Ancoratus of Epiphanius and The Council of 381

Status
Not open for further replies.

Goodcheer68

Puritan Board Sophomore
I was reading The Arian Controversy and in it it gave a brief argument for the Ancoratus of Epiphanius as the source for the creed of Constantinople of 381 instead of the Nicene Creed of 325. Ive done a quick google search and have only come up with a few resources that argue in a similar matter. I have never come across this idea. Does anyone have any info about this. Im not sure that it changes anything but it would be interesting to know and research this more.
 
I was reading The Arian Controversy and in it it gave a brief argument for the Ancoratus of Epiphanius as the source for the creed of Constantinople of 381 instead of the Nicene Creed of 325. Ive done a quick google search and have only come up with a few resources that argue in a similar matter. I have never come across this idea. Does anyone have any info about this. Im not sure that it changes anything but it would be interesting to know and research this more.

He was a major historian and heresiologist. He wouldn't have been operative in 325. Gregory of Nazianzus is probably a more important source in terms of theology, but Epiphanius laid the groundwork. I haven't read Ancoratus (since the price is prohibitive).
 
I was reading The Arian Controversy and in it it gave a brief argument for the Ancoratus of Epiphanius as the source for the creed of Constantinople of 381 instead of the Nicene Creed of 325. Ive done a quick google search and have only come up with a few resources that argue in a similar matter. I have never come across this idea. Does anyone have any info about this. Im not sure that it changes anything but it would be interesting to know and research this more.
I own and have read the translation of this work from the Fathers of the Church series. Interestingly enough, the translation work was completed by Young Richard Kim who chairs the Classics department at Calvin College. He states in an extended footnote on p. 223 that "The current concensus is that the Greek text of the creed of section 118 [of the Ancoratus] is a later editorial interpolation of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, which replaced what was originally the Nicene Creed."

After having read Epiphanius, he was orthodox in his view of the person of Christ, but he was far from being the most astute theologian of his day, though he was very biblically literate. I would not attribute to him the degree of theological acumen necessary for the basis of the creed of Constantinople in 381. He was, to be sure, a very dogmatic individual and expressed often his personal contempt for those whom he regarded as "heretics and enemies" to what he understood to be orthodox Christianity. He essentially invented a theological term, μονώνυμος́/ν, or mononymic, which Oliver Kösters decribed as Epiphanius's "theology of names," which was his own approach to expressing the distinctions of the persons of the Trinity. He traveled a great deal and was notorious for sticking his nose in the theological and ecclesial disputes of others, but is highly revered today by some in the Greek Orthodox community.

One of my favorite citations from this work of his is as follows . . .

Epiphanius of Salamis (310/320-403): Search the divine Scriptures and learn the power of the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit himself, the one who knows the Father and the Son, will reveal to you the knowledge of the Logos, the Son of God, in order that you might not be led astray from the truth and destroy your soul. See Fathers of the Church, Vol. 128, St. Epiphanius of Cyprus, Ancoratus, 19.8 (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2003), p. 91.
Greek text: Ἐρεύνησαν πὰς θείας Γραφὰς, καὶ μάθε τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος τὴν δύναμιν, καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ γινῶσκον τὸν Πατέρα τὸν Υίον, ἀποκαλύπτει σοι τὴν τοῦ Λόγου τοῦ Υιοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ γνῶσιν, ἵνα μὴ πλανηθῇς τῆς ἀληθείας, καὶ ἀπολέσῇς τὴν σεαυτοῦ ψυχήν. Ancoratus, §19, PG 43:52-53.

DTK
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top