What do you think?
Rate this book
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series #11
Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans [Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Vol 11]
Book by Saint Chrysostom
576 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 1925
30 people are currently reading
141 people want to read
About the author
John Chrysostom
1,278 books231 followersJohn Chrysostom (c. 347–407, Greek: Ἰωάννης ὁ Χρυσόστομος), Archbishop of Constantinople, was an important Early Church Father. He is known for his eloquence in preaching and public speaking, his denunciation of abuse of authority by both ecclesiastical and political leaders, the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, and his ascetic sensibilities. After his death in 407 (or, according to some sources, during his life) he was given the Greek epithet chrysostomos, meaning "golden mouthed", in English and Anglicized to Chrysostom.
The Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches honor him as a saint and count him among the Three Holy Hierarchs, together with Basil the Great and Gregory Nazianzus. He is recognized by the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church as a saint and as a Doctor of the Church. Churches of the Western tradition, including the Roman Catholic Church, some Anglican provinces, and parts of the Lutheran Church, commemorate him on 13 September. Some Lutheran and many Anglican provinces commemorate him on the traditional Eastern feast day of 27 January. The Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria also recognizes John Chrysostom as a saint (with feast days on 16 Thout and 17 Hathor).
John is known in Christianity chiefly as a preacher, theologian and liturgist. Among his homilies, eight directed against Judaizing Christians remain controversial for their impact on the development of Christian antisemitism.
The Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches honor him as a saint and count him among the Three Holy Hierarchs, together with Basil the Great and Gregory Nazianzus. He is recognized by the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church as a saint and as a Doctor of the Church. Churches of the Western tradition, including the Roman Catholic Church, some Anglican provinces, and parts of the Lutheran Church, commemorate him on 13 September. Some Lutheran and many Anglican provinces commemorate him on the traditional Eastern feast day of 27 January. The Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria also recognizes John Chrysostom as a saint (with feast days on 16 Thout and 17 Hathor).
John is known in Christianity chiefly as a preacher, theologian and liturgist. Among his homilies, eight directed against Judaizing Christians remain controversial for their impact on the development of Christian antisemitism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
November 2, 2011
This review will differ from a normal review because it is reviewing, not a tightly argued treatise, but a collection of sermons preached on the books of Acts and Romans. One will briefly note Chrysostom's style, address a series of themes and interesting insights from the ancient world and conclude with final observations on the book.
Chrysostom's style in the book of Acts is more marked than in Romans. Of course, one should keep in mind that these sermons (in print) are probably a collection of the best that an ancient stenographer could do. Chrysostom briefly introduces the text as a whole, explicates a few verses, and then concludes in a fashion where he recapitulates the whole text and focuses it on a moral application in conclusion. This is the case in his sermons on Acts; it is not so much the case in Romans.
Observations from Chrysostom
Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox want to claim Chrysostom as “their guy.” When I was reading through this volume I noticed Chrysostom say a few things that help identify with whom he would today identify (hint: it's the latter two groups). (The references will be in the page numbers in the Schaff volume, and not the Homily number itself.)
Tradition: “In fact, there are many things which they have delivered by unwritten tradition” (2).
Ascetism: (I remember in some groups ascetism was evil medieval monkery and that in our “dominon mindset” we should engage in “biblical feasting” (e.g., drunkeness and gluttony). At this point I don't want to quote Chrysostom on asceticism, in which his opinion is well-known, but the editor's response to Chrysostom: “The ascetic principles is of heathen origin” (4). Note the irony: at the end of the footnote the editor says Chrysostom quotes no passage to justify his argument. I note that the editor quotes no passage to justify his per heathen origin. The editor doesn't understand the Eastern church (and this is a notorious shortcoming in the Schaff series). The monk isn't engaging in asceticism to "punish the body because it is evil," but to control the passions so they don't rule they body, because the body is good.
Economcis: “This was an angelic commonwealth, not to call anything of theirs their own...No talk of 'mine' and 'thine' then” (47).
Justification and baptism: “Now he justified them by the regeneration of the laver” (453). On this note one should mention, as Thomas Torrance argues, that nowhere in Scripture is “regeneration” (palingenesis) ever referred to as an “inward” conversion process. It is always referred to as the final product of creation or something baptism does. Back to Chrysostom: in case I have misinterpreted Chrysostom's argument here, the editor notes on the same point in another passage that “Chrysostom cannot mean the gift of faith in regard to baptism” (45).
Ancient Practices of the Church: “Then let us rid ourselves of this demon (passion), at its first beginning let us quell it, let us put the sign of the Cross on our breast” (111). Praying for the recently departed: “This is the greatest memorial...bid them all make for him their prayeres” (140; the rest of th sentence is quite shocking).
Communing with the saints: “Let us keep the saints near us” (319).
Angels: There is actually too much on angels. I will simply cite the page numbers: 171, 198, 366, 450,510. In short, each man has his own angel (171).
Sin and Nature: Chrysostom famously rejects original sin in his homily on Romans 5:12. Elsewhere he notes that sin does not have a substance (423). Therefore, it cannot be equated with “nature.” Sin, like everyone in the ancient church taught, is an evil operation of the will. Natures, by contrast, do not change. That is the very definition of nature. Therefore, a nature cannot change from “good” in the garden to “evil” later in life, otherwise it wouldn't be a nature.
Conclusion
Reading this volume is certainly a healthy exercise in the Fathers. The sermons on Acts are particularly good because they give us a snapshot of what church life was like in the early church (and by contrast what it is not like today. People who prat about wanting to go “early church” never consult the writings of the guys on this topic who, like Chrysostom, were much closer to this reality than we are today). Still, there are a number of flaws in this volume that will keep it from being “re-read.” Like any volume of sermons, it cannot be structured around a theme and thus makes for hard reading. Secondly, the editor feels the need to add his own opinions and latest thoughts to the text when they are almost never needed.
Chrysostom's style in the book of Acts is more marked than in Romans. Of course, one should keep in mind that these sermons (in print) are probably a collection of the best that an ancient stenographer could do. Chrysostom briefly introduces the text as a whole, explicates a few verses, and then concludes in a fashion where he recapitulates the whole text and focuses it on a moral application in conclusion. This is the case in his sermons on Acts; it is not so much the case in Romans.
Observations from Chrysostom
Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox want to claim Chrysostom as “their guy.” When I was reading through this volume I noticed Chrysostom say a few things that help identify with whom he would today identify (hint: it's the latter two groups). (The references will be in the page numbers in the Schaff volume, and not the Homily number itself.)
Tradition: “In fact, there are many things which they have delivered by unwritten tradition” (2).
Ascetism: (I remember in some groups ascetism was evil medieval monkery and that in our “dominon mindset” we should engage in “biblical feasting” (e.g., drunkeness and gluttony). At this point I don't want to quote Chrysostom on asceticism, in which his opinion is well-known, but the editor's response to Chrysostom: “The ascetic principles is of heathen origin” (4). Note the irony: at the end of the footnote the editor says Chrysostom quotes no passage to justify his argument. I note that the editor quotes no passage to justify his per heathen origin. The editor doesn't understand the Eastern church (and this is a notorious shortcoming in the Schaff series). The monk isn't engaging in asceticism to "punish the body because it is evil," but to control the passions so they don't rule they body, because the body is good.
Economcis: “This was an angelic commonwealth, not to call anything of theirs their own...No talk of 'mine' and 'thine' then” (47).
Justification and baptism: “Now he justified them by the regeneration of the laver” (453). On this note one should mention, as Thomas Torrance argues, that nowhere in Scripture is “regeneration” (palingenesis) ever referred to as an “inward” conversion process. It is always referred to as the final product of creation or something baptism does. Back to Chrysostom: in case I have misinterpreted Chrysostom's argument here, the editor notes on the same point in another passage that “Chrysostom cannot mean the gift of faith in regard to baptism” (45).
Ancient Practices of the Church: “Then let us rid ourselves of this demon (passion), at its first beginning let us quell it, let us put the sign of the Cross on our breast” (111). Praying for the recently departed: “This is the greatest memorial...bid them all make for him their prayeres” (140; the rest of th sentence is quite shocking).
Communing with the saints: “Let us keep the saints near us” (319).
Angels: There is actually too much on angels. I will simply cite the page numbers: 171, 198, 366, 450,510. In short, each man has his own angel (171).
Sin and Nature: Chrysostom famously rejects original sin in his homily on Romans 5:12. Elsewhere he notes that sin does not have a substance (423). Therefore, it cannot be equated with “nature.” Sin, like everyone in the ancient church taught, is an evil operation of the will. Natures, by contrast, do not change. That is the very definition of nature. Therefore, a nature cannot change from “good” in the garden to “evil” later in life, otherwise it wouldn't be a nature.
Conclusion
Reading this volume is certainly a healthy exercise in the Fathers. The sermons on Acts are particularly good because they give us a snapshot of what church life was like in the early church (and by contrast what it is not like today. People who prat about wanting to go “early church” never consult the writings of the guys on this topic who, like Chrysostom, were much closer to this reality than we are today). Still, there are a number of flaws in this volume that will keep it from being “re-read.” Like any volume of sermons, it cannot be structured around a theme and thus makes for hard reading. Secondly, the editor feels the need to add his own opinions and latest thoughts to the text when they are almost never needed.
December 23, 2022
I only read the homilies on Romans, but they were a joy to read. His exposition was helpful in reading Romans interpretation without all the contemporary debates taking up all of the focus. His applications were vivid and powerful even for a modern audience.
April 24, 2015
st john chrysostom always speaks to the heart of every matter, elegantly worded and simply put.
His prayers are beautiful.
His prayers are beautiful.
May 31, 2019
Great expositional sermons with pointed applications that are still quite relevant.
June 18, 2019
A tough read with difficult-to-parse English, but some interesting things to think about and occasional delightful rhetoric.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews