본 논문은 영혼치유적 구제론과 구속론적 구제가 요한 크리소스톰에게서 어떠한 관계를 가지고 있었는지를 탐구한다. 영혼치유적 구제는 고대 철학적 치유의 관점에서 가난한 자들에 대한 도움을 통한 영혼의 평화의 회복을 의미한다. 유대-기독교 전통에서 자선은 또한 죄 용서와 하나님의 영원한 심판으로부터의 해방을 위한 중요한 수단으로 간주되었다. 대립적으로 보이는 이 두 전통들이 모두 크리소스톰의 구제설교에서 등장한다. 학자들은 그의 사상에서 철학과 신학이 분리되었다고 주장해왔다. 그러나 본 논문은 크리소스톰의 마태복음과 요한복음 설교를 면밀히 분석하여 이 두 전통들이 그의 구원론과 구속적 구제와 관련된 성경구절 해석을 바탕으로 유기적으로 통합되어 이교 철학자들과 연설가들의 이상을 대체하는 새로운 기독교적 치유론이 되었다는 것을 보여줄 것이다. 크리소스톰에게 있어서 영혼의 병과 결과에 대한 철학적인 개념이 기독 교적인 죄와 심판의 틀 속에서 흡수되어 변화되었다. 죄는 마음의 평화를 깨트리는 욕망의 무질서나 잘못된 생각일 뿐만 아니라 하나님의 말씀에 대한 불순종으로 인한 그의 심판과 지옥의 형벌 아래에 있는 끔찍한 상태이다. 구제는 이러한 영혼의 모든 위기를 해결한다. 즉, 악덕을 제거하고 덕을 증진하여 영혼의 건강을 회복하여 궁극적으로 천국으로 향하게 한다. 크리소스톰은 그리스-로마의 철학적 치유 개념을 거부한 것이 아니라 그의 목양적인 목적에 따라 그것의 목적과 범위와 내용을 변혁하여 기독교적 영혼치유 구제담론을 만들었다.

The starting point of this work is to refute the argument of Peter Brown that the leadership of bishop as “lover of the poor” is not to confine the inspiration to within the Christian church and it would be considered from the social-political structure rather than ecclesiastical-monastic view. Brown insisted that Basileia, which was built for the relief of the poor by Basil, is a striking outcome of the great imperial endowment by which the church was granted its privileges in return for a fully, public commitment to the care of the poor. Even though the leadership of bishop as “the lover of the poor” is in part influenced by the socio-political structure, the religious and spiritual structure of human being is taking precedence over the socio-political structure of human being. Therefore, this work is to present how much as a bishop called “the lover of the poor,” Chrysostom was influenced by the monastic ideas. John Chrysostom, a deacon and presbyter from 381 to 397 in Antioch and a bishop from 398 to 404 in Constantinople, died in exile in 407. He spoke over eight hundred sermons, two hundred and forty two letters, and fourteen treaties on poverty, the rich and the poor and alms. He is called “the lover of the poor.” His understanding of above issues is greatly influenced by monasticism, because the monastic ideal is ‘the voluntary poverty.’ St. Antony died in Egypt in 365, and Pachomius died only a short time before Chrysostom was born. Therefore, definitely he was influenced by monastic ideal very strongly. Chysostom basically adopts the monastic ideals as his life model, and uses them as a basis for how he believes Christian ought to live in the city. The early years of the fourth century had already witnessed the popularity of the ascetic forms of Christianity in Palestine and Syria. In the second half of the fourth century, the manner of the lifestyle of the monks, both in Syria and in Antioch, was no longer unfamiliar. For Chrysostom monks are the models of Christian citizenship and monastery is the model for the city. His desire is to bring the monk’s way of life to the city. For Chrysostom, the monastery is the “city of virtue.” He wants to bring that virtue into the city, where the pursuit of glory prevails. In fact, glory is a key motivator for maintaining the city in an ancient society. Chrysostom challenges the vainglory pursued by so many, through his frequent preaching. In late antiquity, the dignity of the city was measured by the greatness of the city, represented by the Orchestra, the Hippodrome, gym and theatre of a city. He argues that the most important factor for maintaining the city is humility. While Chrysostom takes his ideal for the Christian life and for society from the norms of monasticism, his attempts to implement his ideal in reality represent in almsgiving to overcome the gap between the rich and the poor. He defines wealth itself as neutral. He focused on the function of wealth as utility, consequently he encouraged people to give alms. Therefore, he is called “the lover of the poor.”