DOCSLIB.ORG

The Last Days of Nestorius in the Syriac Sources

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Last Days of Nestorius in the Syriac Sources ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ THE LAST DAYS OF NESTORIUS IN THE SYRIAC SOURCES GEORGE A. BEVAN QUEEN’S UNIVERSITY f the theological debates of the first ture”, precisely to exclude the Antiochene half of the fifth century haunt the “two natures”.4 sixth, then the Council of Chalcedon While the doctrine produced at Chal- hangs as a sort of specter over the cedon may differ subtly from Nestorius’ IJustinianic Church. Although Chalcedon own teaching—I refer here to the affirma- was ostensibly a legitimately constituted tion of the one prosopon and one hypostasis general council, the legitimacy of its doc- of Christ—, the core of the council’s doc- trinal decisions were questioned and even trinal pronouncements fundamentally agreed excoriated by many in the East.1 The inter- with the Antiochene tradition. It was within pretation (hermenaia) of the faith imposed this tradition that the bulk of Nestorius’ be- on the assembled bishops by the imperial liefs lay. Nestorius was in full agreement representatives spoke in no uncertain terms with Theodore of Mopsuestia on the need of Christ’s two natures after the incarnation, for a human and divine nature in Christ in and the Tome of Leo I (Ep. 28) clearly ar- order to avoid the danger of an Apollinarian ticulated the independent functioning of “mingling” or “mixture” inherent in the each nature in the single person of Christ.2 “one nature”, although some of Nestorius’ The principle charge made against Chal- speculative flights might well not have met cedon by its opponents was that it revived with Theodore’s approval.5 the heresy of Nestorius, which had been de- Yet Nestorianism was never defined in cisively condemned, so it was believed, at 431 at First Ephesus in terms of natures; the Council of Ephesus in 431. Considerable Nestorius was condemned as the “New Ju- scholarship has been dedicated to disproving das” with no reference at all to the number the Nestorian underpinnings of Chalcedon, of natures of Christ.6 Nestorius’ position and to proving that the formula “in two na- was only caricatured for advancing the “two tures” was cyrillian.3 Suffice it to say that sons” and for rejecting Theotokos as a these attempts have had to work around the proper appellation for Mary. The reality, as fact that the bishop of Alexandria never has been shown in various studies, was quite himself used the formula. In fact, after 433 different: Nestorius accepted Theotokos with Cyril tended strongly to the formulations only a few quibbles, and he adamantly de- “out of two natures” and “one incarnate na- nied that his talk of the two natures and two ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 7 (2007) - Page 39 The Last Days of Nestorius in the Syriac Sources _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ prosopa of Christ entailed the “two sons”, discovered near Lake Van in the early the heresy of Paul of Samosata.7 1880s.10 The work is not, however, without When Cyril, in ignorance of Nestorius’ its problems. First, the language of the trans- theological pedigree, assented to an Antio- lation is often unclear and garbled due to an chene statement of belief in a letter of 433, overly literal rendering that frequently omits Laetentur Caeli, the two natures were given names in favour of pronouns. Second, there the imprimatur of the bishop’s prestige and are sections of the text missing and other authority, recently won by his defeat of Nes- surviving sections that are clearly dislocated torius.8 With the “two natures” now cast as within the manuscript that Paul Bedjan, its superficially cyrillian in the so-called editor, worked from. Third and perhaps “Symbol of Reunion,” it could be used by most worrying is that the unity of the sur- Flavian of Constantinople in 448 to convict viving work, and the authenticity of several the archimandrite Eutyches for teaching the of its sections, has been called into question, “one nature” and that Christ took his body particularly by Luise Abramowski.11 from heaven. When Second Ephesus, the so- Let us begin with what can be gleaned called Latrocinium, convened in the next of Nestorius’ life after the Council of Ephe- year to rehabilitate Eutyches, they put aside sus in 431. The emperor Theodosius permit- Cyril’s Laetentur Caeli and the Antiochene ted the deposed bishop to return to his mon- statement in favour of Cyril’s post-433 writ- astery just outside of Antioch as a free man ings. In 450, when the new emperor in the fall of 431. But an edict of the em- Marcian and his consort Pulcheria con- peror Theodosius II formally condemned ceived of an eastern council to undo the ap- Nestorius and proscribed his writings sev- parent injustices of Second Ephesus, it was eral years later.12 With this imperial order, a to the affirmation of the “two natures” in formal legal category was created for Nes- 448 that they turned. Fortuitously, pope Leo torians, or rather Simonians (after Simon had written a treatise, his Tomus ad Flavi- Magus), to be added to the list of banned anum, that independently and in complete heresies that had accumulated since the time ignorance of eastern developments and of Constantine the Great. By 435 Nestorius Cyril’s work, insisted unequivocally on the and his friend Irenaeus were officially sent independent function of two natures in the into exile and first went to Petra in Arabia.13 person of Christ that most would have re- How long the two remained in Petra is un- garded as very uncyrillian.9 known, but Irenaeus seems to have escaped It was through this circuitous route that from exile and in 446 or thereabouts he re- the essence of Nestorius’ beliefs, without his appears in Tyre as its ordained bishop. name attached to them, came to be affirmed There was no imperial order to recall at the Council of Chalcedon under a cyril- Irenaeus and Theodosius deposed him in lian guise. What is often not discussed with February of 448, when he learned to his sur- respect to Chalcedon is what Nestorius’ own prise that this determined follower of Nesto- views would have been on the decisions of rius had not only returned but become a the council. We are most fortunate in pos- bishop.14 Irenaeus’ illegal return was doubt- sessing a Syriac translation of Nestorius’ less due to the influence of Theodoret of apologia pro vita sua, the Liber Heraclidis, Cyrrhus and Domnus of Antioch. It is tell- ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies 7 (2007) - Page 40 The Last Days of Nestorius in the Syriac Sources _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ ing that Irenaeus, a man so closely associ- rial authority. But of these events in Egypt, ated with Nestorius, could still find friends Nestorius gives virtually no hint at all in his in Syria as late as 447. apologia. But Nestorius did not so easily escape Nestorius picked up his pen to resume his exile and was moved from Petra to the Liber Heraclidis as early as the year Egypt. Because there is a hiatus of a decade 449. This last section, the second part of between the years 438/9 and 449 in the nar- Book II in Paul Bedjan’s edition, is ap- ration of the Liber Heraclidis, one suspects pended to the other text of the Liber with no that he was moved to isolation in Egypt at evidence that Nestorius went back to revise the former date. Evagrius scholasticus, writ- his earlier writings in light of new develop- ing at the end of the sixth century, is one of ments contained therein. Nestorius says that very few ancient authors who can claim to he was encouraged to begin writing again as have detailed information about Nestorius in he received news of recent events in the East exile. He appears to have consulted at least from his friends.16 Nestorius discusses the two book-length works of Nestorius as well trial of Eutyches in the fall of 448 and the as a collection of letters.15 The excerpts of subsequent persecution and condemnation Nestorius’ letter to the controller of the The- of Flavian of Constantinople for his efforts baid in Egypt show that Nestorius had been against the “one nature”. By his quotations moved to the Oasis in Western Egypt. Now and references, Nestorius demonstrates that known as the Kharga Oasis, Nestorius’ he had access to a copy of the acta of at place of exile lay 100 miles west of the Nile least the first session of Second Ephesus in and encompassed an area about 15 miles 449 and good information about the Home wide and 100 miles long with a concentra- Synod of Constantinople in 448. tion of watered areas. The letters quoted by In the fall of Flavian Nestorius saw a Evagrius also tell us that Nestorius had been distinct parallel for his own plight and yet moved around considerably in the Oasis and further evidence of the wickedness of his had been captured by marauding barbarians, erstwhile supporter, the emperor Theodo- who are identified as “Nobades”. Nestorius sius, towards the orthodox. The section con- was released by his captors in Panopolis on cludes with a prophecy, clearly a vaticinum the Nile, 100 miles to the east. He sought to ex eventu, of the misfortunes that he predicts justify this move to the civil authorities in will befall the empire because of its em- Egypt so as not to be thought a fugitive from peror’s impiety. Among these he includes exile. Later, soldiers moved him to Elephan- the Vandal sack of Rome in 455, the last tine, 200 miles to the south, but the control- datable event in all of the Liber Heraclidis.17 ler of the Thebaid changed his mind yet Yet there is a mystery here.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aestimatio: Critical Reviews in the History of Science
    Explaining the Cosmos: Creation and Cultural Interaction in Late-Antique Gaza by Michael W. Champion Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Pp. xii + 241. ISBN 978– 0–19–933748–4. Cloth £48.00, $74.00 Reviewed by Lorenzo Perrone University of Bologna [email protected] The last two decades have seen a remarkable renewal of interest in Late Antique Gaza, which contrasts positively with the recurring tragedy and isolation of the Palestinian city nowadays. Several studies have addressed different aspects of Gazan religious and intellectual history from the fourth to the sixth century. In early Byzantine Palestine, a region that became more and more Christian despite its continuing multiethnic and multi-religious environment, Gaza remained a stronghold of paganism until at least the be- ginnings of the fifth century. Generally, research has not dealt at oncewith both the pagan and the Christian Gaza of Late Antiquity, thus suggesting the picture of two separate worlds: on the one hand, the ancient Hellenistic heritage of the rhetorical school of Gaza, which in conformity with the Sec- ond Sophistic was not devoid of philosophical concerns; on the other hand, the new tradition of Christian theology and especially of monasticism that flourished in the vicinity of the city during the fifth and sixth centuries. Even in recent research, we find few exceptions to the separate treatment of these topics. The essays collected by Brouria Bitton-Ashkelony and Aryeh Kofsky in their pathbreaking volume Christian Gaza in Late Antiquity [2004], as suggested by its title, mainly focus on the ecclesiastical and monastic life, al- though they include some contributions on pagan festivals, urban games, and spectacles, as well as on the literary activity of the sophists and their social sta- tus.
    [Show full text]
  • Matthew 16:18 in the Philoxenian Version
    1 Matthew 16:18 in the Philoxenian Version Peter A.L. Hill Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia1 1. Little now remains of the Syriac Philoxenian version (PHIL) of the New Testament. Commissioned by Philoxenus of Mabbug and completed in 508/509 by Polycarp, his chorepiscopus, PHIL was based upon the Peshitta (P) and in turn became the Grundtext for the Harklean New Testament (H) completed in 615/616.2 Apart from an edition of the Minor Catholic Epistles thought to be PHIL,3 remnants of the version remain in the scripture quotations found in the later writings of Philoxenus. In this article I will explore one of these quotations, namely Mt 16:18. Historically, considerable controversy has surrounded the interpretation of this verse; thus any additional data are of interest. First, however, a little background regarding the identification of PHIL quotations in Philoxenus’ works. Identifying PHIL Quotations in the Works of Philoxenus 2. It was Günther Zuntz (1945) who first examined the works of Philoxenus with a view to discovering PHIL readings. However, notwithstanding some excellent observations, Zuntz’s methodology was flawed, in part by his failure to distinguish between the array of Graecized citations scattered across a number of Philoxenus’ writings and the genuine PHIL quotations which occur only in the later writings.4 Subsequently, Arthur Vööbus (1954) continued the investigation, with the appreciation that in order to identify PHIL readings it is necessary “to hold to a strict chronological sequence of Philoxenus’ works.”5 Vööbus happily lighted upon a textual source that had “not undergone the possible changes and modifications which could be 1 The substance of this article was presented to a seminar convened by Dr Hidemi Takahashi at the University of Tokyo, 28 September 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction and Index
    Th e Practical Christology of Philoxenos of Mabbug DAVID A. MICHELSON Preview - Copyrighted Material 1 1 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries © David A. Michelson 2014 Th e moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2014 Impression: 1 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: 2014940446 ISBN 978–0–19–872296–0 Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
    [Show full text]
  • Dositheos Notaras, the Patriarch of Jerusalem (1669-1707), Confronts the Challenges of Modernity
    IN SEARCH OF A CONFESSIONAL IDENTITY: DOSITHEOS NOTARAS, THE PATRIARCH OF JERUSALEM (1669-1707), CONFRONTS THE CHALLENGES OF MODERNITY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Christopher George Rene IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Adviser Theofanis G. Stavrou SEPTEMBER 2020 © Christopher G Rene, September 2020 i Acknowledgements Without the steadfast support of my teachers, family and friends this dissertation would not have been possible, and I am pleased to have the opportunity to express my deep debt of gratitude and thank them all. I would like to thank the members of my dissertation committee, who together guided me through to the completion of this dissertation. My adviser Professor Theofanis G. Stavrou provided a resourceful outlet by helping me navigate through administrative channels and stay on course academically. Moreover, he fostered an inviting space for parrhesia with vigorous dialogue and intellectual tenacity on the ideas of identity, modernity, and the role of Patriarch Dositheos. It was in fact Professor Stavrou who many years ago at a Slavic conference broached the idea of an Orthodox Commonwealth that inspired other academics and myself to pursue the topic. Professor Carla Phillips impressed upon me the significance of daily life among the people of Europe during the early modern period (1450-1800). As Professor Phillips’ teaching assistant for a number of years, I witnessed lectures that animated the historical narrative and inspired students to question their own unique sense of historical continuity and discontinuities. Thank you, Professor Phillips, for such a pedagogical example.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Spread of Christianity in Central Asia and the Far East: a New Document
    BR 1065 .M53 1925 Mingana, Alphonse, 1881- 1937. The early spread of Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2018 with funding from The Arcadia Fund https://archive.org/details/earlyspreadofchrOOming THE EARLY SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY I IN CENTRAL ASIA AND THE FAR EAST: I A NEW DOCUMENT ALPHONSE 'MING AN A, D.D. ASSISTANT-KEEPER OF MANUSCRIPTS IN THE JOHN RYLANDS LIBRARY, AND SPECIAL LECTURER IN ARABIC IN THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER Reprinted\ with Additions, from " The Bulletin of the John Rylands Library,” Vol. 9, No. 2, July, 1925 MANCHESTER: THE, UNIVERSITY PRESS, 23 LIME GROVE, OXFORD ROAD. LONGMANS, GREEN & CO., 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, E.C., NEW YORK, TORONTO, BOMBAY, CALCUTTA, AND MADRAS. MCMXXV. THE EARLY SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY IN CENTRAL ASIA AND THE FAR EAST: A NEW DOCUMENT. By A. MINGANA, D.D. ASSISTANT KEEPER OF MANUSCRIPTS IN THE JOHN RYLANDS LIBRARY, AND SPECIAL LECTURER IN ARABIC IN THE UNI¬ VERSITY OF MANCHESTER. Foreword. I. BEFORE venturing into the subject of the evangelisation of the peoples of Mongolian race, it would be useful to examine the ethnological state of the powerful agglomeration of clans inhabiting the adjacent lands lying on the eastern and western banks of the river Oxus. There we meet with constant struggles for supremacy between two apparently different races, distinguished by the generic appellations of Iran and Turan. They were somewhat loosely separated by the historic river, the shallow waters of which in a summer month, or in a rainless season, proved always powerless to prevent the perpetual clash of arms between the warring tribes of the two rivals whose historic habitat lay on its eastern and western borders.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Beginning of the Church
    Excerpts from the “The Historical Road of Eastern Orthodoxy” By Alexander Schmemann Translated by Lynda W. Kesich (Please get the full version of this book at your bookstore) Content: 1. The Beginning of the Church. Acts of the Apostles. Community in Jerusalem — The First Church. Early Church Organization. Life of Christians. Break with Judaism. The Apostle Paul. The Church and the Greco-Roman World. People of the Early Church. Basis of Persecution by Rome. Blood of Martyrs. Struggle of Christianity to Keep its Own Meaning. The New Testament. Sin and Repentance in the Church. Beginnings of Theology. The Last Great Persecutions. 2. The Triumph Of Christianity. Conversion of Constantine. Relations between Church and State. The Arian Disturbance. Council of Nicaea — First Ecumenical Council. After Constantine. The Roman Position. Countermeasures in the East. End of Arianism. New Relation of Christianity to the World. The Visible Church. Rise of Monasticism. State Religion — Second Ecumenical Council. St. John Chrysostom. 3. The Age Of The Ecumenical Councils. Development of Church Regional Structure. The Byzantine Idea of Church and State Constantinople vs. Alexandria The Christological Controversy — Nestorius and Cyril. Third Ecumenical Council. The Monophysite Heresy. Council of Chalcedon (Fourth Ecumenical Council). Reaction to Chalcedon — the Road to Division. Last Dream of Rome. Justinian and the Church. Two Communities. Symphony. Reconciliation with Rome — Break with the East. Recurrence of Origenism. Fifth Ecumenical Council. Underlying Gains. Breakup of the Empire — Rise of Islam. Decay of the Universal Church Last Efforts: Monothelitism. Sixth Ecumenical Council. Changing Church Structure. Byzantine Theology. Quality of Life in the New Age. Development of the Liturgy.
    [Show full text]
  • St.-Thomas-Aquinas-The-Summa-Contra-Gentiles.Pdf
    The Catholic Primer’s Reference Series: OF GOD AND HIS CREATURES An Annotated Translation (With some Abridgement) of the SUMMA CONTRA GENTILES Of ST. THOMAS AQUINAS By JOSEPH RICKABY, S.J., Caution regarding printing: This document is over 721 pages in length, depending upon individual printer settings. The Catholic Primer Copyright Notice The contents of Of God and His Creatures: An Annotated Translation of The Summa Contra Gentiles of St Thomas Aquinas is in the public domain. However, this electronic version is copyrighted. © The Catholic Primer, 2005. All Rights Reserved. This electronic version may be distributed free of charge provided that the contents are not altered and this copyright notice is included with the distributed copy, provided that the following conditions are adhered to. This electronic document may not be offered in connection with any other document, product, promotion or other item that is sold, exchange for compensation of any type or manner, or used as a gift for contributions, including charitable contributions without the express consent of The Catholic Primer. Notwithstanding the preceding, if this product is transferred on CD-ROM, DVD, or other similar storage media, the transferor may charge for the cost of the media, reasonable shipping expenses, and may request, but not demand, an additional donation not to exceed US$25. Questions concerning this limited license should be directed to [email protected] . This document may not be distributed in print form without the prior consent of The Catholic Primer. Adobe®, Acrobat®, and Acrobat® Reader® are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Pulcheria
    Saint Pulcheria Virgin, Empress of the Eastern Roman Empire In 399 AD, in the city of Constantinople, Aelia to have bishops reinstated who had been unjustly Pulcheria was born to the Easter Roman Emperor Flavius dismissed. Arcadius, and his wife Aelia Eudoxia. Arcadius was a In 421 AD, when Bishop Atticus reported the week and easily controlled emperor, reigning during a persecution of Christians by the Sasanian King Bahram V time when the empire was being invaded by various after the destruction of a Zoroastrian temple, Pulcheria Gothic armies comprised primarily of Arian-Christians influenced her brother to send troops to defend the who believed Jesus Christ, the Son, was a creation of the Christians in the Sassanid Empire. After a successful Father, rather than of one substance with the Father. campaign which Theodosius attributed to his sisters piety Pulcheria had an older sister who had passed away young. and virginity, Christians were allowed to return to In 400 AD, her sister Arcadia would be born, followed by Sassanid. During this time, Theodosius married a pagan Theodosius II and Mariana in 401 AD. In 402 AD, who took the name Aelia Eudocia, and converted to Arcadius went on to declare his one year old son Christianity. Theodosius II to be his co-Emperor. In 431 AD, the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus Despite the fact that Pulcheria’s family were was called to address an issue with the Nestorius of Nicene-Christians and accepted the reality of the Trinity, Constantinople, who denied Mary as the Theotokos, the her mother Eudoxia was in constant conflict with the “God-bearer.” Pulcheria supported Cyril of Alexandria, Patriarch of Constantinople, Saint John Chrysostom.
    [Show full text]
  • Byzantine Hymnography and the Quest for Orthodox Unity: Notes on the Liturgical Commemoration of the Council of Chalcedon, Towar
    Byzantine Hymnography and the Quest for Orthodox Unity: Notes on the Liturgical Commemoration of the Council of Chalcedon, Towards the Reconciliation of “Eastern” and “Oriental” Churches Gregory Tucker* Among the issues remaining to be addressed along the path to reconciliation between the “Eastern” and “Oriental” Orthodox is the characterisation of Oriental teachers as heretics in the liturgical texts of the Byzantine Rite. The mere suggestion of liturgical revision to reflect the agreement that multiple theological vocabularies are legitimate and therefore theologians associated with them should not be anathematized or deprecated has been met with fierce opposition from some Eastern Orthodox. This paper considers what might actually be involved in such a revision, taking as an example the texts for the commemoration of the Council of Chalcedon. It suggests that the extent of necessary revision would be far less than is perhaps feared. Keywords: Chalcedon, liturgy, liturgical revision, Byzantine Rite, Eastern Or- thodox, Oriental Orthodox Introduction From an Orthodox perspective, one of the great fruits of modern ecumen- ism1 has been the inauguration of a new phase in the relationship between the “Eastern” and “Oriental” Orthodox churches.2 An unofficial bilateral dialogue began in 1964, which became an official dialogue in 1985. Initial conversations correctly prioritised discussion of contested points in Chris- tology (disagreement over which contributed significantly to and, to a large * Gregory Tucker, Universität Regensburg, Universitätsstr. 31, 93503 Regensburg, Germa- ny, [email protected] 1 This paper will not address opposition on principle to ecumenical dialogue (including dialogue between separated Orthodox groups) which is a common–indeed, characteristic– feature of some traditions within contemporary Eastern Orthodoxy.
    [Show full text]
  • Trinitarian/Christological Heresies Heresy Description Origin Official
    Trinitarian/Christological Heresies Official Heresy Description Origin Other Condemnation Adoptionism Belief that Jesus Propounded Theodotus was Alternative was born as a by Theodotus of excommunicated names: Psilanthro mere (non-divine) Byzantium , a by Pope Victor and pism and Dynamic man, was leather merchant, Paul was Monarchianism. [9] supremely in Rome c.190, condemned by the Later criticized as virtuous and that later revived Synod of Antioch presupposing he was adopted by Paul of in 268 Nestorianism (see later as "Son of Samosata below) God" by the descent of the Spirit on him. Apollinarism Belief proposed Declared to be . that Jesus had by Apollinaris of a heresy in 381 by a human body Laodicea (died the First Council of and lower soul 390) Constantinople (the seat of the emotions) but a divine mind. Apollinaris further taught that the souls of men were propagated by other souls, as well as their bodies. Arianism Denial of the true The doctrine is Arius was first All forms denied divinity of Jesus associated pronounced that Jesus Christ Christ taking with Arius (ca. AD a heretic at is "consubstantial various specific 250––336) who the First Council of with the Father" forms, but all lived and taught Nicea , he was but proposed agreed that Jesus in Alexandria, later exonerated either "similar in Christ was Egypt . as a result of substance", or created by the imperial pressure "similar", or Father, that he and finally "dissimilar" as the had a beginning declared a heretic correct alternative. in time, and that after his death. the title "Son of The heresy was God" was a finally resolved in courtesy one.
    [Show full text]
  • "And the Son" in Regard to the Eastern
    ON THE CLAUSE “AND THE SON,” IN REGARD TO THE EASTERN CHURCH AND THE BONN CONFERENCE. A LETTER TO THE REV. H. P. LIDDON, D.D. IRELAND PROFESSOR OF EXEGESIS, CANON OF S. PAUL’S. BY THE REV. E. B. PUSEY, D.D. REGIUS PROFESSOR OF HEBREW, AND CANON OF CHRIST CHURCH. SOLD BY JAMES PARKER & CO., OXFORD, AND 377, STRAND, LONDON; RIVINGTONS, LONDON, OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE; AND POTT, YOUNG & CO., NEW YORK. 1876. Project Canterbury edition AD 2002 On the Clause “And the Son,” by Edward Bouverie Pusey. (1876) MY DEAREST FRIEND, YOU wish me to state briefly my thoughts, as to the restoration of intercommunion with the Greek Church, and, as bearing on this, what I desiderate in the propositions adopted at the Bonn Conference, and how they could be modified, so that I could myself accept them. This I do the more readily, because it was partly at my instance that you undertook that journey to Bonn, at much inconvenience, I believe, to yourself, and because I know that we are substantially of one mind on this subject, as on others. I hope that I may do this less unsatisfactorily, if I embody in it, what I wrote, two years ago on this, the saddest of all our sad controversies. For it is, in the end, a controversy as to the Being of God, among those who really believe in God, who prize right and true belief in God above all things, who, each, doubt not that they have the right belief, and who do believe the same one with the other, if they could but look calmly at each other’s mode of speech.
    [Show full text]
  • A Public Debate on Cyril of Alexandria's Views on The
    International Journal of the Classical Tradition https://doi.org/10.1007/s12138-019-00551-1 ARTICLE A Public Debate on Cyril of Alexandria’s Views on the Procession of the Holy Spirit in Seventeenth‑Century Constantinople: the Jesuit Reaction to Nicodemos Metaxas’s Greek Editions Nil Palabıyık1 © The Author(s) 2020 On a September afternoon in 1627, crowds gathered at the library of the Jesuit resi- dence in Constantinople to witness a lively public discussion between two repre- sentatives of the Roman Catholic Church concerning Cyril of Alexandria’s views on the procession of the Holy Spirit.1 It is interesting to see that a ffth-century church father’s writings in the context of a dispute dating back to the sixth century were still considered politically relevant, socially infuential and theologically compelling in seventeenth-century Constantinople. The primary aim of this rather ostentatious gathering was to adopt and promote a diferent (according to Eastern Christians an ‘erroneous’) viewpoint on Cyril of Alexandria’s writings on the procession of the Holy Spirit, and thereby to present a counter-argument to that of the Eastern Church. The Jesuit dispute ultimately targeted the theological stance and the reputation of Cyril Lucaris (1572–1638), the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople and the of- cial head of the populous Greek Orthodox millet of the Ottoman Empire. 1 Cyril of Alexandria’s opinion on this question is still controversial, but lies beyond the scope of this article. For a succinct overview, see A. E. Siecienski, The Filioque: History of a Doctrinal Controversy, Oxford, 2010, pp. 47–50.
    [Show full text]