The well-known ecological theologian H. Paul Santmire points out that divine caring for nature we can see in early christian Fathers such as Irenaeus is totally missing in Origen’s anthropocentric view of nature. Origen, according to Santmire, shaped the biblical belief in the resurrection of the body to fit into the hierarchical, spiritualizing conceptuality. Then the material world will presumably fall back into nothingness, from whence it came, at the very end. Santmire concludes that the otherworldly view of salvation and the radical depreciation of the world of nature started from Origen, and this is due to the Platonic and Stoic influence upon him. Origen indeed employed Platonic and Stoic languages and speculations on human being and the created world. However, the fundamental sources and inspirations came from the scriptures and the tradition of the church. Origen, like other early christian Fathers, expressed the unity of creation by describing the functioning of different parts of creation as though they were limbs of a single body. It is difficult to pin Origen down to a specific statement that there will be restoration of the non-rational elements of the universe. He writes that if the heavens are to be changed like a vestment, then they are not to be destroyed, and if the fashion of the world passes away, it is by no means an annihilation or destruction of their material substance, but a kind of change of quality and transformation of appearance. It is primarily of physical human bodies that he is writing, but it is hard to exclude other material bodies from his meaning. Origen’s conception of ‘apokatastasis’, that is, the ‘restoration of all things’ could refer not only to humans but also to their physical environment, a restoration of Paradise. During the series of restorations through which more and more rational beings will have returned to God, successive restorations also of the physical universe will be necessary. When all have returned, at the point when God is all in all, the whole creation will also have returned to a permanent state of aethereal purity. Origen never shut his eyes to the beauty of the world created by God. We should now reevaluate Origen’s view of nature and change the negative thought on him.

Irenaeus was educated by one of the apostolic fathers, Polycarp who was a sincere disciple of Apostle John according to Christian tradition. His name is remembered in our history as one of the founding fathers of the modern era foreign missionary as his journey to spread Christianity reached to the western area, Lyon, from the Eastern Orthodox Church. He criticized Gnosticism, which proclaimed the most important theme in Christianity is just spiritual elements and that it does not give any value to our daily struggles such as our bodily life and materialistic world. Gnosticism fiercely challenged the Christian leaders of the day with their own special school of thought. The followers of Gnosticism, however, failed to simplify their complex system of thoughts and further declined to synthesize the scattering religious thoughts. And they took the separation of real world and spiritual world to the extreme. Some point out that the followers of Gnosticism lived near brim of the river, Euphrates, where Judaism and Christianity were both taught, and this could have led them to have a skewed understanding of the Bible. In that point, Gnosticism came short on comprehending the Word completely and chose the parts that complied with its intentions. As a result, it never had the true understanding of the Bible. Irenaeus, on the other hand, observed that the history of Salvation of God is going to be coherently continued from the creation of the world to the ending time as Old and New Testament write in the complete Bible. He also believed that the fulfillment of the prophesy about the Messiah and Jesus Christ will play a part in continuing the history of God. He was able to come to theses conclusions because he saw the Bible as a whole. “Whole Bible is going to be unified as one wholly, Holy Spirit is being grasped and binded one as if it is a kind of chain. One by one united and somebody lift up one verse of Bible also simultaneously the other verse is following after it” According to the judgment of Irenaeus, if somebody accepts and believes in the perfection of God, he has to acknowledge that it is illogical to have an insufficient view of the Bible. He admits that the Bible is the gift of God for humanity. His position on this matter justifies him to speak for the authority of the Bible. Upon understanding the place of the Bible in the real world, Irenaeus claimed that salvation of the material world is as important as salvation of the humanity. Before discussing the doctrine of Christ, it is important to clarify why the Gnostics’ view was dangerous. Originally, they believed that life in flesh was meaningless, therefore, it was inevitable for them to reject the idea of incarnation of the Christ. Furthermore, they could not agree that a divine being could face death on the cross. In fact, they endeavored to introduce the two sons theory which states that the divine Christ left His flesh on the cross, therefore only the flesh faced death. Irenaeus, however, never spoke lowly of Christianity which obviously did not believe in the two sons theory, and believed that Creator in Old Testament is the same God who is revealed as Father in New Testament. This, once again, conflicted against the Gnostics’ belief that Creator in Old Testament is different from God in New Testament. Irenaeus later pointed out that God and Son of God consist of same essence that is Homoousios. When Markus Aurelius was the emperor of Rome for 19 years(161～180 ca.), Bishop Irenaeus of Lyon had protected the Church with the spirituality of martyrdom. Also he had strengthened the theological system confronting the challenges of Gnosticism. Traveling throughout and outside the empire, Irenaeus truly lived the life of the brilliant leader, serving for the Church of God successfully.

Mittelalterliche Umweltvorstellungen sind das Ergebnis einer Synthese aus antiken Denkmustern und christlichen Glaubensüberzeugungen. Die Christianisierung setzt dem zyklischen Denken, das immer nur das Gleiche wiederkehren sieht, ein Ende. Das Christentum versteht den Weltprozess als einen einmaligen und unwiederholbaren Prozess, der einen Anfang besitzt und auf ein Ziel hin konvergiert. Die christliche Religion rückt einen Gott in das Zentrum der Betrachtung, der nicht mehr in der Natur wirkt, sondern selbiger wie dem Menschen gegenübersteht. Die natürliche Umwelt wurde entheiligt und damit zur bloßen, wertfreien Materie degradiert. Dieses Umweltverständnis eröffnet neue Handlungsmuster im Umgang mit der Natur. Die Natur avancierte zur Schöpfung sowie zum Symbol für den Willen Gottes. Lediglich der Mensch besitzt die Befähigung, sich die Natur verstehend anzueignen. Dieses Umweltverständnis war bis zum 11./12. Jahrhundert bestimmend. Das lateinische Mönchtum maß der Arbeit einen hohen Wert bei. Im scharfen Gegensatz zur klassischen Sicht versah das Mönchtum im Abendland körperliche Arbeit mit dem neutestamentlichen Wert. Das westliche Mönchtum war sicherlich vom östlichen beeinflußt, das die Handarbeit betont hatte. Während die Arbeit jedoch im Osten erst durch Schweigen und Meditation zu einer Art Gottesdienst geworden war, gewann sie im westlichen Mönchtum besonders unter dem Einfluß Augustins und Benedikts einen eigenen, von der Meditation unabhängigen, Wert. Arbeit war nicht mehr einfach Strafe und somit Auswirkung des Sündenfalls. Sie war jetzt mit dem Paradis und Gottes Auftrag an den Menschen verbunden, den Garten Eden zu bebauen und bewahren.(Genesis 2;15) Damit wurde die Arbeit zur Mitwirkung des Menschen an der Schöpfung. Dieses Vorstellung besaß eine starke Motivationskraft. Sie hatte zur Folge, daß die Klöster zu einem wirklichen Paradies wurden. Da Benedikt nicht nur die Gartenarbeit, sondern auch die Feldarbeit anordnete, nahm das ganze Land ringsum an dieser paradiesischen Würde teil. In dem Naturverständnis, das aus dem mönchischen Arbeitethos hervorging, war die Natur unvollendet und konnte mit Hilfe der Technik vom Menschen als co-operator Dei entwickelt werden.

Nach der Reformation erscheint ein eingenartiger Pfarrer auf der Bühne in der Zeit der lutherischen Orthodoxie. Er ist Johann Arndt(1555-1621), der im Gegenteil zur Tendenz der lutherischen Orthodoxie auf die Ansicht der Mystik umfangreich eingeht. Sein Hauptwerk, Vier Bücher vom wahren Christentum(1605-1610), zeigt in einigen Maßen die Neigung für die Mystik und ist ein weitgehend lesendes Erbauungsbuch nach der Bibel in Deutschland im ganzen 17. Jahrhundert und in den folgenden Generationen weiter. Besonders drückt das letzte Buch des wahren Christentums, Liber Naturae, als zwei starke Beweise für Gott grosse Welt und kleine Welt, als Mensch aus. Arndt wollte das Ziel auf die Schöpfung der grossen Welt durch Gottes sechs Tage Schöpfung im ersten Buch Mose zum Ausdruck bringen: zu loben, preisen und kennen Gott. Arndt macht uns die Schöpfung der kleinen Welt durch die Schöpfung der grossen Welt zu sehen. Er zeigt das Licht der kleinen Welt im Menschen durch die Schöpfung des Lichtes in der grossen Welt. Bei ihm ist die sichtbare Welt von der unsichtbaren Welt nicht getrennt, sondern verbunden. Deswegen sondert nicht die Bewahrung der Schöpfung Gottes von die Existenz der Menschen ab. Die Seligkeit des einzelnen Menschen steht mit der Bewahrung der Schöpfung in Verbindung. Da der Sünder, d.h. der das Bild Gottes Verlorene, seine eigene kleine Welt verderbt, mußte die grosse Welt verderben. Daher ist es keineswegs denkbar die Trennung der Wiederherstellung der Schöpfung Gottes von der Wiederherstellung des ursprünglichen Menschen. Die Zerstörung der Schöpfungswelt beruht auf die Verderbnis des Menschen, weil der Mensch sein ursprüngliches Bild verloren hat. Deswegen ist die Seligkeit bei Arndt, das ursprüngliche Bild des Menschen in der Schöpfung wiederherzustellen, weil der urspüngliche Mensch nicht verderbt, sondern gut war.

This essay explores the theological view of the Early Church Fathers on the Septuagint. The Septuagint, commonly abbreviated LXX, was the first translation made of the Hebrew Bible into the Greek. Its origin of the translation is written in the Letter of Aristeas, a document that appeared in around 2C–3C B.C. The Torah was translated first, and other books of the Scripture including the Prophetic Books and Wisdom literature were included progressively. The Septuagint was the Bible used by Apostles and the early Christians. The use of the Greek Bible provided spiritual soil for the universal Christianity which successfully incorporated Jewish ideas into the teaching of Jesus in the Hellenistic settings. On the contrary, the Jewish religious leaders that would later form the Masorates rejected the value of the LXX as Canon by upholding only the Hebrew texts. In return, church fathers pointed out the intentional blurs of the Hebrew Old Testament, by claiming that, in the text, some of the passages representing the Messianic type of Jesus were altered or taken out. The essay analyses the writings of Justin the Martyr who defended the historical value of the letter of Aristeas and the supreme place of the Septuagint as Canon of the church. Irenaeus of Lyon also claimed the LXX as the Scripture of the “catholic” church. Most of the church Fathers including Clement of Alexandria supported the inspirational translation of the Septuagint, with firm faith on the legendary tradition gradually added to the Letter. While Origen was the first Christian scholar who compared the LXX with other translations including the Hebrew text then, it was Jerome who insisted canonical value of Hebrew text over the LXX. The outcome was his Latin Vulgate. Augustine, however, persistently opposed Jerome’s translation and use of the Hebrew text. The essay focuses mainly on the debates between the bishop of Hippo and the hermit of Bethlehem.

Zur Zeit des Caecilius Cyprianus benutzten die Christen die Bibel, die LXX für das Alte Testamentum, schon alle gesammelte 27 +α Schrifen für das Neue Testamentum waren. Damals waren fast alle Juden vom Christentum weggelassen. Und die Theologie entwicklte endlich. Natürlich wurde der Terminus “Theologie” im Christentum zuerst bei Eusebios von Caesarea (260-339) benutzt. Die Hermeneutik wurde mit der ganzen Bibel in der Kirche angefangen(wahrscheinlich von Ireaeus, Tertullianus, Cyprianus). Am Anfang des 3. Jahrhundert sei Cyprianus geboren. Er ist der hoch Gelehrte und hatte “beträchtliches Vermögen,” “Umgang mit Angehörigen des Ritter-und Senatorenstandes” und stammte aus “zumindest ritterlichen Standes.” Cyprianus wurde Christ in der Mitte des 240-jährigen under dem Einfuß des Presbyters Caecilianus, der den Lebensablauf des Cyprianus “von weltlichem Irrtum zum Erkenntnis der wahren Divinität bekehrt hatte”. Der Diakon Pontius bezichnete ihn als “neophytus”(Neubekehrten). Als Cyprianus Christ geworden war, wurde er bald als Neubekehrter “zum Amte eines Priesters und zum Episkopat” geworden. Es ist nicht wegen seiner Pflicht des Episkopates, daß Cyprianus den Aremen die Almosen gab. Als er Christ geworden war, verkaufte er sein Vermögen und gab es den Armen. In der Schrift de opere et eleemosynis het Cyprianus das grichische Wort ἐλεημοσύνη(almosen) ins lateinisch eleemosyna übertragen. Lampe zeigt uns die Bedeutung “almsgiving” und Liddell & Scott übersetzen ins “charity”. Cyprianus erleuchte im Anfang der seinen Schrift, daß Gott selbst “durch den Hinweis auf die Werke der Gerchtigkeit und Barmherzigkeit uns gewissermaßen einen Weg zur Sicherung des Heils eröffnete.” Wenn Cyprianus spricht, daß durch Almosen und Glauben die Vergehen und die Sünde gereinigt wurde, bedeutet es besonders nicht, daß es verleugnet, daß die Vergehen schon vorher “durch Christi Blut und Heiligung geneinigt” wurde. Trotzdem behauptet Cyprianus natürlich, daß “Almosen die Sünde auslöschen wird”. Und er sagt wiederum: “Weil schon einmal in der Tauge Vergebung der Sünde gewährt wird, so möge beständige und unablässige Mildtätigkeit geradeso wie die Taufe wiederum Gottes Gnade(indulgentia= Gunst) spenden”. Nachdem Cyprianus die Notwendigkeit des Almosengeben erörtert hat, kritisierte er scharf die Leute, die in der Kirche waren und sich Almosen zu geben in drei Urschen verzögerten. Die Leute, die eben so wie die Pharisäer “verschlossene Ohren(praeclusae aures)” und “verblendete Herzen” haben, sollen öffnen und aufmachen, um gerne und reichlich Almosen zu geben. Er behauptet, daß die Christen sich “eifrig im Almosengeben zeigen und nicht an irdischem Besitz hängen, sondern vielmehr himmlische Schätze sammeln sollten”.

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.”

De Subventione pauperum, which Vives had published in 1526, was attacked bitterly after his death. In the end of the Middle Age several cities began to enact the poor law. His writing seems to be reasonable, when we take the situation of the age in account. He concealed his writing plan even to his friends, and they did not know that he wrote this work. He seemed to be afraid of the shock which this work would bring about. But he felt a new program for the poor relief very urgent. He published this work with such a complicated mind. Not only the poor relief mandates of Nürnberg, Strasbourg and Ypres, but also the program of Vives supplemented and reformed the poor relief of the Middle Age: they all aimed at the total forbidding of the beggary and the secularization of the poor relief institutions. The organizing systems and the practical methods of the poor relief corresponded to the size of cities. But while the law of three cities were interested in the open relief in common, Vives was interested in the closed relief. He proposed to drive out the healthy but idle from the relief institution, to accomodate only the sick, the old, the orphans, the blind, the lame and the mentally sick, to subdivide the relief institution according to the purpose, to offer the blind and lame the labor opportunity, to offer the healthy poor the technical education, to offer the children of the poor the school education and to collect the charity funds from the rich for the finance. His program was very revolutionary in that time. In the great economical change of the ending Middle Age the increase of the poor shook the social order. The city as the center of the political and economical life must accommodate itself to the new situation with new methods. Therefore the mandate limiting the beggary has developed into the law which would stop the increase of the poor and offer the healthy poor the opportunity to work. For men could not solve the problem of poverty any more by donating a little alms. For the poverty was no longer a private problem but became that of all the society. As Vives says, the poor relief should be carried out by the secular power on the basis of the neighbor love. Therefore the effort which tried to conform to the changing economical situation, was expressed in the process which developped from the mandate limiting beggary into the poor relief law. Though the program of Vives was not directly motivated by the reformation, we cannot deny that it was influenced indirectly by the reformation, because the poor relief law of Nürnberg lent a impetus to a new direction for the poor relief. This new direction can be clearly found in the total forbidding of the beggar inclusive of the mendicant friars and the secularization of the poor relief institution. The men of the Middle Age understood the poverty as the divine order for the salvation of the human beings. Therefore they believed that if they would try to overcome the poverty, they would disobey the will of God. Therefore the poor despaired of their poverty and gave up the will to overcome it. Besides Vives refused the mediaeval belief that the bodily labor was cursed on account of the Fall. He made effort to give the poor the opportunity to overcome the poverty. Vives showed himself a precursor, so far as he made effort to solve the problem of the poverty. Though he dedicated his writing to Bruges city, it must delay the reform of the poor law until 1562. This fact shows how revolutionary his program was.

This article begins with an introduction of women in Calvin’s time in order to explain his context and his attitude about women and women’s issues. Calvin’s Christian thoughts are of great importance both to the church and the society at large. In this article, the author focuses on women around Calvin: more particularly, Calvin’s marriage with Idelette de Bure, his concept of marriage and Marie Dentière as pioneer of women’s theology in his historical context. The author focused on illustrations of influential women in Calvin’s time and their limitations full emancipation. Calvin challenged the medieval ethic of marriage issues while retaining some conservative attitudes. However, he shouldn’t be criticized to feminist measures of the twenty-first century. It is obvious that there are certain limitations of his ideas in his era, but at the same time provides an important theological basis for further development within the Swiss reformed tradition. Particularly in the churches, one must learn to avoid discrimination gender, race, or social class, and instead place as much value as possible on each individual.

The 10th Assembly of WCC will take place in Korea in 2013. Conservative Evangelical churches in Korea take the negative ideas against the WCC. What is the theology of Ecumenical Movement? It is difficult to understand its theology. But it might be possible to catch the Ecumenical theological paradigm. Ecumenical movement produced the astonishing reports after a series of conferences or assemblies. Students who study the Ecumenical movement tend to be frustrated at its extraordinary documents. So I wonder whether any theological paradigm of the Ecumenical movement could be found. If so, we could grasp the total Ecumenical movement at a glace. According to W. A. Visser ‘t Hooft and Konrad Raiser, the Ecumenical movement in the first half of the twentieth century had a theological paradigm of ‘Christocentric universalism’, which had the four elements: Christocentrism, the concentration on the church, the universal perspective of world, and history-centered thought. As the head of church, Jesus Christ let the whole church participate in God’s salvation history to save the whole world. However, the Ecumenical movement in the second half of the twentieth century developed a new theological paradigm, which included the following four elements: Trinity and the kingdom of God, the deep study of the church, the radical study of the world (humanity) and the emphasis on the nature (creation). It could be said that God the Trinity as the Lord of the Kingdom of God let the whole church participate in the works of the Kingdom of God to save both the world (humanity) and the nature holistically. And the churches, as both sign and instrument of the kingdom of God, work to save the world (humanity) and the nature (creation) under the lordship of the Trinity. So we suggest its theological paradigm to be called as a ‘Trinity-centered universalism.’ As a conclusion, this study pointed up that the theological paradigm of the Ecumenical movement developed from Christocentric universalism to Trinity-centered one. Ecumenical movement took root in the ground in the Korean churches today. The Trinity-centered universalism as a Ecumenical theological paradigm could give the observers a coherent understanding and also provide every Ecumenical workers with a sense of solidarity.