No, nor would I ever say he was. He was, though, a prime inspiration for some of the matters that Luther also was clear on, and in that sense we're indebted to him. Just think of two specific areas of Eucharistic theology:
1) It was from St. John Chrysostom, that Luther first learned the significance of the Supper being TESTAMENT - he acknowledges as much in his lectures on Hebrews. 2) It was from St. John Chrysostom that the entire Western tradition and Lutherans with it affirmed the sanctifying, transforming power of the Words of Institution; his statement on the consecration is cited in our Symbols.
St. John was no 4th century Lutheran, but his theology shows a deep and true kinship with that later developed by the Lutheran Confessors at several key points.
3 comments:
Ooo, look at you with the linking of the thing there! (hee-hee)
I liked the interview Fr. Weedon, but, no matter how you try to spin it, St. John Chrysostom was not a pre-16th century Lutheran!
Chris,
No, nor would I ever say he was. He was, though, a prime inspiration for some of the matters that Luther also was clear on, and in that sense we're indebted to him. Just think of two specific areas of Eucharistic theology:
1) It was from St. John Chrysostom, that Luther first learned the significance of the Supper being TESTAMENT - he acknowledges as much in his lectures on Hebrews.
2) It was from St. John Chrysostom that the entire Western tradition and Lutherans with it affirmed the sanctifying, transforming power of the Words of Institution; his statement on the consecration is cited in our Symbols.
St. John was no 4th century Lutheran, but his theology shows a deep and true kinship with that later developed by the Lutheran Confessors at several key points.
Post a Comment