This study retraces the principal moments of the Latin reception of John Chrysostom between c.1440 and 1600 and how they reflect on the study of ancient Christianity in early modern Europe. After a short Introduction to Chrysostom’s reception in medieval Europe and existing historiography on early modern patristics, the first section of this study focusses on the reception of Chrysostom in the fifteenth century. Chapter 1 examines the collaboration between cardinal Jean Jouffroy and the humanist translator Francesco Griffolini in Renaissance Rome. Chapter 2 explores the career and editorial work of the scholastic writer Johannes Heynlin and his impact on Basel’s rise as a centre of patristic studies. The second part of this study investigates the translations and interpretations of Chrysostom by the renowned Dutch humanist, Desiderius Erasmus. Chapter 3 argues that Erasmus advanced Chrysostom as a Pauline theologian in a way deliberately opposed to contemporary Latin traditions of exegesis. Chapter 4 interprets Erasmus’ editions and translations of Chrysostom against the breakdown of his friendship with the Protestant theologian Johannes Oecolampadius. Chapter 5 asks whether Erasmus’ biography of Chrysostom and criticism of spurious texts of the Greek church fathers confirms or contrasts recent investigations of Erasmus’ scholarship on their Latin counterparts. The third part of this study follows the reception of Chrysostom’s life and works in the Catholic world during and after the Council of Trent. Chapter 6 studies the use of Chrysostom’s works at this Council by cardinal Marcello Cervini and his client Gentian Hervet. Chapter 7 uses Chrysostom’s changing place in the Roman breviary to explore Catholic attitudes to historical scholarship and the Greek church in the sixteenth-century. A short conclusion suggests avenues for future research into the reception of Chrysostom in early modern Europe.

Univ. College, Diss.--London, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 282 - 307) and index. Understanding religious identity in fourth century Antioch -- Imperial society, religion and literary culture in fourth century Antioch -- Constructed and strategic religious identities and allegiances -- Chrysostom and the construction of religious identities -- Libanius and the strategic use of religious allegiance -- Religious identities and other forms of social identification -- Religious identity and other social identities in Chrysostom -- Religious allegiance and other social identities in Libanius -- Religious identities and social organization -- Chrysostom and social structure among Christians in Antioch -- Libanius, religious allegiance, and social structure -- Assessing the impact of constructions of identity -- Religious identity, religious practice and personal religious power -- Conclusion.

No description available.

Les quatre homélies de Jean Chrysostome In principium Actorum trouvent leur origine à Antioche entre les années 386 et 397. Elles sont prévues pour la période suivant la fête de Pâques ; le prédicateur s’adresse en particulier aux nouveaux baptisés et il cherche à introduire ses auditeurs à la lecture du livre des Actes des apôtres qui leur est peu familier. Ces textes portent sur l’importance des titres (première homélie), sur le terme « actes » (deuxième homélie), sur le terme « apôtres » (troisième homélie) et sur la raison de la lecture du livre des Actes juste après la fête de Pâques, et non après la fête de la Pentecôte (quatrième homélie). Une homélie sur l’auteur du livre des Actes, aujourd’hui perdue, s’insérait entre le premier et le deuxième texte. On montre que ces homélies forment une « micro-série » ouverte, en lien étroit avec d’autres homélies (De mutatione nominum 1-4, In Genesim sermo 9, In illud : Si esurierit inimicus). L’examen de la tradition manuscrite directe, la prise en compte de la tradition indirecte (eclogae, florilèges, chaîne sur les Actes, tradition arménienne, encomium pour la fête de saint Paul, témoignage dans la littérature byzantine) et l’analyse des premières éditions anciennes permettent de reconstituer l’histoire de ces quatre textes en vue d’une édition critique et de confirmer la cohérence de ce corpus malgré une transmission parfois éclatée. On propose une nouvelle édition des homélies In principium Actorum en la fondant sur des rameaux plus sûrs de la tradition manuscrite grecque. On donne ensuite une nouvelle traduction française des quatre homélies et on présente trois pistes de commentaire. Tout d’abord, la méthode adoptée par le prédicateur pour introduire à la lecture du livre des Actes a des conséquences sur l’exégèse des exemples bibliques choisis : on en montre quelques-unes tout en questionnant la proximité avec un éventuel commentaire suivi et avec des textes d’autres auteurs grecs (Didyme l’Aveugle, notamment). On met en avant l’importance de la mission dans ces homélies : enraciné dans la fête de Pâques, l’appel à la mission permet de créer un lien étroit entre le prédicateur, ses auditeurs et les absents. Ce dernier point mène pour finir à l’étude des visées apologétiques de ces textes : la conversion passe par un retournement de sens et elle se traduit par un changement irréversible de mode de vie, qui doit imiter non seulement celui de Paul mais aussi celui d’autres figures bibliques et du Christ lui-même. / The four homilies In principium Actorum originate in the Antiochene period of John Chrysostom's priesthood (386-397). Their liturgical frame is Easter time; the preacher is speaking especially to neophytes and aims at introducing his listeners to the book of the Acts of the Apostles, which they are not familiar with. In these texts the preacher explains the importance of titles (first homily), the word "Acts" (second homily), the word "Apostles" (third homily) and the reasons why this book is read just after Easter, and not after Pentecost (fourth homily). There used to be another homily about the author of the book of the Acts, which is now missing, between the first and the second homily. These homilies form an open "micro-series" which is strongly linked to other homilies (De mutatione nominum 1-4, In Genesim sermo 9, In illud: Si esurierit inimicus). The study of the direct manuscript tradition, the account of the indirect tradition (eclogae, anthologies, catena in Acta Apostolorum, Armenian tradition, encomium for the feast of saint Paul, testimony in Byzantine literature) as well as the analysis of the first editions make it possible to reconstruct the history of these four texts in preparation for their critical edition. It also confirms the coherence of the corpus, although the homilies have not always been transmitted together. The dissertation presents a new edition of the homilies In principium Actorum which is based on more reliable parts of the Greek tradition. A new French translation of the four homilies is also given. The commentary explores three important aspects. First, the preacher's method of introducing the Acts has consequences on the exegesis of the chosen biblical examples: the dissertation shows some of those consequences and questions the proximity to a continuous commentary and to texts from other authors (for instance Didymus the Blind). The importance of the mission in those homilies is then put forward: rooted in the feast of Easter, the call to mission creates a strong relationship between preacher, listeners and absentees. This last point leads to the apologetical aims of the texts: conversion is due to a shift in meaning and results in a complete change of lifestyle, which should imitate Paul's but also the way of life of other biblical figures and of Christ himself.

The impetus of this study is that by understanding the way John Chrysostom (flor. 398 AD) interprets the gifts of the Spirit (Charismata) as an Antiochene exegete, insights may be yielded as to how the general tendency of Antiochene exegetes may aid in the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 12:1-13:3, which in turn also contributes to the current research on the New Testament. This study asks the question: How does John Chrysostom, as typical Antiochene exegete, interpret the charismata? In order to address this problem, an inductive-deductive method is followed, in which the general characteristics of the Antiochene exegetical school will be examined and then an analysis of the homilies of John Chrysostom, specifically his corpus Homilies on 1 Corinthians, homily 29 to 32, is given. Each homily is examined in the light of its contents, with specific reference to certain traits typical of Antiochene exegesis, such as sensitivity to history, social- and cultural customs, as well as to the grammar and rhetoric of, in this instance, Paul the Apostle. A translation of each homily is also provided. Finally, their value for current research is expounded. Each homily is translated and evaluated from the basis of the ancient Greek text, in which the homilies were originally composed. The homilies are also evaluated in the light of primary and secondary sources as inter-texts. Since the homilies are verbal commentaries, early Christian literature (of approximately 100-700 AD) on the same topic, the primary sources, are compared with the homilies of Chrysostom. Other ancient sources, not necessarily Christian, of the same period or earlier are also incorporated. But it is also necessary to view the homilies within the context of modern commentaries. Thus, a number of modern secondary sources are also evaluated in the light of the homilies and vice versa. In conclusion, the homilies depict an insightful image on how the Antiochene exegetical school viewed the charismata, which in turn, also provides valuable insights for modern interpreters. In this study of the Wirkungsgeschichte of 1 Corinthians 12:1-13:3, one is reminded that, although these primary sources are dated, they are still unexpendable resources for the current study of 1 Corinthians and of the New Testament in general. / Dissertation (MA (Ancient Languages and Cultures Studies))--University of Pretoria, 2007. / Ancient Languages / unrestricted

No description available.

Les homélies de Jean Chrysostome (v. 349 – 407) sur la Deuxième épître aux Corinthiens fournissent un témoignage important sur la pratique de l’exégèse et de la prédication dans l’Antiquité. Sur le plan oratoire, elles sont marquées par de fortes interactions entre Jean et son auditoire et par ce que l’on peut nommer une rhétorique biblique : un discours où l’Écriture est omniprésente, dans le texte commenté comme dans les outils mobilisés dans le commentaire. Sur le plan exégétique, le prédicateur explique l’épître paulinienne de manière littérale, i.e. phrase par phrase ou mot par mot, attentif à la pédagogie de Paul. La notion de salut joue un rôle capital dans cette perspective, car elle guide l’interprétation des moindres variations du ton de l’apôtre ; celle d’amplification n’est pas moins importante, car elle rend compte des larges développements parénétiques qui constituent, à l’intérieur de chaque homélie, un moyen supplémentaire de faire comprendre le texte commenté. Sur le plan théologique, enfin, ce commentaire homilétique permet à Jean Chrysostome de faire écho à quelques thèmes pauliniens : la kénose du Christ, la place de l’Esprit saint dans la communauté chrétienne et l’action de grâce. Prise globalement, une telle pratique homilétique et exégétique pourrait être caractérisée comme une forme d’actualisation de l’Écriture. Toutefois, deux mots empruntés au langage chrysostomien semblent mieux correspondre à cette pratique : l’anamnèse et l’anaphore, qui font jouer la proximité entre l’acte de commenter l’Écriture et la célébration de l’Eucharistie. / The primary aim of this work is to read John Chrysostom’s homilies on Second Corinthians as an insight into the practice of exegesis and preaching in Antiquity. After reviewing the historical background of John’s homilies (chapter 1), I will deal with their rhetorical features, that is: the literary genre of the homiletical commentary (chapter 2), the interactions between John and his audience (chapter 3) and the “biblical rhetoric”, i.e. John’s overwhelming use of Scripture in both the commented text as his own commentary (chapter 4). Secondly, I will describe his exegetical skills, by reviewing the literal explanation of Paul’s wording (chapter 5), the overall understanding of the epistle (chapter 6) and the use of larges hortatory sections as an “amplification” of Pauline moral and spiritual themes (chapter 7). Lastly, I will approach John’s theology on the aspects of the doctrinal teaching of his homilies (chapter 8), his spiritual guidance (chapter 9) and the processes of retrieval and enactment involved in the preacher’s hermeneutics (chapter 10). The results of this work suggest that John’s exegetical practice can be described as a process of anamnesis (rememoration) and anaphora (elevation) of Paul’s text – an exegetical, but also liturgical and existential process.

No description available.

Text in German / This thesis gives a short overview abont the anthropological term worldview and discusses various views of it. A historic resume of the situation of the metropolis Antiochia in Syria in the 4th century AD is followed by an analysis of some important aspects of the worldview of its inhabitants. A short account of the life and work of John Chrysostom is given and followed by an analysis of four of his homilies of the Gospel of Matthew. These are compared with own exegetical points of view of the same texts. The focus is directed to some topics where the influence of worfdview makes itself felt. In the last chapter some observations in connection with the influence of worldview on biblical interpretation ensue. The thesis closes with a short discussion of some missiological and hermeneutical consequences / Christian Spirituality, Church History and Missiology / M.Th. (Missiology)

Text in German / This thesis gives a short overview abont the anthropological term worldview and discusses various views of it. A historic resume of the situation of the metropolis Antiochia in Syria in the 4th century AD is followed by an analysis of some important aspects of the worldview of its inhabitants. A short account of the life and work of John Chrysostom is given and followed by an analysis of four of his homilies of the Gospel of Matthew. These are compared with own exegetical points of view of the same texts. The focus is directed to some topics where the influence of worfdview makes itself felt. In the last chapter some observations in connection with the influence of worldview on biblical interpretation ensue. The thesis closes with a short discussion of some missiological and hermeneutical consequences / Christian Spirituality, Church History and Missiology / M.Th. (Missiology)