DOCSLIB.ORG

The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: the Question of Its Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: the Question of Its Development Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects The hrC istology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Question of Its Development Vasilije Vranic Marquette University Recommended Citation Vranic, Vasilije, "The hrC istology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Question of Its Development" (2012). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 182. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/182 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THEODORET OF CYRRHUS: THE QUESTION OF ITS DEVELOPMENT by Rev. Vasilije Vranic, M.A., MPhil. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2012 ABSTRACT THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THEODORET OF CYRRHUS: THE QUESTION OF ITS DEVELOPMENT Rev. Vasilije Vranic, M.A., M.Phil. Marquette University, 2012 The Christological opus of Theodoret of Cyrrhus remains somewhat controversial due to his involvement in the Nestorian and Monophysite controversies as the champion of the Antiochene milieu. Although the recent scholarship is increasingly benevolent in the considerations of his Christology, still certain doubts are present about the constancy of his teaching. In this dissertation, I argue that the Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus remains consistent and unchanged throughout his life. The analysis of both his early and mature Christological output, as evidenced in the Expositio rectae fidei and the Eranistes, shows that the main theological concepts and terminology remain unaffected by the many years of fierce theological debates. Theodoret’s Christology is constructed around the key concept of sharp distinction between the uncreated and created orders of existence, to which the divine and human natures of Christ respectively belong. The ontological chasm between these orders effectively prevents the union on the level of οὐσία and φύσις, which designate the common characteristics of entities, but could only takes place at the level of πρόσωπον or ὑπόστασις, which he reserves for individual characteristics. Theodoret’s Christology is defined in relation to the economy of salvation. The Logos is the subject of the Incarnation, since he is the only personal presence at the moment of conception. The Logos creates and unites to himself the human nature of Christ. The natures are united in the person of Jesus Christ. The Christological work of Theodoret paved the way to the definition of faith proclaimed at the Council of Chalcedon. It was through his efforts that the Antiochene Christology experienced certain restitution after the blow dealt to it by the Cyrilline party at the Council of Ephesus (431). Therefore, Theodoret of Cyrrhus ought to resume his rightful place in the history of the Christological controversies alongside and in equal glory with Cyril of Alexandria. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Rev. Vasilije Vranic, M.A., MPhil. Now, at the end of six years of study at Marquette University, I should like to begin by thanking my professors and fellow students for their more then generous help and support. The outstanding instruction in various aspects of theological discourse I received from my professors at Marquette exceeded by far all my expectations. From the University, I also received not only a generous financial assistance to complete my studies, but through a Teaching Fellowship awarded to me, I have received the necessary experience to further my academic career. The time spent here was a truly life-changing experience. Marquette indeed provides cura personalis. I would like to thank members of my dissertation committee V. Rev. Dr. Alexander Golitzin, Dr. Michel R. Barnes, Dr. Deirdre Dempsey, and Dr. Mark F. Johnson for kindly agreeing to examine my work. Their comments and ideas in various stages of the writing process have provided invaluable guidance on this difficult path. I reserve special gratitude for my dissertation director Archimandrite Bishop-elect Alexander Golitzin for his patience and support during all these years. I met him while I was still a graduate student at Cambridge University trying to make a decision on my future studies. After hearing him lecture, I decided that I would like to study under his supervision. I am very grateful to him for agreeing to supervise my study of Theodoret’s Christology. It goes without saying that without his constant help and patient advice this dissertation could not have possibly been written. I would also like to thank Dr. Michel Barnes for his kindness in sharing his expertise with me throughout my studies. I am especially grateful for his guidance during one whole semester in which he supervised my dissertation. These supervisions helped me crystallize my thinking and shape my argument. Without the help and relentless support of the late Metropolitan Christopher (Kovacevich) of Midwestern America (Serbian Orthodox Church) I would not have had the privilege of studying at Marquette University. I express my deepest gratitude and appreciation for his constant support and fatherly love. May his memory be eternal! Much gratitude is also due to His Grace Bishop Longin of Midwestern America and New Gracanica (Serbian Orthodox Church) for his kind support of my studies and work in academia. I reserve special gratitude to V. Rev. Prof. Dr. Stanimir Spasovic for many years of wise counsel and the untiring help he provided throughout my studies. His support and guidance played an instrumental part in my life. I will be eternally indebted to him. Thanks to Dr. Sarah Turner of the University of Bristol, who read through my dissertation with an astonishing sense for detail in an attempt to correct my style and grammar. Needless to say, all the remaining mistakes are solely mine and are probably the result of later modifications. I cannot even begin to describe the gratitude I owe to my wife Jelena for all her patience and support in the course of all my studies. Without her, it would have been both physically and emotionally impossible to complete them. This dissertation, in particular, ii is just as much her achievement as it is mine. I am also grateful to our four-year-old son Petar for his unconditional love and understanding, which regaled and encouraged me in the process of writing. He does not know for the time when his father was not too busy to play with him as much as he would like. I believe that will largely change now. Also, thank you to my mother-in-law Prof. Dr. Danica Petrovic and my sister-in- law Dr. Marija Petrovic for their help and support, which they provided to our family when we needed it the most and thus enabled me to complete the dissertation. Finally, I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my entire family, but especially to my wife Jelena, son Petar, our baby girl whom we expect soon, mother Jelena, brothers Vladimir and Nikola, and to the memory of my late father protopresbyter Perisa, who instilled in me the love for theology. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………. i Abbreviations …………………………………………………………………………….vi 1.0. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Statement of the Problem ......................................................................................... 1 1.2. Present Status of the Problem .................................................................................. 3 1.3. Statement of Procedures and Methodology ........................................................... 11 PART I: The Historical Background ................................................................................ 14 2.0. Theodoret and the Nestorian Controversy (before 431 AD) ................................. 16 2.1. The Origin of the Nestorian Controversy .............................................................. 17 2.2. Rome and the Nestorian Controversy .................................................................... 18 2.3. Cyril’s Twelve Anathemas and the Escalation of the Controversy ....................... 24 2.4. The Council of Ephesus (431 AD) ......................................................................... 26 2.4.1. The Convocation of the Council ..................................................................... 26 2.4.2. The Venue of the Council ............................................................................... 29 2.4.3. The Eve of the Council of Ephesus 431 AD ................................................... 32 2.4.4. The Sessions of the Council of Ephesus ......................................................... 34 2.5. Reactions to the Decision of the Council of Ephesus ............................................ 36 2.6. The Aftermath of the Council of Ephesus (431 AD) ............................................. 38 2.7. The Tomos of Reunion .......................................................................................... 48 2.7.1 The Content of the Oriental Creed .................................................................. 49 2.7.2. The Reunion of 433 AD .................................................................................. 53 2.8. Hostility Continues: The Christological Debate from 434 to 444 AD .................. 54 2.8.1. The Controversy over Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia ........ 57 2.9. The Monophysite Controversy .............................................................................. 63 2.9.1. The Resident Council of Constantinople (448
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GLIMPSES INTO the KNOWLEDGE, ROLE, and USE of CHURCH FATHERS in RUS' and RUSSIAN MONASTICISM, LATE 11T H to EARLY 16 T H CENTURIES
    ROUND UP THE USUALS AND A FEW OTHERS: GLIMPSES INTO THE KNOWLEDGE, ROLE, AND USE OF CHURCH FATHERS IN RUS' AND RUSSIAN MONASTICISM, LATE 11t h TO EARLY 16 t h CENTURIES David M. Goldfrank This essay originated at the time that ASEC was in its early stages and in response to a requestthat I write something aboutthe church Fathers in medieval Rus'. I already knew finding the patrology concerning just the original Greek and Syriac texts is nothing short of a researcher’s black hole. Given all the complexities in­ volved in the manuscript traditions associated with such superstar names as Basil of Caesarea, Ephrem the Syrian, John Chrysostom, and Macarius of wherever (no kidding), to name a few1 and all of The author would like to thank the staffs of the Hilandar Research Library at The Ohio State University and, of course, the monks of Hilandar Monastery for encouraging the microfilming of the Hilandar Slavic manuscripts by Ohio State. I thank the Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection; and Georgetown University’s Woodstock Theological Library as well as its Lauinger Library Reference Room for their kind help. Georgetown University’s Office of the Provost and Center for Eurasian, East European and Russian Studies provided summer research support. Thanks also to Jennifer Spock and Donald Ostrowski for their wise suggestions. 1 An excellent example of this is Plested, Macarian Legacy. For the spe­ cific problem of Pseudo-Macarius/Pseudo-Pseudo-Macarius as it relates to this essay, see NSAW, 78-79. Tapestry of Russian Christianity: Studies in History and Culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses The Christology of nestorius and the chalcedonian settlement Fletcher, Stanley P. How to cite: Fletcher, Stanley P. (1972) The Christology of nestorius and the chalcedonian settlement, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/9976/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk THE REVEREND STANLEY P. FLETCHER, B.A. THE CHRISTOLOGY OP NESTORIUS AND THE CHALCEDONIAN SETTLEMENT A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF DURHAM The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. THE GHRISTOLOGY OF NESTORIUS AND THE CHALCEDONIAN SETTLEMENT - ABSTRACT The assessment of Nestorius1 Christology begins with a consideration of his indebtedness to Paul of Samosata, Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia.
    [Show full text]
  • Fortifications and Town Planning in Kyrrhos: Its Hellenistic Origin and Its Evolution Jeanine Abdul Massih, Mathilde Gelin
    Fortifications and town planning in Kyrrhos: its Hellenistic origin and its evolution Jeanine Abdul Massih, Mathilde Gelin To cite this version: Jeanine Abdul Massih, Mathilde Gelin. Fortifications and town planning in Kyrrhos: its Hellenistic origin and its evolution. Rune Frederiksen; Silke Müth; Peter I.Schneider; Mike Schnelle. Focus on fortifications. New Research on Fortifications in the Ancient Mediterranean and the NearEast, Oxbow Books, pp.207-219, 2016, Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens, 978-1-78570-131-3. hal-03025892 HAL Id: hal-03025892 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03025892 Submitted on 1 Dec 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives| 4.0 International License FOCUS ON FOCUS ON FORTIFICATIONS New Research on Fortifications in the Ancient Mediterranean and the Near East AN OFFPRINT FROM Fokus Fortifikation Studies: Volume 2 FOCUS ON FORTIFICATIONS New Research on Fortifications in the Ancient Mediterranean and the Near East edited by Rune Frederiksen, Silke Müth, Peter I. Schneider and Mike Schnelle Hardcover Edition: ISBN 978-1-78570-131-3 Digital Edition: ISBN 978-1-78570-132-0 Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens, Volume 18 © Oxbow Books 2016 Oxford & Philadelphia www.oxbowbooks.com Published in the United Kingdom in 2016 by OXBOW BOOKS 10 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford OX1 2EW and in the United States by OXBOW BOOKS 1950 Lawrence Road, Havertown, PA 19083 Monographs of the Danish Institute at Athens, no.
    [Show full text]
  • Antioch Ian Legacy for Today I
    ANTIOCHANTIOCH IANIAN LEGACYLEGACY FORFOR TODAYTODAY II Fr.Fr. MichelMichel NajimNajim www.Frmichel.najim.netwww.Frmichel.najim.net COURSECOURSE DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION •• YEARYEAR ONE:ONE: SeeSee ofof Antioch.Antioch. TheThe importanceimportance ofof AntiochianAntiochian historyhistory andand legacy.legacy. AntiochAntioch duringduring thethe GrecoGreco--RomanRoman period.period. EarlyEarly AntiochianAntiochian Councils.Councils. AntiochAntioch andand thethe EcumenicalEcumenical Councils.Councils. EarlyEarly AntiochianAntiochian writers:writers: GreekGreek literature,literature, SyriacSyriac literature.literature. AntiochianAntiochian LiturgicalLiturgical tradition.tradition. AntiochainAntiochain Monasticism.Monasticism. MissionaryMissionary rolerole ofof Antioch.Antioch. TheThe ChaliceChalice ofof AntiochAntioch TheThe OldestOldest LiturgicalLiturgical ChaliceChalice •• ThisThis chalicechalice waswas foundfound inin 19101910 nearnear Antioch.Antioch. ItIt goesgoes toto 2th2th centurycentury AD.AD. ItIt isis 77 1/21/2 inchesinches (19(19 cm)cm) high.high. TheThe innerinner cupcup isis mademade ofof plainplain silver,silver, andand thethe outerouter cupcup isis silversilver gilded.gilded. ThisThis cupcup isis decorateddecorated withwith 1212 figuresfigures twotwo representrepresent Christ,Christ, thethe othersothers representrepresent thethe EvangelistsEvangelists andand thethe Apostles.Apostles. ChristChrist thethe SaviorSavior andand thethe YouthfulYouthful ChristChrist TheThe Apostles:Apostles: Andrew,Andrew, JamesJames thethe Greater,Greater,
    [Show full text]
  • Nestorianism 1 Nestorianism
    Nestorianism 1 Nestorianism For the church sometimes known as the Nestorian Church, see Church of the East. "Nestorian" redirects here. For other uses, see Nestorian (disambiguation). Nestorianism is a Christological doctrine advanced by Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople from 428–431. The doctrine, which was informed by Nestorius' studies under Theodore of Mopsuestia at the School of Antioch, emphasizes the disunion between the human and divine natures of Jesus. Nestorius' teachings brought him into conflict with some other prominent church leaders, most notably Cyril of Alexandria, who criticized especially his rejection of the title Theotokos ("Bringer forth of God") for the Virgin Mary. Nestorius and his teachings were eventually condemned as heretical at the First Council of Ephesus in 431 and the Council of Chalcedon in 451, leading to the Nestorian Schism in which churches supporting Nestorius broke with the rest of the Christian Church. Afterward many of Nestorius' supporters relocated to Sassanid Persia, where they affiliated with the local Christian community, known as the Church of the East. Over the next decades the Church of the East became increasingly Nestorian in doctrine, leading it to be known alternately as the Nestorian Church. Nestorianism is a form of dyophysitism, and can be seen as the antithesis to monophysitism, which emerged in reaction to Nestorianism. Where Nestorianism holds that Christ had two loosely-united natures, divine and human, monophysitism holds that he had but a single nature, his human nature being absorbed into his divinity. A brief definition of Nestorian Christology can be given as: "Jesus Christ, who is not identical with the Son but personally united with the Son, who lives in him, is one hypostasis and one nature: human."[1] Both Nestorianism and monophysitism were condemned as heretical at the Council of Chalcedon.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography Many books were read and researched in the compilation of Binford, L. R, 1983, Working at Archaeology. Academic Press, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology: New York. Binford, L. R, and Binford, S. R (eds.), 1968, New Perspectives in American Museum of Natural History, 1993, The First Humans. Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Braidwood, R 1.,1960, Archaeologists and What They Do. Franklin American Museum of Natural History, 1993, People of the Stone Watts, New York. Age. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Branigan, Keith (ed.), 1982, The Atlas ofArchaeology. St. Martin's, American Museum of Natural History, 1994, New World and Pacific New York. Civilizations. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Bray, w., and Tump, D., 1972, Penguin Dictionary ofArchaeology. American Museum of Natural History, 1994, Old World Civiliza­ Penguin, New York. tions. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Brennan, L., 1973, Beginner's Guide to Archaeology. Stackpole Ashmore, w., and Sharer, R. J., 1988, Discovering Our Past: A Brief Books, Harrisburg, PA. Introduction to Archaeology. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA. Broderick, M., and Morton, A. A., 1924, A Concise Dictionary of Atkinson, R J. C., 1985, Field Archaeology, 2d ed. Hyperion, New Egyptian Archaeology. Ares Publishers, Chicago. York. Brothwell, D., 1963, Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment Bacon, E. (ed.), 1976, The Great Archaeologists. Bobbs-Merrill, and Study ofHuman Skeletal Remains. British Museum, London. New York. Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. (eds.), 1969, Science in Archaeology, Bahn, P., 1993, Collins Dictionary of Archaeology. ABC-CLIO, 2d ed. Thames and Hudson, London. Santa Barbara, CA. Budge, E. A. Wallis, 1929, The Rosetta Stone. Dover, New York. Bahn, P.
    [Show full text]
  • Theodoret of Cyrrhus and the Book of Joshua - Theodoret's Quaestiones Revisited
    THEODORET OF CYRRHUS AND THE BOOK OF JOSHUA - THEODORET'S QUAESTIONES REVISITED Seppo Sipila Theodoret, his life and works The city of Cyrrhus (in Greek Kupprn;) lies approx. 90 km north-east of Antioch.1 This is the town after which Theodoret of Cyrrhus was named. He was bishop of the town, holding the see for over 30 years (423-458). Theodoret was born in Antioch around 393. 2 In his youth he acted as a lector in Antioch but later on joined a monas­ tery in Apamea, 3 being nominated to the see of Cyrrhus in 423. 4 He was, as we know now, the last famous theologian of the Antiochian school. Downey, for instance, de­ scribes Theodoret as "the greatest theologian" of his day.5 The beginning of the fifth century was a time of heated theological discussion entailing a serious debate about Christology. In its essentials the question was about the true nature of Christ, discussion of which continues to exercise influence on mod­ ern Christian theology. The conflict arose between the Antiochian and the Alexandrian theology and culminated at the great Council of Chalcedon in its famous formula which defined the two natures of Christ, the divine and the human, as being present in Christ without confusion, change, division, or separation.6 The leading figure on 1For a short description of the city see R. Janin "Cyrrhus," Dictionnaire d'histoire et geographie ecclesiastique (Paris: Letouzey et Ane, 1924) 13.1186-1187. For the location see e.g. the map "Roman Roads in Northern Syria" in G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Well-Trained Theologian
    THE WELL-TRAINED THEOLOGIAN essential texts for retrieving classical Christian theology part 1, patristic and medieval Matthew Barrett Credo 2020 Over the last several decades, evangelicalism’s lack of roots has become conspicuous. Many years ago, I experienced this firsthand as a university student and eventually as a seminary student. Books from the past were segregated to classes in church history, while classes on hermeneutics and biblical exegesis carried on as if no one had exegeted scripture prior to the Enlightenment. Sometimes systematics suffered from the same literary amnesia. When I first entered the PhD system, eager to continue my theological quest, I was given a long list of books to read just like every other student. Looking back, I now see what I could not see at the time: out of eight pages of bibliography, you could count on one hand the books that predated the modern era. I have taught at Christian colleges and seminaries on both sides of the Atlantic for a decade now and I can say, in all honesty, not much has changed. As students begin courses and prepare for seminars, as pastors are trained for the pulpit, they are not required to engage the wisdom of the ancient past firsthand or what many have labelled classical Christianity. Such chronological snobbery, as C. S. Lewis called it, is pervasive. The consequences of such a lopsided diet are now starting to unveil themselves. Recent controversy over the Trinity, for example, has manifested our ignorance of doctrines like eternal generation, a doctrine not only basic to biblical interpretation and Christian orthodoxy for almost two centuries, but a doctrine fundamental to the church’s Christian identity.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT the Apostolic Tradition in the Ecclesiastical Histories Of
    ABSTRACT The Apostolic Tradition in the Ecclesiastical Histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret Scott A. Rushing, Ph.D. Mentor: Daniel H. Williams, Ph.D. This dissertation analyzes the transposition of the apostolic tradition in the fifth-century ecclesiastical histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret. In the early patristic era, the apostolic tradition was defined as the transmission of the apostles’ teachings through the forms of Scripture, the rule of faith, and episcopal succession. Early Christians, e.g., Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen, believed that these channels preserved the original apostolic doctrines, and that the Church had faithfully handed them to successive generations. The Greek historians located the quintessence of the apostolic tradition through these traditional channels. However, the content of the tradition became transposed as a result of three historical movements during the fourth century: (1) Constantine inaugurated an era of Christian emperors, (2) the Council of Nicaea promulgated a creed in 325 A.D., and (3) monasticism emerged as a counter-cultural movement. Due to the confluence of these sweeping historical developments, the historians assumed the Nicene creed, the monastics, and Christian emperors into their taxonomy of the apostolic tradition. For reasons that crystallize long after Nicaea, the historians concluded that pro-Nicene theology epitomized the apostolic message. They accepted the introduction of new vocabulary, e.g. homoousios, as the standard of orthodoxy. In addition, the historians commended the pro- Nicene monastics and emperors as orthodox exemplars responsible for defending the apostolic tradition against the attacks of heretical enemies. The second chapter of this dissertation surveys the development of the apostolic tradition.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wars of the Roses
    Unit 2: Roman Church and the Rise of the Papal State © Jason Asbell, 2019 Unit 2: Roman Church and the Rise of the Papal State © Jason Asbell, 2019 © Jason Asbell, 2019 © Jason Asbell, 2019 © Jason Asbell, 2019 SW India evangelized 1st Cent. AD Manicheanism was a Gnostic belief that was semi-Christian, but believed in a dualistic cosmology in which Good and Evil were equally powerful – this belief system lasted a long time…eventually almost all Manichean believers assimilated into either more mainstream versions of Christianity, Buddhism, or Islam © Jason Asbell, 2019 Unit 2: Roman Church and the Rise of the Papal State © Jason Asbell, 2019 St. Miltiades: First African Pope. First pope after the end of the persecution of Christians through the Edict of Milan (313 AD). Presided over the Lateran council of 313. St. Sylvester I: 1st Council of Nicaea (325). Built St. John Lateran, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and Old St. Peter's Basilica. Stated recipient of Donation of Constantine (later shown to be a forgery) Papal Reigns: St. Miltiades to St. Gregory I "the Great" MILTIADES INNOCENT I FELIX III (II?) JOHN II (2 JULY 311 – 10 JAN 314) (21 DEC 401 – 12 MARCH 417) (13 MARCH 483 – 1 MARCH 492) (2 JAN 533 – 8 MAY 535) MARK BONIFACE I ANASTASIUS II VIGILIUS (336) (28 DEC 418 – 4 SEP 422) (24 NOV 496 – 19 NOV 498) (29 MARCH 537 – 7 JUNE 555) LIBERIUS SIXTUS III HORMISDAS JOHN III (17 MAY 352 – 24 SEP 366) (31 JULY 432 – 18 AUG 440) (20 JULY 514 – 6 AUG 523) (17 JULY 561 – 13 JULY 574) SIRICIUS HILARIUS FELIX IV PELAGIUS II (17 DEC 384 – 26 NOV
    [Show full text]
  • C:\NBWIN\MSCRIPT\THESIS~1.MST Job 1
    Our Present Object: Dynamic and Powerful Eschatology Alongside Dynamic and Powerful Political Ideology in the Historical Work of Eusebius and His Continuators by Drew Kenley Maxwell A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the University of St. Michael’s College and the Historical Department of the Toronto School of Theology. In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael’s College. © Copyright by Drew Kenley Maxwell 2015 Our Present Object: Dynamic and Powerful Eschatology Alongside Dynamic and Powerful Political Ideology in the Historical Work of Eusebius and His Continuators Drew Kenley Maxwell Doctor of Philosphy in Theology University of St. Michael’s College 2015 Abstract This study identifies and expounds upon two key constituent elements in the work of the historians of the Eusebian tradition; eschatology and political ideology. Using the ecclesiastical histories of Eusebius, Socrates Scholasticus, Sozomen and Theodoret as its essential primary documents, the study demonstrates that in the content of each historical work there resides a dynamic and powerful eschatology which is also accompanied by a dynamic and powerful political ideology in every instance. Though it is impossible to objectively prove that such a coincidence is absolutely interrelated, the study suggests in a compelling way, and based on the research, that a causal relationship is very likely. In a secondary way, the study is also a witness to an emergent understanding that in Late Antiquity there was a revisioning of eschatology among the theologians of the Early Church which turned from a predominantly apocalyptic understanding of eschatology to one more grounded in history and, more importantly, the historiography of Early Christiainity.
    [Show full text]
  • Exegesis and Empire in the Early Byzantine Mediterranean
    Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum Studies and Texts in Antiquity and Christianity Herausgeber/Editor: CHRISTOPH MARKSCHIES (Heidelberg) Beirat/Advisory Board HUBERT CANCIK (Tübingen) • GIOVANNI CASADIO (Salerno) SUSANNA ELM (Berkeley) • JOHANNES HAHN (Münster) JÖRG RÜPKE (Erfurt) 17 Michael Maas Exegesis and Empire in the Early Byzantine Mediterranean Junillus Africanus and the Instituía Regularia Divinae Legis With a Contribution by Edward G. Mathews, Jr. With the Latin Text Established by Heinrich Kihn Translated by Michael Maas Mohr Siebeck MICHAF.L MAAS, born 1951; 1973 BA in Classics and Anthropology at Cornell University: 1982 Ph.D. in Ancient History and Mediterranean Archaeology at Berkeley; Professor of History and Director of the Program in Ancient Mediterranean Civilizations at Rice Univer- sity, Houston, Texas. ISBN 3-16-148108-9 ISSN 1436-3003 (Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum) Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at http://dnb.ddb.di'. © 2003 by J. C. B. Möhr (Paul Siebeck), P. O. Box 2040, D-72010Tübingen. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher's written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Guide-Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Held in Rottenburg. Printed in Germany. Acknowledgments It is a pleasure to thank the institutions that enabled me to write this book and the many friends who gave advice and encouragement during its composition.
    [Show full text]