This study is caused by the argument of Wendy Meyer, who argues that to characterize Chrysostom as a “lover of the poor” is to misunderstand him against the argument of Peter Brown. She insists that it is more accurate to call him not “champion of the poor,” but “champion of the voluntary poverty.” But the author is not to focus on the contrast argument of above two scholars but to investigate their argument from view point of the monk-bishop leadership. Therefore, the purpose of this work is to present how the leadership of monk-bishop leadership is forming and figuring out. In fact, “the lover of voluntary poverty” and “the lover of the poor” seems to have the deep gap, which could not overcome. Nevertheless, the new leadership, which evolves above two strange factors, is emerging in the name of monk-bishop leadership in late Antiquity. By focussing on life, work and time of John Chrysostom, this investigation will, portray the transitions of how “the lover of voluntary poverty” and “the lover of the poor” are connecting. John Chrysostom (d.407) lived the monastic life for the several years in the mountain. And he was the presbyter and bishop of Antioch and the Bishop of Constantinople. He is very strong position. in its examination of late-antique poverty. He had an enduring influence on his communities with abundant references to the poor and/or almsgiving to be found in his 823 homilies, 242 letters and fourteen treatises. Particulary, in studying of church and state in late Antiquity, this work has great depts on the study of Peter Brown.

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.”