Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Dedication
- preface
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- PART I JOHANNINE GHRISTOLOGY AND THE ANTE-NICENE CHURCH
- 1 The christology of St John
- 2 The development of christology in the second century
- 3 Christology in the third century
- 4 The traditions at the outbreak of the Arian controversy
- PART II JOHANNINE CHRISTOLOGY AND THE ARIAN CONTROVERSY
- Appendix: The word Homoousios
- Bibliography
- Indexes
4 - The traditions at the outbreak of the Arian controversy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 March 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Dedication
- preface
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- PART I JOHANNINE GHRISTOLOGY AND THE ANTE-NICENE CHURCH
- 1 The christology of St John
- 2 The development of christology in the second century
- 3 Christology in the third century
- 4 The traditions at the outbreak of the Arian controversy
- PART II JOHANNINE CHRISTOLOGY AND THE ARIAN CONTROVERSY
- Appendix: The word Homoousios
- Bibliography
- Indexes
Summary
In the period immediately before the outbreak of the Arian controversy, three theological traditions, each involving a different method of interpreting St John's Gospel, find illustrious representatives within the church. The ‘Antiochene’ tradition is represented by Eustathius of Antioch who was to be the first victim of the Arian reaction in A.D. 328–9; the ‘Alexandrian’ tradition is represented by Eusebius of Caesarea, an avowed admirer of Origen, who was to become a close ally of the Arians; the ‘neo-Alexandrian’ tradition, which, as it developed, came to resemble closely the ‘Western’ tradition, and in which the common faith of the church of Alexandria finds theological expression, was represented by Alexander and his young deacon, Athanasius, who carried on the anti-Origenist reaction of Peter the Martyr. By and large, the Arian controversy was to be an Eastern controversy, but it is significant that Athanasius, the ‘neo-Alexandrian’, was to find his strongest theological support from Hilary of Poitiers, heir to the ‘Western’ tradition of Tertullian and Novatian. In the initial stages of the controversy and immediately before its outbreak, Athanasius plays the role of a representative of the ‘Western’ tradition, although it may be impossible to demonstrate that he was at this time in any way familiar with the ‘Western’ theological tradition or the writings of its representatives.
The three traditions had existed side by side for more than a century. There had been a clash between the Antiochene and Alexandrian traditions in the affair of Paul of Samosata, and between the Alexandrian and Western traditions in the affair of the two Dionysii.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Johannine Christology and the Early Church , pp. 117 - 138Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1970