to Christians. Chrysostom envisions the Christian house as
a house of hospitality and mercy. In the Homily at Acts 26.4, he portrays the
father of the family as the distributor of the Word in the family and the one
who invites the poor for meals and leads the family in whole nights of watches
and prayer... and so the house become a church.
There is a certain discipleship that should go on in the family
regarding the acts of mercy. The children should witness first hands the
devotion of the parents for the Jesus “incarnate” in the poor: “God gave you
children... to act humanly, not beastly... Do you want to leave a good
inheritance to your children? Leave them the charity.”[53]
John was specifically
encouraging his hearers to become the donors themselves and to enter in contact
with the poor. Their mercy was to emanate from the personal devotion to Jesus
and to lead them into personal relations with people that the society disdains.
Wendy Mayer sustains the idea that through the direct appeals to the hearers
themselves, John tries to redirect the giving from the social projects of the
Church and from the ascetic poor to the economically poor. [54]
In the Homily at the Epistle to Philippians, John tries to correct the
‘spiritual’ way in which the help is directed to the poor “It is giving to the
poor that is important, not giving to the ascetic”. The ascetic poor has about
himself the image of a “virtuous poor” which makes the giving more easy for
most of the Christians, but John insisted on the more organic way of giving in
person and establishing individual Christian patronages of mercy besides the
charities that existed at that time in the churches and at the monasteries.
In this sense the Christian should be wise in stewarding their goods
with the specific goal in mind of sharing them with the others: “Therefore let
us use our goods sparingly, as belonging to others, so that they may become our
own. How shall we use them sparingly, as belonging to others? When we do not
spend them beyond our needs... but give equal share into the hands of the poor”[55]
Even if John’s efforts was to make his hearers to devote themselves to
serve directly the poor, in time, the model of charity that survived the best
in the oriental countries where Easter Orthodoxy is at home is the model of
indirect charity. The charity that is given to a “voluntary poor” (priest,
famous hermit, monastery or church or charity of the church). From there the
surplus is distributed to the poor.
The Motivations Chrysostom Uses
to Propel Action Toward the Poor in His Congregation
Chrysostom’s approach to the Christ “incarnate” in the poor from
Matthew 25 passage leads him to affirm that the “Christ is in the poor similar
if not more present than in Eucharist and on the Cross”[56]
The Christian should see and understand this and participate into the
fellowship that the poor intermediates with Christ: “He (Jesus) sacrifice
Himself for us and we ignore Him and we are not giving Him even the basic food,
even if He is ill, or naked we are not taking Him into account.”[57]
Christlikeness or “God likeness” is the second motivator John uses. In the theological key of deification of the
Eastern Fathers, the human being is most human when it is as close as possible
transformed into God likeness: “If he
loves the poor, he is a human being,...but if he has a savage temper, he is a
lion; if he is rapacious, he is a wolf; if he is deceitful, he is a cobra...
Learn what really is the virtue of a human being, and do not be confused.”[58] “He did not say: if you fast you will be like
your Father in heaven... but He said: “be merciful as your Father is merciful
(Luke 6.36) ... Nothing attracts God more than us showing mercy...”[59]
A controversial aspect of the motivation that Chrysostom seeks to
instill in his hearers is the earning of one’s salvation. “...after God’s
loving kindness, we must have our hope of salvation in our own righteous
deeds... nothing will help us hereafter, if we do not have good deeds”[60]
There are passages of Chrysostom’s sermons and homilies that are
somehow against the Gospel of Grace: “The almsgiving in the queen of the
virtues, the one which takes the men quickly to the Pearly Gates. It is our
sweet defense.”[61] Commenting on the trade that the almsgiving
is, John refers to the same capital passage for him: Matthew 25:40 “And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to
you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.”
he affirms: “Do you have a coin? Buy the heaven with it! Not that the heaven is
cheap, but the Master is generous... Heaven is good trade and business and we
neglect it.”[62] In the famous Sermon at
the Ten Virgins, he goes on to say: “...
can you buy with money the eternal life? Yes...”[63] “An
awesome thing is the almsgiving brothers... It is able to wipe out the sins and
to drive away the punishment from us.”[64]
Almsgiving is motivational for Chrysostom as he invests it with the
capacity to atone for sins and reduce the penance for it: “Let him seek a penalty
for his sins by self-condemnation, by complete repentance, by tears, by
confessions, by fasting and almsgiving ... and charity, so that in every way we
may become able to put aside all our sins in this life and to depart to the
next life with full confidence.”[65]
Fear for loosing one’s salvation is also played without regret and
qualification in order to extract the expected answer of obedience from his
audience. The unwise virgins lost their entrance into heaven because of lack of
charity in their lives: ”the virgins were not guilty of licentiousness, or
envy... but they were lacking of oil... which is charity”[66]
The final judgment will be also the great revealer of the heart of
humanity. In this sense the level of material and social success are just roles
that mask the real person, the real character of a person. The Judgment Day
will reveal our real self and the attitude toward mercy will be one of the main
factors that will establish the kind of real persons we are and in consequence
our eternal fate: “Lazarus had the mask of a poor man, but the rich had the
mask of a rich man. Appearances are masks... they departed to the other
world... the masks have been removed, and the faces appear from now on.”[67]
Chrysostom motivates by affirming that Christian impact among pagans
and Jews is enhanced when Christians are practicing philanthropy: ”Make friends
for yourselves by means of unrighteous mammon...Luke 16.9... it is almsgiving
which vouches for you, and your righteous action.”[68]
Another way Chrysostom motivates his congregation is by associating
the practice of mercy with the other virtues and Christian disciplines. He
affirms the centrality of the philanthropy in the growth in the Christian life:
“...prayer without almsgiving is lacking fruit. All are unclean without
almsgiving, all are useless, even most of the virtue is tainted.”[69]
Francine Carman sees many of the strategies that John uses to motivate
not as efficient as it seems in the force of the discourse[70]. Many
of them manipulate and do not empower. He could have used the other powerful
concepts that are more in line with the Gospel of Grace like the other
motivators he uses when he says that all we have is on loan and we are becoming
robbers if we are not sharing from our earthly riches. His passion for the poor
as it happens with many prophetic voices sometimes seems to blind him to the
long strategy of winning whole persons for his cause, not just immediate
action.
Response and Resistance of
the Congregations to the Message of Chrysostom Regarding the Poor
The Response
The name given him by the congregation suggest the love that the
church held for this great teacher. Also the resistance of the people at his
departure both from Antioch and from Constantinople proves the impact that his
sermons and of his person devotion had on the people.
From his sermons though we can deduce that the things were not always
as smooth as it can seem. Chrysostom approached this subject of the
responsibility of the Christian toward the poor in a prophetic fashion and his
sermons cut with precision every inclination toward complacency that he saw in
the congregation.
The situation of the care for the poor in Antioch where he pastored for
most of his life was complex, but it was well organized and sustained by
Chrysostom’s efforts and also by the efforts of Flavian one of the bishops of
the church in the City that was extensively involved in works of mercy. The
social care at the big church, where he pastored was in good shape as they had
an hostel for strangers, an hospital for the incurable sick. Also the church
held four dinning halls, and kept a register where the poor widows were entered
and cared for[71] in which were enlisted
more than 3000 widows[72]
These were extensive projects that were under the see of the pastor
and of the bishop and of the Church. In Constantinople, John seems to have had
an even more extensive influence from his position and by the reforms he
promoted he changed the destination of funds from the clergy toward the social
projects. Olympas and other rich patrons who invested in the many social
projects of the Capital City.[73]
These projects are also proof of some level of success of Chrysostom’s
sermons that were full of exhortations to invest in the poor and somehow
alleviate their poverty.
The Resistance
Stark and other scholars suggest now that the Christianity of the
first centuries was not as it popularly was believed almost exclusively a
“religion of slaves”. Most of the first converts and the so, the founding
members of the church were elite citizens of the city and probably there was a
perpetration of the status of the elite among the leaders and the members of
the Church.[74] So to this elite John addresses most of his
rebukes: “many times I advised you to avoid the greed of riches... perhaps many
revile me and say: won’t he stop fighting with his tongue against the rich... I
am not their enemy ... I speak all just for their good.”[75]
He rebukes them for hoarding things that perish instead of giving them
to the poor: „There is nothing more grievous than luxury... –take heed you
forget not the Lord your God (Deut. 8.11)... luxury often leads to
forgetfulness.” [76]
He rebukes them for being insensitive to the poor and developing a
hardened heart toward them: “(the rich man) was not improved by his prosperity,
but remained beastly... he surpassed the cruelty and inhumanity of any beast.”[77]
Chrysostom critiqued the elite of the City of Antioch (most of it
Christian) because it “was wealthy enough to ‘nourish the poor of ten cities.’”[78]
without making a significant impact in alleviating the poverty of it. Because
the elites in the Church were not giving to the economic poor the church needs
to burden itself with institutions of care (Homily to First Corinthians 21)[79]
Another well ingrained thought that Chrysostom fought against was the
belief of the Roman world that was assumed also by many Christians that the structurally
poor were in a way or another criminals. In the Homily to Acts 8, John talks
about the usual reaction of the people toward those who begged for food,
clothing of money was avoidance, hostility or suspicion.[80]
Chrysostom found resistance when he preached giving irrespectively of
the person and when he preached giving to the economical poor instead of the
voluntary poor (the ascetic). “It is giving to the poor that is important, not
giving to the ascetic” (First Homily to Philippians). In the Homily to Hebrew
11 he insists that “an ascetic male that begs is fraudulent.[81]”
Chrysostom, The State and The
Poor
The prophetic voice of Chrysostom and his ascetic tendencies shows
into the way he crafts his message to the State and the Church. Even when he
was confronted with perhaps the greatest crisis regarding the State of his
whole career as a preacher when members of his congregation participated into the
destruction of the statues of the Emperor Theodosius he remained silent about
the abuse that caused the revolt and only insisted on the individual
responsibilities of the Christians toward the state. Later in life when he is
in the position from which he can influence the business of the church at large
he is not interfering with the State as an institution. The concept of social
welfare was unknown in those times and John resorted only to the categories of
social help he could get realistically.
This does not mean that John feels hindered by the social and
political position of the persons in his churches. He is famous from Antioch
about speaking against the greed and worldliness of the rich and he is not
withholding his critiques when he arrives to be the personal pastor of the
imperial family and of the court. This characteristic gets him into the
problems that led to his exile.
I cannot but underline that although the State was in its first years
of ”happy” marriage with the Church, Chrysostom did not perceive the state as
an actor in relieving the plight of poverty. The State in his mind is separate
from the Church when it comes to serving the poor, but the individuals that are
holding positions of power in the state if Christians are obliged by their
position to a greater and more significant work of charity than the normal
citizen.
Source of the image in this post: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/John_Chrysostom_%28Georgian_miniature%2C_11th_century%29.jpg
[2] Stelian Brezeanu, (1981) 12
[3] Friesen J. Steven “Injustice or God’s will?,” in Wealth
and Poverty in Early Church and Society, ed. Susan R. Holman, (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker
Academic and Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 2008) 20-22
[4] Eftalia Macris Walsh, (2008) 183
[6] Ibid, (2008)
[7] Demetrios J. Contantelos, “The Hellenistic Background
and Nature of Patristic Philanthropy” in Wealth
and Poverty in Early Church and Society, ed. Susan R. Holman, (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker
Academic and Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 2008) 205
[9] Rodney Stark, The
Rise of Christianity, (New York, NY, HarperCollins, 1997) 151
[10] ibidem
[11] ibidem
[12] Rodney Stark, (1997) 153
[13] Rodney Stark, (1997) 154
[14] Rodney Stark, (1997) 155
[15] ibidem
[16] Rodney Stark, (1997) 160
[17] Demetrios J.
Constantelos, (2008) 187 - 199
[18] Steven J. Friesen, (2008) 35
[19] Edward Moore, Wealth,
Poverty, and the Value of the Person, - Some notes on the Hymn of the Pearl and
Its Early Christian Context, in Wealth
and Poverty in Early Church and Society, ed. Susan R. Holman, (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker
Academic and Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 2008) 56
[20] Annewies Van Der Hoek, Widening the Eye of the Needle, (2008) in Wealth and Poverty in Early Church and Society, ed. Susan R. Holman, (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker
Academic and Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 2008) 71
[22] Edward Moore, (2008) 67 - 68
[23] Rodney Stark, (1997) 73-94
[24] Rodney Stark, The
Triumph of Christianity, (Harper One, New York, 2011)
[25] Rodney Stark, The
Triumph of Christianity, (Harper One, New York, 2011) 117
[26] ibid
[27] Demetrios J. Constantelos, (2008) 200 - 201
[28] St John Chrysostom The
Seventh Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich Man (1981)
[29] “... for through love and compassion, not through
asceticism we can become like God.” Rudolf Brändle, (2008) 131
[30] Zachary J. Smith, Deification in the Eastern Orthodox
Tradition : A Protestant Assesment , (Soteriology IS – TH690, May, 2008),
Seen at: http://danutm.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/building-bridges-a-new-book-of-the-orthodox-evangelical-dialogue/
(Accessed September 19, 2012)
[31] Deification, New Dictionary of Theology, Ed. Sinclair
B Fergurson, David F. Wright, J.I. Paker, (Inter Varsity Press, Leicester,
England, 1988) 189
[32] St John Chrysostom The Seventh Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich
Man (1981)
[33] St John Chrysostom, The Second Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich
Man, in “Wealth and Poverty”, (----------) 41
[34] St John Chrysostom, The Second Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich
Man (1981) 50
[35] St John Chrysostom, Word Spoken in the Old Church when the
Statues of Theodosius the Great Were Smashed and about 1 Timothy 6.17, ibid
[36] Francine Cardman, (2008)
168 - 170
[37] St John Chrysostom, The XIX Homily to Romans, in “Homilies
to the Epistle to Romans”, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/584/omilia-x/
(Accessed July 16, 2012)
[38] St John Chrysostom,
Word Spoken in the Old Church when the
Statues of Theodosius the Great Were Smashed and about 1 Timothy 6.17, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/643/celor-bogati/
(Accessed July 2, 2012)
[39] St John Chrysostom, Word in the Sunday from before the Ascension
of the Holy Cross, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/163/duminica-dinaintea-inaltarii-cinstitei-cruci/
(Accessed July 17, 2012)
[40] St John Chrysostom, Sermo cum presbyter (SC 272: 404,
166-169) in Wendy Mayer (2008) 148 - 149
[42] Francine Cardman, “Poverty and Wealth as Theater –
John Chrysostom’ s Homilies on Lazarus and the Rich Man” in Wealth and Poverty in Early Church and
Society, ed. Susan R. Holman, (Grand
Rapids, MI, Baker Academic and Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology,
2008)171
[43] Francine Cardman, (2008) 172
[44] Denise Kimber Buell, “When both Donors and Recipients
are Poor” in Wealth and Poverty in Early
Church and Society, ed. Susan R.
Holman, (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker Academic and Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School
of Theology, 2008) 37-47
[45] St John Chrysostom, The XIX
Homily to Romans, in “Homilies to the Epistle to Romans”, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/584/omilia-x/
(Accessed July 16, 2012)
[46] St John Chrysostom, Word at the Feast of St John the Baptist, in “Sermons on Sundays
and Holidays” http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/479/cuvant-la-sfantul-ioan-botezatorul/
[47] Denise Kimber Buell, (2008) 45-46
[48] St John Chrysostom, The Second Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich Man (1981) 52
[49] ibid, 53
[50] St John Chrysostom, The Fifth Word, in “The First Homilies in Genesis”, (Editura
Sophia, București, 2004) http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/333/cuvantul-al-cincilea/
(Accessed July 14, 2012)
[51] Steven J. Friesen, (2008) 20
[52] Denise Kimber Buell, (2008) 47
[53] St John Chrysostom, The Third Homily about Mercy and the Ten Virgins, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/387/omilia-a-treia/ (Accessed July 15, 2012)
[54] Wendy Mayer, (2008), 151
[55] St John Chrysostom, Second Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich Man, (1981) 50
[56]
Rudolf Brändle, (2008) 136
[57] St John Chrysostom, Seventh Homily to First Timothy, in “Interpretations to First
Timothy”, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/608/omilia-vii-2/
(Accessed July 16, 2012)
[58] St John Chrysostom, The Sixth Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich Man (1981) 107 -108
[59] St John Chrysostom, Fourth Homily to Second Timothy, ibid
[61] St John Chrysostom, The Third Homily about Mercy and the Ten Virgins, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/387/omilia-a-treia/
(Accessed July 15, 2012)
[62] St John Chrysostom, The Fourth Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich Man (1981) 80 -81
[63] ibid
[64] ibid
[65] ibid 96
[66] St John Chrysostom, Fourth Homily to Second Timothy, ibid
[67] St John Chrysostom, The Sixth Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich Man (1981) 110
[68] St John Chrysostom, The Third Sermon on Lazarus and the Rich Man (1981) 77
[69] St John Chrysostom, Fourth Homily to Second Timothy, in ”Interpretations at the Second
Epistle to Timothy, Titus and Philemon”, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/634/omilia-vi-2timotei/
(Accessed July 15, 2012)
[70] Francine Cardman (2008) 171
[71] Rudolf Brändle (2008) 131
[72] Eftalia Macris Walsh, (2008) 183
[73]
Wendy Mayer, (2008) 143 - 147
[74] Rodney Stark, (1997) p38 - 39
[75] St John Chrysostom, Word at the Feast of the Forty Disciples, http://www.ioanguradeaur.ro/153/sfintii-patruzeci-de-mucenici/
(Accessed July 17, 2012)
[76] St John Chrysostom, First Sermon on Larzarus and the Rich Man, in ”On Wealth and Poverty”, (St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, Crestwood,
NY, 1981) 26 -27
[77] St John Chrysostom, (1981) 23
[78] Eftalia Macris Walsh, (2008) 184
[79]
Wendy Mayer, (2008) 156
[80]
Wendy Mayer, (2008) 150
[81] Wendy Mayer, “Poverty and Generosity toward the Poor
in the Time of John Chrysostom”, in Wealth
and Poverty in Early Church and Society, ed. Susan R. Holman, (Grand Rapids, MI, Baker
Academic and Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 2008) 151
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu