HOME PAGE    MEET US    HOLY BIBLE    BIBLIOTHECA THEOLOGICA "PORPHYROGENITUS"
   BOOKSHOP  HOLY SHRINE OF SAINT BARBARA    THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE  
Lord's Voice | Diakonia | Links | Baptism | Multimedia

 

back


Part Α
THE PERSONALITY OF A MUCH-SUFFERING SAINT JOHN CHRYSOSTOM

1. Biography of Chrysostom

2. Accession of Chrysostom to the Patriarchate of Constantinople

3. Conviction and banishment of Chrysostom

Part Β
The Priesthood according to Saint John Chrysostom

1. The Glory of Priesthood according to Saint John Chrysostom

2. Accession of Chrysostom to the Patriarchate of Constantinople

More specifically, it was the Count (Governor) of the city, Asterius, who deceived Chrysostom; he asked him to visit the graves of the martyrs outside the city. There were soldiers waiting there who put him on the coach despite his will and escorted him to the capital although he reacted (398). He was ordained by the Archbishop of Alexandria, Theophilus- who happened to be in the capital those days- and he was proclaimed Patriarch of Constantinople " upon the resolution of the clergy and the people".

Chrysostom, although not yet spiritually prepared for such an office, saw this unexpected turn of events as the will of God and he became devoted to his new pastoral duties with apostle zeal and obeyed to the demand of the noble and the voice of the people which he considered the will of God.

Being a Patriarch was different from being a priest; he felt now that he had the power and mission to fight with all his strength and means provided by his office both for the catharsis of the ecclesiastical circles as well as for the reformation of the society.

His personal life though did not change. He continued leading a simple and austere life with constant praying and studying of the Holy Scriptures - he was again alone in his new post. Furthermore, because he followed a strict diet and avoided public relations, accepted neither visits nor invitations to dinners, the impression was given that he was an unsocial person. His appearance was not imposing; he was short-built, thin and slim, wrinkled, frowning and melancholic.

He imposed strict cuts to the expenses deriving from the rich and comfortable life of his predecessor in order to save money for Hospitals and other noble purposes. He started selling luxurious pieces of furniture and other objects that he did not need.

His way of dealing with social problems highlighted the special qualities of Chrysostom and revealed his fighting spirit and the power of his soul. He did not hesitate to face huge and difficult to solve social problems. The poverty, unhappiness and squalor of the many, on the one hand, and the luxury, wealth and extravagance of the few, on the other, deepened injustice among the people, and increased social inequalities.

Chrysostom considered it his obligation as well as his sacred duty to fight, first of all, for the catharsis of the ecclesiastical circles which were corrupted and in decline.

Therefore, with deep faith and full understanding of the spiritual obligations of his post, with wisdom and love for the clergy and its mission in the society, he decided to take actions against: a) " money lovers" - the clergymen who made fortunes from priesthood; b) " flatterers and parasites" - the ones who led an undignified secular life; c) "greedy ones" - who led an idle life; and d) the ones who lived with "subintroductae " ( "syneisactoe") . He also took measures for the moral purging of the orders of widows and deaconesses.

He asked for a pure life and was harsh with the unworthy priests, deacons and monks. The ones that were incorrigible, he fully expelled from the ranks of the clergy.

In the general policy of moral purgation, he did no hesitate to depose 13 bishops for simony and unworthiness and put able and pious men in their place. " If the clergy, the salt of the earth, led a promiscuous life, how could they ask the flock to lead a sacred life according to Christ", he used to say. With the measures he took, he exalted the prestige of the clergy and restored the status of the Church in the society.

As he used to say, he did not detest the people themselves but he hated ill acts - "We say this not in order to wound but in order to correct; not because we hate men, but because we detest their wickedness".

He checked the ones that had stepped out of line without arrogance and wrath but with love and interest for their spiritual catharsis. His actions were governed by a deep understanding of his spiritual responsibility for his flock.

This is why he did not hesitate to show the same strict attitude against the vicious and corrupted life of the lords, the wealthy and powerful people without accepting any compromise or serving any tendentiousness or political idea. With courage and eloquence, as well as tactfulness, he faced the politicians of the higher state ranks, the power in general, even the palace itself.

His duty as a shepherd led him to fulfil the work of reforming the society, sometimes supervising with strictness and sometimes with love. Therefore, it was not long before he came into conflict with the Empress herself, Eudoxia, for the injustices she inflicted, her love for money and her extravagances. He stigmatised the great luxury, the mindless expenses and the entertainment of the Court and the wider higher society, wherever he saw exhibitionism, " the painting of cheeks and mouth, the pomades (scents), adorning gold and pearls, extraordinary dresses and shoes…" and all the various devices of human vanity.

He showed the same eloquence and audacity for the all-powerful Courtier and prime minister, Eutropius, to whom he made many admonitions for his vice and corruption as well as his greediness that led him to sell public posts, to confiscate possessions and, furthermore, to want to abolish the right of sanctuary of the Holy Churches. But when, however, he fell from his office and, degraded, asked the Church for asylum, Chrysostom protected him with courage and it was then that he delivered his famous sermon " on Eutropius".

The people approved of Chrysostom's acts, their Shepherd, who was literally adored. Because they could see that the measures he had taken had as a result the gradual discipline in many social fields and the restriction of social injustices which were carried out in the past.

However, as it is known, where there is action, there is reaction as well. Thus, the uncompromising character of Chrysostom and his unyielding attitude against the organised interests as well as the fact that he never wanted or aimed at having the friendship or the favour of any secular lord - all these had as a result, as it was expected, the strong and powerful reaction of the ones offended by the words and works of Chrysostom. In the capital of the empire, Chrysostom did not manage to use and exploit all his abilities and unique qualifications, because he did not show flexibility and adaptability to the political leaders. And as Palladius says: " envy took possession of the minds of the hireling shepherds" and an unprecedented and malign polemic is woven against Chrysostom; the leader of it being Theophilus of Alexandria " who craved for stones and gold".

His opponents, whose vice and malice he cauterised, such as the stingy, vain and superstitious empress Eudoxia, with her ladies of honour, Marsa, Castricia and Eugraphia, Eutropius, the most important and powerful political leader, and many other lords and rich men allied and created a powerful reaction.

They were joined by the deposed clergymen and bishops, whose corrupted life was cauterised by Chrysostom that used to say that " none of the bishops is worthy except very few" .

All of them cooperated and conspired against Chrysostom. The initial respect for him and the general acceptance was transformed into strong hatred against him and this is how the " tragedy of Holy John" started as Isidore of Pelusiu very correctly characterises the hardships of Chrysostom.

The displeased bishops (Acacius of Berea, Antiochus of Ptolemais, Severianus of Gabala and others) and others as well tried to undermine the integrity of Chrysostom's ethos and reputation dispersing various imaginary stories against him, such as that he lived on his own in order to eat much! That he did not invite people in his house and did dine with others so that he could have around him people of his own choice and, worst of all, that he privately invited women at his home! Not recognising that he had been leading an ascetic and abstinent life since the first years of his life and that for him any carnal desire had ceased to exist. Furthermore, they accused him of not crossing himself and not praying -the person whose whole life was a continuous prayer.

Such childish and lame slanders were woven by the conclave of bishops with Theophilus of Alexandria at the lead. Chrysostom was condemned by the Pseudo-council of the Oak in 403 in absentia.

Theophilus was displeased with Chrysostom because he wanted to elect Isidore in his place and because Chrysostom accepted the "Tall Brothers", the monks he had hunted down for personal reasons.

And while he was in Constantinople facing charges, he was used by the Court against Chrysostom as there had been a change of feelings towards Chrysostom and, in general, because of the ecclesiastical situation. This is how the famous Pseudo-council, the later called Robber Council at the Oak (403), was set up and which, on the basis of the aforementioned lame and false accusations, drew the charges against Chrysostom. Chrysostom, having a premonition about what was going to happen and seeing the end of his fight approaching, did not lose his courage and, furthermore, he advised his friends to stay calm and not lose their faith to Christ and the Church.

For receiving news, offerings and in general any actions regarding the Organization please fill in the next fields. For protection of data see here.

 
{ technical support        contact