Le paradoxe trinitaire chez Cyrille d'Alexandrie. Herméneutique, analyses philosophiques et argumentation théologique

Boulnois, Marie-Odile

doi:10.3406/ephe.1992.14821

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The figure of Athanasius stands out as the primary authority among them; Cyril appeals to Athanasius time and again as evidence for the truth of his teaching. From Athanasius, Cyril received his characteristic approach to the interpretation of Scripture, to the doctrine of the Trinity, to the person of Christ, and to the goal of salvation, that is, the full sanctification and deification of the believer (see Boulnois 1994Boulnois , 2003. But recent scholarship has demonstrated that Cyril also drew upon the teaching of the Cappadocian Fathers, especially Gregory of Nazianzus, for his understanding of the Incarnate Word as both human and divine (see Beeley 2009, pp.…”

Section: Influencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Christology of Cyril of Alexandria

Keating

2024

Religions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cyril of Alexandria is best known for his teaching on Christ (Christology). Beginning with the wider soteriological framework for Cyril’s teaching on Christ, this study will first establish the core principles and then move to consider contested and controversial aspects of Cyril’s Christology. By drawing attention to Cyril’s frequent statements that the Incarnate Christ acts both “as man” (as a human being) and “as God”, I will offer support for there being two active natures in Cyril’s view of Christ and will propose that Cyril’s Christ acting “as man” opens the way for recognizing the specific human activity of Christ that is intended as a model for human imitation. The study will conclude with considerations on the wider ecumenical impact of Cyril’s Christological doctrine.

show abstract

Section: Influencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Christology of Cyril of Alexandria

Keating

2024

Religions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For a brief overview and an extensive bibliography, see Simonetti (2014, 826-29). On Cyril's teachings, see for example, Wessel (2004); McGuckin (2004); Boulnois (1994); Grillmeier (1975, 473-83); Frend (1979, 121-23). On the difficulties posed by Greek theological vocabulary, see Frend (1979, 2-3).…”

Section: Leo and Eutyches: Context And First Contactmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eutychianorum furor! Heresiological Comparison and the Invention of Eutychians in Leo I’s Christological Polemic

Cohen¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay examines the use of heresiological rhetoric in the letters and tractates of Leo I (bishop of Rome, 440–461) written in defense of the Council of Chalcedon (451). In these texts, Leo claimed the Constantinopolitan monk Eutyches and his supporters, the Eutychians, were an existential threat to the faith. However, Leo’s Eutychians were a heresiological confabulation. Heresiology employs polemical comparison and hostile classification to demarcate the boundaries of authentic Christianity. Because heresiology understands heresy genealogically, contemporary error could be described and condemned thanks to its affiliation with previous heretical sects. This was largely a taxonomic exercise; naming heresies allowed their supposed errors to be categorized and compared, especially with its (imagined) antecedents. Leo employed precisely this kind of comparison to associate Eutyches with earlier heresiarchs. He then reduced all opposition to Chalcedon to ‘Eutychianism,’ the error named for Eutyches, or else to its opposite and equally incorrect counterpart ‘Nestorianism’—both of which were, according to Leo, part of the same diabolically inspired misunderstanding of Christ. In short, Leo transformed Eutyches, the man, into a ‘hermeneutical Eutychian,’ a discursive construct intended to advance Leo’s own theological agenda, especially the creation of an orthodox identity coterminous with adherence to Chalcedon.

show abstract

“…Hypatia, das wird in den Schreiben des Synesius deutlich, bildete die Grundlage des Zirkels, der offenkundig vornehmlich Heiden umfa te, aber auch Christen nicht ausschlo 138 . 132 142 . Vergleicht man ihn mit seinen christlichen Zeitgenossen, so besticht, wie er aus entlegenen Autoren und Schriften Argumente komponiert und seine Quellen rhetorisch wie sprachlich kreativ verarbeitet.…”

Section: '-* Oder Wie Anders « L! Man Den Bericht Des Hesychius Von Munclassified

„Oxbridge“ in der ausgehenden Spätantike oder: Ein Vergleich der Schulen von Athen und Alexandrien

Vinzent

2000

Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Le paradoxe trinitaire chez Cyrille d'Alexandrie. Herméneutique, analyses philosophiques et argumentation théologique

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

The Christology of Cyril of Alexandria

The Christology of Cyril of Alexandria

Eutychianorum furor! Heresiological Comparison and the Invention of Eutychians in Leo I’s Christological Polemic

„Oxbridge“ in der ausgehenden Spätantike oder: Ein Vergleich der Schulen von Athen und Alexandrien

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About