Across the Corrupting Sea by Cavan Concannon Lindsey A. Mazurek

Author:Cavan Concannon, Lindsey A. Mazurek [Cavan Concannon, Lindsey A. Mazurek]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781317185796
Barnesnoble:
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Published: 2016-03-17T00:00:00+00:00

Notes

1 Irenaeus, AH I.10.2. For similar statements, see AH I.10.1 and 3.

2 Irenaeus calls this unifying teaching the “canon” or “rule of truth.” For his articulation of this creed, see AH I.9.4 and 22.1. For a discussion of these and other references in Against the Heresies, as well as the centrality of the “rule” for Irenaeus’ hermeneutics, see V. Ammundsen, “The Rule of Truth in Irenaeus,” JThS 13 (1912): 574–80; P. Hefner, “Theological Methodology and St. Irenaeus,” JRel 44, no. 4 (1964): 294–309; T.C.K. Ferguson, “The Rule of Truth and Irenaean Rhetoric in Book 1 of Against Heresies,” VigChr 55, no. 4 (2001): 356–75; E. Pagels, “Irenaeus, the ‘Canon of Truth,’ and the ‘Gospel of John’: ‘Making a Difference’ through Hermeneutics and Ritual,” VigChr 56 (2002): 339–71.

3 P. Horden and N. Purcell, The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2000).

4 For further explorations of the category of “connectivity” in relation to early Christianity, see Chapter 4 in this volume.

5 G. Woolf, “A Sea of Faith?” in Mediterranean Paradigms and Classical Antiquity, ed. I. Malkin (New York: Routledge, 2005), 126–43.

6 The division of early Christian communities into two distinct camps remains widespread in scholarship. Noteworthy examples of this approach include: W. Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity, ed. R.A. Kraft and G. Krodel (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971); A. Le Boulluec, La notion d’hérésie dans la littérature grecque IIe–IIIe siècles (Paris: Études augustiniennes, 1985); and M. Edwards, Catholicity and Heresy in the Early Church (Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2009). Recently, however, some historians have moved beyond Eusebius’ two-camp approach, preferring instead either a “varieties of early Christianity” (for example, Bart Ehrman) or an “identity formation” (for example, Karen King) approach. For an excellent discussion and critique of the approaches of Ehrman and King, see D. Brakke, The Gnostics: Myth, Ritual, and Diversity in Early Christianity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010), 5–28. Brakke advocates a more dynamic approach, in which Christianity took shape as “the result of a complex process in which differing forms of Christianity competed with, influenced, borrowed from, and rejected each other” (The Gnostics, 3). Brakke’s model allows both for diversity within early Christianity as well as the real possibility that competing factions mutually influenced each another. A text-market approach, which I will detail below, is compatible with Brakke’s model.

7 See Bauer’s chapter entitled “The Use of Literature in the Conflict” in Orthodoxy and Heresy, 147–94.

8 EH V.27, 28. Translation and italics are Bauer’s (Orthodoxy and Heresy, 149–50).

9 See especially EH I.4.2, 14. For a recent analysis of Eusebius’ rhetoric of ethnicity, see A.P. Johnson, Ethnicity and Argumentation in Eusebius Praeparatio evangelica (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).

10 Bauer, Orthodoxy and Heresy, 158.

11 In the words of Bauer: “Apart from the tempest tossed island of ecclesiastical orthodoxy within the Christianity of Antioch, and the timid attempt to assist orthodoxy in Egypt to achieve a united existence, the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius shows no knowledge at all of ‘ecclesiastical’ life and warfare east of Phrygian Hierapolis until the third century” (Orthodoxy and Heresy, 172).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.