FLESHLY, PSYCHIC AND SPIRITUAL MANFLESH'S

FLESHLY, PSYCHIC AND SPIRITUAL MANFLESH'S
AND SOUL'S WARFARE -ACCORDING
TOTHE APOSTLE PAUL AND ST JOHN CHRYSOSTOM
H.E. METROPOLITAN DR. PAUL YAZIGI
St. John of Damascus Intitute of Theology
University of Balamand
INTRODUCTION

The contemporary world offers a plurality of anthropologies. Each one of these is based on a cosmo-theory. Each one reflects a religiosity and affects, by the same token, man's spiritual energies, in one way or the other. Conversing today with such a variety of anthropologies is not possible only but in the deepening in the Christian anthropology, the one that can only be approached through the knowledge of and communion with Jesus Christ, something that has been expressed and established by the teaching and the witness of the Holy Fathers of the Church. The discipleship to their teaching is not only urgent for us today, but it is quite the only possible approach at hand, in order to converse with the contemporary man in general, and to expose, on the one hand, the Christian view of man, and on the other hand, to defy the manifold trends of the world anthropologies at their root. Drawing closer to the richness of the Christian tradition, we choosed to examine one aspect of the whole thematic, that of man in his threefold situation or, better to say classification, i.e. the fleshly, the psychic and the spiritual. In this regard, we will keep in view the interrelation between the soul and the body, as well as the man's warfare in its apparent duplicity, that of the body and that of the soul. In this perspective, since we choosed to examine our subject according to the resources of the Orthodox Tradition, reference to the Apostle Paul cannot be avoided at any rate. In that case, it is also unescapable to seek for St John Chrysostom's exegesis, since the latter is the most authoritative interpreter of Apostle Paul's Letters.
A- BODY AND SOUL, BODILY AND SPIRITUALWARFARE
1. Preliminary
It is possible to man to benefit from the consequences of the Fall, or better to say, to benefit from the therapeutic measures themselves that God provided after the Fall to secure a pedagogical environment for man to walk in, and even more, to benefit from the existence of Satan and his presence. In fact, the prevalence of evil and sin, as well as the kingdom of Satan do not constitute in themselves a form of violence that urges man to commit sin. The post-lapsarian atmosphere gives the impression of a new situation suitable for the flourishing of sin. Nontheless, this impression would come out true only when the postlapsarian situation is considered apart from God's wisdom and love to mankind. It is precisely this perspective that St John Chrysostom assimilates in order to defend not only the absolute pre-lapsarian freedom of man against any form of violence against him, but also man's post-lapsarian freedom that leads him to his perfection.
2. Man's body in the post-lapsarian and eschatological perspectives
Right from the beginning, St John Chrysostom considers that the body (owvma), after the Fall, cannot be seen as the one who induced sin. Apostle Paul's expressions that describe the body as that of sin, or as that of death, etc., can be misinterpreted and understood as some kind of reproach against the body, only when these expressions are considered without their eschatological background(1). For example, when St John Chrysostom explains Apostle Paul's verse "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies …"(2), he says that the Apostle is not accusing the "mortal body" to be the cause of sin. Actually, he is trying to give comfort. Giving comfort is necessary, since victory against sin is a difficult task and needs a lot of struggle and much more 'philosophy' (filosofiva)(3). Therefore, the Apostle Paul uses here the term "mortal" in its temporal and eschatological connotation. In fact, he intends to say: "this mortality, as a state, will reach an end". It is something that comforts man while enduring the hardship of the struggle, gives courage and stimulates the zeal, and by the same token, makes victory an easier task(4). Sin reigns not only through the mortal body, but also through sloth. This is indeed the meaning of the Apostle Paul's words: "to make you obey their passions [of your mortal bodies]". Thereby, he clearly indicates, "The body is a means (mevson) for evil and virtues. It is like a weapon"(5). The eye, for example, is an instrument whose function is to see, but seeing in good or evil way is the work of the intention (proaivresh). In the same perspective, when the Apostle Paul invites "to be crucified with Christ", "for the destruction of the body of sin", St John Chrysostom explains that Apostle Paul's use of the term 'body' does not designate the human body as such, but craftiness in its entirety. The same applies when he speaks about wickedness in its entirety, naming it "old man". By the same token, somebody can understand Apostle Paul's exhortation towards deadening one's body's members(6). The Apostle Paul as "body of death" also designates the body. Indeed, it is death that seized the body, and not the body that brought about death. As a matter of fact, a captive is said to belong to barbarous, not because he comes from them and is indeed a barbarous, but because he is in their possession(7). In the same perspective, when interpreting Apostle Paul's stripping of the body, in reference to 2 Cor. 5,4, St John Chrysostom explains that the body is not considered as "evil", neither does he simply have in mind the body. Actually, he is speaking of the corruption and its contradistinction with incorruptibility. He says that we do not groan for the way we will be delivered by from the body, "but we hasten to be freed from corruptibility that is within"(8). In this way, he provides us with an eschatological interpretation about the fact that the Apostle Paul does not reject the body, but that he is groaning from the corruptibility of the body and desires the life to come which will not swallow the body but its corruptibility ("in order that corruptibility will be swallowed by life"). According to St John Chrysostom, the Apostle Paul is looking forward seeing the eschatological form of the body, and reaching the moment when he will wear it incorruptible. If he is meanwhile groaning, it is from life's present situation, a situation that is an alteration of the primitive beauty and an alienation from God's will, since God created man, not to leave him to die, but "to work out immortality"(9). For, when the Apostle Paul says: "food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for the food; and God will destroy both one by one"(10), he is not condemning the body, but he is predicting in regard to the eschatological state when man will not eat or drink. It is the immoderate extravagance of the soul that is being condemned here. Moreover, St John Chrysostom remarks that the Apostle Paul continues saying: "but the body is not for prostitution but for the Lord"(11). Furthermore, in the verse Rom. 7,5, St John Chrysostom says that the Apostle Paul "is designating that the principal (archv) of craftiness (ponhriva) is elsewhere. It comes from the active thoughts (energouvntwn logismwvn) and not from the activated members (energoumevnwn melwvn)"(12). So far, it becomes clear that St John Chrysostom, through his eschatological focus, is refuting the misinterpretations of basic verses from Apostle Paul's letters.

3. The relationship between the body and the soul
For St John Chrysostom, the relationship between the body and the soul can be compared to the relationship between the "horseman" and the "horse"(13), or between the "ship" and the "captain"(14), or between a "lady" and her "servant"(15), etc. Using these comparaisons, he transfers the responsibility for the actions from the body to the soul. This way, the soul is given more importance in comparaison with the body, while the flesh (savrka) turns to be "inferior" in regard to the soul. Nonetheless, this does not mean that the soul and the body are struggling one against the other, or that the flesh is crafty. On the contrary, these comparaisons put the tone on the harmony and the responsibility, as this can be seen in the example of "a guitarist and its guitar", or of "a ship and its captain". Consequently, it is useless to take care of the body, when the soul is being neglected. While referring to this overturn of the hierarchy of values, St John Chrysostom adds: in this case happens what can be observed when the servant is having a good time, and being in a state of relaxation confers no benefit at all to her lady who is about to die(16). Furthermore, he also refers to the Apostle Paul, who wants to show how much the soul is precious and valuable: in fact, when punishing the Corinthian who was caught committing fornication, he indeed consigned his body to "Satan", as to a rough pedagogue, "for the destruction of the flesh"(17). But he did so in order to save his soul. A similar example to which he makes reference is that of Job(18). Elsewhere, he teaches that the soul is the one that will save the body, because whatever the body had suffered happened because the soul had sinned; if the soul behaves again righteously, the body will partake in the soul's glory as well(19).

Certainly, man is a 'doubled nature' (difuevòv ) creature, one whole and psychosomatic being, where the body is perceived as the soul's instrument which expresses its energies (enerv geievòv ), an instrument suitable in everything to respond to the energies of the 'philosophic' soul(20). Nevertheless, someone can wonder about the extent to which the body is that much well matched to the soul and its needs, mainly because it is the body that blinds the soul. But this can be easily answered: it is not at all the body that blinds the soul, but luxury. Luxury is the "enemy" not only of the soul, but also of the nourished body, because the body in his relation to the soul "becomes weaker instead of being stronger"(21).
4. The soul's immortality
For St John Chrysostom, the essence of the soul (yuchv) is incomprehensible (akatavlhpto). It is indeed so because it exists. In fact, if we mutilate one member of the body, the other members won't die. The soul still exists, but we do not know the way this occurs(22). "The soul has a bodiless and immortal essence (ousiva) and has a great supremacy over the body"(23). If the soul of the animals is their blood, it is not the same when speaking about man's soul(24). Certainly, there is no doubt for St John Chrysostom concerning the immortality of his soul. At any rate, this fact is questioned neither in idolatry nor in philosophy. Needless to say that the soul is immortal not because it is so from its own nature (fuvsei), as a soul without beginning (avnarch) and unborn (agevnnhth), but because God "breathed into it"(25) and wanted it to be immortal. Indeed, He wanted that we live unto eternity: therefore, the soul is immortal due to God's will(26). It is God who donated man an immortal soul so that he can enjoy the eternal kingdom. "The irrational creatures are useful only for the present life", whereas it has been given to us "an immortal soul, so that we can stand by the king's side forever in the endless ages"(27).
5. The priority of the soul and its dignity
The main advantage that the soul acquires in regard to the body is reflected in its character's agility (eukivnhto). In fact, the soul's psychic dignity (nobility) (yucikhv eugevneia) or sickness (morbidity) cannot be considered as its constituent by nature (fuvsei), whereas the bodily beauty belongs to the body by nature (fuvsei), and remains non transferable, because whatever belongs to the nature is "immovable and non transferable". Any alteration can easily occur to the soul, because what is psychic depends on the intention (proaivresh) and does not belong to the nature(28). As an application of these truths within an ethic focus, someone can affirm that there is no illness of the soul that can remain incurable(29); every illness of hers has its suitable medicines. For these reasons precisely, it seems strange to St John Chrysostom to see man taking more care of his body and even trying to alter its beauty, -something that is impossible -, whereas he neglects the soul's dignity and beauty, at the time when the improvement of their soul is within reach. This is the reason why St John Chrysostom firmly recommends a change one's care in a way that all the care and attentiveness would be focused on the soul(30).

6. Feeding the soul in its interrelation with the soul's energies
When St John Chrysostom speaks about feeding the soul he uses the image of the bread and the body: in as much the bread is for the body, likewise the word (lovgoò) is to the soul. As a matter of fact, whenever we see someone eating stones, immediately we doubt whether he is a man; we must know too that whenever one feeds his soul with nonsense (alogiva), instead of the word (lovgoò), this means that he has lost his human distinctiveness. Indeed, the Scripture says: "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God"(31). Having in mind the context of the present life, someone can deduce that a body is living from the fact that it is acting; likewise, the life of the soul can be discerned from its energies (enevrgeieò). That someone walks, drinks, or stands on both his feet, cannot be considered as energy (enevrgeia) of the human soul. On the contrary, it "shows that this man is an irrational creature in a human shape"(32), according to St John Chrysostom. The merciless rich in Luke, who only used to eat, drink and enjoy one's self, is an example of one's soul not performing any of its activities (enevrgeieò). Man's soul and its energies are interrelated: when man's soul dies, its energies fade away; vice versa, the absence of these energies is a proof of the soul's death. Because when Satan rushes and hits the soul, then, if the soul is dead, it will feel nothing; and when Satan steals its treasure, it will remain inactive. When the soul is not nourished, it dies. It is not decomposed into dirty liquid, ashes and dust like the body, but "it is dismantled into a dirtier state, to drunkenness, anger, greed, to incongruous love and inopportune desires". For example, Joseph had a living body, whereas the Egyptian woman had a dead one. Job and the Apostle Paul showed through their spiritual activity (energy) that they have a living soul. This is what the Apostle Paul intended to say when he wrote: "she who
is self-indulgent is dead even when she is alive"(33).

7. The biological life and the soul's spiritual energies
Generally, St John Chrysostom wants throughout all these to make it crystal clear that the biological life of the body constitutes neither a feature of being a man, nor a mark that distinguishes him from all the living creatures. Specific feature of man is the spiritual energy (pneumatikhv enevrgeia), a fact that can only be understood in its fulfillment when the soul is receptive of the energies of the Holy Spirit(34). Indeed, the eschatological dimension of the Christian ethics, in the scope of the anthropological perspective of St John Chrysostom, establishes a difference between biological life in itself (as a separate entity) and the biological life of man: the biological life does not embrace man's life, whereas man's life embraces the biological one as well as the spirit, the living soul, and the work of virtue. The living man is not defined from the fact that he is breathing or looking at the sun, but from fulfilling the possibility of doing good things, from caring for whatever is related to the true life, the coming one and real. Dealing with man's life leads to affirm that "Biwvnai" does not mean "zhn". Life cannot be confused with the being, neither death with non-existence(35). Life, as defined by St John Chrysostom, is the work of virtue, the care for the real life, the existence of a living soul. If it is useless to cover a dead body with a "fashioned dress", it is also useless to cover a dead soul with a "beautiful body". In the eschatological perspective, death will attain the body as well as the soul. If the death of the soul is dangerous, on the contrary, the death of the body is useful, since it promotes the moral perfection and leads man toward his original destination. The bodily death comes by nature (fuvsei), and not by the will (prtoairevsei). Therefore, this death is "rapidly dismantled". On the contrary, the psychic death comes by the will (proairevsei) and constitutes a crime, i.e. a sin. Consequently, this death "is not dismantled at all"(36). Apostle Paul's teaching is very characteristic in this perspective: raising a dead soul is quite superior to raising dead people.
8. Flesh, body and spirit in the scope of the spiritual warfare
But he who wants to nourish his soul and live in godliness (eusevbeia) is persecuted if not by sin that reigns in the world, then it would be, without fail, by Satan himself, or even by passions, as the Apostle Paul says: "the flesh desires against the spirit"(37). To realize one's decision to nourish one's soul needs "a lot of philosophy (filosofeivn), since such an endeavor does not match at all with comfort (avnesh)". For this reason, the Apostle Paul says: "I pommel my body and subdue it", alluding to the exercise of violence and the hardship of the struggle that would face those who are subduing their body(38). Referring to such an atmosphere, he says: "though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed everyday"(39). Some people, misunderstanding Apostle Paul's verse Gal. 5, 17, claim that he is dividing man in two opposite substances, showing thereby that the soul is waging war against the flesh. Nevertheless, this is not true according to St John Chrysostom. Indeed, the latter remarks that the Apostle Paul "is not calling here flesh the body", since the body is not considered in the category of those elements that "are causing the action (apov ta kinouvnta)" or "are promoting the motion (apov ta
energouvnta)", but in the category of those elements that "are put to motion (atov ta kinouvmena)" or "upon which the action falls (atov ta
energoumevna)"(40). In this perspective, when interpreting the verse: "I pommel my body and subdue it", he remarks that the Apostle Paul says neither "refute", nor "punish", because "the flesh is not an enemy"(41). In the Scripture, "flesh" does not simply designate the body. In fact, St John Chrysostom makes here the following point: "he does not call flesh only the nature (fuvsh) of the body, but the crafty intention (proaivresh)". On the other hand, the Apostle Paul says: "you are not in the flesh but in the spirit", and "those who live according to the flesh cannot please God at any rate". According to St John Chrysostom's interpretation, the Apostle does not mean that one should deaden his flesh, because he himself (i.e. the Apostle Paul) had a flesh too. Indeed, in the context of this verse of the Apostle Paul, "Flesh" means "the earthly thought (logismovò)", the sloth and unaware thought. The responsibility of carrying such a thought cannot be attributed to the body but is considered to be a crime of the sloth soul. When the Apostle says: "the work of the flesh are plain …, impurity, licentiousness, …, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger"(42), even though he attributes impurity to the body, he could not impute to it the enmity, the anger, etc. It is clear by now that when the Apostle Paul uses the term 'flesh', he designates the fleshly care and not the body itself. The words "flesh", "body" and "soul" in the Scripture do not have always the same meaning. For example, "Christ's flesh", i.e. his body, designates the Church. Consequently, designating the fleshly care using the word "flesh" is not considered to be a reproach against the body(43). St John Chrysostom reaches the point where he understands the word "spirit" (pneuvma) to be not the living soul, i.e. the spiritual constituent of man but "the Holy Spirit", certainly without denying the role of he soul. Consequently, the warfare between the flesh and the spirit designates the war between fleshly care that is located in the evil desires and in mortality, on the one hand, and the Holy Spirit who is the Life-giver, on the other hand. At any rate, it is not an ontological warfare between the body and the soul, but it is a moral warfare of death and life. In this regard, St John Chrysostom writes: "what is the enmity? It is the enmity of the soul towards the body, of evil towards virtue". Indeed, he intends to speak about the warfare of a living or a dead soul(44).
B- FLESHLY, PSYCHIC AND SPIRITUAL MAN
In the context of what has been previously developed, in as much "flesh" designates the "care" (frovnhma) of the flesh, likewise, "fleshly man" (sarkikovò avn+rwpoò) is the one who lives according to "the care of the flesh", in luxury, extravagance, greed, and every sin(45). He is the one who confines himself to fleshly pleasures, "who is attached to the present world and its affairs for ever, being away from the energy of the Spirit". This person, putting aside "the mind" (nouò), and the "principal" (archv) of the soul, "becomes entirely dedicated to the flesh"(46) and looks at things using only his bodily eyes, with which "nobody could learn the heavenly things". In the same way, the "psychic man" (yucikovò avn+rwpoò) is the one who "examines things with the mind (diavnoia) only"(47). As St John Chrysostom puts it, the bodily eyes and the logic (logikhv) are not able to know correctly the heavenly things, since, when about those things of the world, they do not even have a correct knowledge, how much would be like when they would examine man himself using only the logic (logikhv) and the mind (diavnoia). Surely, this will result into a lot of foolishness and much mockery(48), because "it is not sufficient to have either a body or a soul by themselves when someone is not enjoying the heavenly assistance". Indeed, without this "heavenly assistance", i.e. God's encouragement and strengthening, man, not only does not see correctly, but also cares for quite the opposite things. This fact is not due to the nature of the observed object, but to the weakness the man who "could not understand that he is being put to trial on the spiritual level (anakrivnetai
pneumatikwvò)". In other words, he is not conscious that he needs faith(49). Therefore, the soul and the body are not sufficient for man to reach perfection. Undoubtedly, he needs what reveals his humanity, i.e. his spirituality (pneumatikovthta)(50). It is a reality that is demonstrated by the fact that when we love or hate someone, we do so, not because he is a man as such, but more precisely, because he is such or such a man(51), i.e. good or evil man. "The spiritual man" (pneumatikovò ávn+rwpoò) exploits all man's dimensions: he is the new creature, the one that God wanted from the beginning, when He made the first movement, i.e. the creation of the matter, and gave to man the responsibility of leading the creation towards to its spiritual fulfillment (apopneumavtwsh), or better to say, towards its christification (cristopoivhsh) in the image of God (i.e. of Christ)(52). He is the man who, even though time is passing by, does not get old, but on the contrary, is renewed, having in his possession more knowledge and higher experiences, becoming more and more vigorous, all the more stronger. He is born to live. The natural law has no power over him. In this regard, birth is not the first step for this man towards death. The nature of the body of the spiritual man does not change, but the body becomes a spiritual body, a body that is cleansed from the fleshly care (sarkikov frovnhma). St John Chrysostom summarizes all this approach and refers to Apostle Paul's verse: "you are not in the flesh but in the spirit". As he explains it, the nature of the body does not "change", but "it acquires wings". In other words, it is spiritualized (apopneumatwvnetai). What happens here can be compared to what happens to the iron. The iron, when placed in the fire, becomes like fire, while its nature remains the same(53). Likewise, the spiritual man, after being propelled as with wings, becomes like an "angel". He dwells seemingly down on earth but in regard to his care (frovnhma), he has climbed to heaven(54). In such an instance, not only his body is led by his soul, but also his soul is led by the Spirit. St John Chrysostom affirms in this regard that the one who serves the Spirit and is under His discipleship cannot be master of his own opinion (gnwvma), because he has chosen to subdue it in every way to the authority of the Spirit. Nevertheless, man's discipleship to the Holy Spirit presupposes asceticism, a pure life, and a life that transcends the fleshly care. It is an approach that St John Chrysostom bases on God's word to Noah: "my spirit shall not abide in men for ever, for they are flesh"(55). The spiritual man does not reject the body. Instead, he purifies it with God's grace. This man is the man according to the image and likeness of God. He partakes in and has communion with God's grace(56). On the opposite, the "fleshly" and even the "psychic" man, lacking for the likeness of God that comes through the practice of virtue, is no more a real man. He has crippled his human being. In the end, he becomes a crippled man. On the other hand, the spiritual man, using the eyes of the body as well as the eyes of faith, knows everything related to the fleshly and psychic man, i.e. the unbeliever. As St John Chrysostom explains it, the spiritual man acquires besides the knowledge of the nature of the present things (of the world), that the others know too, a higher knowledge: the value of the coming things, what the world will be like at the end, what is awaiting the unrepentant sinners, what the just will enjoy, and the fact that the present things of the world do not have any value by themselves. On the contrary, the fleshly and psychic man is not aware of the presence of such knowledge(57). At this level, St John Chrysostom compares this man to a blind who cannot see everything that a spiritual man can, or to an illiterate person who, when he receives a letter, perceives in it nothing but paper and ink. The spiritual man, instead, is compared to an educated man who can read, hear the voice (of the sender) throughout the paper and converse with him. This man, having possessed the experience given by the Holy Spirit as an additional eye, sees deeper and perceives all those things that are hidden to the others. These eyes are more truth worthy than those of the body(58).
C- "MAN" ACCORDING TO THE HOLY SCRIPTURE
Man (avn+rwpoò) is superior to the irrational creatures not according to the flesh, but, and only, according to his spiritual dimension. Man's dignity (nobility) (eugevneia) and generally his superiority are not confined to his bodily profile, as for example in regard to the faculties of seeing and hearing, with which many animals are superior to him, but in the possibility and ability of divine knowledge (+eognwsiva), of godliness (eusevbeia) and virtuous life: "we are worse than wild pigs, when we are naked from virtue", as St John Chrysostom says characteristically( 59). In his commentary of the parable of Lazarus and the rich, he remarks that, within the context of the Gospel, no name is being attributed to the rich, because God does not consider him to be a man, since he lacks for man's dignity (nobility). Indeed, the treasure accumulated through plundering shows the rich to be a wolf and not a man. In fact, the rich "lost his dignity (nobility) through craftiness". Man is recognized as a man not from his external features, but from the internal one. It is like the tree that is recognized not from its leaves but from its fruits(60). According to another interpretation, St John Chrysostom remarks that for the Scripture, "man" (avn+repoò) is usually the venerable and the holy, whereas it usually reserves to the sinners the terms "fleshes"(61), "dogs", "horses", "serpents" and "wolves"(62). "Man" is the one who is destined to true life, whereas "the multitude" is much more considered to be a substance destined to fire. This way, the spiritual law becomes clear, the one that stipulates: "better one who does God's will than a multitude who is disobedient to His will"(63). The prophet Elijah was one, but the world was not worthy of him. In another biblical instance, only Noah, from all those who lived at his time, is named "man", because he was the only one who vouchsafed man's image, since man's image is not but to practice virtue. All the others, those contemporary to Noah, had betrayed the dignity (nobility) of man's nature with their crafty intentions and had fallen in the state of the irrational creatures(64). If, in the world's judgment, man is the fleshly and psychic man, as St John Chrysostom remarks, then to the Scripture and the Christian ethics, man is not the one who simply has hands and feet, neither the one who is rational, but the one who practices courageously godliness and virtue. Indeed, the Scripture calls Job "man", only for his virtue. Quite in the same perspective, St John Chrysostom defines man the one who reveals the energies (enevrgeieò) of the soul and his disposi- tion (diav+esh) to accomplish the spiritual and divine things. In his final classification, St John Chrysostom affirms categorically that man is only the "worker of virtue" and "the spiritual man". All the more, the Apostle Paul used quite the same criterion when he made a classification of men. As St John Chrysostom points it out, wealth and any similar things did not constitute Apostle Paul's criterion to establish such a classification. In the end, having in mind such an approach, someone can understand the reason why Isaiah, when entering into Jerusalem, could not see men(65).
CONCLUSION
In short, according to St John Chrysostom, it became clear that man's decision to become a "monster" or an "angel" is not affected by the post-lapsarian situation, but it mainly depends on his will. Even though man is living in a dramatic situation, he did not loose the authority of managing his freedom. To be a fleshly or a spiritual man is not a feature of man's nature, but of his will. Indeed, spiritual men have the same nature with that of the fleshly men. Moreover, they live in the same context and under the same conditions. Such an instance is witnessed in various ways in the Scripture. Indeed, many changes occurred, where publicans became apostles and disciples transformed into betrayers, where prostitues and burglers became virteous and magiciens bowed in reverence, and last but not least, unfaithful became faithful. In conclusion, all the previous changes could happen by the will (proairevsei) and not by the nature (fuvsei). If whatever related to virtue or evil happens by nature, then there would not be any hope or possibility to change(66).
________(1) See Rom. 6, 6; 24 and 2 Cor. 5, 4.
(2) Rom. 6, 12.
(3) The practice of virtue became much more difficult than before. It "needed much more philosophy": Hom. in Rom. 11, 3, PG 60, 487 etc. Hom. in Rom. 12, 3, PG 60, 498 etc.
(4) Hom. in Rom. 11, 2-3, PG 60, 486-7.
(5) "Do not yield your members to sin as instruments of wickedness but … as instruments of righteousnessi", Rom. 6, 13.
(6) 2 Cor. 4, 10.
(7) Rom. 6, 24 and Hom. in Rom. 13, 4, PG 60, 512.
(8) Hom. in 2 Cor. 10, 1-2, PG 61, 467-8. Hom. in Rom. 13, 4, PG 60, 512.
(9) Hom. in 2 Cor. 10, 2, PG 61.
(10) 1 Cor. 6, 13.
(11) Hom. in 1 Cor. 17, 1, PG 61, 140.
(12) Hom. in Rom. 12, 4, PG 60, 499 and 13, 2, PG 60, 509, as well as Rom. 7, 5: "while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit of death".
(13) Hom. in Acts 29, 4, PG 60, 220.
(14) Hom. in Rom. 13,2, PG 60, 509.
(15) Hom. in Mat. 55, 4, PG 57, 544.
(16) As above.
(17) 1 Cor. 5, 5.
(18) Hom. in 48th Psalm 5, PG 55, 229. Likewise, "for what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world and forfeits his life?" (Mat. 16, 26). Will a father prefer his house instead of his son? Likewise, God will not prefer the world instead of man's soul, that soul that has been bought at a price, that of the precious blood of His Son (1 Cor. 7,
23), as St John Chrysostom says.
(19) Hom. in 1 Cor. 15, 2, PG 61, 120-1.
(20) Hom. in 1 Cor. 39, 8 PG 61, 345.
(21) As above.
(22) See "On the incomprehensibility of God", Malingrey, A.-M., Sources Chrétiennes, t.
28, p. 295.
(23) Hom. in Gen. 13, 3, PG 53, 107. The bond and the relationship between the soul and the body have always preoccupied man's mind. Contemporary fields as psychology or psychiatry and Freud as well pretend that the soul is located in man's brain or in man's heart. A Theory as this is being denyed today by heart's transplantation operation or by brain operation (Decorticate). At any rate, the issue does not belong to these domains of Science, because the immaterial soul can not be located using the istological ot the pathological methods. See, Doctor Traboulsi, A., Orthodox vision of man, Ed. An Nour, Beirut 1989, p. 58-60.
(24) Lev. 17, 4.
(25) Hom. in Gen. 12, 5, PG 53, 103.
(26) Hom. in John 31, 5, PG 59, 182-4. Hom. in 1 Cor. 7, 5, PG 60, 90-1. See Romanides,
J., The forefathers' sin, 2nd edtion, Athens 1989. Karmiri, I., St John Damascene
Dogmatic teaching, Athens 1940.
(27) Hom. in John 31, 5, PG 59, 182-4. See Romanides, The forefathers' sin, 2nd edtion,
Athens 1989, p. 118.
(28) Catechism 1, 10, Sources Chrétiennes, t. 50, p. 113.
(29) Letter to the Theodore 2, 15, PG 47, 299.
(30) Catechism 8, 21-22, Sources Chrétiennes, t. 50, p. 258-9.
(31) Mat. 4, 4.
(32) Hom. in 2 Cor. 16, 3, PG 61, 438 etc.
(33) 1 Tim. 5, 6.
(34) See Yazigi, Ierod. Paul, Eschatology and Ethics - The Eschatological basis of the life in Christ according to St John Chrysostom, Thessalonica 1992, p. 44 etc.
(35) See Hom. in 1 Tim. 13, 3-4, PG 61, 438 etc. God created the world out of nothing, and brought out the creation into being according to His will. Death does not mean a return to nothingness and non-existence. See Trabulsi, A., Orthodox vision of man, ed. An Nour, Beirut 1989, p. 34. See also, Hom. in Gen. PG 53, 345. Hom. in 1 Cor. PG 61, 143. Hom. in Col. PG 62, 318. Hom. in the poor Lazarus PG 48, 1021. See Moulard, A., St John Chrysostom, his life, his work, Paris 1949, p. 123. Zizioulas, J., "Apantisis", Sinaxi 3 (1982), p. 80 etc.
(36) Hom. in 1 Tim. 13, 3-4, PG 567-9. This is the reason why St John Chrysostom affirms that, according to the Scripture, there are living who had died (1 Tim. 5, 6) and dead who are living (Abraham, Isaak, …(Mat. 22, 32)). See Hom. in Rom. 13, 7-8, PG 60, 517-20: Those who live practicing virtue are the only one who live, while those who live in pleasure are already dead. See Hom. in Rom. 11, 5, PG 60, 489. Hom. in Eph. 4, 1, PG 62, 31. Gregory Palamas, Letter to Xenia, PG 150, 1049; Moral Chapters, PG 150, 1152-3.
(37) Hom. in the poor Lazarus 3, 6, PG 48, 1000. See Gal. 5, 17.
(38) Hom. in the poor Lazarus 3, 6, PG 48, 1000. See 1 Cor. 9, 27.
(39) Hom. in Eph. 13, 2, PG 62, 95-6. See 2 Cor. 4, 16.
(40) Hom. in Gal. 5, 5, PG 61, 672. Hom. in Rom. 12, 4, PG 60, 499; 13, 2, PG 60, 509. See the soul desires: Psalm 83, 2; 1 King 20, 4; Wisdom Sirach 18, 30; Psalm 41, 2.
(41) Hom. in 1 Cor. 23, 1-2, PG 61, 190.
(42) Gal. 5, 19-21. See Hom. in Gal. 5, 5, PG 61, 672.
(43) As above. Hom. in 1 Cor. 42, 1, PG 61, 361 etc.
(44) Hom. in Acts 37, 3, PG 60, 266-7. Hom. in 1 Cor. 42, 1, PG 61, 361 etc. Hom. in Gen. 12, 5, PG 53, 103.
(45) Hom. in Eph. 5, 4, PG 62, 40-2. Hom. in 2 Cor. 3,3, PG 61, 408. Hom. in 1 Cor. 42, 1, PG 61, 361 etc. See Rom. 8, 6.
(46) Hom. in 1 Cor. 7, 5, PG 61, 60-1: at this point, St John Chrysostom clarifies that the appellation "fleshly care" does not slander the body, because it is impossible to sin with the soul's participation. Hom. in 2 Cor. 3, 3, PG 61, 408.
(47) Hom. in 1 Cor. 7, 5, PG 61, 60 etc.
(48) Hom. in 1 Cor. 7, 5, PG 61, 60-1. See 1 Cor. 2, 14.
(49) Hom. in Eph. 5, 4, PG 62, 40-2. Hom. in 2 Cor. 3, 3, PG 61, 408: "… and he will find himself without the Spirit's energy, having the possibility to go everywhere, to get lost wherever he wills".
(50) According to the Orthodox Theology, the Greek term "pneuatikovò avn+rwpoò", which originated from Apostle Paul's letters, defines man's morality with the term "pneumatikovthta". In the Western Theology, the term spirituality is related to the moral and religious life of the believer, in opposition to the worldly life of the unbelievers. See Mantzarides, G., Orthodox spiritual life, Pournara, Thessalonica 1986, p. 18. See Hoeffe, O., (edt.), "Spiritualité", Dictionnaire de la Morale, Paris 1983, p. 190-1.
(51) Hom. in Col. 8, 1, PG 62, 352.
(52) As above.
(53) Hom. in Rom. 13, 8, PG 60, 518. See Rom. 8,8. See Mantzarides, G., Orthodox spiritual life, Pournara, Thessalonica 1986, p. 149.
(54) Hom. in Rom. 13, 7, PG 60, 517.
(55) Gen. 6, 3. Hom. in 2 Cor. 3, 3, PG 61, 408.
(56) See About unclear prophecies … 2, 5, PG 56, 182: as St John Chrysostom remarks, man is spiritual "because of the energies of the Spirit". See Mantzarides, G., Orthodox spiritual life, Pournara, Thessalonica 1986, p.19.
(57) Hom. in 1 Cor. 7, 5, PG 61, 60-1.
(58) Hom. in 1 Cor. 7, 1, PG 61, 55-6. Hom. in Gen. 28, PG 53, 259. According to him, the faith is an eye that is more credible than the bodiby eye: Catechism 8, 6, Sources Chrétiennes, t. 50, p. 251.
(59) Hom. in Phil. PG 7,6, PG 62, 237-8.
(60) Hom. in the poor Lazarus 6,4, PG 48, 1032-3. St John Chrysostom remarks in this regard, that Jesus, when naming Lazarus, acknowledged the latter as a cherished person for his virtue and his patience, whereas when He did not deign to name the rich, he reckognised neither him as a man, nor his glory as weel. He only underlined his suffering, because his glory is simply a dream, whereas his suffering is a fact.
(61) Hom. in Acts 8, 3, PG 60, 74. Hom. in those who left …1, PG 51, 68.
(62) Hom. in 1 Tim. 13, 4, PG 62, 569.
(63) Wisdom Sirach 16, 3.
(64) Hom. in Gen. 23, 3, PG 53, 201.
(65) Hom. in Rom. 2, 5, PG 60, 406. See Is. 50,2.
(66) Hom. in 1 Cor. 2, 3, PG 61, 22; Hom. in John 1, 3, PG 59, 28; Hom. in Mat. 59, 2, PG 57, 575-6.