DOCSLIB.ORG

Athanasius of Alexandria in Greek and Coptic Historical Tradition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Athanasius of Alexandria in Greek and Coptic Historical Tradition JournalofCopticStudies 15 (2013) 43–54 doi: 10.2143/JCS.15.0.3005411 ATHANASIUS OF ALEXANDRIA IN GREEK AND COPTIC HISTORICAL TRADITION BY DAVID M. GWYNN Athanasius of Alexandria (bishop 328-373) has a well-deserved reputa- tion as one of the most influential and controversial figures of Greek patristic history. His traditional image is that of the saint who champi- oned Christian orthodoxy against the so-called ‘Arian’ heresy, an image that originated in the writings of Athanasius himself.1 Yet Athanasius has also been likened to a ‘Mafia gangster’,2 and has been described as a man characterised equally by theological genius and divisive violence.3 This is not the place for a full discussion of Athanasius’ complex career (my own biography of Athanasius has now been published as Athanasiusof Alexandria:Bishop,Theologian,Ascetic,Father).4 The aims of this paper are more modest: to assess the accounts of Athanasius presented in early Coptic historiography, to compare those accounts to the Greek historical tradition, and to consider the contribution that the Coptic evidence might make to a more balanced interpretation of Athanasius’ life and legacy. There are of course certain inherent difficulties in comparing Greek and Coptic accounts of Athanasius. The great majority of Athanasius’ works survive in the Greek in which he wrote.5 Scholars have therefore approached the study of his life chiefly through these works, and through the Greek ecclesiastical tradition represented by the fifth-century church 1 This image is nicely encapsulated in the entry for Athanasius by Bright (1877) in the DictionaryofChristianBiography, and more recently in the numerous works of Charles Kannengiesser, summarised in his Prolegomena (2002). For a more critical assessment of Athanasius’ writings, see Gwynn (2007). 2 Barnes (1981) 230. Barnes expanded upon this interpretation in his Athanasiusand Constantius (1993). 3 Hanson (1988) esp. 239-273. For the ‘Arian’ Controversy, see now Ayres (2004) and Behr (2004), and for further recent studies of Athanasius, see Pettersen (1995), Martin (1996), Anatolios (1998) and the articles collected in Gemeinhardt (2011). 4 Gwynn (2012). 5 For Athanasius’ knowledge of Greek literary culture, see Stead (1976). Attempts have been made to argue that Athanasius also wrote in Coptic (Lefort (1933), Müller (1974)). As Barnes (1993) 13 has observed, however, while Athanasius probably could speak the Coptic language, all extant Athanasian Coptic writings appear to be translations from Greek originals. 996664.indb6664.indb 4433 113/01/143/01/14 115:095:09 44 DAVID M. GWYNN histories of Socrates (d. c.440), Sozomen (d. c.450) and Theodoret (d. c.466).6 To speak of a Coptic historical tradition on the other hand is to use the term Coptic in a very broad sense, as the relevant material largely survives in translations from lost Coptic language writings. More- over, there is no fully extant Coptic equivalent to the Greek ecclesiastical historians.7 Socrates, Sozomen and Theodoret all wrote continuations of Eusebius of Caesarea’s original HistoriaEcclesiastica, and their works cover the entire period of Athanasius’ episcopate and set his career against the wider background of fourth- and early fifth-century Christianity. The Coptic HistoriesoftheChurch may originally have offered an equally broad view of Christian history, for the first sections of the Histories likewise draw upon Eusebius, but this text is now extremely fragmentary.8 Much of the material from the lost Histories survives in Arabic transla- tion in the HistoryofthePatriarchsofAlexandria, but this work is more narrowly focused on Egypt rather than the wider Church and despite its conventional title is a collection of biographies rather than a narrative history.9 A comparison between these various texts is not therefore com- paring like with like. A similar problem holds true for our other leading representative of early Coptic historiography, the seventh-century Chron- icle of John of Nikiu. John’s Chronicle survives only in a late Ethiopic translation of an Arabic translation of the original, and again is not an annalistic record of the type characteristic of the Greek chronicle genre.10 Nevertheless, the Greek and Coptic traditions do share considerable common ground. Both represent Athanasius as one of the greatest leaders of the fourth-century Church and uphold Athanasius’ conception of him- self as a champion of orthodoxy, an orthodoxy that came to be represented by the original Nicene Creed of 325. During the fifth century, the author- ity of Athanasius was recognised by men from all parts of the theological spectrum, by Nestorius of Constantinople and Theodoret of Cyrrhus no 6 For a general introduction to these three historians see Chesnut (1986), and for Socrates and Theodoret see the works of Urbainczyk (1997, 2002). A fourth Ecclesiastical History was written in the fifth century by Philostorgius, an adherent of the so-called ‘Neo- Arian’ theology. His hostility to Athanasius makes him a valuable if at times unreliable alternative source, but in this article I have limited myself to the ‘orthodox’ Greek tradition represented by his three contemporaries. 7 Nor is there any indication that these fifth-century Greek ecclesiastical histories were ever translated into Coptic. 8 See Orlandi (1968a), Johnson (1973, 1977) and most recently Orlandi (2007). 9 On the complex history of this work see den Heijer (1989). All my translations are taken from the text of Evetts (1907). 10 All translations here from the Chronicle are taken from Charles (1916). 996664.indb6664.indb 4444 113/01/143/01/14 115:095:09 ATHANASIUS OF ALEXANDRIA IN GREEK AND COPTIC 45 less than by Cyril and his Alexandrian successors.11 This remained true in the divided churches that gradually emerged after the Councils of Ephesus in 431 and Chalcedon in 451.12 Where the historical traditions differ sig- nificantly is in the events of Athanasius’ life that they choose to emphasise and in the sources upon which they draw. It is these differences which I wish to explore. According to the HistoryofthePatriarchs (Evetts (1907) 407-408), Athanasius as a youth was raised by his mother, who was an ardent pagan and desired him to marry. Athanasius, however, drove away the many beautiful girls his mother brought before him. In despair his mother took him to Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria (312-328), who baptised them both and oversaw Athanasius’ education in the Scriptures. A different story of Athanasius’ childhood appears in the Greek ecclesiastical histo- rians. Socrates (I.15) and Sozomen (II.17), drawing in turn on the Latin ecclesiastical historian Rufinus (X.15), report that when Alexander first saw Athanasius the latter was playing with other children and performing the actions of a bishop in their games, even baptising them. Athanasius played the role so well that Alexander confirmed the baptisms that Atha- nasius had performed and took him into his entourage.13 These stories are equally hagiographical towards Athanasius and nei- ther can be proven to be true (or false). Both have the same purpose, to identify Athanasius as a man marked out from his youth for greatness and to bind Athanasius closely with his predecessor Alexander. However, this last theme is of greater significance in the Coptic tradition than in the Greek. Socrates ends his version of Athanasius’ upbringing with the statement that Alexander brought Athanasius to Nicaea as his deacon ‘to assist him in the disputations there when the Synod was convened’ (Socrates I.15), but he places no major importance on Athanasius’ role during Alexander’s episcopate. By contrast, the HistoryofthePatriarchs declares that once Athanasius’ education was complete Alexander ‘made him his scribe, and he became as though he were the interpreter of the aforesaid father, and a minister of the word which he wished to utter’ 11 Athanasius’ works are cited repeatedly in the patristic florilegia of Nestorius’ Bazaar ofHeracleides and Theodoret’s Eranistes. For the importance of Cyril’s exploitation of Athanasius’ anti-Arian rhetoric against Nestorius to establish himself as Athanasius’ heir and the new champion of orthodoxy, see Wessel (2004) esp. 126-137. 12 On the reinterpretation of Christian tradition that took place during the debates sur- rounding Chalcedon, see further Gwynn (2009) and other articles in the same volume. 13 Rufinus’ source for this episode is unknown, but as he spent a number of years in Egypt it is possible that his story draws on Alexandrian tradition. For the Ecclesiastical History of Rufinus, see Thelamon (1981). 996664.indb6664.indb 4455 113/01/143/01/14 115:095:09 46 DAVID M. GWYNN (Evetts (1907) 408). This emphasis is naturally appropriate to an Egyptian context and is typical of the HistoryofthePatriarchs, where the suc- cession of the bishops of Alexandria is further reinforced by similarly associating Theophilus with Athanasius, and then Cyril with his uncle Theophilus.14 The relationship between Alexander and Athanasius also underlies hagiographical claims that Athanasius played a leading role at the Council of Nicaea, claims which have no basis in the writings of Athanasius himself.15 Most importantly for my present purposes, their relationship is equally central to the account in the HistoryofthePatri- archs (likewise preserved in fragments of the Coptic Histories) of the conflict between Alexander, Athanasius and Arius that led to Arius’ death. Immediately following the story of Athanasius’ youth and baptism, the HistoryofthePatriarchs reports that after the emperor Constantine died, his son Constantius was corrupted by Arius. Constantius therefore sum- moned Alexander from Alexandria to Constantinople and asked him to restore Arius. Athanasius accompanied Alexander to the imperial court as ‘his interpreter and scribe and mouthpiece’ (Evetts (1907) 409) and refuted Arius in debate until Arius withdrew. The next day, Arius bribed the royal attendants not to allow Athanasius to enter the debating room, but Alexander refused to speak, for ‘how shall I speak without a tongue’ (Evetts (1907) 410).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FASTING and PRAYER OUR HOPE the Anchor of Our Soul
    FASTING AND PRAYER OUR HOPE The Anchor of Our Soul April 7, 2019 4th Sunday of Lent John of the Ladder Revision F GOSPEL: Mark 9:17-30 EPISTLE: Hebrews 6:13-20 Today’s Gospel lesson is virtually ignored in the West except for some charismatic churches due to its controversial nature. In the Eastern lectionary, however, it is used twice: here from Mark 9 and on the 10th Sunday after Pentecost from Matthew 17. Here the theme of fasting and prayer will be covered while on the 10 Sunday after Pentecost, the theme of a faith capable of moving mountains will be used. Today’s Epistle lesson has been used by some Western churches, but is falling into disuse also. Table of Contents Background for the Gospel Lesson ............................................................................................................................ 560 Gospel: Mark 9:14-30, (Matthew 17:14-21, Luke 9:37-42) ..................................................................................... 561 History of Fasting ........................................................................................................................................... 563 Types of Prayer .............................................................................................................................................. 569 Epistle: Hebrews 6:13-20 .......................................................................................................................................... 572 Oaths and Promises .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cyril of Alexandria 11:20 - 13:00 Tuesday, 20Th August, 2019 Room 1 Presentation Type Short Communications
    Cyril of Alexandria 11:20 - 13:00 Tuesday, 20th August, 2019 Room 1 Presentation type Short Communications 605 Surpassing Mere Logomachy: Cyril and Theodoret on the Third and Fourth Anathemas Michael Magree, S.J. University of Notre Dame, South Bend, USA Abstract To avoid erroneous evaluations of ancient debates, it is necessary to note the particulars of the arguments in order to see just where the disagreements lay. In the case of Theodoret of Cyrus’s and Cyril of Alexandria’s debates about the twelve anathemas, the exchanges about Philippians 2:5-11 show that each recognized points of agreement in their common opposition to non-Nicene theologies and, more precisely, in their common acceptance both of the Word’s consubstantiality with the Father and of the Word’s consequent immutability and omniscience. Each bishop attempted to use these principles to argue for their respective differing claims about the Word enfleshed. Theodoret said that the union of humanity and divinity cannot be called natural, because this would obscure the distinction of these natures and would make the union involuntary. Cyril had used just such a distinction of nature and will, but he then had to clarify how it applied. Theodoret argued that consubstantiality means that the Word cannot be ignorant, and therefore Jesus Christ can only be ignorant insofar as he is the human subject of ignorance. Cyril said that a true union must entail the ability to say that the incarnate Word is the subject of ignorance, while not ignorant in itself. Cyril’s repetition of the claim that ‘the same one can both suffer and not suffer’ in his later Quod Unus Sit Christusshowed that Theodoret’s attack on this point hit on a claim that Cyril could recognize as difficult to accept.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arian Controversy, Its Ramifications and Lessons for the Ghanaian Church
    International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention ISSN (Online): 2319 – 7722, ISSN (Print): 2319 – 7714 www.ijhssi.org Volume 2 Issue 11ǁ November. 2013ǁ PP.48-54 The Arian Controversy, its Ramifications and Lessons for the Ghanaian Church IDDRISSU ADAM SHAIBU Department of Religion & Human Values, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast-Ghana ABSTRACT: The thrust of this paper is to explore the Arian controversy, the ramifications of decisions taken by the various councils on the body of Jesus Christ and the possible lessons that the Ghanaian Church can learn from these ramifications. This was done by reviewing literature on the Arian controversy. It came out that Arianism was condemned at the council of Nicaea. However, this did not end the controversy due to the inclusion of a word that was deemed unbiblical and the interferences of some Roman Emperors.The paper concludes that it is advisable that the church ought to have the capacity to deal with her internal problems without the support of a third party, especially those without any theological insight to issues of the Church. It seldom leads to cribbing, leads to negativity, breeds tension and sometimes fighting/civil war which then lead to destruction of lives and properties. I. THE GREACO-ROMAN WORLD Although, Christianity emerged in the Roman world, it matured in the world of Greek philosophy and ideas. The Greek world was one that paid much respect to philosophical sophistication. The Early Church was thus permeated and penetrated by this philosophical sophistication (Hellenism) (Weaver, 1987). The religion in its earliest form can be said to be a hellenistic movement that attracted hellenised people from different ethnic groups.
    [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]
  • 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 Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate
    The Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate by David Andrew Graham A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Wycliffe College and the Theological Department of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael's College © Copyright by David Andrew Graham 2013 The Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate David Andrew Graham Master of Arts in Theology University of St. Michael’s College 2013 Abstract This thesis contributes to the debate over the meaning and function of the doctrine of divine impassibility in theological and especially christological discourse. Seeking to establish the coherence and utility of the paradoxical language characteristic of the received christological tradition (e.g. the impassible Word became passible flesh and suffered impassibly), it argues that the doctrine of divine apatheia illuminates the apocalyptic and soteriological dimension of the incarnate Son’s passible life more effectively than recent reactions against it. The first chapter explores the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria and the meaning and place of apatheia within it. In light of the christological tradition which Cyril epitomized, the second chapter engages contemporary critiques and re-appropriations of impassibility, focusing on the particular contributions of Jürgen Moltmann, Robert W. Jenson, Bruce L. McCormack and David Bentley Hart. ii Acknowledgments If this thesis communicates any truth, beauty and goodness, credit belongs to all those who have shaped my life up to this point. In particular, I would like to thank the Toronto School of Theology and Wycliffe College for providing space to do theology from within the catholic church.
    [Show full text]
  • 274 Publishers, Inc., 1974, Pp. 637, $ 15.00. This Is the First Volume
    274 Reviews of Books Andrei Oţetea, Ed., The History of the Romanian People, Boston, Mass., Twayne Publishers, Inc., 1974, pp. 637, $ 15.00. This is the first volume in the National Histories Series, edited by Professor Sherman D. Spector (of the Russell Sage College, well known to us as the author of Spector-Rene Ristelhueber, A History of the Balkan Peoples, New York, Twayne, 1971), whose intent is «to present the historical evolution of a nation as that nation’s historians see it. In this way, indigenous historians can present contemporary interpretations of their national history, and American readers may gain new perspectives and insights not generally avail­ able in the West». The original work —Istoria Poporului Român—was prepared for a Romanian audience, and «its success has led to its appearance in an English-language translation». Prepared by 14 Romanian authorities, its 23 chapters, divided into 4 parts (Ancient History, Medieval History, Modern History and Contemporary History), are the best available presentation of the «revised» Romanian history from the contemporary Marxian (socialist) point of view. There are no footnote references, and the bibliography (pp. 618 - 623) refers nearly entirely to Romanian studies. Quite interesting and valuable are 11 color and 144 black and white illustrations. Spector recommends this history «to those dispassionate and objective American readers who wish to acquire an appreciation of the struggles Romanians have endured since they were swept up into the whirlwind of international politics». We heartily agree with his recommendation, although the presentation is not «dispassionate and objective», being a frankly ideological version of the present regime’s views of the «forms of social and na lional struggle whose crowning glory was the insurrection of August 23, 1944, raised to a higher stage in our days by the Romanian Communist Party which serves the noblest causes of our people» (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Ba-350Te/350Ste
    1 ” ” BA-350TE/350STE /2 -2 BRONZE BALL VALVE MSS SP-110 THREE-PIECE, FULL-PORT 600 WOG / 150 SWP EXTENDED TUBE ENDS INLINE REPAIRABLE* MATERIALS LIST AVAILABLE 15 6” FEMALE 6” MALE 14 ITEM PART MODEL MATERIALS ASTM SPEC. END END 1 Body 350 & 350S Bronze B584 2 End Cap 350 & 350S Bronze B584 B’ 350 Brass B16 3Stem 350S 316 Stainless Steel B276 4 Packing Nut 350 & 350S Brass B16 5 Packing 350 & 350S PTFE RPTFE 6 Thrust Washer 350 & 350S (25% Glass Reinforced) 13 12 350 CP Brass B16 9 7Ball OPEN 350S 316 Stainless Steel B276 11 MILWAUKEE VALVE BA-350 L RPTFE 8 Seat 350 & 350S (15% Glass Reinforced) 9 Handle 350 & 350S Steel w/ Zinc Plating B633 R 10 Handle Nut 350 & 350S Steel w/ Zinc Plating B633 11 Handle Grip 350 & 350S Vinyl 12 Body Bolt 350 & 350S Steel (Gr 8) w/ Zinc Plating B633 13 Body Nut 350 & 350S Steel (Gr 8) w/ Zinc Plating B633 14 Stub End, 6"M 350 & 350S Copper Tube, Type "K" 15 Stub End, 6"F 350 & 350S Copper Tube, Type "L" 10 3 Pressure temperature charts contain valve seat 5 4 7 and body ratings for standard valves. Solder 8 6 end valves are de-rated by the limitations of the 2 2 H joint as specified in ASME 16.18. Brazing installations can be likewise derated. Consult ASME 16.18 and the American Welding Society for the actual joint ratings of the material being used for the specific application. Pressure and Temperature ratings may be further derated in accordance with the pressure rating associated with the type of copper tube 1 A used for the stub end.
    [Show full text]
  • Circumcision of the Spirit in the Soteriology of Cyril of Alexandria Jonathan Stephen Morgan Marquette University
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects Circumcision of the Spirit in the Soteriology of Cyril of Alexandria Jonathan Stephen Morgan Marquette University Recommended Citation Morgan, Jonathan Stephen, "Circumcision of the Spirit in the Soteriology of Cyril of Alexandria" (2013). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 277. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/277 CIRCUMCISION OF THE SPIRIT IN THE SOTERIOLOGY OF CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA by Jonathan S. Morgan, B.S., M.A. 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 2013 ABSTRACT CIRCUMCISION OF THE SPIRIT IN THE SOTERIOLOGY OF CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA Jonathan S. Morgan, B.S., M.A. Marquette University, 2013 In this dissertation I argue that Cyril of Alexandria’s interpretation of “spiritual circumcision” provides invaluable insight into his complex doctrine of salvation. Spiritual Circumcision – or Circumcision by the Spirit -- is a recurring theme throughout his extensive body of exegetical literature, which was written before the Nestorian controversy (428). When Cyril considers the meaning and scope of circumcision, he recognizes it as a type that can describe a range of salvific effects. For him, circumcision functions as a unifying concept that ties together various aspects of salvation such as purification, sanctification, participation, and freedom. Soteriology, however, can only be understood in relation to other doctrines. Thus, Cyril’s discussions of circumcision often include correlative areas of theology such as hamartiology and Trinitarian thought. In this way, Cyril’s discussions on circumcision convey what we are saved from, as well as the Trinitarian agency of our salvation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Holy See
    The Holy See GREETINGS OF JOHN PAUL II TO THE DELEGATIONS FROM THE OTHER CHURCHES AND ECCLESIAL COMMUNITIES Thursday, 25 January 2001 I am very pleased to have this moment of fellowship, which gives me the welcome opportunity once again to express my gratitude to each of you, venerable and dear Brothers, who wished to take part in today's celebration. Dear Brothers, I am pleased to spend this time of fellowship with you and to take the opportunity to thank you for your cordial presence at this celebration for the close of the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity. Our common prayer at the tomb of the Apostle Paul has been a source of great joy for me. I give thanks to the Lord for this moving sign of our commitment to Christian unity at the beginning of the third millennium. In a very special way, then, I wish to express my gratitude to each of you for your presence today. May Christ, "the way, and the truth, and the life", continue to guide and sustain us in fidelity to his will that all may be one. I am delighted that we have been given this time of fraternal fellowship, after having earlier brought our petitions to God in shared prayer. I would like to thank in particular: - the Delegation from the Ecumenical Patriarchate, representing His Holiness Bartholomew I, Ecumenical Patriarch; - the Delegation from the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria, representing His Beatitude Petros VII, Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa; - the Delegation from the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch, representing His Beatitude
    [Show full text]
  • Early-Christianity-Timeline.Pdf
    Pagan Empire Christian Empire 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 1 AD Second 'Bishop' of Rome. Pupil of Student of Polycarp. First system- Bishop of Nyssa, brother of Basil. Pope. The Last Father of the Peter. Author of a letter to Corinth, atic theologian, writing volumi- Bishop of Original and sophisticated theologi- model of St Gregory the Church. First of the St John of (1 Clement), the earliest Christian St Clement of Rome nously about the Gospels and the St Irenaeus St Cyprian Carthage. an, writing on Trinitarian doctrine Gregory of Nyssa an ideal Scholastics. Polymath, document outside the NT. church, and against heretics. and the Nicene creed. pastor. Great monk, and priest. Damascus Former disciple of John the Baptist. Prominent Prolific apologist and exegete, the Archbishop of Constantinople, St Leo the Pope. Able administrator in very Archbishop of Seville. Encyclopaedist disciple of Jesus, who became a leader of the most important thinker between Paul brother of Basil. Greatest rhetorical hard times, asserter of the prima- and last great scholar of the ancient St Peter Judean and later gentile Christians. Author of two St Justin Martyr and Origen, writing on every aspect stylist of the Fathers, noted for St Gregory Nazianzus cy of the see of Peter. Central to St Isidore world, a vital link between the learning epistles. Source (?) of the Gospel of Mark. of life, faith and worship. writing on the Holy Spirit. Great the Council of Chalcedon. of antiquity and the Middle Ages. Claimed a knowledge and vision of Jesus independent Pupil of Justin Martyr. Theologian.
    [Show full text]
  • The 12Th Day of November Commemoration of Our Father
    The 12th Day of November Commemoration of our Father among the Saints, John the Merciful, < Patriarch of Alexandria, the Almsgiver; and the Commemoration of our Venerable Father Nilus the Faster, of Sinai. Evening Service At “Lord, I have called...,” 6 stikhera: 3 stikhera of the holy father, in Tone 4: To the melody, “Thou hast given a sign....” Thou didst emulate the compassion of the merciful Máster, / O wondrous fáther John, / Thou didst distríbute thy bread to the needy in charity, O hóly one. / Therefore, thy memory abides truly, foréver, / And those who celebrate it with faith are delivered from trials and afflíctions, /// O most richly-bless’t híerarch. As He who sees all sécret things / Beheld the purity and ríghtness of thy mind / And the inspired náture of thy character and wáy of life / He anointed thee with myrrh and elevated thee to a magníficent throne / And entrusted thee with the guídance of thy flock /// Which thou didst lead to the harbor of divine grace, O holy fáther John. The Lord granted thee all the prayers of thy heart, O truly wóndrous one, / For thou didst keep all His saving commándments. / Trúly, thou didst love God with thy entire being and thy neíghbor as thyself / And thou didst give help to those in need, O thou who art bléss’t by God, /// Therefore, we honor thee today, O holy fáther John. And 3 stikhera of the venerable father, in Tone 8: To the melody, “What shall we call thee?….” Whát shall we call thee, O hóly one? / A river flowing from the spiritual páradise? / A channel carrying to us the many gífts províded by God? / A flowing tide filled with the teáchings of grace? / A vessel of wisdom, divine knowledge and understánding? / A fervent instructor and an árdent intercéssor? /// Pray now that our sóuls may be saved! What náme shall we give thee, O vén’rable one? / Worker in the grove of immortálity? / Blessèd gardener of the spíritual páradise? / Learnèd student of the láws of God? / Teacher of the dóctrines divine? / 1 RLE.
    [Show full text]