Thesis (Th. M.)--Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 2006. / "Athumia" appears in Greek letters on t.p. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 74-77).

Univ., Diss.--München, 2001.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Trinity International University, 2001. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 238-254).

Habilitationsschrift--Göttingen. / Bibliography: p. [201]-211.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Duquesne University, 2009. / Title from document title page. Abstract included in electronic submission form. Includes bibliographical references (p. 284-322) and index.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Trinity International University, 2001. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 238-254).

Thesis (Th. M.)--Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, 2006. / "Athumia" appears in Greek letters on t.p. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 74-77).

The aim of this thesis is to reveal the intimate relationship between John Chrysostom's Eucharistic theology and the christian life, and that at the Eucharist Man's true being is demonstrated. It investigates Chrysostom's exegetical and oratorical method in order to ascertain how he approached a text and how he delivered his understanding of it. He is a representative of the Antiochene School of Exegesis and his fame as a preacher was a result not so much of his oratorical construction, but of the underlying spiritual unity within the oration. The purpose of all his preaching and exegesis was to evoke a moral response from his hearers. In the consecration of the elements, Chrysostcm displayed a remarkable openness to the varying traditions. He saw reciting the words of institution and invoking the Spirit as effecting consecration. Not only this, but also the moral life of the congregation played its part in effecting consecration. Once the elements had been consecrated, Christ was sacrificed, symbolically and literally, not again but in memory (Greek letters) of the Passion, which thereby becomes a present reality. In Chrysostom's understanding of the real presence he displays yet again an openness to the traditions. Christ is both present symbolically through the elements and literally through the transformation of the elements. The real presence demanded of the communicant a high degree of morality. To approach the Table on which Christ lay demanded a life of virtue, not only from the individual communicant but from the whole community. Those who partook unworthily imitated Judas and shared his fate. The community had to approach the Table in unity. At the Table, however, the community received its unity from Christ, the community became the body of Christ. Through participation and becoming the body of Christ, the community was united with the Godhead . Schism, therefore, was a very serious sin for it tore the body of Christ apart. For Chrysostom, Christ was also present in and intimately united with the poor. The church had to be able to be aware of Christ's presence in the poor and be responsible toward Him. In giving to the poor, the communiicant acknowledged that he/she had received at the Table and also received his/her salvation from Christ through the poor. The whole Eucharistic feast not only fed the christian with spiritual food, but called the communicant away from gross materialism to a life-giving dependance on God. It called the communicant to give to others as he/she had received from Christ.

No description available.

Throughout the ages historical text criticism has been used to study texts of ancient authors of Christian ethical values. Two such persons were Paul the apostle and John Chrysostom. This study shows that text historical criticism is not without problems. The problem lays not so much in the idea of historical text criticism, but how it was and is still being applied today, it is never without bias. This use of the texts of Paul and Chrysostom who were both very outspoken on the subject of sexuality has caused great amounts of emotional and in cases also physical pain to people who misapplied historical text criticism and as Martin and others have effectively shown, any such interpretation of text that has a intention to hurt people cannot be the right method. Ancient sexuality worked and was constructed completely different from the sexuality of modernity. The way gender was appropriated in ancient times, the way sexuality was construed and applied were set against a wholly different context and set of rules than that of the current day. This becomes clear in Roman and Hellenistic sexuality that is discussed in detail in this study. Unlike modern times, the ancients did not have a simplistic two-sex model that was based on biological sex, in their world, one’s actions determined one’s sex. Both Paul and Chrysostom were very well educated people, they were aware of philosophic thought in their day and took these thoughts into account whilst saying and writing what they did. Paul was at heart a dedicated Pharisee who only later turned toward Christianity. He was well acquainted with Jewish sexual ethics; he had an absolute repulsion towards any form of desire, which he believed led to many other sins. His writings available to us should not be seen as biographies but as letters intended to be arguments with very good rhetoric and diatribe, written with the goal of achieving to convince the receiver or listener. He was extremely conservative in his viewpoint on sex, if he could have had his way, no sexual contact between any person would have existed, but he realised that not everybody had the same gifts he had. This point of view was mostly because of his eschatological worldview, for Paul when you became a Christian you became a slave of God and you were no longer a slave of any passions, so much the more, the passions of the flesh. Chrysostom, who lived almost four hundred years later, had a great veneration for Paul. He basically shared all Paul’s views on sexuality, although not always for the same reasons. Chrysostom was however, in his way also eschatological. His life, like that of Paul was caught up in many confrontations, which had an influence on the way he thought and the things he had opinions on. Chrysostom, like Paul preferred the ascetic lifestyle not only for himself but for everyone, he believed that marriage accompanied death–both spiritual and physical in the end. He so much clang to the ideas of Paul, that a sort of “Paulism” developed. Chrysostom, however noble his sayings might come across did not always have the purest of motive, some of the things he did or say was to achieve a certain political goal, even if it was just to gain more power for the church. This is one aspect that should be kept in mind when studying his texts. Unfortunately, for many people, many misinterpretations, be it willingly/intentionally, many mistranslations of key words on the Bible (like the word malakos) have been made. What so ever the intention–be it to propagate popular social sexual propaganda, or whatever–this is and was not right. Like mentioned many people has experience hurt because of this. Rhetorical text analysis is being set forward as an alternative to historical text criticism in a slight but hopeful effort to overcome this problem and enable the churches of today to welcome many more Christians into their families. / Biblical and Ancient Studies / M. Bib. (New Testament)