DOCSLIB.ORG

Magnanimous Virtue: the Fruit of Redemptive Suffering Sr

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Magnanimous Virtue: the Fruit of Redemptive Suffering Sr Magnanimous Virtue: The Fruit of Redemptive Suffering Sr. Madeleine Grace, CVI Suffering and Hope Conference University of St. Thomas November 10-13, 2005 While many of us may have met the name of John Chrysostom (347-407) as the golden tongued orator, the unraveling of his life and the difficult plight he entailed is known by few. His time period and home are far removed from current society yet the message of his famous orations are quite applicable within today’s milieu. Our focus however will not be a famous oration but a work written in exile. This piece of the Golden Tongue in a certain sense foreshadows our late Pontiff’s Salvifici Doloris, and yet, holds its own purpose. There are likewise certain commonalities within the lives of John Chrysostom and John Paul II (1920-2005), yet it must be stated up front that they travel very different paths. Born at Antioch in what was then Syria of well to do Christian parents, he received his education in that city and then went off to live as a hermit in the mountains for four years. Returning to Antioch he was ordained to the deaconate in 381 by Meletius, Bishop of Antioch, and to the priesthood in 386 by Bishop Flavian, Meletius’ successor. In Antioch from 386 to 397, he delivered some of his most well-known homilies. In 397, he was appointed patriarch of Constantinople where he focused on reform of the city and the clergy. In fact, the historian Sozomen recounts that Chrysostom, who was a moral reformer by nature, “did not confine his efforts to the reformation of his own church; but as a good and large-minded man, he sought to rectify abuses throughout the world.”1 The church historian Theodoret readily gives Chrysostom the title “the great teacher of the world.”2 The Patriarch set an example of simplicity in lifestyle and gave much of his income to the erection of hospitals and the support of the poor, yet his efforts to raise the moral tone of the city met great opposition. Chrysostom’s archenemy was the empress Eudoxia who believed that his sermons on luxury and depravity of lifestyle were directed against her and her court. As the historian Sozomen further recorded, “this boldness [of the Patriarch] pleased the people, but grieved the wealthy and the powerful, who were guilty of most of the vices which he denounced.”3 Hostile bishops who did not share John’s reform nature joined Eudoxia in a successful maneuvering which led to John’s exile. When the populace heard of the Patriarch’s banishment in 403, they were outraged. The 1The Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen, in A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church 2, Socrates, Sozomenus: Church Histories (Grand Rapids, Michigan, Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1952), 8.3:400. 2Theodoret, The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 3, Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, Rufinus: Historical Writings (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983), 5.34:154. 3The Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen, 8.2:400. Empress became frightened at the people’s anger and recalled Chrysostom.4 The exile, however, did not change the orator’s reform nature nor temper his tongue5 and he was sent into exile again on June 24th in the following year.6 Amid all of this intrigue, John complained that he was exiled “without a legal trial or any of the forms of the law,” yet immediately complied.7 The people followed him into exile. In an attempt to discourage further pilgrimages, he was led to a desolate region on the eastern edge of the Black Sea. He died en route at Pontus in the year 407. It was during these final years, probably not long before his death, that John composed the work which has come to be known as None Can Harm Him Who Does Not Injure Himself, or simply, On Suffering. In this short treatise, he maintains that no one can inflict harm or destroy one’s life of virtue if one does not allow that to happen.8 He recalls the example of Job who lost family, friends, property, and health — everything seemingly exteriorly precious to the individual in this life. As the solitary Bishop reflected on Job’s condition, he perceived that he was not robbed of his possessions but increased in the wealth of his virtue.9 At the same time, in taking the example of Cain and Abel, God does not abolish penalties on account of the virtue of those who suffer. Rather, He ordains punishments on account of the malice which individuals perform with wickedness in their hearts. Those who are entreated with evil “become more illustrious in consequence of the designs formed against them” due to “the courage of those who are the victims of them.”10 John calls upon the words of Paul, “We do not lose heart, because our inner being is renewed each day even though our body is being destroyed at the same time” (2 Cor 4:16).11 The great benefit of these sufferings for Chrysostom and certainly for the Christian world is that they “expiate sins, and work righteousness. So great is the advantage of them in the case of those who bear them [sufferings] bravely.”12 Proceeding in his argument, the Patriarch points out that if one receives unjust injury and then responds with “blasphemous speech,” this person has inflicted “damage” on himself which proceeds “from within, and from the man himself ... from his own littleness of soul.”13 Not even 4It is believed by some that the famed Eudoxia had a miscarriage and blamed the loss of the child on the injustice committed against Chrysostom and therefore led to recalling him. Other accounts refer to the tremblings of an earthquake which so frightened Eudoxia that she pleaded with the Emperor for the recalling of Chrysostom. See Philip Schaff, “Prologomena: The Life and Work of st John Chrysostom, ” Introduction to John Chrysostom, None Can Harm Him Who Does Not Injure Himself, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 9, Saint Chrysostom: On the Priesthood; Ascetic Treatises, Select Homilies and Letters; Homilies on the Statues (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1908), 13 and New Catholic Encyclopedia, 2002 edition, sv “John Chrysostom, St” by P. W. Harkins. 5See The Ecclesiastical History by Socrates Scholasticus in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 2, Socrates, Sozomenus: Church Histories, 6.18:150. 6New Catholic Encyclopedia, 2002 edition, sv “John Chrysostom, St” by P. W. Harkins. 7The Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen, 8.22:413. 8Chrysostom, None Can Harm Him Who Does Not Injure Himself, 2:272. 9Chrysostom, None Can Harm Him Who Does Not Injure Himself, 3:273. 10Chrysostom, None Can Harm Him Who Does Not Injure Himself, 4:274. 11New American Bible 12Chrysostom, None Can Harm Him Who Does Not Injure Himself, 4:274. 13Chrysostom, None Can Harm Him Who Does Not Injure Himself, 5:274. 2 the devil has the power to upset the individual “who lived before the law and before the time of grace. ... Such is the force of nobility of soul.”14 Chrysostom contrasts the response of Paul and that of Judas to what each had been given. Paul experienced “innumerable storms of trial” yet was crowned with victory all the more in consequence for Paul had a mind “disposed to virtue” which Judas did not. While Judas who was initiated in the “highest form of the Christian life,” received the grace to perform miracles, heard many sermons on poverty, the Savior, knowing his covetous nature, entrusted him with the money for the poor. Christ provided the opportunity for Judas to have a “means of appeasing his greed [so that] he might be saved from falling into that appalling gulf of sin, checking the greater evil beforehand by a lesser one.”15 Thus, Chrysostom repeats his theme, “in no case will anyone be able to injure a man who does not choose to injure himself.” Likewise, the person who is not willing to be temperate cannot be of any profit to others.16 Referring to the example of the house built on sand, buildings of this kind will fall, even if no one put pressure on them for there is no foundation.17 The Patriarch concludes his essay by reiterating his thesis: If any one be harmed and injured he certainly suffers this at his own hands, not at the hands of others, even if there be countless multitudes injuring and insulting him: so that he does not suffer this at his own hands, not all the creatures who inhabit the whole earth and sea if they combined to attack him would be able to hurt one who is vigilant and sober in the Lord.18 The key to such steadfastness is a decisive belief in the redemptive value of suffering, the strength of which is drawn from his last line: “one who is vigilant and sober in the Lord.” There is no question that suffering borne in a Christ like sense bears its own fruit. History is fortunate to have retained much of the correspondence of the “Golden Tongue” while in exile. For a man who suffered terribly from the cold, he shows a great compassion for those who have experienced any kind of ill health whatsoever. Further, his heart goes out to his followers in Constantinople who have suffered on his account. At one point, Chrysostom counsels the deaconess Olympias on restorative health remedies.19 Certainly compassion — a sharing in the passion, the suffering of another — is a natural fruit.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • The Importance of Athanasius and the Views of His Character
    The Importance of Athanasius and the Views of His Character J. Steven Davis Submitted to Dr. Jerry Sutton School of Divinity Liberty University September 19, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I: Research Proposal Abstract .............................................................................................................................11 Background ......................................................................................................................11 Limitations ........................................................................................................................18 Method of Research .........................................................................................................19 Thesis Statement ..............................................................................................................21 Outline ...............................................................................................................................21 Bibliography .....................................................................................................................27 Chapter II: Background of Athanasius An Influential Figure .......................................................................................................33 Early Life ..........................................................................................................................33 Arian Conflict ...................................................................................................................36
    [Show full text]
  • NPNF2-03. Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, & Rufinus
    NPNF2-03. Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, & Rufinus: Historical Writings by Philip Schaff About NPNF2-03. Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, & Rufinus: Historical Writings by Philip Schaff Title: NPNF2-03. Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, & Rufinus: Historical Writings URL: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf203.html Author(s): Schaff, Philip (1819-1893) Publisher: Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library Print Basis: New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1892 Source: Logos Inc. Rights: Public Domain Status: This volume has been carefully proofread and corrected. CCEL Subjects: All; Proofed; Early Church; LC Call no: BR60 LC Subjects: Christianity Early Christian Literature. Fathers of the Church, etc. NPNF2-03. Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, & Rufinus: Philip Schaff Historical Writings Table of Contents About This Book. p. ii Title Page.. p. 1 Preface.. p. 2 The Ecclesiastical History, Dialogues, and Letters of Theodoret.. p. 3 Title Page.. p. 3 Translator©s Preface.. p. 3 Chronological Tables to accompany the History and Life of Theodoret.. p. 4 Prolegomena.. p. 9 Parentage, Birth, and Education.. p. 9 Episcopate at Cyrus.. p. 13 Relations with Nestorius and to Nestorianism.. p. 15 Under the Ban of Theodosius and of the Latrocinium.. p. 19 Theodoret and Chalcedon.. p. 22 Retirement after Chalcedon, and Death.. p. 24 The Condemnation of ªthe Three Chapters.º. p. 26 The Works of Theodoret.. p. 28 Contents and Character of the Extant Works.. p. 30 Manuscripts and Editions of Separate Works.. p. 41 The Anathemas of Cyril in Opposition to Nestorius.. p. 42 Counter-statements of Theodoret.. p. 43 The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret.. p. 52 Book I. p. 52 Prologue.--Design of the History.
    [Show full text]
  • Theodoret, Commentator on the Psalms
    THEODORET, COMMENTATOR ON THE PSALMS At the Council of Chalcedon in 451, Theodoret was formally reinstated as bishop of Cyrus following deposition by the Robber Synod of Ephesus in 449, an assembly declared null and void by Pope Leo I the following year. In that year 451 Theodoret wrote to “the monks of Constantinople” a letter in which he claims authorship of thirty five works1 – a remarkable achievement for someone who for the same number of years, before retirement in 458, was bishop of a diocese with over 800 parishes in his care, and who was credited also with its civic improvement and social welfare2. In an earlier letter, dated on internal evidence December 448, Theodoret, better known to later ages for his dogmatic and controversial treatises, apologetic and historical works, claims also to have commented on “all the prophets, the psalter, and the apostle”3. For a busy pastor, that is clearly an imposing exegetical output, con- centrating on the Old Testament, no mention being made of any com- mentary on the Gospels, and that on the fourteen Pauline epistles being left possibly till last. Most of the Old Testament, the exception being Wisdom Books, came in for comment – Pentateuch, Historical Books and Prophets, as well as the Song of Songs – whether in full commentary or, owing to failing health, in a series of Quaestiones. Theodoret tells us in its preface that he would like to have begun his exegetical works with that Commentary on the Psalter as an appropriate firstfruits, partly because of the exalted nature of the material, partly perhaps because of the pride of place such an opus occupied among the works of other Fathers, including fellow Antiochenes Theodore of Mopsuestia and – to judge from textual evidence of youthful inexperience – possibly John Chrysostom4.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret of Cyrus
    2 Theōria in Theodore’s and Theodoret’s Commentaries This chapter provides analysis of primary source material in the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret of Cyrus in order to illustrate and develop a definition of Antiochene —or at least theōria as understood by Theodore and Theodoret. Primary sources theōria for this research include manuscripts of Theodore’s and Theodoret’s exegetical works found in the TLG database1 and in J. P. Migne’s (PG).2 These are supplemented with recent Patrologia Graeca translations such as those in the Fathers of the Church (FC) multivolume series and catenae such as the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (ACCS).3 Despite the presence of significant research on Antiochene exegesis, there remains a relative dearth of serious study on Antiochene in the primary sources of Theodore and theōria Theodoret. My study builds on the foundation of Bradley Nassif’s 33 ANTIOCHENE THEŌRIA IN THEODORE AND THEODORET dissertation, which, among other concerns, addresses primarily theōria in the writings of John Chrysostom.4 In this chapter I aim to help fill the first of Nassif’s five noted lacunae for research on Antiochene —namely, to review other individual Antiochene writings and theōria their use of the term .5 Regarding such analysis, the Catholic theōria patristic scholar Bertrand de Margerie writes: The complexity of the material available shows that we still undoubtedly await the definitive work that will give us an exact understanding of the meaning of Antiochian , or, better still, of the different meanings theoria of the term found in the authors of the School and even within the same author.6 The reader will have to decide if the material in this chapter provides such an exacting definition of from the writings of Theodore theōria and Theodoret.
    [Show full text]
  • Against Jovinian and Ascetic Responsibility
    chapter 8 Against Jovinian and Ascetic Responsibility In 384 Jerome wrote a letter praising Blesilla, the daughter of his friend and pa- tron Paula. Recently recovered from a serious illness, Blesilla had subsequently converted to ascetic Christianity.1 This letter is part of Jerome’s attempt to cul- tivate a circle of patrons in Rome.2 When Jerome writes of Blesilla’s asceticism he emphasises the power of words to affect the material world: She smelt somewhat of neglect and lay in the tomb of the world bound by the bandages of wealth, but Jesus roared, dismayed in spirit, and cried out, saying: “Blesilla, come out!” Having been called, she has risen and come out and eats with the Lord. … She knows that she owes her life to the one to whom she has entrusted it … [When she was ill] what reme- dies were there from her kindred, what words all lighter than smoke? She who has died to the world and who lives again in Christ owes nothing to you ungrateful relatives.3 Blesilla was already a Christian, and here her conversion to asceticism is inter- woven with the story of Lazarus from John 11– 12, linking her life to this biblical model of sanctity.4 Throughout his stay in Rome and during his subsequent time in the East, Jerome showed how literary production – the reading, writ- ing, supplementing, and discussion of material textual artefacts – constituted the lived ascetic Christian life.5 Once again, in this letter to Marcella, the move to ascetic Christianity derives from the gospel text; it is a literary product.
    [Show full text]
  • AN INTRODUCTION to CHURCH HISTORY: from the BEGINNINGS to 1500
    AN INTRODUCTION TO CHURCH HISTORY: from THE BEGINNINGS to 1500 COURSE TEXTBOOK This textbook is based principally on: Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church, (Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York 1918) Also included herein are selections and material adapted from the following sources: Chadwick, Henry The Early Church, Revised Edition. (Penguin, 1993) Deansly, Margaret, A History of the Medieval Church, 590-1500. (Routledge. London. 1989) Dysinger, Luke, “Early Christian Monasticism”, The Encyclopedia of Ancient History 2010. Logan, F. Donald, A History of the Church in the Middle Ages, (Routledge, London. 2002) Vauchez, Andre, The Spir’ty of the Medieval West from the 8th to the 12th Century, (Cistercian, 1993). 1 2 CONTENTS 1. JESUS and the HELLENISTIC WORLD 6. LEADERSHIP and LITURGY [1.1]. The General Situation; 5 [6.1]. The Hierarchical Development Of 47 [1.2]. The Jewish Background; 10 The Church . [6.2]. Public Worship And Sacred [1.3]. Jesus and the Disciples; 13 49 Seasons [[2.1]2. p.92 ] 1 2. THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH [6.3]. Baptism 50 [2.1]. The Palestinian Christian [6.4]. The Eucharist. 51 Communities 15 [6.5]. Forgiveness Of Sins 52 [2.2]. Paul and Gentile Christianity 17 [6.6]. Sinners in the Church 54 [2.3]. The Close of the Apostolic Age 20 [2.4]. The Interpretation of Jesus 21 7. PERSECUTION and TRANSFORMATION 3. GENTILE CHURCH and ROMAN [7.1]. Rest And Growth, 260-303 55 EMPIRE [7.2]. Rival Religious Forces 55 [3.1]. Gentile Christianity of the Second Century 25 [7.3]. The Final Struggle 56 [7.4].
    [Show full text]
  • Athanasius of Alexandria
    Athanasius of Alexandria “Athanasius” redirects here. For other uses, see Church, Oriental and Eastern Orthodox churches, the Athanasius (disambiguation). Lutherans, and the Anglican Communion. For the Italian bishop, see Athanasius I (bishop of Naples). 1 Biography Saint Athanasius of Alexandria (/ˌæθəˈneɪʃəs/; Greek: Ἀθανάσιος Ἀλεξανδρείας, Athanásios Alexandrías; c. 296–298 – 2 May 373), also called Athanasius the Great, Athanasius the Confessor or, primarily in the Coptic Orthodox Church, Athanasius the Apostolic, was the twentieth bishop of Alexandria (as Athanasius I). His episcopate (because of the importance of the see, considered an archbishopric by Rome, the Coptic papacy, or an Orthodox patriarchate) lasted 45 years (c. 8 June 328 – 2 May 373), of which over 17 were spent in five ex- iles ordered by four different Roman emperors. Athana- sius is a renowned Christian theologian, a Church Father, the chief defender of Trinitarianism against Arianism, and a noted Egyptian leader of the fourth century. Conflict with Arius and Arianism as well as successive Roman emperors shaped Athanasius’ career. In 325, at the age of 27, Athanasius began his leading role against the Arians as his bishop’s assistant during the First Coun- cil of Nicaea. Roman emperor Constantine the Great had convened the council in May–August 325 to address the Arian position that the Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth, is of a distinct substance from the Father.[1] Three years after that council, Athanasius succeeded his mentor as archbishop of Alexandria. In addition to the conflict with the Arians (including powerful and influential Arian churchmen led by Eusebius of Nicomedia), he struggled against the Emperors Constantine, Constantius II, Julian Statue in Catania, Sicily.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Christian Church, Volume I: Apostolic Christianity
    History of the Christian Church, Volume I: Apostolic Christianity. A.D. 1-100. by Philip Schaff About History of the Christian Church, Volume I: Apostolic Christianity. A.D. 1-100. by Philip Schaff Title: History of the Christian Church, Volume I: Apostolic Christianity. A.D. 1-100. URL: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc1.html Author(s): Schaff, Philip (1819-1893) Publisher: CCEL First Published: 1882 Print Basis: Revised edition Rights: Public Domain Date Created: 2002-11-26 Contributor(s): Wendy Huang (Markup) CCEL Subjects: All; History; LC Call no: BR145.S3 1882-1910 LC Subjects: Christianity History History of the Christian Church, Volume I: Apostolic Christianity. Philip Schaff A.D. 1-100. Table of Contents About This Book. p. ii History of the Christian Church. p. 1 Preface to the Revised Edition. p. 1 From the Preface to the First Edition. p. 2 Preface to the Third Revision. p. 3 Contents. p. 4 Addenda. p. 4 Literature. p. 6 Nature of Church History. p. 7 Branches of Church History. p. 10 Sources of Church History. p. 12 Periods of Church History. p. 13 Uses of Church History. p. 17 Duty of the Historian. p. 18 Literature of Church History. p. 21 Preparation for Christianity in the History of the Jewish. p. 36 Central Position of Christ in the History of the World. p. 37 Judaism. p. 38 The Law, and the Prophecy. p. 43 Heathenism. p. 46 Grecian Literature, and the Roman Empire. p. 49 Judaism and Heathenism in Contact. p. 54 Jesus Christ. p. 57 Sources and Literature.
    [Show full text]
  • The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: the Question of Its Development
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Dissertations (1934 -) Projects The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Question of Its Development Vasilije Vranic Marquette University Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu Part of the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Vranic, Vasilije, "The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Question of Its Development" (2012). Dissertations (1934 -). 182. https://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.
    [Show full text]