John PapaspanosHONS110210 April 2007

Against the Judaizers

In the year 387, a newly ordained Christian priest of Antioch,

John Chrysostom, delivered an infamous series of sermons from his

pulpit that would forever alter the history of Judeo-Christian

sentiments.  The homilies were unprecedented in their anti-Semitic

polemic, expressing such bitterness and hostility toward the followers

of Judaism that the modern reader, without an understanding of the

circumstances, would perceive Chrysostom as a distasteful and

detestable figure of Church history.  The eight fiery orations were

entitled Adversus Judaeos (Against the Jews), but the title is not

reflective of their purpose.  In actuality, the homilies were directed

towards the Judaizers—the “simple and foolish” among his flock who

fell victim to the “tricks and snares” of the Jews.  The lines of

separation between the Christian and Jewish camps were not

respected by some people from Chrysostom’s community.  The

Christians who were engaged in this “boundary-crossing” behavior

were collectively classified as “Judaizers”.1 Ultimately, John sought to

discourage the Judaizers in their interaction with Judaism.  The

homilies sprouted from Chrysostom’s “desire that Christians be able

to win back their friends and family who had deserted the Church by

means of persuasion”.2 

To persuade his flock to shun Judaism, Chrysostom followed the

traditional tools of formal rhetoric to belittle the Jewish faith—the

“techniques of the psogos3 are apparent in the use of half-truths,

innuendo, guilt by association, abusive and incendiary language,

malicious comparisons, and in all, excess and exaggeration”.4 

Moreover, in his fire and brimstone tone, Chrysostom employed

metaphors and hyperboles to invoke emotion among his listeners

which would instigate more fervor in action.  However, behind the

mud-slinging and name-calling tactics aimed to persuade his

uneducated audience, Chrysostom produced a complete theological

refutation of Judaism in order to bolster the bulwark dividing the two

intermingling communities.  Thus, only after examining the cultural

context of third century Antioch one can view Chrysostom’s bursts of

intolerance in light of their true nature.  In this paper, I will argue

that John Chrysostom, in his First Homily Against the Jews, did not

attack the individual Jew per se, but aimed to detract Christian

participation in Jewish rites to unify and strengthen his minority

congregation.

In the fourth century the Eastern Church, in the midst of

opposition, called for a powerful voice to bring the flock to orthodoxy. 

Some time between the years 344 to 354 of our era, a man was born

at Antioch, blessed with the gift of awe-inspiring eloquence; he was to

attain the epithet of ‘Chrysostom’ (Golden Mouth).  Son of Secundus

and Anthusa, Saint John Chrysostom was born into a noble Christian

family.  His father passed away while John was still a child and left the

widowed Anthusa in deep grief and sorrow.  At the age of 20, Anthusa

did not remarry, as was the custom of the day.  However, with great

religious faith, she swore to raise John with the utmost moral

principles and to send him to the finest schools Antioch could offer. 

After completing his elementary education, he proceeded to

study the standard curriculum of the Hellenized world: history,

literature, and rhetoric.  Under the distinguished teacher Libanius,

John “showed such aptitude in his studies as to earn high encomiums

from his master.  His schooling of rhetoric would prepare John for his

unforeseen future as a deacon of the Church.  Gradually, John grew

restless with these “professors of verbosities” and looked to

philosophy for intellectual and spiritual fulfillment.5  He completed his

secular studies with the legal profession in his scope, but the worldly

pursuits of wealth and status were vapid and fruitless.  His sight was

directed upwards to that “higher philosophy” which offered a better

understanding of God and the way to salvation.6

Young John displayed a nobility of character that did not remain

unnoticed.7  Bishop Meletius recognized John as a prospect for the

clergy and admitted him to Baptism.  He became a student at the

Asceterion established by Carterius and Diodorus of Tarsus.8  This

educational institution was akin to a monastic or sacred studies

school.  There John immersed himself into the study of scripture and

theology under the guidance of his teacher Diodorus—the most

influential man John had ever met.9  His teacher possessed a lofty

spirituality, and he led the “school of literal interpretation” of the

scripture as opposed to the “allegorical interpretation” adhered by the

Alexandrian scholars.1

After a few years as a student of theology, John felt an even

higher calling—to live the life of an ascetic.  At that time, Syria

became enveloped with the same spirit that called for thousands of

men in Egypt to wander out into the desert.11  Antioch was the home

of a semi-pagan society which provoked many Christians to live on the

hills and in the caves that surrounded the city.  In their minds, this

was the only way to salvation.  Complete solitude with the

denouncement of all worldly possessions and pleasures was the

formula for righteous living in the eyes of the most obedient servants

of God.  For this reason, John left the city, to the dismay of his mother,

and set out to live with an old Syrian monk in the outskirts of the

city.12

After four years of the monastic life, John sought more solitude

within the confines of a cave located on the outskirts of the city.13   

With the deprivation of sleep and the lack of proper nourishment, John

could not endure the harsh living conditions associated with life in the

dark and dreary cavern during the winter of 380-381, so he

reluctantly returned home.

Upon the arrival of his favored friend, Bishop Miletius invited

John to accompany him to a council at Constantinople to debate the

eminent heresy of Apollinaris.  Before their departure, Miletius

ordained John a deacon of the Church and so began the legacy of St.

John Chrysostom.

In fourth-century Antioch, “pagans, Manichaeans, Gnostics,

Arians, Apollinarians, and Jews, made their proselytes at Antioch, and

the Catholics were themselves separated by the schism between the

bishops Meletius and Paulinus.”14  Consequently, the Christians of

Antioch had the choice of following three distinct bishops—the Arian

leader, Meletius (who was ordained by an Arian), and Paulinus who

attracted the most devout advocates of the Nicene party (since he was

not ordained by an Arian).  In 386, Bishop Flavian, successor to

Miletius, ordained John as a priest of the Church.  This context

anchors Chrysostom in the crux of contention among the city’s

Christian believers.  The man who ordained Chrysostom was given

authoritative power by an unorthodox Arian bishop.  According to the

Council of Nicaea, Flavian was not a legitimate clergy of the orthodox

faith.  Therefore, in the eyes of some Antioch Christians, Chrysostom

was not a true priest with the authority to conduct the liturgy and to

perform the holy sacraments. 

Nevertheless, Chrysostom accepted his new role as a shepard of

his modest flock with the purest motives and the highest ideals. 

Accordingly, during the twelve years of his priesthood at Antioch,

Chrysostom experienced the happiest days of his life.  Following every

liturgy, John would produce and perform the most beautifully eloquent

homilies extemporaneously, alluring people from all socioeconomic

backgrounds to come and listen.  His clearness and simplicity in word

and meaning preached to the lowest denominator, allowing all minds

to understand his message.  The relationship between speaker and

audience was very intimate.  John would balance his homilies in

length, alternate his tone, and modify the appearance of his own

authority.  From the perspective of his listeners, Chrysostom was seen

as “that small emaciated frame that housed an indomitable spirit ever

ready to do battle with the forces of evil.”15

Just as Julian grouped the Jews and pagans together as

“defenders of ancient traditions and cultivators of the rites and

ceremonies,”16 Chrysostom likewise used associations for the

advancement of his interests.  He encompassed all the evil-doers

behind one ugly mask.  The affinity between the Arians, pagans, and

Jews17 allowed Chrysostom to include all three parties on his “black

list” of impiety.       

Disregarding religious affiliation, Chrysostom also condemned

any persons visiting the various venues of entertainment.  “Whenever

we waste precious time on worthless things, we are far from

contributing anything to our soul, we even harm it.”18  John was

especially referring to the entertainment venues that were dangerous

to his audience—particularly the theatre and the hippodrome.19  The

hippodrome would house thousands of frenzied spectators screaming

and cursing for their favored horse.  John saw this preoccupation as a

grand diversion for his parishioners.  The race schedules often

conflicted with the liturgical services and the church would be left

without its congregation—mainly the male parishioners.2  In his

Homily Against the Games and Theatres, Chrysostom condemns “the

cries and disorderly shouting” which “filled the city.”21  Even on the

most sacred days of the Christian calendar, the Friday of Holy Week,

the Church was vacant:

“When your Master was being crucified on behalf of the world

and such a sacrifice was being offered, and paradise was being

opened…God was being reconciled to human beings, and everything

was being changed—on that day you should have been fasting and

giving praise and sending up prayers of thanksgiving for all the

blessings in the world to the one who made them…Then did you leave

the church.”22 

This instance of faithlessness sheds light on the gradation of

devotion and dedication Chrysostom’s audience exhibited towards

their faith.  In some ways, the “audience’s behavior differed little from

when they were in each other’s homes or at the hippodrome or

theatre—people gossiped, chatted, and laughed during the liturgy and

sermon.”23 

Moreover, with great excitement and vigor, the people of

Antioch gathered in great numbers to see the plays performed at the

theatre.  The wealthy would build them alongside their mansions.24 

The excitement of the drama and the nudity of the actresses attracted

spectators much like modern cinematic movies incite the imagination

of people in today’s society.  Likewise, this particular aspect of

Hellenic culture brought frustration to John due to its widespread

popularity.  The old Roman proverb still rang true—the only

ingredients needed to make a citizen happy were bread and games. 

Without discrimination, the love of spectacles was shared by pagans

and Christians alike.  In response, Chrysostom would bellow at his

audience, “The circus, theatre, and hippodrome are an apostasy—a

return to the idols—and enemies of purity.”25 

According to Chrysostom, among the Pagans, Jews, and Arians,

the most seductive source of evil among the three parties was the

Jewish camp.  In the fourth century, a “resurgence of Judaizing

Christianity took place partly due to Julian’s efforts to rebuild the

temple in Jerusalem and return the city to the Jews.”26  To combat the

elusive power belonging to the Jews, Chrysostom strived to undermine

their theology via his sophistic homilies.  Almost alone on this mission

of solidarity, Chrysostom was “scarcely the only ancient Christian to

engage in anti-Jewish rhetoric and actions.”27  According to John

Gager, Chrysostom was “clearly, an extreme case.” The emergence of

such derogatory speech against the Jews at such an early period in

Christian history stands testament to the unique circumstances found

in Chrysostom’s native Antioch during his lifetime.  Did Christianity

spawn anti-Semitism?  Was John Chrysostom the first anti-Semite?  A

brief discussion of anti-Semitism and its origins must be addressed to

understand the cultural inheritance of John Chrysostom and his

contemporaries.

“Anti-Semitism was not a Christian invention.”28  The pagan

world of antiquity expressed anti-Jewish sentiment long before Jesus

Christ and the Apostles, let alone John Chrysostom and his homilies. 

In Hellenistic culture, the value of unity among diverse nations and

peoples was prevalent—stemming from Alexander the Great and his

vision of the “one state” or politeia.  In this grand social mosaic, the

Jews were thoroughly dispersed tiles.  The Sybylline Oracles

proclaimed “every land and every sea is full of them.”29  Due to their

overwhelming numbers and splendid organization, the Jews enjoyed

favorable privileges and freedoms by their Roman overlords. 

Whenever a Jew “emigrated he sought out his brethren and formed a

community.”3  When at least ten or more Jews gathered together, a

synagogue would be built for the social and spiritual support of the

community.31  The Jews of the Diaspora were always active members

in the cities they settled in, especially in the economic sector. 

Therefore, “The outbursts of anti-Semitism in Greek

communities are an index of the power, success, and wealth of the

Jews.”32  In Antioch, the Jews’ collection of wealth provided the

resources and the manpower for the construction of synagogues

which ranked among the finest buildings in the city.33  But regardless

of their involvement in civic and commercial affairs, the Jews always

retained a distinct identity for themselves.  They were the “Chosen

people:” God allowed Abraham to father descendents as numerous as

the stars; God gave Moses the stone tablets.  God promised the Jews a

messiah for their salvation.  The Jews’ sense of “self” affected their

behavior and their apparently aloof attitude towards the popular

culture created a buffer of separation between the Jews and the

gentiles.34  This disparity was a source of discontent for the gentiles,

but even so, the Jews still “kept stubbornly apart”.35  Furthermore, the

books of Maccabees “taught for Jews to have as little to do with the

seductive gentiles”36.  In addition, the pantheon of the ancient Greeks

and Romans had little appeal to the believers of Yahweh.  As a result,

naïve pagans often flung charges of atheism against the Jews.  In

reaction, to combat the dominant culture, the minority Jews clung

together naturally and this tendency incited criticism from the

gentiles—one example being the Jews were “cliquish,” grouping

together in opposition to the others.37   Finally, Jews were accused of

being primitive by practicing obsolete rituals that were otherwise

abandoned by other tribes.  The anti-Jewish “invective” was not a

product of the common man alone, since Roman writers with great

influence from Tertullian to Cicero expressed their anti-Jewish

sentiments, but their critiques were “petty gossip” compared to the

later Christian polemics.38  But when and how did Christian anti-

Semitism arise?  The answers emerge with the discussion of “how,

when, and why Christianity separated from Judaism?”39, or more

precisely, “When did Christianity cease to be a Judaism?”4  The setting

of this question lies within the walls of Antioch during the fourth

century of the Common Era—the native city of John Chrysostom. 

“Both early Judaism and early Christianity were mostly urban

movements and Antioch was a key city for both.”41  Founded by the

Seleucids in 300 B.C. Antioch was a large Greek-speaking city in

northern Syria that lay twenty miles from the sea.  Nestled between

the Orontes River and a mountain range, the geographic location was

near perfect with the large fertile plain in the north and Daphne’s

water springs to the south.  Antioch was home to the Roman governor

of Syria, the comes orientis (ranking imperial official in the east) and

the chief military officer in the east.   Moreover, with the north-south

trade routes from Phoenicia to Asia Minor passing through and the

accessibility to the roads leading east to the Tigris-Euphrates valley,

the city was in the crossroads of trade and movement.  Furthermore,

the strategic location of the port-city Seleucia furthered Antioch’s

commercial capabilities and produced a brilliant effect on the lives of

the citizens of Antioch.  As a center of trade and commerce, Antioch

attracted Greeks, Romans, and Asiatics—while it was “gradually

enriched by the horde of Syrian merchants who were to be found

trading in every quarter of the globe.”42 

In the mid 4th century, an affluent landowning aristocracy

emerged as the conservative camp in the city—“maintaining and

guarding the city’s Hellenic traditions, transmitting them to their

children.”43  Another prominent class in the social structure was the

skilled professionals—the lawyers, rhetoric teachers, high-ranking

civil servants, and higher clergy.  The city demographics in Antioch

fostered “famous citizens, brilliant culture, and handsome buildings—

the highest accomplishments of Greek civilization.”44     

In the fourth century, Antioch certainly reached “the acme of

splendor.”  But regardless of its wealth and extravagance, Antioch had

its less glamorous facet.  Great masses of people lived in poverty. 

“There existed a highly visible class of beggars and homeless people

who solicited the rest of the citizens of Antioch as they went about

their business in the marketplace and streets.”45  Not unlike any

present-day urban center, Antioch was a metropolis with a wide socio-

economic spectrum.

Incidentally, the city of Antioch was also a fruitful center for

Jewish conversions among the gentile population.46  As a counter-

action, the Pauline missionary group originated in Antioch.  In the

Acts of the Apostles, this city was the site of the first “deliberate

mission to gentiles and the locus of the decisive controversy over

terms of their admission to the church.”47  For the gentile population,

both Christianity and Judaism were alluring religions, Christianity

being the new and uprising sect.  On the contrary, Judaism was “an

ancient heritage, preserved in written form, an uncompromising

monotheism, combined with serious moral standards, a belief that

basic religious truths were directly revealed by the divinity, a strong

sense of community, and finally, a conviction that Judaism

represented the religious destiny of all humanity.”48  Even the

Christians found awe in their mother religion—marveling at the

festivals and customs as well as revering the holy books and the

synagogues which housed them.

The essence of the Jewish faith was expressed through these

festivals and customs.  To partake in a festival or custom is to become

affiliated with the corresponding religious group.  “In the great cities

of the Roman Empire the primary distinguishing marks of religious

allegiance were ritual, the proper observances of festivals, and the

calendar.”49  Nevertheless, these customs did not create an

impervious barrier which neatly divided the religious factions of

Antioch into distinct identities.  “In many situations, Jews and

Christians behaved as if there were no rigid boundaries to separate

them as if they shared a common culture.”5  Since both Judaism and

Christianity are based on the same scriptural heritage, their

commonality concealed the “absolute difference between Jewish and

Christian practice” for the majority of Chrysostom’s flock that

unknowingly crossed the “blurred and porous boundary”.51

The problem of the Judaizers eventually outgrew the formidable

Arian threat to the extent that in the fall of 387, Chrysostom

interrupted his series of homilies condemning the Arians to better

concentrate on the Judaizers—the greater menace to his minority

congregation. 

In his first homily Against the Jews Chrysostom begins with an

analogy depicting the grave situation—there is a disease plaguing the

body of the Church.  With dramatic flair, he then asked a rhetorical

question that must have held the entire audience in suspense—“What

is this disease?” 

The festivals of the “wretched and miserable” Jews were fast

approaching and they “followed one after another in succession.” 

Accordingly, Chrysostom had high hopes of deterring his audience

from attending them.  Therefore, from the beginning, Chrysostom

speaks directly about the temptation that is forthcoming.  The object

of abuse is not focused on the Jew, but the Jewish festivals.   He

relates the struggle with the Jews to the previous struggle with the

Arians—one that must be won in order to sustain the legitimacy of the

Church.52 

During the course of the homily, Chrysostom proclaims “I hate

the Jews for they have the Law and they insult it.”  This statement

directly refers to the “antagonism between Judaism and Christianity

over the messiahship of Jesus”53.  According to Chrysostom, the Jews

“crucified the one spoken of by the prophets”54   Throughout the Old

Testament, prophets forecast the coming of a savior.  As the

recipients of the Holy Scriptures, the Jews “possess the heralds of

truth and have maliciously resisted them as well as the truth.”55  This

rejection of Christ’s divinity is the crucial point of disagreement

between Judaism and Christianity.  Chrysostom paints another

analogy to enhance this point, “The sun of righteousness rose on them

first, but they turned their back on its beams and sat in the

darkness.”56  To emphasize this key point is to enlighten the listeners

to understand the foundation beliefs of their own faith.  Since the

Jewish and Christian practices were not really that similar, the

Christian attraction to Judaism was chiefly due to the neglect and lack

of understanding regarding their own belief and worship.57 

Chrysostom explained to his listeners that the pillar of Christian faith

is Jesus Christ the Lord.  He is the Logos and the Way.  Through the

intervention of God via the incarnation of Christ, mankind can be

redeemed; thus, salvation becomes possible.  According to the Jews,

Jesus was simply a prophet and the messiah was yet to come.  With

this point of contention, either party could not have the slightest

tolerance for the other.  Judaism and Christianity were set apart

forever when the divinity of Christ came into question.         

Moreover, the discussion of the holy books ushers in the

introduction of Paul in the homily.  Through his missionary work, Paul

created a deviation from the Jewish adherence to the Law.  In order to

make Christianity a more accepting and alluring religion to the non-

Jews of the Hellenic world, Paul developed a Christianity without “the

two factors that might otherwise have inhibited its growth—the

obligations of the ritual law and the close connection between religion

and national identity.”58  These two factors were dominant

characteristics of Judaism and their rejection caused further

antagonism between the Jews and the Christians.  The Jewish test of

religious authenticity was fidelity to the Torah of God.  Therefore,

when the Christians decided to facilitate the conversion process for

gentiles, the Jews denounced Christianity.  As an apologist,

Chrysostom assaulted yet another aspect of Judaism—the Jewish

house of worship known as the synagogue.  Chrysostom portrays the

building as “a den of wild animals”59  This comparison between

sinners and wild animals is evident of Chrysostom’s rhetorical

training.  In Homily 1, Chrysostom used the imagery of a fat animal

that cannot draw the plow of Christian teaching and essentially, must

be slaughtered.  This classical use of imagery reveals the supposed

nature of the Jew—inclined to be intoxicated and gluttonous creatures

of God.6  Once again, Chrysostom strives to paint a caricature of the

Jew for a more enthusiastic response among his listeners.         

Finally, Chrysostom mentions the presence of mayia within the

walls of the synagogue.  Whenever the Christians fell ill, common

practice was to visit the synagogue for healing.  Charms, incantations,

and amulets were thought to have special magic powers.61  In the

superstitious tradition, the healing powers were produced by the

“books.”  “To the simple and uneducated, the books had magical

powers and were capable of working wonders and miracles.”62 

Chrysostom offers a personal account when the preacher witnessed

two fellow Christians fall victim to the impiety of the synagogue—

which ranks with the pagan temple in evilness.  As the story goes63,

the validity of an oath was strengthened among two Christians when

the verbal agreement was done inside a Jewish synagogue.  “The

veneration of the synagogue was in his audience” and for this reason,

Chrysostom was compelled to “fire all his rhetorical cannons to

convince his audience—and perhaps also himself—that entering a

synagogue or venerating it” is a violation of loyalty.64      In his Homily

Against the Jews, it is evident that Chrysostom used all his powers of

speech to combat the power of Jewish attraction. 

In conclusion, Chrysostom’s aim in his Homily Against the Jews

was not to attack the Jews as such, but to deter Christians from

participating in Jewish rites.65  “Far from representing a popular

hostility toward Judaism among Christians in Antioch, Chrysostom’s

imprecations reveal the exact opposite: a widespread Christian

infatuation with Judaism.”66  In the eyes of Chrysostom, this was a

grave threat to the stability of Christianity.  He was deeply concerned

for the future of his parish.  If his flock is following the Jewish rites

how will they withstand criticism from the surrounding hostile parties

—especially the other Christian camps who are vying for orthodoxy? 

In the fourth century, “Christians lived in a pluralistic world and it

could not be assumed without argument that Christian beliefs were

true or that the Christian way of relating scriptural prophecies to

historical events was manifest.”67  As an apologist, Chrysostom spoke

to protect the splintering flock of Christians from further disarray. 

The already divided Christian community was now being further

dissolved by an external religion.  Without active missionary work, the

Jews were bringing Christians into synagogues to participate in the

Jewish festivals and rites.  The fact that baptized Christians were

being led so easily and readily to participate in the Jewish rites caused

such fear and distress in the mind of Chrysostom that the young priest

was compelled to convey this emotion to his audience. 

In summation, John Chrysostom did not orate the Adversus

Judaes for any hateful purposes, but for the survival of what he

believed to be Orthodox Christianity.

1 Fonrobert pg. 240

2 Wilken pg. 123

3 A rhetorical term for a speech which attempts to insult, degrade, or otherwise attack something.   A psogos is the opposite of a panegyric, or a speech in praise of something. The term originates from the Greek psogos—meaning blame.

4 Wilken pg. 116

5 Dalton pg. 2

6 Dalton pg. 2

7 Dalton pg. 3

8 Dalton pg. 3

9 Dalton pg. 3

1 Dalton pg. 3

11 Dalton pg. 3

12 Dalton pg. 3

13 Dalton pg. 5

14 www.newadvent.org

15 Dalton pg. 8

16 Meeks and Wilken pg. 29

17 Williams pg. 26

18 Coniaris pg. 46

19 Coniaris pg. 46

2 Mayer & Allen pg. 118

21 Mayer & Allen pg. 119

22 Mayer & Allen pg. 119

23 Mayer & Allen pg. 38

24 Vandenburghe pg. 63

25 Vandenburghe pg. 63

26 Wilken pg. 73

27 Fonrobert 235

28 Davies pg. 4

29 Angus pg. 146

3 Angus pg. 147

31 Angus pg. 148

32 Angus pg. 149

33 Angus pg. 148

34 Davies pg. 5

35 Davies pg. 5

36 Davies pg. 5

37 Davies pg. 5

38 Davies pg. 21

39 Lieu pg. 305

4 Lieu pg. 2

41 Meeks and Wilken pg. 1

42 D’Alton pg. 218 

43 Wilken pg. 2

44 Wilken  pg. 2

45 Mayer and Allen pg. 34

46 Downey pg. 447

47 Meeks and Wilken pg. 13

48 Gager pg. 136

49 Wilken pg. 92

5 Lieu pg. 307

51 Fonrobert pg. 240

52 Homily 1 pg. 87

53 Davies pg. 19

54 Homily pg. 89

55 Homily 1  pg. 91

56 Homily 1 pg. 18

57 Downey pg. 449

58 Gager pg. 140

59 Homily 1 pg. 90

6 Homily 1 pg. 87

61 Wilken pg. 83

62 Wilken pg. 80

63 According to Fonrobert, this example was quite possibly fabricated to enhance credibility.   

64 Fonrobert pg. 240

65 Wilken pg. 31

66 Meeks and Wilken pg. 31

67 Wilken pg. 159