Tag Archives: John Chrysostom

Baptism For The Dead?

Posted on by
Reply
The earliest known indoor font and baptistery is from a house church located at Dura-Europos in modern-day Syria. It seems to have occupied an ordinary house that was converted for worship between AD 233 and 256.
The church was uncovered by a team of archaeologists during two excavation campaigns in the city from 1931-32. The frescos were removed after their discovery and are preserved at Yale University Art Gallery.



Otherwise, what do those who are baptized for the sake of the dead? If those who are really dead are not raised, why at all are they baptized for their sake? And why are we in danger at every hour? I die every day. (1 Cor. 15:29-30)

St. Paul refers to the living being baptized for the sake of the dead, a practice otherwise unknown in the early church. But it seems to be a practice that the Corinthians were familiar with. “Why be baptized for the dead if Christ is not raised from the dead?” The apostle refers to the liturgical practice of the Corinthians to underscore the point he has been making in the epistle: Christ was raised form the dead. Why else are we in church or doing anything as members of the Church? Nothing we do makes sense if Christ is not risen from the dead.

Sin has brought death into the world and we are baptized in the hope that our dead bodies will be raised again in the resurrection. If there is no resurrection, our baptism is meaningless and our bodies remain as dead as they are now.

St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Epistles to the Corinthians 40.2

The apostle might be referring to the baptism of those in bed and about to die or new-born infants about to die. Why baptize the dying and those as-good-as-dead if there is no Resurrection of the body?

But he seems to be referring not to deathbed baptisms but to people who are being baptized for vicariously for the deceased. People in the city of Corinth were generally concerned about the fate of the dead. Perhaps the living Corinthian Christians were baptized on behalf of their friends and neighbors–as well as their family members–who had not had the opportunity to become Christians during their lifetimes. If baptism was critical for sharing the Resurrection, how else could the living best serve the deceased?

Wherever the Gospel was preached, the new converts were always concerned about the fates of the non-Christian ancestors. Pagan Greeks came to see the poets and philosophers as the equivalent of the prophets in ancient Israel, so their ancestors had some access to the Good News just as ancient Jews did. In Gaul, it was common to bless pagan graves with holy water, baptizing the dead who were buried there. In other places, the prayers for the dead–especially on All Souls’ Day–were the most important prayers a new Christian could offer.

Prayers for the dead. Baptism on behalf of the dead. Blessing the pagan graves. These were all ways the living Christians showed their love and concern for their non-Christian dead relatives, trying to include the dead in the Kingdom of God. No one is ever saved alone. Salvation is, by definition, a communal event.

One Goes Hungry While Another Gets Drunk, Part 2

Posted on by
Reply
Judith with the head of Holofernes, Lucas Cranach The Elder. (c. 1530) In the Book of Judith, the Jewish heroine enters the tent of the Assyrian general Holofernes, gets him drunk and chops off his head to save her town. Judith, who is “the pride of all our people and the glory of our race” is considered to be a type of the Mother of God: As Judith beheaded Holofernes, so also is Mary the woman who by her divine pregnancy and childbearing (of Jesus) crushed the head of the serpentine demon, the Devil. Read more about Judith as a type here.


For in eating, each one by preference takes his or her own meal; and one goes hungry while another gets drunk. Don’t you have houses for eating and drinking? (1 Cor. 11:21-22)

The apostle condemns the parish members who are better off bringing their own food and wine to parish dinners and then refusing to share, getting drunk while other people at dinner are going hungry. The meal that was meant to erase and heal social divisions only exposed these divisions and made them worse.

The contrast between the “haves” and the “have nots” is a classic theme of Greek and Roman writers. Pliny complained that some hosts served “cheap and paltry” food and wine to guests that they thought less important while having “elegant dishes” served to themselves and a few special guests. Pliny thought this was sordid behavior. (Epistle 2.6)

Other writers, like Juvenal, made fun of hosts who did this. The host was not refusing to spend money, Juvenal said; the host just wanted to cause his guests pain. “What comedy … is more amusing than a disappointed stomach?” A host who did this was truly malicious, Juvenal thought.

Socrates insisted that meals be truly communal experiences. Plutarch warned against disorder at meals and dinner parties. Nevertheless, drunkenness was so common at common meals that Sparta and Crete outlawed dinner parties. Even in the Old Testament, hosts were urged to take care of their guests before sitting down at the table themselves. The host who is generous with food is blessed and guests were expected to help others before helping themselves to the meal. (Sirach 31-32)

Alas, the misbehavior of the Corinthians at dinner had a long pedigree. Their misbehavior revealed that they despised the Church rather than loving their brothers and sisters, as they claimed. Actions always speak louder than words.

Paul reminds us that the Master gave up everything, including himself, for us. But we are reluctant to even share a little food with our fellow believers…. Do not dishonor your brothers or neglect them in their hunger. Do not get drunk. Do not insult the Church. When you come together, give thanks for what you have to eat and do not cut yourself off from your neighbors.

St. John Chrysostom, Homily 27 on 1st Corinthians

“We Have Knowledge!”

Posted on by
Reply
Traditional Easter baskets are full of eggs, meat, cheese, and holiday Easter bread. People bring their baskets to church to be blessed and share the food with their families, friends, and neighbors. Community identity is forged by what people do or do not eat together.


Concerning food that has been offered to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs us up but love builds us up. If anyone thinks that he or she knows something, that one does not yet know as he or she ought to know. (1 Cor. 8:1-2)

Having spent all of chapter 7 talking about various aspects of marriage, St. Paul turns to the subject of food. He discusses various aspects of food for the next three chapters of this epistle. Food was important to the Christians of Corinth. Food is still important to Christians today.

The Corinthian parish had evidently written to St. Paul and asked him several questions about food. What to eat? Who to eat with? How to maintain their Christian identity in connection with food?

St. Paul begins by pointing out that although all the Corinthians claim to have knowledge, there is both “false knowledge” and “true knowledge.” The difference is that true knowledge goes together with love. False knowledge puffs up people, making them proud and arrogant. True knowledge, united with love, brings people into fellowship with each other. “We have knowledge!” was apparently the slogan or motto of the faction of the parish that was proud and arrogant. St. Paul warns these people that too often the people who claim to know more or know better are–in fact–the ones who know the least about the truth.

“Whatever knowledge we may have, it is still imperfect,” said St. John Chrysostom when he was preaching about this passage. “Where God is concerned, we cannot even say just how wrong our perception of him is.” He warns them, “More than anyone else, the arrogant injure themselves.”