In a previous article here at Common Good, I suggested we recenter our theology of economics on the central rite of the Eucharist. But how should the Eucharist shape the church’s relationship to the larger socio-economic context, and what vision for society and economics does it give us?
John Chrysostom’s preaching explains. His homilies on 1 Corinthians 15 focused especially on how the Lord’s Supper, or the Eucharist, connects to issues of poverty and social justice.
Chrysostom was an influential pastor and theologian in the Eastern church in the fourth century. He was noted for his asceticism and his extraordinary preaching abilities — the moniker “Chrysostom” means “golden-tongued” in Greek and was bestowed on him over a hundred years after his death by Pope Vigilius. After serving as the popular bishop of Antioch, Chrysostom was made the bishop of Constantinople, which was and is the most important ecclesiastical office in the Eastern church. There, he clashed with the elites because of his uncompromising preaching, which is clearly on display in his Homilies on First Corinthians.
Chrysostom explicitly connects the Eucharist with economic justice in these sermons. Chrysostom made many enemies in the court and capital because of his strong denunciations of vice, luxury, and laxity. In his homily on 1 Corinthians 11:17-27, first, he notes that the Corinthians had corrupted a noble custom in the practice of the communal meal that had developed in the context of the Eucharist. He sees the background for the communal meal in Acts, after the mass post-Pentecost conversions. For the Corinthian church, in a similar manner, eating together across socio-economic divides reflected their common worship. However, because of divisions centered on parties and personalities, this “most excellent and most useful” communal meal became corrupt.
Chrysostom focuses on the economic, and sociological, divisions in the Corinthian church, rather than doctrinal differences: “By ‘factions’ here, [Paul] means those which concern not the doctrines, but these present divisions.” Additionally, he says, “if he call them divisions, marvel not. For, as I said, he wishes to touch them by the expression: whereas had they been divisions of doctrine, he would not have discoursed with them thus mildly.”
Chrysostom focuses on the mistreatment of the poor by the rich in the communal meal. Since the master of the meal is Jesus, the meal belongs to him, so everyone in the church should have equal access to it. Therefore the rich are sinning by eating (or carousing) separately from the poor, and by not sharing their food and drink with those who have less:
See also a second fault again whereby those same persons are injured: the first, that they dishonor their supper: the second, that they are greedy and drunken; and what is yet worse, even when the poor are hungry. For what was intended to be set before all in common, that these men fed on alone, and proceeded both to surfeiting and to drunkenness. Wherefore neither did he say, “one is hungry, and another is filled” but, “is drunken.” Now each of these, even by itself, is worthy of censure: for it is a fault to be drunken even without despising the poor; and to despise the poor without being drunken, is an accusation. When both then are joined together at the same time, consider how exceeding great is the transgression. (Homily XXVII, edited by Philip Schaff)
Chrysostom comments in great detail on the issue of socio-economic injustice. On 1 Corinthians 11:24, he says:
Wherefore does he here make mention of the Mysteries? Because that argument was very necessary to his present purpose. As thus: “Your Master,” says he, “counted all worthy of the same Table, though it be very awful and far exceeding the dignity of all: but you consider them [the poor] to be unworthy even of your own [concern/help], small and mean as we see it is; and while they have no advantage over you in spiritual things, you rob them in the temporal things. For neither are these your own.” (Homily XXVII)
He exhorts his hearers to behave in a manner worthy of the Lord’s Table and all that it represents:
If therefore you come for a sacrifice of thanksgiving, do on your part nothing unworthy of that sacrifice: by no means either dishonor your brother, or neglect him in his hunger; be not drunken, insult not the Church. As you come giving thanks for what you have enjoyed: so do yourself accordingly make return, and not cut yourself off from your neighbor. Since Christ for His part gave equally to all, saying, “Take, eat.” He gave His Body equally, but do you not give so much as the common bread equally? Yea, it was indeed broken for all alike, and became the Body equally for all. (Homily XXVII)
Chrysostom connects being worthy to participate in the eucharist with acting justly towards the poor. Sharing equally in the spiritual meal means that rich and poor have equal access, and this should translate elsewhere as well.
Chrysotom also chides his congregation for not extending eucharistic equality beyond the walls of the church. Chrysostom charges his hearers with drunkenness and neglect of the poor outside of the church, which demonstrates that they have not learned the lessons of eucharistic economics and eucharistic justice. How we eat the eucharist should affect the rest of our lives, including our economic lives. He ends Homily XXVII with an exhortation to what we might call “eucharistic ethics.” He denounces excessive luxury and drunkenness, and declares that the temperance they should have learned and practiced in the eucharist should characterize the rest of their lives. In other words, by celebrating the Lord’s Supper rightly, it should form us into people who are generous to the poor and temperate in our use of worldly goods and of alcohol. Eucharistic participation and practice should lead to spiritual and practical formation.
Chrysostom also connects the Eucharist with ecclesial economics in his Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew:
Do you wish to honor the body of Christ? Do you ignore him when he is naked? Do not pay homage in the temple clad in silk, only then to neglect him outside where he suffers cold and nakedness. He who said, “This is my body,” is the same One who said: “You saw me hungry and gave me no food,” and “Whatever you did to the least of my brothers you did also to me.” … What good is it if the eucharistic table is overloaded with golden chalices, when he is dying of hunger? Start by satisfying his hunger, and then, with what is left, you may adorn the altar as well (Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew 50.3-4, edited by J.P. Migne).
Here he argues from the other direction: We are not qualified to participate in the Eucharist if we are not acting justly. Our hunger for the Eucharist should motivate us to help feed the hungry. Our poverty before Christ should drive us to care for the poor. The love and sacrifice of Christ on the cross, memorialized in the Lord’s Table, should compel us to love and sacrifice for others. Being filled and nourished in communion enables us to pursue Eucharistic economic justice.
John Chrysostom’s fearless proclamation of the truth in the halls of power and prestige should continue to inspire us today. But, like his master, who promised persecution if we follow him (John 15:18-20), Chrysostom’s defense of the poor and preaching eucharistic economics came at a cost. He was eventually exiled from Constantinople and died in a small town. Chrysostom laid his life on the altar and was willing to be sacrificed for what he knew was true. This is what regular participation in the Lord’s Supper equips us to do. As we feed in faith on the ultimate sacrifice, and as we are nourished by drinking the wine that represents his life poured out for us, we are strengthened to lay down our life for others, especially for the poor. This is eucharistic economics in practice.