Maurice Wiles
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199245918
- eISBN:
- 9780191600814
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199245916.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
Arianism is a fourth‐century heresy, which affirmed Christ to be divine, but not in the same full sense in which God the Father is divine. Traditional Trinitarianism, with its classical expression in ...
More
Arianism is a fourth‐century heresy, which affirmed Christ to be divine, but not in the same full sense in which God the Father is divine. Traditional Trinitarianism, with its classical expression in the Nicene Creed, emerged out of controversy with Arianism and defined Christ as being of one substance with the Father. The overall aim of the book is to trace when and where beliefs of an Arian nature have recurred in the subsequent history of Christianity. It begins with an account of the main findings of recent scholarship on fourth‐century Arianism, which involve substantial revision of the traditional picture of the faithful orthodox defending sacred truth against the evil heretics. It goes on to provide survey accounts of Gothic Christianity, of references to Arianism in the Middle Ages, and of the resurgence of Arian‐type beliefs in the continental Reformation. There is a major concentration on eighteenth‐century Britain, where many leading intellectual figures favoured a view of the Trinity close to that of early Arianism. In particular, there are detailed studies of the theological beliefs of Isaac Newton, William Whiston, and Samuel Clarke. The collapse of these views (and the similar views of many leading heterodox dissenters) into Unitarianism is traced out, and reasons for that development offered. The final chapter looks at the development of the historical study of Arianism in Britain from John Henry Newman to Rowan Williams, with special regard for the relation between the scholars’ faith and scholarly judgement. Finally a brief epilogue asks about the implication of this historical study for contemporary Trinitarian faith.Less
Arianism is a fourth‐century heresy, which affirmed Christ to be divine, but not in the same full sense in which God the Father is divine. Traditional Trinitarianism, with its classical expression in the Nicene Creed, emerged out of controversy with Arianism and defined Christ as being of one substance with the Father. The overall aim of the book is to trace when and where beliefs of an Arian nature have recurred in the subsequent history of Christianity. It begins with an account of the main findings of recent scholarship on fourth‐century Arianism, which involve substantial revision of the traditional picture of the faithful orthodox defending sacred truth against the evil heretics. It goes on to provide survey accounts of Gothic Christianity, of references to Arianism in the Middle Ages, and of the resurgence of Arian‐type beliefs in the continental Reformation. There is a major concentration on eighteenth‐century Britain, where many leading intellectual figures favoured a view of the Trinity close to that of early Arianism. In particular, there are detailed studies of the theological beliefs of Isaac Newton, William Whiston, and Samuel Clarke. The collapse of these views (and the similar views of many leading heterodox dissenters) into Unitarianism is traced out, and reasons for that development offered. The final chapter looks at the development of the historical study of Arianism in Britain from John Henry Newman to Rowan Williams, with special regard for the relation between the scholars’ faith and scholarly judgement. Finally a brief epilogue asks about the implication of this historical study for contemporary Trinitarian faith.
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.
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.
Daniel H. Williams
- Published in print:
- 1995
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198264644
- eISBN:
- 9780191682735
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198264644.003.0010
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
This chapter summarizes the discussions in the preceding chapters. The historical reconstruction of the years 360–87 challenged assumptions resulting from the ‘triumphalist’ model, namely, that the ...
More
This chapter summarizes the discussions in the preceding chapters. The historical reconstruction of the years 360–87 challenged assumptions resulting from the ‘triumphalist’ model, namely, that the west had always been sympathetic to Nicene Christianity and that its complete subjugation of Homoian Arianism was accomplished soon after the loss of its political support under the Emperor Constantius. The early career of Ambrose was construed in a way that radically diverged from the heroic caricature exhibited in presentations overly dependent on hagiographic literature. It was also shown that the synod of Aquileia, organized by Ambrose and composed mainly of fellow north Italian bishops, did not end the conflict with the Homoians as he had certainly hoped. On the contrary, the synod seems to have acted as a lightning rod, charging renewed Homoian efforts against Ambrose. An event that marked the political demise of Homoianism in the west was Maximus' invasion in the summer of 387 and Theodosius' subsequent occupation of the western provinces after his defeat of Maximus.Less
This chapter summarizes the discussions in the preceding chapters. The historical reconstruction of the years 360–87 challenged assumptions resulting from the ‘triumphalist’ model, namely, that the west had always been sympathetic to Nicene Christianity and that its complete subjugation of Homoian Arianism was accomplished soon after the loss of its political support under the Emperor Constantius. The early career of Ambrose was construed in a way that radically diverged from the heroic caricature exhibited in presentations overly dependent on hagiographic literature. It was also shown that the synod of Aquileia, organized by Ambrose and composed mainly of fellow north Italian bishops, did not end the conflict with the Homoians as he had certainly hoped. On the contrary, the synod seems to have acted as a lightning rod, charging renewed Homoian efforts against Ambrose. An event that marked the political demise of Homoianism in the west was Maximus' invasion in the summer of 387 and Theodosius' subsequent occupation of the western provinces after his defeat of Maximus.
Peter Widdicombe
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199242481
- eISBN:
- 9780191697111
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199242481.003.0013
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
This concluding chapter compares what Athanasius says about the themes of our change from slaves to sons and the corresponding change in our relation with God with what Origen has to say. While these ...
More
This concluding chapter compares what Athanasius says about the themes of our change from slaves to sons and the corresponding change in our relation with God with what Origen has to say. While these themes are important for both writers, Athanasius has comparatively little to say about them and Origen much. The reasons for this correspond to the differences in the structure of their theologies, and reflect both the differences in challenges each was attempting to meet — Arianism in the case of Athanasius, and Marcionism in the case of Origen — and, more generally, the differences in their relations to Greek philosophy and Christian tradition.Less
This concluding chapter compares what Athanasius says about the themes of our change from slaves to sons and the corresponding change in our relation with God with what Origen has to say. While these themes are important for both writers, Athanasius has comparatively little to say about them and Origen much. The reasons for this correspond to the differences in the structure of their theologies, and reflect both the differences in challenges each was attempting to meet — Arianism in the case of Athanasius, and Marcionism in the case of Origen — and, more generally, the differences in their relations to Greek philosophy and Christian tradition.
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.
Stephen Hampton
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- September 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780199533367
- eISBN:
- 9780191714764
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199533367.003.0005
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology, Church History
This chapter examines the origins of Samuel Clarke's Arianism. It argues that Clarke was merely setting out the logical consequences of the highly subordinationist strain in christology that had ...
More
This chapter examines the origins of Samuel Clarke's Arianism. It argues that Clarke was merely setting out the logical consequences of the highly subordinationist strain in christology that had become increasingly influential within the Church of England during the later 17th century. That strain can be traced back to Episcopius's rejection of Calvins's assertion that that Son can properly be described as autotheos in relation to his divine nature, and was exemplified in Bull's celebrated defence of the Nicene creed. The chapter argues that the Anglican Reformed refused to adopt this subordinationist approach, and continued to contend for the medieval catholic consensus on the matter, which was itself rooted in the decress of the Fourth Lateran Council.Less
This chapter examines the origins of Samuel Clarke's Arianism. It argues that Clarke was merely setting out the logical consequences of the highly subordinationist strain in christology that had become increasingly influential within the Church of England during the later 17th century. That strain can be traced back to Episcopius's rejection of Calvins's assertion that that Son can properly be described as autotheos in relation to his divine nature, and was exemplified in Bull's celebrated defence of the Nicene creed. The chapter argues that the Anglican Reformed refused to adopt this subordinationist approach, and continued to contend for the medieval catholic consensus on the matter, which was itself rooted in the decress of the Fourth Lateran Council.
Paul L. Gavrilyuk
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- November 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199269822
- eISBN:
- 9780191601569
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199269823.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
Major reconsideration of the notion of divine impassibility in patristic thought. It is commonly claimed that patristic theology fell prey to the assumption of Hellenistic philosophy about the ...
More
Major reconsideration of the notion of divine impassibility in patristic thought. It is commonly claimed that patristic theology fell prey to the assumption of Hellenistic philosophy about the impassibility of God and departed from the allegedly biblical view, according to which God is passible. The author argues that this standard view misrepresents the tradition. For the fathers, the attribute of divine impassibility functioned in a restricted sense as an apophatic qualifier of divine emotions. Gavrilyuk construes the development of patristic thought as a series of dialectical turning points taken to safeguard the paradox of God’s voluntary and salvific suffering in the incarnation.Less
Major reconsideration of the notion of divine impassibility in patristic thought. It is commonly claimed that patristic theology fell prey to the assumption of Hellenistic philosophy about the impassibility of God and departed from the allegedly biblical view, according to which God is passible. The author argues that this standard view misrepresents the tradition. For the fathers, the attribute of divine impassibility functioned in a restricted sense as an apophatic qualifier of divine emotions. Gavrilyuk construes the development of patristic thought as a series of dialectical turning points taken to safeguard the paradox of God’s voluntary and salvific suffering in the incarnation.
Daniel H. Williams
- Published in print:
- 1995
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198264644
- eISBN:
- 9780191682735
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198264644.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
The publication of De fide represents a sudden and dramatic reversal in Ambrose's policies towards the Homoians in Milan. Probably written in late autumn of 378, the document is nothing less than a ...
More
The publication of De fide represents a sudden and dramatic reversal in Ambrose's policies towards the Homoians in Milan. Probably written in late autumn of 378, the document is nothing less than a full-scale attack against western Arianism, denigrating it as the worst of heresies and as an enemy to the truth. Such a transformation indicates that the carefully balanced scales of Ambrosian administration had been tipped. In reality, however, this polemical manifesto by Ambrose is not so surprising. The chapter shows how much had transpired at Milan to vitiate Valentinian's promise to Ambrose that his episcopate would be characterized by a ‘peaceful future’. The composition of De fide is itself a reaction to these events and must be considered in light of the political and religious circumstances that gave rise to it.Less
The publication of De fide represents a sudden and dramatic reversal in Ambrose's policies towards the Homoians in Milan. Probably written in late autumn of 378, the document is nothing less than a full-scale attack against western Arianism, denigrating it as the worst of heresies and as an enemy to the truth. Such a transformation indicates that the carefully balanced scales of Ambrosian administration had been tipped. In reality, however, this polemical manifesto by Ambrose is not so surprising. The chapter shows how much had transpired at Milan to vitiate Valentinian's promise to Ambrose that his episcopate would be characterized by a ‘peaceful future’. The composition of De fide is itself a reaction to these events and must be considered in light of the political and religious circumstances that gave rise to it.
Paul L. Gavrilyuk
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- November 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199269822
- eISBN:
- 9780191601569
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199269823.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
Five major interpretations of Arianism are considered. According to the Hanson-Wiles interpretation, the Arians used psilanthropic argument to emphasize that God suffered in Christ. The author shows ...
More
Five major interpretations of Arianism are considered. According to the Hanson-Wiles interpretation, the Arians used psilanthropic argument to emphasize that God suffered in Christ. The author shows that this interpretation is one sided, partly because other parties involved in the christological debates of the fourth and fifth centuries also used the psilanthropic argument. The Arians emphasized the impassibility of the High God in order to exclude him from any participation in human suffering. The pro-Nicene theologians succeeded in sustaining the vital tension between the transcendence of God and his involvement in suffering in the incarnation.Less
Five major interpretations of Arianism are considered. According to the Hanson-Wiles interpretation, the Arians used psilanthropic argument to emphasize that God suffered in Christ. The author shows that this interpretation is one sided, partly because other parties involved in the christological debates of the fourth and fifth centuries also used the psilanthropic argument. The Arians emphasized the impassibility of the High God in order to exclude him from any participation in human suffering. The pro-Nicene theologians succeeded in sustaining the vital tension between the transcendence of God and his involvement in suffering in the incarnation.
Eric Plumer
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- April 2004
- ISBN:
- 9780199244393
- eISBN:
- 9780191601194
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199244391.003.0003
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
Although a first reading of Augustine's Commentary suggests that his purpose was simply to expound the meaning of the Letter to the Galatians line by line in a clear and concise manner, closer ...
More
Although a first reading of Augustine's Commentary suggests that his purpose was simply to expound the meaning of the Letter to the Galatians line by line in a clear and concise manner, closer reading uncovers implicit polemic against Manicheism, Donatism, Arianism, and paganism. Nevertheless, Augustine's Commentary is not essentially polemical, but pastoral. Comparison with his monastic Rule demonstrates that the Commentary was written for Augustine's monastic community as its primary audience and that Augustine's immediate concern was to discover ways in which Paul's directives for Christian living could be implemented within that community. Success within the monastic community would enable Augustine as parish priest to implement Paul's directives within the wider community of his parishioners at Hippo and beyond.Less
Although a first reading of Augustine's Commentary suggests that his purpose was simply to expound the meaning of the Letter to the Galatians line by line in a clear and concise manner, closer reading uncovers implicit polemic against Manicheism, Donatism, Arianism, and paganism. Nevertheless, Augustine's Commentary is not essentially polemical, but pastoral. Comparison with his monastic Rule demonstrates that the Commentary was written for Augustine's monastic community as its primary audience and that Augustine's immediate concern was to discover ways in which Paul's directives for Christian living could be implemented within that community. Success within the monastic community would enable Augustine as parish priest to implement Paul's directives within the wider community of his parishioners at Hippo and beyond.
Mark A. Noll
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195151114
- eISBN:
- 9780199834532
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195151119.003.0004
- Subject:
- Religion, History of Christianity
Outside the American context, republican ideology had always been seen as a pernicious influence upon religious life. According to orthodox Christians in the Old World, especially in Britain, ...
More
Outside the American context, republican ideology had always been seen as a pernicious influence upon religious life. According to orthodox Christians in the Old World, especially in Britain, republicanism, with its emphasis on the role and choice of the individual, relied too much on heterodox views of human volition. Nevertheless, Americans came, by the end of the eighteenth century, to embrace a mixture of republican and Christian philosophies. In turn, the principle of “Christian liberty” contributed greatly to the effort for American independence.Less
Outside the American context, republican ideology had always been seen as a pernicious influence upon religious life. According to orthodox Christians in the Old World, especially in Britain, republicanism, with its emphasis on the role and choice of the individual, relied too much on heterodox views of human volition. Nevertheless, Americans came, by the end of the eighteenth century, to embrace a mixture of republican and Christian philosophies. In turn, the principle of “Christian liberty” contributed greatly to the effort for American independence.
Maurice Wiles
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199245918
- eISBN:
- 9780191600814
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199245916.003.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
Outlines the attitude of modern scholarship to heresy in general, and to Arianism in particular. Argues that Arianism as traditionally understood is largely a polemical construction created by ...
More
Outlines the attitude of modern scholarship to heresy in general, and to Arianism in particular. Argues that Arianism as traditionally understood is largely a polemical construction created by Athanasius, and is an unsatisfactory concept for historical research. Finally offers its own sympathetic reconstruction of Arianism with a more positive evaluation of the Arian appeal to scripture, tradition, and research.Less
Outlines the attitude of modern scholarship to heresy in general, and to Arianism in particular. Argues that Arianism as traditionally understood is largely a polemical construction created by Athanasius, and is an unsatisfactory concept for historical research. Finally offers its own sympathetic reconstruction of Arianism with a more positive evaluation of the Arian appeal to scripture, tradition, and research.
Henry Chadwick
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199246953
- eISBN:
- 9780191600463
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199246955.003.0024
- Subject:
- Religion, Church History
The position of Dionysius, made bishop of Alexandria in about 247, meant that he was called upon to comment on controversial matters in a time of great difficulty and persecution. This led to ...
More
The position of Dionysius, made bishop of Alexandria in about 247, meant that he was called upon to comment on controversial matters in a time of great difficulty and persecution. This led to disagreements over the nature of Christ with the bishop of Rome, another Dionysius. While Rome was primarily concerned with the affirmation of monotheism, Alexandria was more concerned with protecting the threeness and Christian understanding of God. These differences point to a broad difference of approach to the doctrine of God between the Latin west and the Greek east. Latin theologians sympathizing with Alexandria were accused of Arianism, i.e. denying the complete divinity of Jesus. East and west also differed over baptism. A letter by Dionysius indicates the conversion of the Armenians to Christianity.Less
The position of Dionysius, made bishop of Alexandria in about 247, meant that he was called upon to comment on controversial matters in a time of great difficulty and persecution. This led to disagreements over the nature of Christ with the bishop of Rome, another Dionysius. While Rome was primarily concerned with the affirmation of monotheism, Alexandria was more concerned with protecting the threeness and Christian understanding of God. These differences point to a broad difference of approach to the doctrine of God between the Latin west and the Greek east. Latin theologians sympathizing with Alexandria were accused of Arianism, i.e. denying the complete divinity of Jesus. East and west also differed over baptism. A letter by Dionysius indicates the conversion of the Armenians to Christianity.
Henry Chadwick
- Published in print:
- 2001
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780199246953
- eISBN:
- 9780191600463
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0199246955.003.0029
- Subject:
- Religion, Church History
The new situation created by the rise to sole power of a Christian emperor was seen by many Christians as fulfilment of the prophecy that God's word would spread throughout the civilized world but ...
More
The new situation created by the rise to sole power of a Christian emperor was seen by many Christians as fulfilment of the prophecy that God's word would spread throughout the civilized world but raised new questions about the unity of the Church. The Divine Institutes by Lactantius was directed against pagan philosophers and stressed the need for education about Christianity to put an end to persecution, while Eusebius of Caesarea wrote a panegyric of Constantine and about the superiority of biblical religion over paganism. However, the ‘subordinationist’ theology of Arius raised the fundamental problem of the Christian doctrine of God and was viewed by Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, as a heresy for which toleration was not possible. The Council of Nicaea in 325, the largest assembly of bishops yet gathered, produced the Nicene Creed, the effects of which divided the eastern Church. It would now be taken as axiomatic that dissenters were to be excluded from the Church, without any minority rights.Less
The new situation created by the rise to sole power of a Christian emperor was seen by many Christians as fulfilment of the prophecy that God's word would spread throughout the civilized world but raised new questions about the unity of the Church. The Divine Institutes by Lactantius was directed against pagan philosophers and stressed the need for education about Christianity to put an end to persecution, while Eusebius of Caesarea wrote a panegyric of Constantine and about the superiority of biblical religion over paganism. However, the ‘subordinationist’ theology of Arius raised the fundamental problem of the Christian doctrine of God and was viewed by Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, as a heresy for which toleration was not possible. The Council of Nicaea in 325, the largest assembly of bishops yet gathered, produced the Nicene Creed, the effects of which divided the eastern Church. It would now be taken as axiomatic that dissenters were to be excluded from the Church, without any minority rights.
Rowan Williams and Frances Young
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780197264348
- eISBN:
- 9780191734250
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- British Academy
- DOI:
- 10.5871/bacad/9780197264348.003.0015
- Subject:
- History, Historiography
Maurice Frank Wiles (1923–2005), a Fellow of the British Academy, was an Anglican theologian who was able within that tradition to develop the field of ‘doctrinal criticism’. He began his career ...
More
Maurice Frank Wiles (1923–2005), a Fellow of the British Academy, was an Anglican theologian who was able within that tradition to develop the field of ‘doctrinal criticism’. He began his career concentrating on the period of the early Fathers of the Church, and it was this grounding that sowed the seeds of his later work on modern doctrine. Arianism would remain a particular interest. Yet Wiles retained a profound respect for tradition and, like the Fathers, constantly measured his doctrinal critique against the experience of believers in life and worship, regarding theology as second-order discourse – reflection on the significance of what was primary for Christianity, such as the experience of salvation. During his student days two people particularly influenced him: Ian Ramsey, who was Chaplain of his college and his first Theology tutor; and Henry Chadwick, who encouraged his early research in the Church Fathers. The evolution of Wiles' thinking is perhaps best observed in the collection published as Working Papers in Doctrine.Less
Maurice Frank Wiles (1923–2005), a Fellow of the British Academy, was an Anglican theologian who was able within that tradition to develop the field of ‘doctrinal criticism’. He began his career concentrating on the period of the early Fathers of the Church, and it was this grounding that sowed the seeds of his later work on modern doctrine. Arianism would remain a particular interest. Yet Wiles retained a profound respect for tradition and, like the Fathers, constantly measured his doctrinal critique against the experience of believers in life and worship, regarding theology as second-order discourse – reflection on the significance of what was primary for Christianity, such as the experience of salvation. During his student days two people particularly influenced him: Ian Ramsey, who was Chaplain of his college and his first Theology tutor; and Henry Chadwick, who encouraged his early research in the Church Fathers. The evolution of Wiles' thinking is perhaps best observed in the collection published as Working Papers in Doctrine.
Martin Dzelzainis
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780199295937
- eISBN:
- 9780191712210
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199295937.003.0009
- Subject:
- Literature, 17th-century and Restoration Literature
The aim of this chapter is to retrace as far as possible Milton's engagement with antitrinitarianism, working backwards from the end of his life — the period when we can be relatively certain about ...
More
The aim of this chapter is to retrace as far as possible Milton's engagement with antitrinitarianism, working backwards from the end of his life — the period when we can be relatively certain about his Arianism. Under investigation as well is the matter of how wide a range of religious views Milton would come to embrace within reformed Christianity. An exploration of the author's intellectual engagements with reformist works reveals that Milton questioned orthodox belief in the Trinity in the mid-1640s rather than in the early 1650s. The chapter explores the outer limit of religious tolerance Milton embraces within reformed Christianity, and the political conditions that expose the dimensions of his intellectual engagement with antitrinitarianism. An earlier date for Milton's heretical, antitrinitarianism is posited on the basis of Milton's knowledge of religious controversies in Geneva and Poland.Less
The aim of this chapter is to retrace as far as possible Milton's engagement with antitrinitarianism, working backwards from the end of his life — the period when we can be relatively certain about his Arianism. Under investigation as well is the matter of how wide a range of religious views Milton would come to embrace within reformed Christianity. An exploration of the author's intellectual engagements with reformist works reveals that Milton questioned orthodox belief in the Trinity in the mid-1640s rather than in the early 1650s. The chapter explores the outer limit of religious tolerance Milton embraces within reformed Christianity, and the political conditions that expose the dimensions of his intellectual engagement with antitrinitarianism. An earlier date for Milton's heretical, antitrinitarianism is posited on the basis of Milton's knowledge of religious controversies in Geneva and Poland.
Susan Wessel
- Published in print:
- 2004
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199268467
- eISBN:
- 9780191699276
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268467.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Early Christian Studies
What were the historical and cultural processes by which Cyril of Alexandria was elevated to canonical status while his opponent, Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople, was made into a heretic? In ...
More
What were the historical and cultural processes by which Cyril of Alexandria was elevated to canonical status while his opponent, Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople, was made into a heretic? In contrast to previous scholarship, this book concludes that Cyril's success in being elevated to orthodox status was not simply a political accomplishment based on political alliances he had fashioned as opportunity arose. Nor was it a dogmatic victory, based on the clarity and orthodoxy of Cyril's doctrinal claims. Instead, it was his strategy in identifying himself with the orthodoxy of the former bishop of Alexandria, Athanasius, in his victory over Arianism, in borrowing Athanasius' interpretive methods, and in skillfully using the tropes and figures of the second sophistic that made Cyril a saint in the Greek and Coptic Orthodox Churches.Less
What were the historical and cultural processes by which Cyril of Alexandria was elevated to canonical status while his opponent, Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople, was made into a heretic? In contrast to previous scholarship, this book concludes that Cyril's success in being elevated to orthodox status was not simply a political accomplishment based on political alliances he had fashioned as opportunity arose. Nor was it a dogmatic victory, based on the clarity and orthodoxy of Cyril's doctrinal claims. Instead, it was his strategy in identifying himself with the orthodoxy of the former bishop of Alexandria, Athanasius, in his victory over Arianism, in borrowing Athanasius' interpretive methods, and in skillfully using the tropes and figures of the second sophistic that made Cyril a saint in the Greek and Coptic Orthodox Churches.
Robin Whelan
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- September 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780520295957
- eISBN:
- 9780520968684
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- University of California Press
- DOI:
- 10.1525/california/9780520295957.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, History of Christianity
Recent work on the notoriously passionate Christian conflicts of the later Roman Empire has elucidated their wide-ranging political and social implications. However, the fifth-century conquest of the ...
More
Recent work on the notoriously passionate Christian conflicts of the later Roman Empire has elucidated their wide-ranging political and social implications. However, the fifth-century conquest of the Roman West by “barbarian” rulers brings this train of inquiry to a juddering halt, as scholars of early Christianity turn eastward for new doctrinal developments, and early medieval historians focus on political continuity and ethnic identity in the new kingdoms. This book argues that Christian controversy retained its sophistication and its sociopolitical consequences in the post-imperial West. It examines church conflict under the Vandals, who ruled the former Roman province of Africa (the modern-day Maghreb) from 439 to 533 CE. Exploiting neglected Christian texts, this book exposes a sophisticated culture of disputation between Nicene (“Catholic”) and Homoian (“Arian”) Christians, and it explores their rival claims to represent the true church, which consciously evoked earlier ecclesiastical controversies. It argues that this Christian conflict cannot be firewalled from other developments in post-imperial Africa, revealing its implications for issues of social identity and political formation. Through careful comparison with the evidence for Homoian Christianity in the other barbarian successor kingdoms, it seeks to set out a new framework for understanding Christian identity across the post-imperial West.Less
Recent work on the notoriously passionate Christian conflicts of the later Roman Empire has elucidated their wide-ranging political and social implications. However, the fifth-century conquest of the Roman West by “barbarian” rulers brings this train of inquiry to a juddering halt, as scholars of early Christianity turn eastward for new doctrinal developments, and early medieval historians focus on political continuity and ethnic identity in the new kingdoms. This book argues that Christian controversy retained its sophistication and its sociopolitical consequences in the post-imperial West. It examines church conflict under the Vandals, who ruled the former Roman province of Africa (the modern-day Maghreb) from 439 to 533 CE. Exploiting neglected Christian texts, this book exposes a sophisticated culture of disputation between Nicene (“Catholic”) and Homoian (“Arian”) Christians, and it explores their rival claims to represent the true church, which consciously evoked earlier ecclesiastical controversies. It argues that this Christian conflict cannot be firewalled from other developments in post-imperial Africa, revealing its implications for issues of social identity and political formation. Through careful comparison with the evidence for Homoian Christianity in the other barbarian successor kingdoms, it seeks to set out a new framework for understanding Christian identity across the post-imperial West.
A. D. Nuttall
- Published in print:
- 1998
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198184621
- eISBN:
- 9780191674327
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198184621.003.0004
- Subject:
- Literature, Poetry, Drama
Milton — long thought to be England's second-greatest poet, author of the principal English justification of God the Creator, systematic misogynist, classicist, Puritan — presents himself in De ...
More
Milton — long thought to be England's second-greatest poet, author of the principal English justification of God the Creator, systematic misogynist, classicist, Puritan — presents himself in De Doctrina Christiana as an Arian heretic, that is, far from exalting the Son above the Father, as earlier figures in this book have done, he violently reverses the picture; he erases the egalitarian orthodox Trinity and exalts the Father above the Son. This chapter explores Milton's theology by the side door of his poetry. It attempts to engage in a different manner with the principal matter at issue: the goodness or otherwise of the Creator, the wickedness or otherwise of Adam and Eve in eating from the tree of knowledge.Less
Milton — long thought to be England's second-greatest poet, author of the principal English justification of God the Creator, systematic misogynist, classicist, Puritan — presents himself in De Doctrina Christiana as an Arian heretic, that is, far from exalting the Son above the Father, as earlier figures in this book have done, he violently reverses the picture; he erases the egalitarian orthodox Trinity and exalts the Father above the Son. This chapter explores Milton's theology by the side door of his poetry. It attempts to engage in a different manner with the principal matter at issue: the goodness or otherwise of the Creator, the wickedness or otherwise of Adam and Eve in eating from the tree of knowledge.
