'A Self-made Living Saint? Authority and the Two Families of Theodoret of Cyrrhus'. In J.S. Ott & T. Vedriš (eds), Saintly bishops and bishops' saints. Zagreb: Hagiotheca 2012, 49-65. (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Question of Its Development
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. 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-inlaw 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
The Creation of The Episcopal Power in Late Antiquity. The Case of Athanasius of Alexandria
The authors of Church histories from the first half of the fifth century had presented in their work a triumphal view of the Christian success over paganism in the fourth century. In all these works, a man was glorified as the defender of Nicene orthodoxy against the Arian heresy; that is Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria. A central figure in the above-mentioned ecclesiastic histories, Athanasius had achieved a great attention by the modern scholars, justified by the role played by the bishop as a central actor in the context of the fight against the Arian heresy, between 328 (the date of his election as bishop of Alexandria) and 373 (the date of his death). The present paper intends to analyze the bishop's power in the fourth-century Alexandria. Also, the analysis of the bases of patriarchal power, both legally and informally, represents an important part in the economy of the discussed subject.
2003
This thesis is focused upon the double treatise of Theodoret of Cyrus written before the Council of Ephesus (431) entitled On the Holy and Vivifying Trinity [ITepi. xrjq aytaq icaî (oo7ioioo Tpiaboq] and On the Incarnation/Inhumanation of the Lord [Flepi xrjq xoo Kuplou Evavdpa)7rfiaecoq]. After a brief presentation of Theodoret's life and the place of this work in his oeuvre (Ch. 1), Ch. 2 is concerned with the textual tradition, including the time of writing, the handing down through history in various manuscripts, the ascription to Cyril of Alexandria, the editions and the restoration to the author by modern scholarship. Chapters 3 and 4 are concerned with the doctrinal analysis of the first and the second half respectively. Apart from the presentation of the theological issues discussed by the author, during which various Trinitarian and Christological concepts and expressions as well as some soteriological and pastoral emphases (including their effect upon Theodoret's Christology) are analysed, the thesis is also an attempt to vindicate the author from some one-time and modern charges concerning his alleged crypto-Nestorianism. During the exegesis and historical-theological commentary it will be argued that some of the main accusations brought against him (i.e. the absence of a genuine communicatio idiomatum, a two-subject Christology, the non-application of a hypostatic union in Christ around 431 etc.)-when compared to the valid theological standards of his own time (The Formula of Reunion, Leo's Tome and the Chalcedonense)-are largely unwarranted or anachronistic. Although someverbaldefects of Theodoref s way of expressing his concept of the union in Christ remain (defects which he himself corrected in his later works), nevertheless his basic concept and model of the Word Incarnate is theologically sound. The final conclusion of the work is that the understanding of Chalcedonian orthodoxy according to either of the two ancient parallel traditions is admissible. The key figures of the two schools-Cyril and Theodoretare to be seen as presenting two aspects of the same truth. Although their emphases are different, the Alexandrian and Antiochene Christological systems represent rather complementary than opposing views and the rejection of either would result in a partial but significant loss of our common Chalcedonian heritage. Since no critical edition is yet available, all the quotations found by modern scholars are listed in the Appendix, including my own textual discovery of a few longer excerpts from the virtually unquoted first tract. Thus, among the purposes of the thesis is also the intention to contribute towards the first critical edition of this double treatise. The Appendix also contains the first English translation of both halves. Dedicated to my wife Zita and to my daughter Zsdfia in the hope that with the help ofourLord 9September 2002 wiftbe the last time when I am not together zvithyou on your birthday Daddy fetesdgemnehj Zitanah, is Z>sdfia [dnyomnalâ zzaCaz remdnysdggeb, hogy ha a Jo Isten is ugy afqnja, 2002. szeptember 9-e (egyen az utotsd aflqdom, rrdhpr hidnyzom a sziiletisnapi asztalmetttiC "Edesapa Table of contents Acknowledgements 1 List of abbreviations Prooemium Chapter 1: Theodoret as Theologian and Churchman 1.1 Birth, education and consecration for bishopric in Cyrus 1.2 The Nestorian controversy 1.3 Between Ephesus and Chalcedon 1.4 Theodoret's death and condemnation in 553 Chapter 2: The Textual Tradition of Both Treatises 2.1 The dating of the two treatises 2.1.1 External and internal evidence 2.1.2 A possible post-Ephesian retouching 31 2.2 The textual tradition 2.2.1 Manuscripts of ancient and mediaeval authors 2.2.2 The editions 2.3 The restoration of both works to Theodoret Chapter 3: Theodoret's Trinitarian Concept 3.1 The structure and purpose of both treatises 3.1.1 Unbalanced chapter division 3.1.2 The addressees of De Trinitate and De incamatione 61 3.2 The teaching about God the Father 3.2.1 The Father's specific title in relation to the Son and to the Spirit 3.2.2 Other attributes of the Father 3.2.3 Conclusion 3.3 The teaching about God the Son 3.3.1 The Son's titles and attributes Coeternity with the Father The Son as 'reflection', 'express image' and 'icon' The Son as o cov and Mediator The Son and the assumed nature 81 Excursus: The inadequacy of the Arian syllogism The Son's specific titles in relation to the Father and to the Spirit Begotten impassibly Only-begotten and Firstborn Reciprocal knowledge between Father and Son 101 Equality of power Equality of worship Sameness of nature and of essence Sameness of dominion 111 3.3.2 Conclusion 112 3.4 The teaching about God the Holy Spirit 113 3.4.1 The Spirit's specific attribute in relation to the Father and to the Son The problem of the Filioque 3.4.2 Other titles and properties of the Holy Spirit The Spirit as Creator The Holy Spirit as God of God The Holy Spirit is uncreated and eternal 3.4.3 Conclusion 3.5 Theodoret's doctrine on the Trinitysummary The properties of the divine hypostasesan outlook to Christology Chapter 4: The Christology of Theodoret's De incarnatione 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Anthropology underlying Christology 4.2.1 The human body 4.2.2 The human soul 4.2.3 Theological reasons why Christ had to assume a human rational soul 4.3 The concept and meaning of sin 4.4 The divinity and humanity of Christ in the oikonomia 4.4.1 TTie birth and childhood of Christ 4.4.2 The baptism of Christ 4.4.3 The soteriological heartland of Theodoret's early Christology: the Temptation-story 4.4.4 The passion, death and resurrection of Christ 4.5 Theodoret's Christological model: Two natures-One Person 4.5.1 The properties of both natures 4.5.2 Communicatio idiomatum or communicatio onomaton? The ontological importance of'naming' 4.5.3 The subject of predication The concrete designations used for the manhood 4.5.4 The attributive ascription of different deeds and its legitimacy 4.5.5 The union of worshipthe 'cultic prosopon' 4.5.6 Terminology 'Essence', 'nature' and 'person' Terms describing the union Rejection of misleading terms and the 'image' of the oikonomia Conclusion Bibliography Appendixes Appendix 1: Towards a critical edition of De Trinitate and De incarnatione Appendix 2: Theodoret of Cyrus: On the Holy and Vivifying Trinity (English translation) Appendix 3: Theodoret of Cyrus: On the Inhumanation ofthe Lord (English translation) 2 Abraham and his wife Margaret, to Balint Joo and his wife Kim, as well as to my friends Attila Gall and Abraham Kovacs for all their loving care and helpful readiness in every need. Concerning my academic formation in Scotland have a lot to thank New College. My supervisor, Prof. David Wright has won my admiration not only by his profound erudition, but for the caring empathic vigilance by which he continued to look after not merely the formation of the thesis, but after my own personal spiritual welfare also. His watchful guidance was undoubtedly vital regarding all the aspects of this academic enterprise including translation, sources, style and method. I thank my other supervisor, Dr. Paul Parvis, for his invaluable help with the revision of the translation of De incarnatione as well as for his clarifications concerning the Syriac sources. I express my thanks to Dr. Gary Badcock, my first supervisor in 1998, for all his encouragement as well as for his scholarly and spiritual support. Prof. Larry Hurtado has been my great spiritual comforter, who also rocked the cradle of my first academic publications. I owe him and his family a heartfelt gratitude. Prof. Graeme Auld, Dr. Jane Dawson, Dr. Jolyon Mitchell and all the others have also given their contribution towards this achievement. Together with them, the very supportive and most friendly staff of New College (the librarians, the secretaries, the servitors and all those whom 1 cannot name here, but whose smiling faces I had the privilege to encounter day by day) as well as all the wonderful fellow students certainly deserve a very special recognition. It was this atmosphere of togetherness and mutual support of teachers, students and staff members in New College by which I felt less alone whilst being separated from my family. And the list is far from being over. I present my deepest thanks to all those persons and organisations who have enabled the continuation of my academic studies: to Langham Research Scholarships and to Paul Berg, John Stott and their colleagues for all their material and invaluable spiritual support during emotionally stressful times; to the Hope Trust; to the Mylne Trust; to the Ministers' Relief Society and to Rev. Alan Lathey for his kind letters of support; for Blythswood Care, which granted me some very important books of and about Theodoret; and to all those whose names I have forgotten to mention. May God's blessing be upon them and upon their noble endeavours. My one year spent in Tubingen as a 'Scottish exchange student' also had its invaluable benefits. The people in the Ev. Stiff, especially Rev. Gabriele Wulz contributed substantially towards my feeling 'home away from home' during the time I spent there. I express my deepest gratefulness towards Prof. Luise Abramowski for having had the privilege of her company in her home and to receive fresh, first-hand information concerning some of the most crucial aspects of my academic research. Some of these are included in the thesis, yet apart from her amazingly vast learnedness and academic scholarship I have to thank her also for her most encouraging words of support both in Tubingen and also following the publication of my first article in the JTS. Similarly, Prof. Jean-Noel Guinot and Mme Guinot are also due a very special recognition and thankfulness for all his enthusiasm concerning 'Against the magi in Persia' written 'eighteen years ago', i.e. in 431;
The Constancy and Development in the Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus
2015
Part 1 The Historical Background 2 Theodoret and the Nestorian Controversy (before AD 431) 15 2.1 The Origin of the Nestorian Controversy 17 2.2 Rome and the Nestorian Controversy 19 2.3 Cyril's Twelve Anathemas and the Escalation of the Controversy 25 2.4 The Council of Ephesus (AD 431) 27 2.4.1 The Convocation of the Council 27 2.4.2 The Venue of the Council 30 2.4.3 The Eve of the Council of Ephesus AD 431 32 2.4.4 The Sessions of the Council of Ephesus 33 2.5 Reactions to the Decision of the
Review: Vasilije Vranic, The Constancy and Development in the Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus
Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum / Journal of Ancient Christianity, 2016
Vasilije Vranic develops his Marquette University dissertation into a tightly written monograph on Theodoret's Christology. Vranic lucidly, logically, and non-polemically attempts to prove Theodoret's Christology remained essentially unchanged throughout his ministerial years. He builds on Marcel Richard's 1 and especially Frances M. Young's 2 proposal that Theodoret's Christology only underwent lexical development which did not change his views substantively (pp. 6, 8, 78). Vranic accomplishes this by analyzing three primary sources-the first two from Theodoret's early period (423-432 and 430), and the third from the later .
The bishop Theodoret of Cyrrhus (393-c. 463), actively engaged in the theological disputes and events of the first half of the 5 th century CE, also wrote exegeses and ecclesiastical history. His Religious History, a collection of thirty lives of saints who lived near Antioch and Cyrrhus, was written with the aim of presenting Christian ascetics in the mould of classical examples whilst keeping the ideals of Syriac monasticism. This paper analyses Theodoret's use of the lexeme θεραπεία in this work, after surveying its earlier use, in ancient Greek and early Christian literature. This lexeme is significant because of the prominent role of healing in the theology of Christians in Antioch and Cyrrhus and because of the importance of the cult of the Unmercenary Saints Cosmas and Damian.
A Landscape of Bodies: Exploring the Role of Ascetics in Theodoret's Historia Religiosa
From hunching over in compact wooden crates to suspending themselves in a box several feet off the ground, Theodoret’s ascetics as described in his Religious History perform awe-inspiring feats. While previous scholarship has delved into the politics motivating this history or the differences between Syrian and Egyptian asceticism, landscape has faded into the background, signaling little more than proper location of ascetic practice. Yet place for Theodoret constitutes more than just scenery, as it actively becomes entangled in the imagery of the ascetics’ bodies. After fighting a war within themselves, the bodies of these men and women turn to stone and they become not just people but places, ramparts for the greatness of Christianity. While becoming part of the landscape, these men and women establish themselves as limes of Theodoret’s power and Christianity itself, fortifying its borders with the watchtowers and forts of their bodies. The fight that ensues between these Christians and their daimon assailants takes place for both the physical place and the souls of those who lay within its borders. Daimons scream, yell, hurl rocks and uproot trees at the hopes of overcoming the defensive structures of the ascetic and reclaim the land and its people for itself. The body of the ascetic, fused with the rock of the earth and manned with the army of his soul, stalwartly repels these creatures as completely as the strongest Roman fortification. Once these borders have been established, pilgrims, not only from Cyrrhus and Antioch, but from across the Roman Empire, visit the ascetic fortifications, ‘Christianizing’ the land between. By inextricably linking place to his ascetics, Theodoret forever alters the landscape not only of Syria but of Christian asceticism itself.