See part 1 for the introduction. Here’s another excerpt from a little latter in the homily. I was much more free with this translation, since the syntax was pretty far from anything resembling English. Corrections, as always, are welcome. The Greek text can be found here. I started at “θάνατος γὰρ ψυχῆς ἀσέβεια.”
“Ungodliness and the irreverent life are death for the soul. But is not the worship of God, and proper life, sustenance for the soul? Prayer leads to a life that is worthy of serving God, and it enriches our very souls. For if one extols virginity, or zealously honors the temperance of marriage, or rules over anger and lives with meekness, or is purified of envy , or practices one of the other virtues, then they will have an easy and light time on the race-path of godliness, for their path has been made smooth by the leadership of prayer.” John Chrysostom, De Precatione.
Category: greek
John Chrysostom on Prayer (Part 1)
This week, my campus pastor spoke about prayer, and I decided it would be beneficial to offer some thoughts from the Church Fathers on prayer throughout the week. Most likely, they will come from John Chrysostom, since I’m reading one of his homilies at the moment. It’s titled, quite appropriately, “On Prayer” (Περι Προσευχης). The Greek text can be found in the Patrologia Graeca 50.775. I found it online here.
Here’s an excerpt from the first homily (my own translation, corrections are welcome).
“For just as the sun is light to the body, so prayer is light to the soul. If then it is a great loss for a blind person to not see the sun, how much worse is it for a Christian to not pray always, and through praying to lead the light of Christ into their soul? Indeed, who wouldn’t marvel in amazement at the loving mercy of God that has been shown to us, that such a great honor has been given to us, that we are considered worthy of prayer, and of communion with God himself! For in the time of prayer, we truly do speak with God, and through this prayer we are joined with the angels.”
~John Chrysostom. De Precatione. Homily 1.
Greek to Latin translation example
As a follow up to my post from a few days ago, I thought that I’d post an example of Greek to Latin translation. For those familiar with Latin, you’ll see just how nascent my Latin is. Naturally though, the purpose of this is to learn Latin (and practice Greek), not to produce the successor to the Vulgate ;-).
I’ve tried to produce a fairly literal translation, though there were a few places where I simplified the syntax (trading participles for sub-clauses), or used an infinitive instead of a relative clause.
This excerpt is from John 1:26-29. I’ve included the Greek text (which comes from a manuscript at the British Library: http://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/Viewer.aspx?ref=add_ms_7141_f152r), my Latin translation, and an English translation. I have since looked at the Vulgate, but I haven’t corrected my word choice or sentence structure against the Vulgate. (For instance, I should have put Ecce agnus Dei in the final line, but I used a plural imperative of video instead). I’ve only corrected grammatical/spelling errors as I’ve noticed them. If you spot any errors, please let me know in the comments!
in caritate Dei,
Alex
εγω βαπτιζω εν υδατι, μεσοσ δε υμων εστηκεν ον υμεις ουκ οιδατε
Ego baptizo per aquam. in medio vostrorum stetit quid vos non conspicitis.
I baptize with water. Among you all stood the one whom you do not understand.
αυτος εστιν ὁ οπισω μου ερχομενος ος εμμπροσθεν μου γεγονεν.
ille est qui post meum veniet et ante meum fuit.
He is the one who comes after me, and was before me.
ὁυ εγω ουκ ειμι αξιος ινα λυσω αυτου τον ιμαντα του υποδηματος
Ego non sum dignus lorum calceorum solvere.
I am not worthy to untie the strap of his sandles.
ταυτα εν βηθανια εγενετο περαν του ιορδανου ὁπου ην Ιωαννης βαπτιζων.
haec in Bethanae in ripa Iorandanis fuerunt, ubi Joanes baptizibat.
These things took place in Bethany at the bank of the Jordan, where John was baptizing.
τη επαυριον βλεπει ὁ Ιωαννης τον Ιησουν εχρομενον προς αυτον και λεγει
cras vidit Joanes Jesum venientem ad illum et dixit,
On the next day, John saw Jesus approaching him and said,
ιδε, ὁ αμνος του Θεου, ὁ αιρων την αμαρτιαν του κοσμου.
Videte, agnus Dei qui rapit peccatum mundi.
Behold, the lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
Learning Latin with Greek
As I’ve been plodding away trying to learn Latin, I thought that I’d write a bit about my process. Over the span of my Latin study, I’ve tried four or so different approaches. The first was Rosetta Stone. I honestly found Rosetta Stone frustrating. Maybe it was because I never got past “puer legit” and “puella edit” but it was boring and I often felt like the vocabulary being taught was useless. I suppose it is useful to know “radiophonam” is a modern word for radio, but that wasn’t going to help me read Augustine or Cicero. Granted, I do think immersion is a good thing (which entails learning modern words), but that didn’t help my interest.
At the same time, I was also using the traditional textbook: Wheelock. The traditional approach was similar to how I had approached Greek: memorize the basic charts and just start translating sentences. I do find Wheelock a bit daunting. The amount one has to memorize for Latin is significantly higher than one does for Greek (5 declensions versus 3!). I’m still working through it because I do like seeing all of the grammar laid out, but it’s not my sole approach any longer.
Recently, I purchased Ortberg’s excellent “Lingua Latina per se illustrata.” For those who aren’t familiar with this book, it’s an excellent way to get acquainted with reading Latin. The chapters start off very simple “Roma in Italia est. Italia in Europa est. Graecia in Europa est” etc. It progressively gets more difficult, but the entire textbook is in Latin. The exercises are mostly of the “fill in the the ending” sort, which is fantastic practice as I try to make the declensions second nature.
Since my knowledge of basic grammar has progressed somewhat, I’ve added a third practice that really seems to be helping. One thing I’ve realized about language is that I don’t even begin to internalize it until I start “producing” in the language. Thus, I’ve started translating bits of the Gospel of John into Latin (from Greek of course!). This is not only much more fun than Ortberg or Wheelock, but I’m learning quite rapidly. I’m having to look up most of the words I write, but certain things are starting to stick. Plus, there’s something that’s just fun about writing in Latin. Perhaps that’s the nerd in me though ;-). Oh, and if you really want to nerd out, then don’t dare translate from your printed/online Greek New Testament. Instead, pull up one of the beautiful Greek manuscripts online, like this one. Then you can practice your Latin, Greek, and Paleography!
Finally, I’ve found reading about the Church Fathers to be helpful also. I’m currently reading J.N.D. Kelly’s excellent biography of Jerome. As the early Church’s linguist par excellence, he definitely encourages me to press on. I want to be able to read what he wrote in the original!
in caritate Dei,
Alex
John Chrysostom on Singing and Desire
Ἐπειδὴ γὰρ λόγῳ παραστῆσαι τὸν ἔρωτα οὐκ ἰσχύει, περιέρχεται ζητῶν ὑπόδειγμα, ἵνα κἂν οὕτω τὸ φίλτρον ἡμῖν ἐνδείξηται, καὶ κοινωνοὺς ποιήσῃ τοῦ ἔρωτος. Πειθώμεθα τοίνυν αὐτῷ, καὶ μάθωμεν οὕτως ἐρᾷν. Καὶ μή μοι λεγέτω τις· Καὶ πῶς δύναμαι φιλεῖν τὸν Θεὸν ὃν οὐ βλέπω; Καὶ γὰρ πολλοὺς οὐχ ὁρῶντες φιλοῦμεν, οἷον τοὺς ἐν ἀποδημίᾳ φίλους ὄντας ἡμῖν, ἢ παῖδας καὶ πατέρας, ἢ συγγενεῖς καὶ οἰκείους· καὶ οὐδὲν γίνεται κώλυμα ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὁρᾷν, ἀλλ’ αὐτὸ δὴ τοῦτο μάλιστα ἐκκαίει τὸ φίλτρον, αὔξει τὸν πόθον.
For since he (the psalmist) could not represent this desire in words, he became for us an example in his seeking, so that whenever this love-charm is shown to us, we too may share in his desire. Therefore, let us be convinced by him, and learn to desire as he did. But let no one say to me, “And how do I love this God, whom I don’t see?” For there are many whom we love, even when not seeing, like those who are abroad and friends to us, or children and parents, or family and relatives. And not seeing does not become a hindrance, but this is instead the perfect time to light the love-charm, to increase your passion. (PG 55.158)
I have translated ερως, often translated as love, as desire. It commonly has sexual connotations, but I don’t see any of that here. This is desire that is felt between friends and family, and is not limited to husband and wife. I don’t really like the translation of φιλτρον as “love-charm,” but it means something like that, a song designed to kindle up desire for someone close. Here, Psalm 40 is a φιλτρον, “As the deer desires the springs of the waters, so my should desires you, O God.” I also struggled to find good English for κοινωνοὺς ποιήσῃ τοῦ ἔρωτος, which I think is a marvelous turn-of-phrase. Literally it’s, “he makes us partakers of this love/desire.” I switched the sentence and around and made “we” the subject. “Light the love-charm” sounds quite odd to my ear, but I’ll let it stand for now.
η χαρις του κυριου μετα υμων,
Alex
John Chrysostom on the Love of God
John’s homily on Psalm 41 (LXX) is full of excerpts I like. Here’s another I read today:
Ἐπεὶ οὐ τοσοῦτον φιλεῖ ἡμᾶς μόνον, ὅσον παιδία μήτηρ φιλόστοργος, ἀλλὰ πολλῷ πλέον, ἄκουσον τί φησιν· Εἰ γὰρ καὶ ἐπιλάθοιτο, φησὶ, γυνὴ τῶν ἐκγόνων αὐτῆς, ἀλλ’ ἐγὼ οὐκ ἐπιλήσομαί σου. Τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγε δεικνὺς, ὅτι πάσης φιλοστοργίας θερμότερος ὁ περὶ ἡμᾶς αὐτοῦ πόθος ἐστίν.
So he does not love us in this manner only, as a loving mother with her children, but much more so! Listen to what was said, “For even if a women forgets her children, I will not forget you.” Thus it is clear, then, that his love for us is far greater than any parental love. (PG 55.161).
Even in my budding Greek skills, I’m starting to appreciate why he is called the “Golden-mouthed” and the “Heavenly-trumpet.” If only I could do it justice in translation!
Alex
John Chrysostom on worldly and spiritual songs
I was reading John’s homily on the 42nd psalm this morning, and came across this passage. I rather liked it, so I decided to translate it and post it here.
Ἀπὸ μὲν γὰρ τῶν ἔξωθεν ᾀσμάτων βλάβη, καὶ ὄλεθρος, καὶ πολλὰ ἂν εἰσαχθείη δεινά· τὰ γὰρ ἀσελγέστερα καὶ παρανομώτερα τῶν ᾀσμάτων τούτων τοῖς τῆς ψυχῆς μέρεσιν ἐγγινόμενα, ἀσθενεστέραν αὐτὴν καὶ μαλακωτέραν ποιοῦσιν· ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν ψαλμῶν τῶν πνευματικῶν πολὺ μὲν τὸ κέρδος, πολλὴ δὲ ἡ ὠφέλεια, πολὺς δὲ ὁ ἁγιασμὸς, καὶ πάσης φιλοσοφίας ὑπόθεσις γένοιτ’ ἂν, τῶν τε ῥημάτων τὴν ψυχὴν ἐκκαθαιρόντων, τοῦ τε ἁγίου Πνεύματος τῇ τὰ τοιαῦτα ψαλλούσῃ ταχέως ἐφιπταμένου ψυχῇ. Ὅτι γὰρ οἱ μετὰ συνέσεως ψάλλοντες τὴν τοῦ Πνεύματος καλοῦσι χάριν, ἄκουσον τί φησιν ὁ Παῦλος· Μὴ μεθύσκεσθε οἴνῳ, ἐν ᾧ ἐστιν ἀσωτία, ἀλλὰ πληροῦσθε ἐν Πνεύματι. Ἐπήγαγε δὲ καὶ τὸν τρόπον τῆς πληρώσεως. Ἄδοντες καὶ ψάλλοντες ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν τῷ Κυρίῳ. Τί ἐστιν, Ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν; Μετὰ συνέσεως, φησίν· ἵνα μὴ τὸ στόμα μὲν λαλῇ τὰ ῥήματα, ἡ διάνοια δὲ ἔξω διατρίβῃ πανταχοῦ πλανωμένη, ἀλλ’ ἵνα ἀκούῃ ἡ ψυχὴ τῆς γλώττης. (PG 55.157)
For in the songs of the world there is harm, ruin, and much that would lead to danger. For all the licentiousness and lawlessness of these songs bring about divisions in the soul. But in the spiritual psalms, there is great gain, great benefit, great sanctification, and every tenant of philosophy may be found. By these words, the soul is cleansed, and the Holy Spirit is quick to be with the one who sings in this manner. For those who sing with understanding invoke the grace of the Spirit, which is why Paul says, “do not get drunk on wine, in which there is debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. ” Following this phrase on fullness, we hear, “singing and psalming in your hearts to the Lord.” What does it mean to sing “in your hearts to the Lord”? It means to sing with understanding, so that your mouth may not merely speak the words while your mind perishes, entirely deceived and separated. Instead, the soul should heed the tongue.
A question for all ye trinitarian specialists
Currently, I’m reading a Byzantine text called the Palaea. It’s a collection of stories from the Old Testament, with all sorts of apocryphal legends filled in too. The work begins with a confession of orthodoxy, but I’m a bit puzzled on what refers to Jesus, and what refers to the entire trinity. There’s all sort of variants too, which makes it all the more frustrating. Here’s the portion of the first paragraph:
ὁ πατηρ ὁ αναρχος απεριγραπτος απεριοριστος αγεννητος αοριστος
ακαταληπτος παντα περιεχων και περιοριζων και υπ ουδενος οριζομενος.
θεος ὁ υιος γεννηθεις παρα του πατρος προ παντων αιωνων αρευστως, επ εσχατων
δε σαρκωθεις δια οικονομιαν εκ παρθενου μητρος. ατρεπτος απεριγραπτος κατα
τον πατερα περιγραπτος κατα την σαρκα. θεος το πνευμα το αγιον ομοουσιον τω
πατρι και τω υιω. ενεργουν τα παντα και διακρατων, διεπων, και συνεχων κατα αμφω
γαρ εν τοις τρισιν ουδε ατελες αλλα μια βασιλεια, μια θελησις, μια ουσια, εν
φως τρισηλιον, δυο φυσεις, θεοτητα λεγω και ανθρωποτητα.
The bolded part is what I’m curious about. My translation: “But [there is] one kingdom, one will, one nature, one three-fold (three-sunned?) light, two natures, I mean the divine and the human.”
The language seems to be referring to the Trinity at first. One will and one nature, in particular, wouldn’t be an orthodox confession of Jesus (condemned as monothelitism and monophytism respectively). I guess my question refers to that language in reference to the whole Trinity. Is there a common divine will among the Trinity? Or am I misreading θελησις which doesn’t strictly mean θελημα…? Why does the author switch so quickly from a confession of the Trinity to a confession of Jesus? Perhaps that’s standard fare that I’m no aware of? Any help would be much appreciated.
ΠΙΣΤΙΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ and John Chrysostom (Part 6)
This post is a part of a series: parts one, two, three, four, and five.
This post should round out my posts on πίστις Χριστοῦ, at least for now. This one should be rather brief. John’s comments on Eph 3:12, “In him, and through faith in him, we may approach God with freedom and confidence,” are very brief. He does have a few interesting things to say about faith when discussing the prayer around 3:17ish. Thus, let us begin.
The first place to start is 3:12. John quotes the verse and then offers a comment or two: “‘In whom’, he says, ‘we have the boldness to approach him with confidence, through faith in him.’ Not as captives, he says, do we approach him, nor as those worthy of pardon, nor as ones who have sinned. This boldness, he says, we have in confidence. That’s to say, we have it with courage. Where does it come from? It comes from faith in him. (Πόθεν; Διὰ τῆς πίστεως αὺτοῦ.).” The comments are sufficiently vague that they could be rendered as “through his faithfulness” if that could be established elsewhere. But since he usually means “through faith in him” where that comes up, it’s proper to read it as we have traditionally: “through faith in him.” Though I do wonder about the article. What’s the difference between Διὰ τῆς πίστεως αὺτοῦ. as we have here and διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ in Romans? Anything significant? Anything that we could actually know? I guess I’ll have to defer to the linguists for now. I don’t have a clue!
Next, we’ll look at a few things he has to say about the prayer in 3:14-21. “‘So that he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner beings, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts though faith.’ See how he prays good things for them, and with such great desire, so that they may not waver. But how does this happen? Through the Holy Spirit, in your inner beings, Christ lives through faith in your hearts. How? In love, being rooted and established, so that you may experience together with all the saints, how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ. Later on, after tying 3:14-21 to the prayer in chapter 1, he continues, “This power, he says, strengthens us to bear temptations, so that we may not lead astray. How does Christ dwell in hearts? Hear the words of Christ himself, “The father and I, we will come and make a dwelling place with him.” And he doesn’t just dwell, but he dwells in your faithful hearts, which rooted are rooted in his love, not being lead astray.”. Later he talks about “knowing that Christ lives in us through faith.” The cognitive element is fairly strong here, just like it is in Philippians. The last little bit shows that that Christ’s dwelling in us results in us having “faithful hearts,” (ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ταῖς πισταῖς) that are “rooted in his love,” and “not led astray.” Thus, this knowledge of Christ does impact us. It enables our own faithfulness. John thus sees our faithfulness as part of that prayer, perhaps even the reason Paul prays it. The faithfulness of God isn’t in sight, but ours is.
Essentially, these passages back up much of what we see in Philippians. Faith is knowing and experience Jesus through the Spirit. John’s comments on 3:12, though ambiguous, support a “faith in Christ” reading since he doesn’t offer any indication to the contrary. We know Christ through faith, and this knowing results in Christ dwelling in us through the Spirit. It creates faithfulness in our own hearts as we are strengthened in him, rooted in his love. Faith and faithfulness are intertwined, though distinct.
ἐν πίστει αὐτοῦ,
Alex
Books Received
I forgot to mention last week that I received two books in the main from the fine folks at Zondervan:
- Con Campbell’s, Keep Your Greek
- Grant Osborne’s Commentary on Matthew from Zondervan’s new “Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament Series.”
I’ve thumbed through both so far, and like what I see. I’ll be posting reviews up in the next month.
Alex Poulos, PhD 