A. N. Papathanasiou, Liberation Perspectives

7/28/2019 A. N. Papathanasiou, Liberation Perspectives

1/21

Athanasios N. Papathanasiou

Liberation Perspectives in Patristic Thought.

An Orthodox Approach

Offprint from:

Hellenic Open University.

Scientific Review of Post-Graduate Program Studies in Orthodox Theology'

vol. 2 (2011), pp. 419-438.

___________________________________________________________________________

Athanasios N. Papathanasiou, Dr. Theology, B. Law. Tutor, Hellenic Open University

G. Papandreou 13, 16231 Vironas, Athens, Greece [email protected]


2/21

419

thanasios N. Papathanasiou

Liberation perspectives in Patristic ThoughtAn Orthodox Approach

. .

To , . , - : 1. - . 2. -. 3. . 4. - . 5. . , , - - , - . - .

-. . . -

. . . . .

bstract

The article tries to highlight a few parameters of Patristic thought, parameterswhich are able to feed an important theological reflection on social justice and


3/21

420


inspire the christian witness today. n the Patristic writings five basic axes can be

pointed out, which provide a basis for the hermeneutics of liberation and contributeto a dialogue between Liberation Theology and Orthodox theology: 1. The empha-sis uponpraxis - action. 2. Withholding the working wage and the sanctity of theweak. 3. The class based structure of society and the will of God. 4. Compassionatecharity as a danger. 5. Contending and resistance. Given that the ecclesiastical lit-erature is not a solid substance, nor does it constitute ahistorical material, one canfind out that the social liberation activity has roots in certain currents of Patristictradition, which offer the basis for a radical questioning of class based society. Thisactivity cimprizes an essential part of christian identity and is not incompatible withthe personal spiritual struggle.

eywords.Liberation theology. Social Justice. Charity. Solidarity. Resistance. King-dom. Patristc trends.

It is superfluous to say that it is impossible to tackle this truly huge subjectin just one paper. Therefore, what I will try to do here1 is to highlight a fewparameters of Patristic thought (almost only of the Greek speaking Fathers),parameters which are able, in my opinion, to feed an important theological

reflection on social justice and contribute to the christian witness today.

A.

As is well known, the words with which Christ himself announced hismission publicly, according to the Gospel of Luke, describe a liberating mission:

The spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me topreach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedomfor the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind; to release the

oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lords favour (Luke 4:18-19).

1. Paper delivered at the Seminar for graduate students Biblical Liberation Theology, Pa-tristic Theology and the Ambivalence of Modernity in Orthodox and Ecumenical Perspec-tives. University of Heidelberg and the School of Theology, University of Thesaloniki, Acad-emy for Theological Studies, Volos, Greece, 29 May 2009.


4/21

421

Liberationperspectivesinpatristicthoughtanorthodoxapproach

It is this extract which, since the decade of the 1970s, has become a common

ground in contemporary Theology of Liberation.2 It is especially importantthat we consider the extract in its scriptural and historical context. Accordingto Luke, these words are an excerpt from the prophet Isaiah (61:1-2), whichChrist simply read out aloud in the synagogue. If we pay attention, however,we will see that in Lukes text there is an addition: the phrase to release theoppressed has been taken from a different point in Isaiah, where it serves todefine the fasting which pleases God. This authentic fasting - says God himselfthrough Isaiah - does not consist in observing ritual, bowing ones head likea reed, [] lying on sackcloth and ashes. The fasting that pleases God is toloosen the chains of injustice and untie the cods of the yoke, to set the oppressed

free and break every yoke (58:5-6). The effect of this addition in the Gospel istherefore greater insistence on the fact that the epoch inaugurated by Jesus isessentially an epoch of liberation.3

Around fourteen centuries later, we come across a text of Gregory Palamas,a saint of the Orthodox Church (12961359), who tries to clarify what fastingis approved by God. Gregory quotes the above excerpt from Isaiah (to loosenthe chains of injustice...) and continues:

The voracious and the unjust will not be resurrected to meet

Christ face to face and be judged but will be condemned direct-ly because in this present life they never really came face to facewith Christ. Enormous possessions are in reality communal, sincethey derive from the common fund of wealth provided by nature,which God has created. How then is he who appropriates the com-mon wealth not actually greedy, even if he is not like the one whosteals others goods? Thus, the former - alas - will suffer a terriblepenalty as a bad servant, and the latter will endure worse and morehorrible punishments. Neither of these can escape the sentence ifhe does not accept the poor in his life. At the Last Judgment, the

righteous will say: That attitude expressed in the phrase this is

2. See, for example, Gustavo Gutierrez, The God of Life, engl.tr. Matthew J. OConnell(Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1991) 6-9.

3. See Jacques Matthey, Luke 4: 16-30. The Spirits mission manifesto; Jesus hereneuticsand Lukes editorial, Internalional Review of Mission 352 (2000) 3-11.


5/21

422


mine and this is yours has long been expelled from here since we

in our earthly life hated it. For this reason we inherited the King-dom of Heaven. The Church Fathers call the phrase this is mine,or this is yours cold, and wherever it prevailed the bond of lovewas absent and Christ was pushed far away.4

I think that we can see this text of Gregory Palamas as an illustrative casestudy. Specifically, we can underline the following three points:

1. According to Palamas, wealth, even that which is acquired legally,constitutes a problem in itself. The problem in essence is born of ones obsessionwith possession (ownership). As we will see below, this view constitute the

backbone which traverses Bibical and Patristic theology, something whichPalamas himself knows and mentions. That the phrase mine and yours isindeed cold is something which John Chrysostom highlighted ten centuriesearlier5 - maybe also other church Fathers, whom I have ignored.

2. I view as very important the phrase of Palamas: if he does not acceptthe poor in his life. Clearly, here he means something much more thanoccasional charity. In accordance with a long tradition which already beganfrom the Old Testament, the widows, the poor and the weak (those, in otherwords, who do not draw their identity from social influenceand do not found

their hope in riches) constitute the friends of God. It is interesting how thistradition contributed to tangible ecclesiastical statements, in other words intooly Canons which demand of the bishops to protect the poor and the weakfrom the tyranny of the powerful. For example, the 7th canon of the Synodof Sardis (343) asks of the ecclesiastical leaders that they visit the politicalrulers only in order to present requests for the protection of the weak. It firmlyforbids any other visit, to prevent selfish exchanges between church leadersand officers of the state.6 If the bishop does not work as a protector of the weak,said the monastic reformer Theodore the Studite (late 8th - early 9th c.), he

4. Gregory Palamas, On the Fifh Lenten Sunday, Sermon 13,Patrologia Graeca (fromnow on,MPG) 151: 161C-165B. See my (SocialJustice and Orthodox Theology) (Athens: Akritas, 20063) 42-46 (in Greek) as well as my (My God, the Foreigner) (Athens: Akritas, 20042).

5. John Chrysostom, On the Acts, Sermon 7,MPG. Vol. 60, col. 66.6. See my (Sinful Visits), Exodos 15:19 (1995) 40-46 [in Greek].


6/21

423


is condemned because he is behaving not as a bishop, but as a merchant.7 As

Peter Brown has pointed out, by the end of the fourth century, the election ofa bishop meant that the poor of the city were able to make themselves heard asa special group.8

In the same vein, other precepts can be found. For example, the 12th canonof the 7th Ecumenical Synod (767) specified that, if it were necessary to sella church-owned field, the bishop or abbot should take care that the plot oflandshould not be sold to noblemen and rich men, but rather to clerics orsmall farmers. The issue concerned, clearly, the long-lasting clash of centralimperial power with the big landowners, who were particularly tyrannicalto small farmers. The 41st Apostolic canon (probably from the end of the 3rd

c.) stated that the income of ecclesiastical property should be distributed tothose in need. Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain (a saint of the OrthodoxChurch, 1749-1809) clarifies that the phrase those in need, means widows,the poor and (something which is very important in our times) foreigners.9Indeed, according to the 25th canonof the Synod of Antioch (341), if clerics areindifferent to the oppression of the poor, then the issue must be examined bythe Synod of bishops. This perspective constitutes, in my opinion, a meetingpoint of the traditional theology with modern liberation theology. Rememberthe key concept preferential option for the poor, coined by Gustavo Gutierrez

in 1967 and highlighted by the Medellin conference of Catholic bishops in1968.10

3. Palamas links the eschaton with history, and salvation with action, andspecifically with solidarity. In his theology, salvation is impossible withoutsolidarity towards the weak (he talks about theousting of Christ himself!). Itreminds us of the words of Jon Sobrino:

7. Theodore the Studite, Letter to Anastasios,MPG. Vol. 99, col. 949A.

8. Peter Brown, Power and Presuasion in Late Antiquity. Towards a Christian Empire (Wis-consin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1992) 91-101.

9. Agapius and Nicodemus, The Rudder of the Metaphorical Ship of the One Holy Catholicand Apostolic Church of the Orthodox Christians, or All the Sacred and Divine Canons , engl. tr.D. Cummings (Chicago: The Orthodox Christian Educational Society, 1957) 63.

10. See Hohn O Brien, Theology and the Option for the Poor(Collegville, MN: LiturgicalPress, 1992).


7/21

424


Extra pauperes nulla salus [no salvation outside (or apart from)

the poor]. Strictly speaking, we are not saying that salvation al-ready exists automatically with the poor, but that without them itcannot exist at all.11

The connection between history and eschaton means that the action ofChristians in history has a characteristic which distinguishes it from whateveractions of solidarity by those who are not Christians. The activity of Christiansshould be prophetic, in other words an activity which reveals to the world thenature of the Kingdom which Christians hope for. It is a testimony of the worldthat is to come. The activity of Christians, in other words, should constitute a

real witness for the vision of the death of death - everytype of death, everykindof power that opposes love. From this perspective (and apparently contrary tomodern Eucharistio-monism which understands the celebration of the Eucharistas the sole sign of the coming Kingdom and dissociates the Kingdom from socialaction), actual love and solidarity constitute in history a sign of the Kingdom.12

Why, in my opinion, do these points of the text of Gregory Palamas havea particular importance? Because Palamas is par excellence the voice of theOrthodox doctrine of theosis (deification) that is, of the capacity of Man tobecome, in this very life, a participant of Gods energies, which Orthodox

theology accepts as being divine and therefore uncreated. But the issue here isnot the debate about the nature of Gods energies. I am presenting the abovetext of Palamas because it has particular symbolic importance today. Thetheology regarding the deification of Man is often welcome as mysticism, asinner withdrawal of the human being within himself, as fighting the passionsetc., without any organic connection with action and with ones neighbour and,often, without a connection with the eschatological renewal of the whole world.Indeed, preoccupation with issues of solidarity is often considered spirituallyharmful, because (always in this line of thought) it distracts the believer from

11. Jon Sobrino, The Eye of the Needle. No Salvation Outside the Poor. A Utopian-PropheticEssay(London: Darton-Longmam-Todd, 2008) 41.

12. Thanasis (Athanasios) N. Papathanasiou, . - (The Signs of theKingdom. Some Invisible Aspects of Kabasilas and Some Temptations of Our Eucharistic The-ology), Synaxis 114 (2010) 13-21 [in Greek].


8/21

425


his primary devotion to aim at personal catharsis. As a matter of fact, Patristic

texts as well as more recent theological works by Orthodox theologians exist,which expressthis (very problematic, in my opinion) approach. Nevertheless,the thing we must beware of is that the ecclesiastical literature is not a solidsubstance, nor does it constitute ahistorical material which fell from heaven,as roughly argued by the followers of Patristic Talmudism.13 The ecclesiasticpresence in history is comprised of currents which converge or diverge, whichmust however be examined within the historical context and be judged on theground of the substantive criteria of the ecclesiastical event.

Palamass extract may trigger a question especially relevant to our whole

subject. Is the radical spirit of this text representative of its authors sociopoliticalattitude and deeds in general? Within the framework of the anti-aristocratrebellion of the Zealots in 14th c. Thesaloniki, Gregory backed emperorIoannes Kantakouzenos (who was supported by the nobility), not IoannesPalaiologos (who was supported by the people). We may wonder why he didso. The answer must not be formalistic, seeing each party as a solid religio-socio-political entity, but it needs to take under serious consideration all theparameters of that historical moment. It seems that Palamass position wasthe typical one of certain aristocratic circles, who did censure social injustice

(Meyendorff has drawn attention to the fact that in spite of his keeping pacewith Kantakouzenos, Palamas never lowered his acute criticism),14 yet they didnot proceed to certain social action,15 contrary to other, rather revolutionarychurchmen, as we will see later on.

The social liberation activity, therefore, indeed has roots in currentsof Patristic tradition and it is not incompatible with the personal spiritualstruggle. Saint Maximus the Confessor (c. 580 - 662) is particularly helpfulto us in understanding how anthropology and sociology are intertwined. The

13. I owe the term to John Panteleimon Manoussakis, The anarchic principle of ChristianEschatology in the Eucharistic Tradition of the Eastern Church, Harvard Theological Review100:1 (2007) 44.

14. John Meyendorff,A Study of Gregory Palamas (Beds, UK: The Faith Press-St VladimirsSeminary Press, 19742) 89-91.

15. John L. Boojamra, The Church and Social Reform. The Policies of the Patriarch Athana-sios of Constantinople (New York: Fordham University Press, 1993) 11.


9/21

426


crown of virtues, he says, is a love which is indissolubly twofold: love for God,

and love for our fellow human. Man, however, has the embarrassing capacityto go against his nature and replace love with a caricature of it, i.e. self-love.So he seeks after pleasure and clings to the world in order to gain individualsatisfaction. Man is imprisoned in his individual self, and his communion withother human beings disintegrates.16 Avarice - Maximus says characteristically -is the passion of a man who receives with joy but gives away with grief. Comparethis with what Christopher Lasch has said:

Consumer capitalism gives so much emphasis on the immediatesatisfaction of infantile desires, and so cultivates preoccupation

with self image, that it creates narcissistic personalities, actuallyunable to form caring and open relationships.17

The proclamation of the Apostle Paul is well known, All of you who werebaptised into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jewnor Greek, slave nor freeman, male or female, for you are all one in ChristJesus (Gal. 3:27-28). This saying is interpreted by some people in a ratherspiritualistic manner: that Christ does not discriminate between his members.18To the contrary, saint John, patriarch of Alexandria (the start of the 7 th c.),

who was called The Merciful on account of his extensive philanthropic works,interpreted the saying literally. John maintained that spiritual equality entailssocial equality: If we are equal before Christ, he said, then we should become

16. Maximus the Confessor, To John Couvikoularios, on Love,MPG Vol. 91, col. 396D-401C.

17. Christopher Lash, The Culture of Narcissism. American Life in an Age of DiminishingExpectations (New York: W. W. Norton, 1978). See Athanasios N. Papathanasiou, ChristianAnthropology for a Culture of Peace. Considering the Church in Mission and Dialogue To-

day, Violence and Christian Spirituality. An Ecumenical Conversation,Emmanuel Clapsis, ed.,(Geneva-Brookline: WCC Publications-Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2007) 87-106.

18. Cyril of Alexandreia, for example, claims that slavery is not a natural institution andhumans therefore cannot be divided into slaves by nature and free by nature. For him slavery ismerely a result of human greed. However he understands the said Pauline proclamation only asreferring to the freedom Christ grants against the slavery imposed by sin. See Cyril, On worshipin spirit and truth, sermon 7,MPG Vol. 68, col. 528CD. See also his sermon 8, op.cit., col. 552.


10/21

427


equal between us.19 In other words, the Church must exist as a community

which makes a living practice of love, equality and solidarity. If this positionis combined with the Patristic insistence that all people (regardless of religion)are children of God and are icons of Christ, then demand for equality takeson universal dimensions. These perspectives have extraordinary philosophicaland political weight, if we recall that the conviction of the ancient Greekphilosopher Aristotle that certain nations are by nature slaves, endured throughtime (though it was questioned by the Stoics) and indeed it received sanctionfrom Christian personalities like Thomas Aquinas in the 13th c.20

B.Very roughly speaking, I think that in the Patristic writings five basic axes

can be located, which provide a basis for the hermeneutics of liberation:1. The emphasis uponpraxis - action.2. Withholding the working wage and the sanctity of the weak.3. The class based structure of society and the will of God.4. Compassionate charity as a danger.5. Contending and resistance

1. he Emphasis upon Praxis-Action

The narrative of the Old Testament concerning the creation of the worldstates that on the seventh day God rested from all the work of creating thathe had done (Gen. 2:3). Christ clarified that this does not mean that Godremained inactive from that moment. It showed that God is not only he who is,but also he who acts: My father is always at work to this very day, and I, too,am working (John 5:17). Love never stops - just as God never ceases to exist,for God is love. And love is a movement, an opening to him who is not-I. Love,in brief, contains action.

19. H. Gelzer, Leontios von Neapolis, Leben des Heiligen Johannes des Barmherzigen Erz-bischofs von Alexandrien (Freiburg-Leipzg, 1893) 65.

20. M. I. Finley,Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology(Middlesex: Penguin Books, 19832)18, 119.


11/21

428


The acts of God bring to the world the eschatological Kingdom. The world

will become authentically that which it was created to be, when it will become thenew, regenerated world of God. In this view, the world is still on course towardsits completion. The created world, says saint Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335 - c. 394),is not simply made, but is still being made.21 History, in other words, is an openprocess, which is made not automatically, by entelechy, but with the free synergyof God and Man. This concept may remind us of the wonderful poem of AntonioMachado (1875-1939) - if, of course, we read it without falling into despair:

Wanderer, your footsteps arethe road, and nothing more.

Wanderer, there is no road;the road is made by walking.By walking one makes the road,and upon glancing behindone sees the paththat will never be trod again

The anticipation of the Kingdom is expressed in the holy liturgy andworship, but also with actual love. Otherwise, Christian life is in danger of

lapsing into ritualism.

22

I know many, said saint Basil the Great (330 - 379),who fast, pray, are hardened and generally put into practice every religioushabit with willingness, so long as it does not cost them anything, and who carenothing for all those who are in need. What does the rest of their virtue benefitthem? They are unsuitable for the Kingdom of God.23

The disconnection of liturgical life from solidarity has been characteristicallypointed out as a distortion of Christian life, by two important churchmenin modern times; Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain and Cosmas of Aitolia.Nicodemus dares to say that whoever has acquired property by voracity andinjustices, is not forgiven merely by repenting, even if he is baptised after the

completion of the injustice. He must restore justice and return to the wronged

21. Gregory of Nyssa, Commentary on the Song of Songs,MPG Vol. 44, col. 885D.22. On this issue see my article, The Church as ission. Fr Alexander Schmemanns Li-

turgical Theology Revisited, Proche-Orient Chrtien 60 (2010) 6-41.23. Cited by John of Damascus, Sacred Parallel Texts,MPG Vol. 95, col. 1489C-D.


12/21

429


parties all that he grabbed from them.24 In the same spirit Cosmas (a saint of

the Orthodox Church, 1714-1779) thought that, even if all the spiritual fathers,priests, bishops and patriarchs forgive the exploiter, the perpetrator remainsunforgiven if he is not forgiven by the person wronged whether he be anOrthodox Christian, a western Christian or a Jew.25

2. Witholding the working wage and the sanctity of the weak

As is well-known, in the Bible a conviction exists that the pain of thewronged cries out to the heavens: thus the tyranny against the Jews in Egyptcries out (Ex. 2:23) as does the withheld wage, regardless of whether the worker

is a Jew or a foreigner (Deut. 24:14-15). Simultaneously, the depriver (he whodoes not give the worker his earned wage) is regarded as a killer (Sirach 34: 22).This view prevails, as we know, right up to the Epistle of James (5:4-6) in theNew Testament.

It is interesting that the same view is expressed by several church Fathers,who ask the Church to condemn spiritually those who withhold wages with thepenance demanded of the killer.26 Yet StJohn Chrysostom (c. 349 - 407) goeseven further, claiming that the deprivation of someones salary is more brutaland heavier than murder.27

We have already talked about the poor as Gods friends. Moreover, wecan mention here the following, which underline the sanctity of the weak: inaccordance with the canon law, the vessels of churches (e.g. the chalice) areholy and are not permitted to be sold. Only one exception is allowed: they canbe sold so that captives can be freed with the income generated (or accordingto another view, so that the defence of the country can be strengthened againstenemies who are attacking it). Saint Ambrose, bishop of Milan in the 4th c.,says The property of the church consists of the support of the destitute. Letpagans enumerate how many captives the temples have ransomed, what dolesthey have given to the poor, to how many refugees they have provided living

24. Agapius and Nicodemus, The Rudder, op.cit. 731.25. John Menounos, The Teaching of Kosmas of Aitolia (Athens: Tenos, 1979) 45 [in Greek].26. Texts colleced by Nicodemus, Interpretation of the Seven Catholic Letters (Athens: Mys-

tikos-Panagopoulos, 1971) 60 [in Greek].27. John Chrysostom, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews,MPG Vol. 63, col. 176.


13/21

430


allowances.28 It is noteworthy, for example, that freeing captives was a major

task of Celtic abbots.29 Particularly characteristic however is the stance of saintAkakios, bishop of the Armenian city of Amida at the beginning of the 5th c.During the war between the Byzantines and the Persians, the first capturedseven thousand prisoners, who started to get starved. Akakios intervened andsummoned his clergy. Our God, he told them, needs neither dishes nor cups,for he neither eats nor drinks []. Since our Church possesses many gold andsilver vessels, which derive from the generosity of the faithful, it is our duty toransom the prisoners with these and to feed them. So the vessels were melteddown, the captives (the enemies!) were ransomed, given food, and sent back totheir king with the necessary provisions for the return journey. King Baranos

V of Persia expressed his deep respect for the wisdom of the Byzantines whoknew how to win by both, war and charity.30

In this way the Church does not need to desacralizeitself in order to meetthe world. Quite the opposite! In any case - celebrating the Eucharist as well asserving the victims of history - proves to be the sacrament of liberation, asLeonardo Boff put it.31

3. The class based structure of society and the will of God

The view has often been expressed that a class based society is the will of God,that God creates the rich and expects them to manage material goods, and thatthe fate of the poor is also given by God so that certain people have the invaluablechance to practice patience through poverty. And it is true that anyone can findin the works of the Fathers a wealth of advice on the one hand towards the rich tobecome more philanthropic, and on the other hand towards the poor to becomemore patient. Such recommendations were clearly unavoidable in the context

28. Cited by Peter Brown, Power an Persuasion in Late Antiquity. Towards a Christian Em-

pire (Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1992) 96.29. Thomas O Loughlin, Centic Theology. Humanity, World and God in Early Irish Writ-

ings (London-New York: Continuum, 2000) 74.30. Socrates, Ecclesiastical History,MPG Vol. 67, col. 781.31. Leonardo Boff, The Poor, the New Csmology and Liberation, in Religion, Interna-

tional Relations and Development Cooperation, Berma Klein Goldewijk, ed., (Wageningen, TheNetherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2007) 113.


14/21

431


of their pastoral work, in order to alleviate the social misery somehow, and for

contemporary needs to be confronted. Nevertheless, it would be inaccurate andwrong if we conclude that the Fathers were limited to this view.

There are many cases where the church Fathers offer the basis for a radicalquestioning of class based society. Not only do they not understand it as the wishof God, but conversely they view it as one of the disastrous consequences ofthe fall of human being from paradise. Several Fathers say that poverty, wealthand slavery invaded humankind just as illnesses invade the human organism.Consequently, the law, which the Christian must accept, is not the law of thepowerful (class based inequality) but of the creator (equality).32 The picturewhich Basil the Great calls forth in order to answer the arguments of the rich

that actually they are not doing wrong to anybody, because their ownershipis lawful, is characteristic. The rich man - he says - resembles the person whoenters the theatre first, occupies as many empty seats as he can, and thendoes not let those who enter later sit there.33 So that we can comprehend theradicalism of these positions, we should remember that they were articulatedin the despotic period of Roman law, which had elevated the right of ownershipto the skies. In this perspective, wealth in itself constitutes a problem even ifit has been accumulated through lawful means. Here one has to take also intoaccount the criticism exercised by numerous churchmen against usury and

taxation which of course comprised legal practices and institutions.

34

The debate about whether social injustice is the will of God, has beenrecorded characteristically regarding the following question: at some pointin the Old Testament, God speaking through the mouth of prophet Haggai,says: To me, the lord of the universe, belongs silver and gold (2:8). JohnChrysostom informs us that onto this sentence someone had added the phrase:and I give it [the gold and silver] to whoever I [God] want, wishing, clearly,to legalise metaphysically the plutocracy - the domination of the wealthy.John Chrysostom sharply condemns the addition, which he considers to be

32. Gregory of Nazianzus, On Love for the Poor,MPG Vol. 35, col. 892A-B. John Chryss-tom, Commentary on the first epistle to Timothy, PG 62, 563. Symeon the New Theologian,Catechesis, Source Chrtiennes 104, 110-112. See also Barry Gordon, The Economic Problemin Biblical and Patristic Thought(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1989).

33. Basil, On Luke 12: 13-21,MPG Vol. 31, col. 276B.34. Gregory of Nyssa, Against Usurers,MPG Vol. 46, col. 433-452.


15/21

432


concocted by the devil. It is inconceivable, he says with outrage, to believe that

the enrichment of corrupt people is the will of God, people who do not deserveto see the sun and breathe, for they stir up everything around them, grab thehomes of widows, cause wrong to orphans, and oppress their inferiors.35

The refutation of seeing social injustice as Gods will constitutes, in myopinion, the highest service. It shows the power that hermeneutics has as acreative force in a living theology. For example, in contrast with Chrysostom,Cyril of Jerusalem uses the extract from Haggaitogether with the addition, inorder to argue that riches are given by God!36 It is true that here Cyril tries torecant Manichaism which claimed that material world belongs to evil. So Cyrildefends Gods rights on the entire world, but stops here without proceeding to

social criticism as Chrysostome did.

4. Compassionate charity as a danger

As we know, charity is seen by the church as an invaluable quality of man: it isseen as the opening to the other and as the real detachment from material goods.

Simultaneously, however, the Fathers clarify a danger here. Charity canbe distorted and end up as an excuse for social injustice, especially when it ispractised by him who is causing the social injustice. What is the gain, says

Gregory of Nyssa, if you create many poor people through exploitation andyou bring relief to one with charity? If there did not exist the crowd of exploiters,then there would not exist either the multitude of poverty-stricken.37

In this spirit, we find some very interesting canonical statements. Followingthe biblical saying that whoever offers a sacrifice with the money of the poor,is like sacrifising a child before the very eyes of his father (Sirach 34:20), theApostolic Orders (4th c.) require that the bishops do not accept donationsfrom rich people who are exploiting the weak. And indeed they ask that theyturn down these donations, even if their church risks being destroyed by a lackof revenue.38

35. John Chrysostom, On prophet Isaiah,MPG Vol. 56, col.158.36. Cyrill of Jerusalem, Eighth Catechesis,MPG Vol. 33, col. 632A. Cyrill does so in or-

der to fight back the manichaistic belief that material goods belong a priori to the realm of evil.37. Gregory of Nyssa, Against Usurers,MPG Vol. 46, col. 445A-B.

38. Orders of the Holy Apostoles MPG Vol. 1, col. 812B.


16/21

433


5. Contending and resistance

St Diadochos of Photici (5th. c.) says that Christians must be inspired by love,even for their enemies. However he clarfies that it is a mistake for us to thinkthat rage must be completely absent from the life of a Christian. That which thebeliever must root out is the perverse orientation of rage, in other words its usefor the satisfaction of his egotism. If, however, the rage shows care for his fellowhuman, it is legitimate. Consequently, that which the Christian must do is torage against those who oppress the poor.39 Chrysostom says explicitly that rageis a natural force which was planted within us by God, exactly so that we canhelp the wronged. On the contrary, the passion for money - he continues - is

not a natural force.40

Characteristic of the criteria which the Christian is called upon to practisein his daily life is a debate which occupied the Church already in the 2 nd c.. Theheretical Marcionites accepted a type of dualism. Therefore, they were arguingthat on the one hand there exists the bad God of the Old Testament and on theother hand the good God of the New Testament. One of the arguments theyput forth to strengthen their position was an event which is commemoratedin the Old Testament. When God was preparing the Jews to leave the slaveryof Egypt, he commanded them to borrow valuable equipment and clothing

from the Egyptians, but in reality not so that they would return them later,but so that they might appropriate them (Ex. 11:2, 12:35-36). In the opinion ofthe Marcionites that proved the immorality of the God of the Old Testament.Saint Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons (end of 2nd - beginning of 3rd c.), answeredtheir opinions by arguing something completely different. God is one, but he isrevealed in history in many and varied ways. His order to the Jews underlinesthe right of workers to strive for their rights. With the embezzlement of the

valuable equipment from the Egyptians, says Irenaeus, the Jews did nothingother than earn a part of their unpaid wages, with which the Egyptians hadbecome rich many times over.41

39. Diadochos Photikes, Ta Ekaton Gnostika Kephalaia (Hundred Chapters on SpiritualKnowledge) new greek tr., monk Theoclestos of Dionysiou Monastery (Holy Mountain-Thes-saloniki 1977) 133, 208 [in Greek].

40. John Chrysostom, Sermon 23 on the Second Epistle to Corinthians,MPG Vol. 61, col. 563.41. Robert M. Grant, Irenaeus of Lyons (London: Routlege, 1997) 158-159.


17/21

434


We cannot say, of course, that this position of Irenaeus signalled a more

general revolutionary stance of the Church against social injustice. Insistenceupon changes in individual economic behaviour rather than a proposalfor structural socio-economic changes are the hallmark of the work of theFathers.42. It is characteristic that two centuries after Irenaeus we meet thisstance (in other words an illegality so that substantial justice can be rendered)on the level of sainthood. Abba Makarios of Alexandria proceeded to commita fraud, so that he could care for the incurables of Alexandria. He took moneyfrom a rich and avaricious woman with the promise that he would buy herprecious stones at a bargain price. However, he gave the money for the treatmentof patients.43

The Church was always reserved towards the practice of violence. In thePatristic texts, however, sometimes we find the puzzle that all cases of violenceare not seen as the same thing. Chrysostom, for example, condemned the

violent actions of the rebellious people of Antioch, but he supported thembefore the emperor. Besides in another case he talks to the well off Christiansand defends the hungry who resort to violence: How is it that you dont turn redwith shame if someone is called a wrongdoer when he is struggling to survive?Even if he is a criminal, he deserves to be helped since he is so oppressed byhunger that he is forced to do those things,44 John the Merciful, Patriarch of

Alexandria, declared that it would not be wrong if one would figure out waysto strip the rich even out of their clothes in order to help poor people45, whileSt Athanasius, Patriarch of Constntinople (1289-1293 and 1303-1309) and aforerunner of hesychasm, had been pioneering in social reform measures andwas strongly opposed by bishops and monks when he tried to distribute churchproperty to weak people.46 Needless to say, views like these contradict other

42. Anastassios D. Karayannis and Sarah Drakopoulou Dodd, The Greek Christian Fa-thers, inAncient and Medieval Economic Ideas and Concepts of SocialJustice, S. Todd Lowry-Barry Gordon, eds. (Leiden -New York-Kln: Brill 1998) 177.

43. Palladius, Lausaic History,MPG Vol. 34, col. 1018A-1019C.44. John Chrysostom, Sermon 14, on the Epistle to the Romans,MPG Vol. 60, col. 535.45. . Delehaye, Une Vie indite de S. Jean lAumnier,Analecta Bollandiana 45 (1927) 45.46. Boojamra, op. cit. 48, 104.


18/21

435


patristic views which do not consent to this radical activism.47

In order to understand the dynamics that the interpretation has, it is veryinteresting to see how different church Fathers (such as Anastasios of Sinai in the 7th c. and Nikolaos Mystikos in early 10th c.) interpret the well-knownsaying of Apostle Paul,

everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, forthere is no authority except that which God has established. Theauthorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently,he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what Godhas instituted (Rom. 13:1-2).

Although the saying is categorical, the Fathers mentioned do not accept itwithout objections. They insist that unjust power does not constitute the willof God.48 In this way, the Fathers give priority to justice and the interests of thepeople, invite the individual to judge the political authority and thus close theroad to the worst political nightmare: theocracy. In my opinion this positionis the precursor of modernity and the emancipation of man from the level of asubject (subordinate) to the level of a citizen.

C.

How much did the above currents of Patristic thought manage to influencedrastically the life of the church? The answer is not easy, but I think it shouldbe sought in the fact which I emphasised from the start: the progress of the

47. Nicolas Kabasilas, for example, stressed the importance of charity, yet he rejected theconfiscation of grand properties for the sake of solidarity. He viewed confiscation as a kind ofunacceptable / intolerable violence. See A. Papathanasiou, The Signs of the Kingdom, op. cit.19-21.

48. Saint Anastasios of Sinai clarifies that the coronation of a wicked sovereign and Godstoleration of him is the fruit of peoples wickedness, not Gods will. Anastasios refers the readerto similar answers given by Isidore of Pelousion, the Apostolic Cnstitutions, Olympliodorus,Gregory of Nyssa, John Chrysostom and Theodoret, who also claim that the tyrants do notenjoy Gods consent. See Anastasios of Sinai, , 16,MPG Vol. 89, col.476-484. Moreover, Nicolas Mysticos, , 32,MPG vol. 111, col. 209C speaks of theright of indiscipline to unjust sovereigns.


19/21

436


Church in history is complex. It occurs with clashes and contradictions, with

saintliness and betrayal. We have to work hard in order to locate the criteriawhich will save the substance of Christian faith. Remember, for example, theclash between two viewpoints in the heart of the Church: on the one hand the

view which argued that the Church must be rich and powerful, and on theother hand the view that the church must be poor and humble. In the 4th c. thisclash manifested itself between the imperial aspirationson the one hand andthe monastic movement on the other. In the 10th c. it manifested itself betweenthe hermits of Mount Athos on the one hand and Saint Athanasios the Athonitewho imported there the institution of the rich monastery on the other hand.In the 16th c. it manifested itself in Russia between Saint Nilus of Sora (who

argued for monastic lack of property) on the one hand and Joseph of Volotsk(who argued for monastic property) on the other. It is impressive that in mostcases, this clash manifested itself correspondinglyand as a disagreement as towhether heretics could be tolerated or, to the contrary, persecuted.49

Characteristic of the predicament in which the researcher can find himselftoday, is the following question: Wouldnt it be an anachronism if we wouldexpect (on the basis of modern criteria) that middle age Church would havedemanded the immediate abolition of slavery? Wouldnt it be utopian, as if onewould demand today the abolition of hired labour? Reservations like these are

probably serious, however they must not become an alibi for the abandonmentof the Christian vision! The Good News must break through the social statusquo and inculcate the everyday life with the criteria of the Kingdom, no matterhow utopian they may sound. This tag-of-war, realism on the one hand and the

vision on the other hand, have often been appearing with great tension in history.As we know, the Apostle Paul did not condone slavery being abolished. He

chose a middle path, that of the brotherly relations of masters and slaves (wecould say), and he emphasised that the true salvation of man is not dependantupon his social position.50

The echo of this stance of Paul can be found in one holy canon, which

condemned the Eustathians, who encouraged (in the name of devoutness)the slaves to escape from their masters. The Eustathians were followers of

49. See Georges Florovsky, Ways of Russian Theology, I (Belmond, MA.: Nordland, 1979) 19-24.50. 1 Cor. 7: 20-21, Eph. 6: 5-7, 1 Tim. 6: 1, Tit. 6: 1, Phil.


20/21

437


Eustathius, bishop of Sebastea, an outstanding proponent of asceticism. It was

his life which provided Basil the Greats inspiration.51 Eustathius teaching,however, was full of rigorism (e.g. contempt of marriage), which was eventuallycondemned by the 3rd canon of the Synod of Gangra in the middle of the 4thc. So, we can wonder: Wouldnt Eusathiuss position against slavery enjoy awider acceptance? This is an issue of special research, of course. In any event,however, Eustathiuss importance shows that liberating attitudes are stemmingfrom the Christian faith, from the very guts of the Church event.

All Byzantine canonists interpreted the canon on the ground of Pauls texts,and, as a matter of fact, they bypassed the importance of liberating views. Oneof the canonists, John Valsamon in the 12th c., mentions, in support of the

canon, a law promulgated by the emperor Constantine VII, the Purple born(middle 10th c.) against those subjects (subordinates) who rebelled againsttheir superiors.52 The interesting thing here is that Valsamon claims that thelaw was issued in agreement with the Patriarch Alexios and the Synod! Thelaw provided that the rebels would be anathematized that is, excommunicated!

In the same spirit (the defence of the social status quo) we can find manyother canonical provisions. For example, no Holy Canon prevents the clergyfrom owning slaves (while there are Canons which prevent the clergy fromlending money with interest),53 and several Canons ask for the masters

permission so that his slave can be ordained, because this ordination resultedin the liberation of the slave. If a slave managed to be ordained a bishop withoutthis permission, he would be defrocked and returned to his previous position.54

How could we judge this collaboration between the empire and the church?Apparently the whole matter had to do with an attempt to make a metaphysical

justification for the established social order. On the other hand, however, laws

51. Charles A. Frazee, Anatolian asceticism in the Fourth Century: Eustathios of Sebasteaand Basil of Caesarea, Catholic Historical Review 66 (1980) 16.

52. G.A. Rallis and M. Potlis, Syntagma ton theion kai ieron kanonon (Collection of the divine

and holy Canons) Vol. III (Athens 1853) 103 [in Greek]. The text of the law has not survived. SeeEleftheria Papagianne, To provlema ton doulon sto ergo ton kononologon tou 12ou aiona (Theproblem of slaves in the work of 12 c. canonists), in Vyzantio kata ton 12o aiona. Kanoniko di-kaio, kratos kai koinonia (Byzantium in the 12th c.; Canon Law, State and Society), N. Oikonomides,ed. (Athens: Society of Byzantine and Postbyzantine Studies, 1991) 407.

53. 17th canon of the 1st Ecumenical Council.54. Papagianne, op. cit., 410-411, 417-8, 421, 444.


21/21

438


which gave slaves the power to reject the carrying out of unethical orders of their

masters have particular interest, as well as canons which condemned Christianmasters, who in the age of the persecutions, ordered their slaves (who were alsoChristians) to deny the Christian faith on their masters account.55 Such canonscan maybe seem comical and superfluous in our times, but they also constitute,in my opinion, valuable embryonic affirmations of the modern emancipationof man from the level of subject to the level of citizen. It would be also of greatimportance if several Christian socialist, anarchist and utopian movements inGreece in modern times were studied thoroughly.56

D.Allow me to end this paper of mine with some remarks,which will be brief

in order to save time:1. The adherents and agents of a liberating theology should not come to

possess messianic self awareness. Nor should they end up in a paternalisticstance, which talks on behalf of the protected, but often does not hear them. Thechurch is called to be a servant of the liberating mission of God, and to be readyto call into question everykind of slavery. In other words, to be ready to discernwhen the hope bearing presences degenerate in new tyrannic establishments.

2. Liberation is indissolubly linked with reconciliation. Yet, if reconciliation,which is discussed in our times as the new paradigm for the mission of thechurch, is divorced from liberation, then it becomes a compromise with the oldworld and with the dominion of death. What will remain is just the cunning ofreconciliation; a caricature of it.

3. I think that an important difficulty which Christian conscience faces inhistory is the following: how Christian witness will reflect a way of life, andwill not be merely an impersonal ideology. The hard thing is not to declaregenerally and in abstract that you love all of mankind. The hard thing is torecognize Christ Himself in every single person. In short, the gospel of Christ

is indeed of Christ, when it is preached in the manner of Christ.

55. 7th canon of Peter of Alexandeia. See Ralles and Potles, op.cit. IV, 22-23.56. See Kostis Moskof, (Intro-duction to the History of Working Class Movement) (Athens: Kastanioti 1985) [in Greek].

Date post:	03-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	martin-everett
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

A. N. Papathanasiou, Liberation Perspectives

Documents