Today the church celebrates the repose of St. John Chrysostom. On the actual day of his repose, September 14/27, all liturgical services are focused on the exaltation of the cross. Just yesterday, I wrote about Archbishop Germogen (Golubev), who “chose his battle” of fighting for the Church, even when others considered such activity counterproductive. St. John Chrysostom did not have a problem with speaking his mind, either. St. John was born in the mid-fourth century in Antioch, a great city of the Roman Empire, where the disciples of Christ were called “Christians” for the first time (Acts 11:26). St. John was taught by the famous rhētor Libanius; the latter never converted to Christianity, but valued St. John’s homiletic gift. It was an interesting time in which to live. The Empire had been officially Christian for less than a century. Antioch, an ancient, reputable city of Alexander the Great, was competing against the new capital brought to the Bosporus by Constantine the Great. (I wrote about this period in my post for September 29.) The “twilight” of Late Antiquity became an important dimension in St. John’s life. St. John counted such prominent figures as Archbishop Theophilos of Alexandria among his adversaries. It is noteworthy for our historical understanding of holiness that, despite Theophilos’ struggle to overturn the Archbishop of Constantinople, canonical answers submitted by Theophilos became part of the universal tradition of the Orthodox Church. Then as now, bishops differed among themselves. Some would spend all the money at their disposal on building projects. St. John spent what he had on those who constituted the “wealth of God”: the poor. Bishops visiting the capital were offended, because the modest reception they enjoyed fell short of the previous standards of hospitality. Understandably, such an attitude made St. John popular among the ordinary people of Constantinople. The fact that universal popularity was not a goal of his can be seen from his relationship with Empress Eudoxia, the powerful wife of Emperor Arcadius. She was a pious woman and respected St. John. However, it was he who did not hesitate to denounce her publicly when, for example, a silver statue of her was installed in front of the church. At the same time, it would not be fair to picture St. John as a person who had lost touch with reality. It was he who had to negotiate on behalf of the Romans with the invading Arian Goths, and he who permitted them to have a church building and worship there in their language if they would follow the faith of the Council of Nicea. St. John’s moral rhetoric was close to that of Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitskii), as expressed in an anecdote recorded by Archimandrite Kiprian (Kern): A. Ametistov, a great admirer of Metropolitan Anthony and a man who was theologically knowledgeable and had a very sharp and cynical mind, once said to Metropolitan Anthony at an idle moment in Constantinople regarding his attitude toward hesychasm, Palamas, mysticism, and so on, literally the following: “So I’m imagining to myself, Vladyko, that you would meet St. John Chrysostom and St. Gregory Palamas, and here’s what you’d say: ‘So what’s the point, Bishop Gregory, for you to write stuff that’s neither understandable to people, nor that you yourself can explain clearly? Why don’t you follow His Grace John’s example? All that he has written is clear and applicable to life, and it all has a moral basis.’” Source: D.V. Zaitsev, “Ioann Zlatoust,” [John Chrysostom] Part I, Pravoslavnaia Entsiklopedia. | 
