David M. Gwynn
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199205554
- eISBN:
- 9780191709425
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199205554.003.0008
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
This chapter assesses Athanasius’ presentation of the ‘Eusebians’ as ‘Arian’. After a brief introduction to Athanasius’ highly polarized heresiological polemic, it traces Athanasius’ construction of ...
More
This chapter assesses Athanasius’ presentation of the ‘Eusebians’ as ‘Arian’. After a brief introduction to Athanasius’ highly polarized heresiological polemic, it traces Athanasius’ construction of the ‘Arianism’ which he imposes upon his opponents. A comparison between this ‘Athanasian Arianism’, the doctrines of Arius himself, and the known doctrines of Eusebius of Nicomedia and Asterius ‘the Sophist’ reveals that these two alleged ‘Eusebians’ differ theologically both from Arius’ and from Athanasius’ definition of ‘Arianism’. Indeed, Eusebius and Asterius appear to have been representative of a widespread theological position held by a significant number of eastern bishops in the first half of the 4th century, a theology expressed above all by the ‘Dedication Creed’ of the Council of Antioch in 341. The chapter then turns to the methodology through which Athanasius created his distorted polarized construct of the ‘Arian Controversy’, and concludes with a brief assessment of how this construct influences Athanasius’ interpretation of the Council of Nicaea and the Nicene Creed.Less
This chapter assesses Athanasius’ presentation of the ‘Eusebians’ as ‘Arian’. After a brief introduction to Athanasius’ highly polarized heresiological polemic, it traces Athanasius’ construction of the ‘Arianism’ which he imposes upon his opponents. A comparison between this ‘Athanasian Arianism’, the doctrines of Arius himself, and the known doctrines of Eusebius of Nicomedia and Asterius ‘the Sophist’ reveals that these two alleged ‘Eusebians’ differ theologically both from Arius’ and from Athanasius’ definition of ‘Arianism’. Indeed, Eusebius and Asterius appear to have been representative of a widespread theological position held by a significant number of eastern bishops in the first half of the 4th century, a theology expressed above all by the ‘Dedication Creed’ of the Council of Antioch in 341. The chapter then turns to the methodology through which Athanasius created his distorted polarized construct of the ‘Arian Controversy’, and concludes with a brief assessment of how this construct influences Athanasius’ interpretation of the Council of Nicaea and the Nicene Creed.
Jon M. Robertson
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199212606
- eISBN:
- 9780191707360
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199212606.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
This book presents a detailed study of the theological concept (divine mediation) that was central to the Christological controversy of the early 4th century. The subject of this study is the access ...
More
This book presents a detailed study of the theological concept (divine mediation) that was central to the Christological controversy of the early 4th century. The subject of this study is the access to God provided through the divine Word, as seen in the theologies of Eusebius of Caesarea, Marcellus of Ancyra, and Athanasius of Alexandria during the early years of the ‘Arian’ controversy. By analysing the views of three participants at the Council of Nicaea (325), this book demonstrates the variety of perspectives in a way that questions popular approaches to the period that see the controversy as having only two sides. This analysis constitutes a new approach to the early Arian controversy, as well as showing the theological backdrop of Athanasius' insight on Christ as mediator. It further demonstrates the contemporary relevance of the issue by giving an Athanasian critique of the modern Christology of Roger Haight.Less
This book presents a detailed study of the theological concept (divine mediation) that was central to the Christological controversy of the early 4th century. The subject of this study is the access to God provided through the divine Word, as seen in the theologies of Eusebius of Caesarea, Marcellus of Ancyra, and Athanasius of Alexandria during the early years of the ‘Arian’ controversy. By analysing the views of three participants at the Council of Nicaea (325), this book demonstrates the variety of perspectives in a way that questions popular approaches to the period that see the controversy as having only two sides. This analysis constitutes a new approach to the early Arian controversy, as well as showing the theological backdrop of Athanasius' insight on Christ as mediator. It further demonstrates the contemporary relevance of the issue by giving an Athanasian critique of the modern Christology of Roger Haight.
David M. Gwynn
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199205554
- eISBN:
- 9780191709425
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199205554.003.0004
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
This chapter traces the origins of Athanasius’ polemic against the ‘Eusebians’. The ‘Eusebian party’ first appears in the Encyclical Letter of Athanasius’ predecessor Alexander, and the analysis of ...
More
This chapter traces the origins of Athanasius’ polemic against the ‘Eusebians’. The ‘Eusebian party’ first appears in the Encyclical Letter of Athanasius’ predecessor Alexander, and the analysis of this text requires a reassessment of the entire chronology of the ‘Arian Controversy’ from its beginnings to the Council of Nicaea. It then traces Athanasius’ presentation of the events leading up to his own exile at the Council of Tyre in 335 in the Apologia Contra Arianos, and contrasts this presentation to the evidence provided by Athanasius’ earlier writings, particularly his Festal Letters. In the later Apologia Contra Arianos narrative, Athanasius attributes his exile to a ‘Eusebian’ conspiracy, yet there is no mention of the ‘Eusebians’ in any of Athanasius’ writings before 335. In these writings, he is concerned solely with the Melitian schismatics who oppose him within Egypt. The ‘Eusebian party’ as a polemical construct and the true source of Athanasius’ suffering appears in his writings for the first time at the Council of Tyre itself, in the letters circulated to the eastern bishops at that Council by Athanasius’ Egyptian supporters.Less
This chapter traces the origins of Athanasius’ polemic against the ‘Eusebians’. The ‘Eusebian party’ first appears in the Encyclical Letter of Athanasius’ predecessor Alexander, and the analysis of this text requires a reassessment of the entire chronology of the ‘Arian Controversy’ from its beginnings to the Council of Nicaea. It then traces Athanasius’ presentation of the events leading up to his own exile at the Council of Tyre in 335 in the Apologia Contra Arianos, and contrasts this presentation to the evidence provided by Athanasius’ earlier writings, particularly his Festal Letters. In the later Apologia Contra Arianos narrative, Athanasius attributes his exile to a ‘Eusebian’ conspiracy, yet there is no mention of the ‘Eusebians’ in any of Athanasius’ writings before 335. In these writings, he is concerned solely with the Melitian schismatics who oppose him within Egypt. The ‘Eusebian party’ as a polemical construct and the true source of Athanasius’ suffering appears in his writings for the first time at the Council of Tyre itself, in the letters circulated to the eastern bishops at that Council by Athanasius’ Egyptian supporters.
Jon M. Robertson
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199212606
- eISBN:
- 9780191707360
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199212606.003.0003
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
This chapter analyses Eusebius of Caesarea's understanding of the radical transcendence of God the Father, which influenced his view of the Word as an intervening mediator between the Father and the ...
More
This chapter analyses Eusebius of Caesarea's understanding of the radical transcendence of God the Father, which influenced his view of the Word as an intervening mediator between the Father and the created world. It argues that his concept of mediation is necessarily a ‘deictic’ one, i.e., one in which the mediator — while similar to that which it images — is not to be identified with it in any fundamental way. This is particularly evident in his presentation of ‘image’ theology. He favoured the illustration of image for the Father/Son relationship because he felt it pictured their similarity and non-identity, as well as described the eternal soteriological function of the Son in mediating knowledge of the Father. His comprehension of the Incarnation was that it reflected, at a new but not qualitatively different level, the ongoing mediating function of the Word.Less
This chapter analyses Eusebius of Caesarea's understanding of the radical transcendence of God the Father, which influenced his view of the Word as an intervening mediator between the Father and the created world. It argues that his concept of mediation is necessarily a ‘deictic’ one, i.e., one in which the mediator — while similar to that which it images — is not to be identified with it in any fundamental way. This is particularly evident in his presentation of ‘image’ theology. He favoured the illustration of image for the Father/Son relationship because he felt it pictured their similarity and non-identity, as well as described the eternal soteriological function of the Son in mediating knowledge of the Father. His comprehension of the Incarnation was that it reflected, at a new but not qualitatively different level, the ongoing mediating function of the Word.
David M. Gwynn
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199205554
- eISBN:
- 9780191709425
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199205554.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
This monograph offers a historical and theological re-evaluation of the polemical writings of Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria (328-73) and their influence upon modern interpretations of the so-called ...
More
This monograph offers a historical and theological re-evaluation of the polemical writings of Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria (328-73) and their influence upon modern interpretations of the so-called ‘Arian Controversy’. It examines in detail the methodology of Athanasius’ polemic, and focuses on his representation of his opponents as a single ‘Arian party’, hoi peri Eusebion (‘the ones around Eusebius [of Nicomedia]’ or the ‘Eusebians’). After an initial chronological catalogue of Athanasius’ polemical works, it traces the evolution of his construction of the ‘Eusebians’ from his own condemnation at the Council of Tyre in 335 onwards, and assesses the actions and the ‘Arian’ theology that Athanasius attributes to his foes. This examination of Athanasius’ polemic and of what little external evidence survives against which the polemic can be compared reveals that the ‘Eusebians’ were neither a ‘party’ nor ‘Arian’. Athanasius’ image of a 4th century Church polarized between his own ‘orthodoxy’ and the ‘Arianism’ of the ‘Eusebians’ as a polemical construct. The distortions inherent within this construct must be recognized to fully understand the 4th century Church, the men whom Athanasius branded as ‘Eusebians’, and Athanasius himself.Less
This monograph offers a historical and theological re-evaluation of the polemical writings of Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria (328-73) and their influence upon modern interpretations of the so-called ‘Arian Controversy’. It examines in detail the methodology of Athanasius’ polemic, and focuses on his representation of his opponents as a single ‘Arian party’, hoi peri Eusebion (‘the ones around Eusebius [of Nicomedia]’ or the ‘Eusebians’). After an initial chronological catalogue of Athanasius’ polemical works, it traces the evolution of his construction of the ‘Eusebians’ from his own condemnation at the Council of Tyre in 335 onwards, and assesses the actions and the ‘Arian’ theology that Athanasius attributes to his foes. This examination of Athanasius’ polemic and of what little external evidence survives against which the polemic can be compared reveals that the ‘Eusebians’ were neither a ‘party’ nor ‘Arian’. Athanasius’ image of a 4th century Church polarized between his own ‘orthodoxy’ and the ‘Arianism’ of the ‘Eusebians’ as a polemical construct. The distortions inherent within this construct must be recognized to fully understand the 4th century Church, the men whom Athanasius branded as ‘Eusebians’, and Athanasius himself.
Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780520257399
- eISBN:
- 9780520954663
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520257399.001.0001
- Subject:
- History, History of Religion
During the fourth century AD, theological controversy divided Christian communities throughout the eastern half of the Roman Empire. At stake in these disputes was not only the truth about God but ...
More
During the fourth century AD, theological controversy divided Christian communities throughout the eastern half of the Roman Empire. At stake in these disputes was not only the truth about God but also the authority of church leaders whose legitimacy rested on their willingness to validate that truth. Because that truth could not be fixed, however, nor that willingness secured, the dispute constantly threatened prelates' claims to authority. In this book, Galvão-Sobrinho argues that churchmen's response to that challenge gave birth to a new style of church leadership that contributed to the affirmation of episcopal power. The author shows how prelates engaged in the dispute embarked on quests to assert their orthodoxy and legitimacy—tasks that called for organized, sustained, and effective action, and that demanded prelates and their congregations to be constantly mobilized. Galvão-Sobrinho argues that the dispute produced new modes of behavior—dispositions and tendencies to act in particular ways—that continuously channeled powers. While these novelties were largely the work of prelates in the first half of the fourth century, the style of command they inaugurated was incorporated into a dynamic model of ecclesiastical leadership that came to define the episcopal office in late antiquity.Less
During the fourth century AD, theological controversy divided Christian communities throughout the eastern half of the Roman Empire. At stake in these disputes was not only the truth about God but also the authority of church leaders whose legitimacy rested on their willingness to validate that truth. Because that truth could not be fixed, however, nor that willingness secured, the dispute constantly threatened prelates' claims to authority. In this book, Galvão-Sobrinho argues that churchmen's response to that challenge gave birth to a new style of church leadership that contributed to the affirmation of episcopal power. The author shows how prelates engaged in the dispute embarked on quests to assert their orthodoxy and legitimacy—tasks that called for organized, sustained, and effective action, and that demanded prelates and their congregations to be constantly mobilized. Galvão-Sobrinho argues that the dispute produced new modes of behavior—dispositions and tendencies to act in particular ways—that continuously channeled powers. While these novelties were largely the work of prelates in the first half of the fourth century, the style of command they inaugurated was incorporated into a dynamic model of ecclesiastical leadership that came to define the episcopal office in late antiquity.
Jon M. Robertson
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199212606
- eISBN:
- 9780191707360
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199212606.003.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
This introductory chapter explores the perplexity of scholarly approaches to the early Arian controversy. It identifies recent approaches to the period that are inadequate due to erroneous ...
More
This introductory chapter explores the perplexity of scholarly approaches to the early Arian controversy. It identifies recent approaches to the period that are inadequate due to erroneous presuppositions or the imposition of later concepts. The term ‘Arianism’, for example, is often used without thought of any clear theological content from the 4th-century movement. Much of the confusion in approach to the post-Nicene debate also stems from a predilection on the part of many to treat theological terminology wihtout considering their original context. Terms and phrases such as ‘essence’, ‘hypostasis’, ‘consubstantial’, and ‘godhead’ can only be fruitfully understood within their theological situ. Related to this is a third problem of the inadequate categorization of the various groups of the early controversy. Classifications built upon the mere occurrence of terms, based on geographical distinctions, or imposed by later decisions of orthodoxy conceal more than they reveal.Less
This introductory chapter explores the perplexity of scholarly approaches to the early Arian controversy. It identifies recent approaches to the period that are inadequate due to erroneous presuppositions or the imposition of later concepts. The term ‘Arianism’, for example, is often used without thought of any clear theological content from the 4th-century movement. Much of the confusion in approach to the post-Nicene debate also stems from a predilection on the part of many to treat theological terminology wihtout considering their original context. Terms and phrases such as ‘essence’, ‘hypostasis’, ‘consubstantial’, and ‘godhead’ can only be fruitfully understood within their theological situ. Related to this is a third problem of the inadequate categorization of the various groups of the early controversy. Classifications built upon the mere occurrence of terms, based on geographical distinctions, or imposed by later decisions of orthodoxy conceal more than they reveal.
Sara Parvis
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- May 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780199280131
- eISBN:
- 9780191603792
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199280134.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
In the recent explosion of scholarship on the Arian controversy, the years immediately after Nicaea have been comparatively neglected. This is partly because the prevailing view in the ...
More
In the recent explosion of scholarship on the Arian controversy, the years immediately after Nicaea have been comparatively neglected. This is partly because the prevailing view in the English-speaking world is that either there was no real theological controversy at all during the years 325-345, merely a general distaste for the activities of Athanasius of Alexandria, or that there was a general fear throughout the East of the theology of Marcellus of Ancyra, uniting Eastern bishops against him. This book argues that neither of these positions can be sustained on the basis of the available evidence. It examines closely the evidence for episcopal attendance at the important councils of these years, and shows that all were demonstrably partial; that there was never a majority of politically active Eastern bishops against Marcellus, Athanasius, or their fellow supporter of Alexander, Eustathius of Antioch; and that Marcellus was deposed for theological opinions which he did not hold in the manner attributed to him. These years are best made sense of by returning to the idea of two theological and political alliances at war with one another before, during, and long after Nicaea, which only began to fragment in the early 340s after the death of Eusebius of Nicomedia and the falling-out of Marcellus and Athanasius over the so-called ‘Western Creed of Serdica’.Less
In the recent explosion of scholarship on the Arian controversy, the years immediately after Nicaea have been comparatively neglected. This is partly because the prevailing view in the English-speaking world is that either there was no real theological controversy at all during the years 325-345, merely a general distaste for the activities of Athanasius of Alexandria, or that there was a general fear throughout the East of the theology of Marcellus of Ancyra, uniting Eastern bishops against him. This book argues that neither of these positions can be sustained on the basis of the available evidence. It examines closely the evidence for episcopal attendance at the important councils of these years, and shows that all were demonstrably partial; that there was never a majority of politically active Eastern bishops against Marcellus, Athanasius, or their fellow supporter of Alexander, Eustathius of Antioch; and that Marcellus was deposed for theological opinions which he did not hold in the manner attributed to him. These years are best made sense of by returning to the idea of two theological and political alliances at war with one another before, during, and long after Nicaea, which only began to fragment in the early 340s after the death of Eusebius of Nicomedia and the falling-out of Marcellus and Athanasius over the so-called ‘Western Creed of Serdica’.
Stephen J. Davis
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9789774248306
- eISBN:
- 9781617970436
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- American University in Cairo Press
- DOI:
- 10.5743/cairo/9789774248306.003.0003
- Subject:
- Religion, History of Christianity
This chapter examines the history of the cultivation of monastic support and the theological controversies in the Egyptian Church during the period from 312 to 451 ad. It focuses on three theological ...
More
This chapter examines the history of the cultivation of monastic support and the theological controversies in the Egyptian Church during the period from 312 to 451 ad. It focuses on three theological conflicts: the Arian Controversy, the Origenist Controversy, and the Nestorian or Christological Controversy. It suggests that during these conflicts, the Alexandrian patriarchs positioned themselves as staunch defenders of theological orthodoxy and their importance was not limited simply to their literary output or to the role they played in defining and defending the faith of the Egyptian Church. They also had an important social and political role to play, one that was inextricably intertwined with their advocacy of specific theological doctrines.Less
This chapter examines the history of the cultivation of monastic support and the theological controversies in the Egyptian Church during the period from 312 to 451 ad. It focuses on three theological conflicts: the Arian Controversy, the Origenist Controversy, and the Nestorian or Christological Controversy. It suggests that during these conflicts, the Alexandrian patriarchs positioned themselves as staunch defenders of theological orthodoxy and their importance was not limited simply to their literary output or to the role they played in defining and defending the faith of the Egyptian Church. They also had an important social and political role to play, one that was inextricably intertwined with their advocacy of specific theological doctrines.
Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780520257399
- eISBN:
- 9780520954663
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520257399.003.0008
- Subject:
- History, History of Religion
Nicaea failed to produce theological consensus, but in the politically charged climate after the council, theological disagreement became even more threatening to church leaders, who understood that ...
More
Nicaea failed to produce theological consensus, but in the politically charged climate after the council, theological disagreement became even more threatening to church leaders, who understood that their leadership had come to depend on their ability to convince as many people as possible of the orthodoxy of their views and legitimacy of their positions. Focusing on the particularly well-documented early career of Athanasius, this chapter looks at the consolidation of the new style of church leadership that had emerged in the early years of the Arian controversy. As the dispute rekindled, prelates responded to its challenges not by seeking consensus and compromise, but by asserting their authority, suppressing opposition, and promoting their views on a much wider field.Less
Nicaea failed to produce theological consensus, but in the politically charged climate after the council, theological disagreement became even more threatening to church leaders, who understood that their leadership had come to depend on their ability to convince as many people as possible of the orthodoxy of their views and legitimacy of their positions. Focusing on the particularly well-documented early career of Athanasius, this chapter looks at the consolidation of the new style of church leadership that had emerged in the early years of the Arian controversy. As the dispute rekindled, prelates responded to its challenges not by seeking consensus and compromise, but by asserting their authority, suppressing opposition, and promoting their views on a much wider field.
Robin Whelan
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- September 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780520295957
- eISBN:
- 9780520968684
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520295957.003.0005
- Subject:
- Religion, History of Christianity
This chapter examines the fundamental Nicene response to their opponents’ claim to Christian orthodoxy: they made them into Arians. It shows the intellectual effort this (deceptively difficult) move ...
More
This chapter examines the fundamental Nicene response to their opponents’ claim to Christian orthodoxy: they made them into Arians. It shows the intellectual effort this (deceptively difficult) move required. Nicene controversialists drew on the history and heresiology of both the Arian Controversy and the Donatist Schism to portray contemporary Homoians as heretics. To establish the link between their opponents and the Arians of the past, Nicene authors imaginatively rewrote fourth-century ecclesiastical history, reworking what they saw as an authoritative past to match the needs of the present. In so doing, they made the contemporary controversy into a reenactment of earlier conflicts—one from which they, as the heirs of Athanasius and Augustine, would inevitably emerge triumphant. Of course, Homoian clerics were exploiting the same histories of the church to support their own ecclesiological claims. For both sides, this controversy was not new, but rather an extension of fourth-century Trinitarian debates.Less
This chapter examines the fundamental Nicene response to their opponents’ claim to Christian orthodoxy: they made them into Arians. It shows the intellectual effort this (deceptively difficult) move required. Nicene controversialists drew on the history and heresiology of both the Arian Controversy and the Donatist Schism to portray contemporary Homoians as heretics. To establish the link between their opponents and the Arians of the past, Nicene authors imaginatively rewrote fourth-century ecclesiastical history, reworking what they saw as an authoritative past to match the needs of the present. In so doing, they made the contemporary controversy into a reenactment of earlier conflicts—one from which they, as the heirs of Athanasius and Augustine, would inevitably emerge triumphant. Of course, Homoian clerics were exploiting the same histories of the church to support their own ecclesiological claims. For both sides, this controversy was not new, but rather an extension of fourth-century Trinitarian debates.
Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780520257399
- eISBN:
- 9780520954663
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520257399.003.0009
- Subject:
- History, History of Religion
Chapter 8 argues that the dispute encouraged bishops to devise new strategies of asserting their authority in city and empire, sometimes in sheer opposition to the emperor and even questioning his ...
More
Chapter 8 argues that the dispute encouraged bishops to devise new strategies of asserting their authority in city and empire, sometimes in sheer opposition to the emperor and even questioning his legitimacy. The chapter deals with the period from the death of Constantine to Julian's reign, as the faaçade of Nicene unity finally crumbled, and rival groups of bishops brought the dispute out into the open, scrambling to have their own definition of faith prevail. The author stresses in particular the role that violence, practiced on a new and unprecedented scale, played in this process.Less
Chapter 8 argues that the dispute encouraged bishops to devise new strategies of asserting their authority in city and empire, sometimes in sheer opposition to the emperor and even questioning his legitimacy. The chapter deals with the period from the death of Constantine to Julian's reign, as the faaçade of Nicene unity finally crumbled, and rival groups of bishops brought the dispute out into the open, scrambling to have their own definition of faith prevail. The author stresses in particular the role that violence, practiced on a new and unprecedented scale, played in this process.
Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780520257399
- eISBN:
- 9780520954663
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520257399.003.0005
- Subject:
- History, History of Religion
This chapter focuses on the social dimensions of the theological controversy in Alexandria, following closely the efforts of rival churchmen to make ordinary Christians their partners in the dispute. ...
More
This chapter focuses on the social dimensions of the theological controversy in Alexandria, following closely the efforts of rival churchmen to make ordinary Christians their partners in the dispute. It is here, as churchmen interacted with one another and with their congregations, that we begin to see the rise of a new type of church leader—brash, enterprising, and combative.Less
This chapter focuses on the social dimensions of the theological controversy in Alexandria, following closely the efforts of rival churchmen to make ordinary Christians their partners in the dispute. It is here, as churchmen interacted with one another and with their congregations, that we begin to see the rise of a new type of church leader—brash, enterprising, and combative.
Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780520257399
- eISBN:
- 9780520954663
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520257399.003.0006
- Subject:
- History, History of Religion
Chapter 5 follows the dispute as it migrated outside of Egypt and engaged church leaders elsewhere in the East. It argues that the same processes at work in Alexandria fueled the expansion of the ...
More
Chapter 5 follows the dispute as it migrated outside of Egypt and engaged church leaders elsewhere in the East. It argues that the same processes at work in Alexandria fueled the expansion of the conflict in other communities: the same devotion to precise theologies of the Son and the same urgency to instruct the people. And as church leaders discovered that popular support helped them validate their claims of orthodoxy, the escalation of the conflict became inevitable and compromise even harder to attain.Less
Chapter 5 follows the dispute as it migrated outside of Egypt and engaged church leaders elsewhere in the East. It argues that the same processes at work in Alexandria fueled the expansion of the conflict in other communities: the same devotion to precise theologies of the Son and the same urgency to instruct the people. And as church leaders discovered that popular support helped them validate their claims of orthodoxy, the escalation of the conflict became inevitable and compromise even harder to attain.
Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780520257399
- eISBN:
- 9780520954663
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520257399.003.0001
- Subject:
- History, History of Religion
The introduction describes the genesis of this study in light of the author's interests in religious violence associated with the so-called Arian controversy in the fourth century AD. After briefly ...
More
The introduction describes the genesis of this study in light of the author's interests in religious violence associated with the so-called Arian controversy in the fourth century AD. After briefly surveying the historiography, it explains how this study, with its focus on the impact of the theological controversy on patterns of church authority, hopes to make an original contribution. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu's concept of the habitus, the study postulates a connection between engagement in controversy and the rise of new style of church leadership that came to define the episcopal office in the fourth century AD. The introduction also lays out the chapter structure of the book and provides a justification for the geographical and chronological limits of the study.Less
The introduction describes the genesis of this study in light of the author's interests in religious violence associated with the so-called Arian controversy in the fourth century AD. After briefly surveying the historiography, it explains how this study, with its focus on the impact of the theological controversy on patterns of church authority, hopes to make an original contribution. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu's concept of the habitus, the study postulates a connection between engagement in controversy and the rise of new style of church leadership that came to define the episcopal office in the fourth century AD. The introduction also lays out the chapter structure of the book and provides a justification for the geographical and chronological limits of the study.
Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780520257399
- eISBN:
- 9780520954663
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520257399.003.0007
- Subject:
- History, History of Religion
Chapter 6 deals with the impact on the controversy of Constantine's intervention and the “criminalization” of doctrinal dissent following the proclamation of Nicene orthodoxy. Thereafter, theological ...
More
Chapter 6 deals with the impact on the controversy of Constantine's intervention and the “criminalization” of doctrinal dissent following the proclamation of Nicene orthodoxy. Thereafter, theological positions became politically charged and dissent from orthodoxy, however that was defined, posed even more serious threats to prelates' claims to leadership.Less
Chapter 6 deals with the impact on the controversy of Constantine's intervention and the “criminalization” of doctrinal dissent following the proclamation of Nicene orthodoxy. Thereafter, theological positions became politically charged and dissent from orthodoxy, however that was defined, posed even more serious threats to prelates' claims to leadership.
Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780520257399
- eISBN:
- 9780520954663
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520257399.003.0004
- Subject:
- History, History of Religion
This chapter demonstrates how, in the early Arian controversy in Alexandria, there was a subtle but fundamental change in the nature of church leaders' response to theological disagreement. ...
More
This chapter demonstrates how, in the early Arian controversy in Alexandria, there was a subtle but fundamental change in the nature of church leaders' response to theological disagreement. Challenged by their rivals and driven by a new certainty that they possessed the truth, church leaders embarked on a disruptive quest to prove their orthodoxy and discredit their opponents. Persistent confrontation, combined with a determination to undermine fellow churchmen, replaced the former attempts to find consensus. The chapter argues that this change resulted from the need to achieve greater precision in defining the truth about God, which altered one's relationship with one's belief and encouraged a deeper sense of devotion to rival conceptions of the deity. These developments hindered efforts to reach compromise.Less
This chapter demonstrates how, in the early Arian controversy in Alexandria, there was a subtle but fundamental change in the nature of church leaders' response to theological disagreement. Challenged by their rivals and driven by a new certainty that they possessed the truth, church leaders embarked on a disruptive quest to prove their orthodoxy and discredit their opponents. Persistent confrontation, combined with a determination to undermine fellow churchmen, replaced the former attempts to find consensus. The chapter argues that this change resulted from the need to achieve greater precision in defining the truth about God, which altered one's relationship with one's belief and encouraged a deeper sense of devotion to rival conceptions of the deity. These developments hindered efforts to reach compromise.
Michael Gaddis
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- March 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780520241046
- eISBN:
- 9780520930902
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520241046.003.0003
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Archaeology: Classical
This chapter investigates certain aspects of the complicated relationship between church and state in the fourth century, focusing mainly on the doctrinal and factional conflicts commonly known as ...
More
This chapter investigates certain aspects of the complicated relationship between church and state in the fourth century, focusing mainly on the doctrinal and factional conflicts commonly known as the “Arian controversy”. Also the chapter discusses pagan-Christian conflict under Julian. It also explores how discourses of martyrdom and persecution came to be invoked as ideological weapons in conflicts within the Christian community. The religious conflicts of the fourth century were driven partly by theological controversy, partly by personal ambition and rivalry, but also by serious concerns over how to regulate an episcopal power that had expanded so dramatically into the secular sphere. Julian was well aware of the power inherent in Christian martyrial discourse. The discourse of martyrdom could be used to justify a stance of defiance toward power, to carve out a space in which religion could be used to articulate legitimate resistance to the emperor's will.Less
This chapter investigates certain aspects of the complicated relationship between church and state in the fourth century, focusing mainly on the doctrinal and factional conflicts commonly known as the “Arian controversy”. Also the chapter discusses pagan-Christian conflict under Julian. It also explores how discourses of martyrdom and persecution came to be invoked as ideological weapons in conflicts within the Christian community. The religious conflicts of the fourth century were driven partly by theological controversy, partly by personal ambition and rivalry, but also by serious concerns over how to regulate an episcopal power that had expanded so dramatically into the secular sphere. Julian was well aware of the power inherent in Christian martyrial discourse. The discourse of martyrdom could be used to justify a stance of defiance toward power, to carve out a space in which religion could be used to articulate legitimate resistance to the emperor's will.
Sophie Cartwright
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- August 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780198744559
- eISBN:
- 9780191805813
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198744559.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies, Theology
This book explores Eustathius of Antioch’s theological anthropology, offering unprecedented insight into one of the early ‘Arian’ controversy’s most important thinkers. It situates Eustathius in ...
More
This book explores Eustathius of Antioch’s theological anthropology, offering unprecedented insight into one of the early ‘Arian’ controversy’s most important thinkers. It situates Eustathius in relation to the early ‘Arian’ controversy, the Constaninian Revolution, the legacies of Irenaeus and Origen, and the philosophical commentary tradition. It provides a detailed overview of Eustathius’s corpus. Eustathius’s anthropology stands within a tradition shaped by Irenaeus’s theology that had already come into conversation with Origen in Methodius of Olympus. Origen drew on Irenaeus, but had a radically different cosmology; this impacted subsequent engagement with both thinkers. Eustathius’s engagement is further conditioned by the early fourth century’s widespread rejection of the eternity of the intelligible world and the Constantinian Revolution. Consequently, Eustathius perceives radical disjunction between God and humankind, and is ambivalent about the possibilities of the current world order, partly because he is unhappy with Constantine’s involvement at Nicaea. Eustathius’s theology of embodiment draws on Irenaeus, in opposition to what he perceives as the Origenist and Platonist anthropology, which, in his anti-Arian works, he associates with Eusebius of Caesarea. However, his doctrine of Christ’s human soul and his psychology draws on Origen. In his divisive Christology, Christ is the perfect human. This resembles Irenaeus’s Adam–Christ typology enriched by Origen’s doctrine of Christ’s human soul. In a common narrative of enslavement to the devil and Christ’s defeat of him, Eustathius particularly emphasizes Christ’s humanity. He sees history as a tragedy to be redeemed and correspondingly looks to a corporeal eschatological kingdom under a human king.Less
This book explores Eustathius of Antioch’s theological anthropology, offering unprecedented insight into one of the early ‘Arian’ controversy’s most important thinkers. It situates Eustathius in relation to the early ‘Arian’ controversy, the Constaninian Revolution, the legacies of Irenaeus and Origen, and the philosophical commentary tradition. It provides a detailed overview of Eustathius’s corpus. Eustathius’s anthropology stands within a tradition shaped by Irenaeus’s theology that had already come into conversation with Origen in Methodius of Olympus. Origen drew on Irenaeus, but had a radically different cosmology; this impacted subsequent engagement with both thinkers. Eustathius’s engagement is further conditioned by the early fourth century’s widespread rejection of the eternity of the intelligible world and the Constantinian Revolution. Consequently, Eustathius perceives radical disjunction between God and humankind, and is ambivalent about the possibilities of the current world order, partly because he is unhappy with Constantine’s involvement at Nicaea. Eustathius’s theology of embodiment draws on Irenaeus, in opposition to what he perceives as the Origenist and Platonist anthropology, which, in his anti-Arian works, he associates with Eusebius of Caesarea. However, his doctrine of Christ’s human soul and his psychology draws on Origen. In his divisive Christology, Christ is the perfect human. This resembles Irenaeus’s Adam–Christ typology enriched by Origen’s doctrine of Christ’s human soul. In a common narrative of enslavement to the devil and Christ’s defeat of him, Eustathius particularly emphasizes Christ’s humanity. He sees history as a tragedy to be redeemed and correspondingly looks to a corporeal eschatological kingdom under a human king.
Karl Shuve
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- April 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780198766445
- eISBN:
- 9780191821325
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198766445.003.0004
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies, Biblical Studies
This chapter focuses on the late fourth-century Spanish bishop Gregory of Elvira, whose Tractatus de epithalamio is the earliest extant commentary on the Song composed in Latin. It is argued that the ...
More
This chapter focuses on the late fourth-century Spanish bishop Gregory of Elvira, whose Tractatus de epithalamio is the earliest extant commentary on the Song composed in Latin. It is argued that the Tractatus is the product of the mid fourth century and therefore does not make use of Jerome’s translation of Origen’s Homilies on the Song. Instead, it preserves earlier Latin interpretations. The now-lost commentaries of Victorinus of Poetovio and Reticius of Autun are reconstructed as far as possible. It is shown that Gregory’s Tractatus contains a historical narrative to the Song, and that he strongly relies on notions of female purity and defilement in his discussion of heresy, which anticipates a transition to the ascetic interpretation of the Song.Less
This chapter focuses on the late fourth-century Spanish bishop Gregory of Elvira, whose Tractatus de epithalamio is the earliest extant commentary on the Song composed in Latin. It is argued that the Tractatus is the product of the mid fourth century and therefore does not make use of Jerome’s translation of Origen’s Homilies on the Song. Instead, it preserves earlier Latin interpretations. The now-lost commentaries of Victorinus of Poetovio and Reticius of Autun are reconstructed as far as possible. It is shown that Gregory’s Tractatus contains a historical narrative to the Song, and that he strongly relies on notions of female purity and defilement in his discussion of heresy, which anticipates a transition to the ascetic interpretation of the Song.