In Antioch, Nicaea, and the Synthesis of Constantinople, DragoÈ Andrei Giulea delineates a new map of the theological trajectories involved in the fourth-century Christological debates, and envisions the solution of Constantinople 381 as a synthesis of the two theoretical paradigms produced at the councils of Antioch 268 and Nicaea 325. The author argues that the main theological trajectories participating in the debate were the Antiochene, the Arian, the Nicene, the Homoian, and the pro-Nicene.
Giulea redefines the pro-Nicene theology, which dominated the discussions of Constantinople 381, as a synthesis of the most effective metaphysical categories of Antioch and Nicaea. Basil of Caesarea initiated the pro-Nicene synthesis by developing a dual Trinitarian discourse, simultaneously securing ontological individuality and divine unity.
DragoÈ Andrei Giulea, Ph.D. (2010), is a lecturer in Patristics at St. Maximus the Confessor Theological Centre in Montreal, Canada. He has published many studies in Early Christianity and Patristics and a monograph entitled Pre-Nicene Christology in Paschal Contexts (Brill, 2013).
Abbreviations
Introduction
â1âThe Quest for Mapping an Ancient Controversy
â3.âThe Main Thesis and Methodological Aspects
â3.1âThesis
â3.2âThe Tenets of Faith and the Metaphysical Assumptions Shape a Trajectoryâs Grammar
â3.3âThe Semantic Assumptions of a Basic Vocabulary Define a Theological Grammar
â3.4âMetaphysical Assumptions are More Fundamental than Hermeneutical Rules
â3.5âThe New Theological Grammar of the Pro-Nicene Synthesis
Part 1 Reassessing the Map of the Main Trajectories 1âAntioch 268 and the Grammar of Individual Ousia
â1âAntioch 268: A Forgotten Orthodoxy of the Third Century
â2âAntioch 268 in Its Eastern Roman Context of the Third Century
â3âAntioch 268 and Its Legacy in the Antiochene Councils after Nicaea 325
â3.1âAntioch 341
â3.2âAntioch 345
â3.3âSirmium 351
â4âEusebius of Caesarea: A Theology in the Grammar of Antioch 268
â5âHomoiousians: Refining the Grammar of Antioch 268 after Eusebius
â6âConcluding Remarks
2âThe Arian Trajectory
â1âArianism: Another Instantiation of the Grammar of Individual Ousia
â2âArius
â2.1âContinuity with the Antiochene Metaphysical Assumptions
â2.2âThe Separation from the Antiochene Trajectory: The Son as Creature Not Existing before Its Generation
â2.2.1âNot a Christian Internal Theological Development
â2.2.2âNot Developed from a Philosophical System
â2.2.3âNeither from the Early Jewish-Christianity
â2.2.4âBut from his Arguments on the Unique Condition of the Unbegotten First Principle
â2.2.5âConsequences of Ariusâs Thesis: Diastema, Unlikeness, the Son does not Know the Father
â3âEusebius of Nicomedia
â4âAsterius the Sophist
â5âAetius: An Anomoian Arian
â6âEunomius: A âHomoianâ Arian
â7âConcluding Remarks
3âThe Independents and the Mediating Solution of Homoianism
â1âEusebius of Emesa
â2âCyril of Jerusalem
â3âAcacius of Caesarea
â4âThe âBlasphemyâ of Sirmium 357
â5âHomoianism
â6âConcluding Remarks
4âNicaea and the Gradual Articulation of the Grammar of Common Ousia
â1âIntroduction
â2âAlexander of Alexandria
â3âEustathius of Antioch
â4âMarcellus of Ancyra
â5âAthanasius of Alexandria
â5.1âThe Meanings of οá½Ïία
â5.2âConsubstantiality and the âx from xâ Principle
â5.3âParticipation as Divine Generation
â5.4âAnalogies and Immaterial Divine Generation
â5.5âTrinity as One Plural Divinity. The Identity of Divine Substance
â5.6âThe Identity of the Divine Attributes
â6âDidymus of Alexandria
â7âApollinarius of Laodicea
â8âConcluding Remarks
âSummary of Part One
Part 2 Reassessing the Pro-Nicene Trajectory as the Synthesis of Antioch and Nicaea
âProlegomena: The Context of the Early 360s, the Rapprochement, and the Emergence of the Pro- Nicene Trajectory
5âThe Early Basil of Caesarea and the Antiochene Legacy
â1âIntroduction: Ep. 361 and the Homoiousians?
â2âBasil of Caesareaâs Ep. 361 and Eun. 1.19: The Quest for the Commonality of the Father and the Son
â3âDivine Ousia and the Theology of âLikenessâ in Basilâs Ep. 361 and Apollinariusâ Response in Ep. 362
â4âConcluding Remarks
6âOusia in Basil of Caesareaâs Contra Eunomium: The Turning Point of His Career
â1âThe Ambivalence of Ousia in Contra Eunomium
â2âContra Eunomium in Its Sitz im Leben
â3âOusia as an Individual Substance in Contra Eunomium: The Continuity with the Antiochene Grammar
â3.1âOusia as Individual Substance
â3.2âBasilâs Theology of âLikenessâ
â4âOusia as Common Substance in Contra Eunomium: Basilâs Shift Toward the Nicene Grammar
â5âThe Rational Account of Substance and the Divine Commonality
â5.1âThe Search for the Commonality of Substance (Ïὸ κοινὸν Ïá¿Ï οá½ÏίαÏ)
â5.2âBasilâs Doctrine of the Rational Account of Substance (lo/goj th=j ou)si/aj)
â5.3âThe âBundle Theoryâ in Contra Eunomium
â5.4âThe Rational Account of Substance in Basilâs Later Texts
â6âBasilâs New Concept of Substance as âStuffâ: In Line with the Nicene Grammar
â7âBasilâs Epistle 9: One More Step toward Nicaea
â8âConcluding Remarks
7âThe Synthesis of Antiochene and Nicene Theologies: Basil of Caesareaâs Later Trinitarian Grammar and the Context of Constantinople 381â382
â1âBasilâs Dual Trinitarian Discourse in Context
â2âBasilâs Polemic with Eustathius of Sebasteia
â3âMeletians and Paulinians in Conflict: T\he Internal Nicene Debate over the Terms Prosopon and Hypostasis and Basilâs Articulation of the New Synthesis
â4âThe Pro-Nicene Synthesis in the Context of Constantinople 381
â4.1âGregory of Nazianzus
â4.2âGregory of Nyssa
â4.3âAmphilochius of Iconium
â4.4âThe Letter of the Council of Constantinople 382
â5âConcluding Remarks
âSummary of Part Two
âFinal Conclusions
Bibliography
Indexes
All interested in Early Christianity and Patristics, the Arian debate, and the evolution of theological concepts and doctrines from the Council of Antioch 268 to Nicaea 325, to Constantinople 381. Keywords: Nicaea, Antioch, Constantinople, councils, Arianism, Basil of Caesarea, Patristics, consubstantiality, Homoiousians, Homoians, Eusebians, pro-Nicenes