Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPasztori-Kupan, Istvanen
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-22T12:46:53Z
dc.date.available2018-05-22T12:46:53Z
dc.date.issued2003en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1842/30631
dc.description.abstracten
dc.description.abstractThis thesis is focused upon the double treatise of Theodoret of Cyrus written before the Council of Ephesus (431) entitled On the Holy and Vivifying Trinity and On the Incarnation/Inhumanation of the Lord . After a brief presentation of Theodoret's life and the place of this work in his oeuvre (Ch. 1), Ch. 2 is concerned with the textual tradition, including the time of writing, the handing down through history in various manuscripts, the ascription to Cyril of Alexandria, the editions and the restoration to the author by modern scholarship.en
dc.description.abstractChapters 3 and 4 are concerned with the doctrinal analysis of the first and the second half respectively. Apart from the presentation of the theological issues discussed by the author, during which various Trinitarian and Christological concepts and expressions as well as some soteriological and pastoral emphases (including their effect upon Theodoret's Christology) are analysed, the thesis is also an attempt to vindicate the author from some one-time and modern charges concerning his alleged crypto-Nestorianism. During the exegesis and historical-theological commentary it will be argued that some of the main accusations brought against him (i.e. the absence of a genuine communicatio idiomatum, a two-subject Christology, the non-application of a hypostatic union in Christ around 431 etc.) - when compared to the valid theological standards of his own time (The Formula of Reunion, Leo's Tome and the Chalcedonense) — are largely unwarranted or anachronistic. Although some - verbal - defects of Theodoref s way of expressing his concept of the union in Christ remain (defects which he himself corrected in his later works), nevertheless his basic concept and model ofthe Word Incarnate is theologically sound.en
dc.description.abstractThe final conclusion of the work is that the understanding of Chalcedonian orthodoxy according to either of the two ancient parallel traditions is admissible. The key figures of the two schools -Cyril and Theodoret - are to be seen as presenting two aspects of the same truth. Although their emphases are different, the Alexandrian and Antiochene Christological systems represent rather complementary than opposing views and the rejection of either would result in a partial but significant loss of our common Chalcedonian heritage.en
dc.description.abstractSince no critical edition is yet available, all the quotations found by modern scholars are listed in the Appendix, including my own textual discovery of a few longer excerpts from the virtually unquoted first tract. Thus, among the purposes of the thesis is also the intention to contribute towards the first critical edition of this double treatise. The Appendix also contains the first English translation of both halves.en
dc.publisherThe University of Edinburghen
dc.relation.isreferencedbyAlready catalogueden
dc.subjectAnnexe Thesis Digitisation Project 2018 Block 19en
dc.titleTheodoret of Cyrus's double treatise On the Trinity and On the Incarnation: the Antiochene pathway to Chalcedonen
dc.typeThesis or Dissertationen
dc.type.qualificationlevelDoctoralen
dc.type.qualificationnamePhD Doctor of Philosophyen


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record