Theodore abu Qurrah As a polemicist with Monophysites
Theodore Abu Qurrah c. 750 — c. 830 A. D., Bishop of Harran, the founder of the Melkite theological tradition, is mainly known in modern patrology as an apologist for Christianity in the face of Islam, Judaism and Manichaeism. However, researchers often overlook the fact that Abu Qurrah was primaril...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Russian |
| Published: |
St. Tikhon's Orthodox University
2017-08-01
|
| Series: | Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия I. Богословие, философия |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://periodical.pstgu.ru/en/pdf/article/4631 |
| _version_ | 1818503226985545728 |
|---|---|
| author | Oleg Davydenkov |
| author_facet | Oleg Davydenkov |
| author_sort | Oleg Davydenkov |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Theodore Abu Qurrah c. 750 — c. 830 A. D., Bishop of Harran, the founder of the Melkite theological tradition, is mainly known in modern patrology as an apologist for Christianity in the face of Islam, Judaism and Manichaeism. However, researchers often overlook the fact that Abu Qurrah was primarily an Orthodox theologian who saw the main purpose of his activities in the positive exposition of the Orthodox faith, as well as in polemics with heterodox Christians Monophysites, Nestorians, Maronites. Of all heresies, Theodore considered the most dangerous the moderate Monophysitism of Severus of Antioch. This article discusses the argument of the Bishop of Harran against the Severian doctrine of one composite nature of the incarnated God the Word. We come to a conclusion that Theodore was not only aware of the patristic tradition of criticising the Severian concept of the composite nature, but also enriched it. Of the ten arguments that he presented against this doctrine fi ve do not occur, at least explicitly, in the Byzantine Chalcedonian tradition. Abu Qurrah complements the argument against the concept of the composite nature with a criticism of the Severian use of the anthropological paradigm and tries to establish the limits of its use in the Orthodox Christology. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-10T21:21:14Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5503b1e948ba4447b25a1e84cf9ef440 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1991-640X |
| language | Russian |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-10T21:21:14Z |
| publishDate | 2017-08-01 |
| publisher | St. Tikhon's Orthodox University |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия I. Богословие, философия |
| spelling | doaj.art-5503b1e948ba4447b25a1e84cf9ef4402022-12-22T01:33:08ZrusSt. Tikhon's Orthodox UniversityВестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия I. Богословие, философия1991-640X2017-08-01722847http://dx.doi.org/10.15382/sturI201772.28-479Theodore abu Qurrah As a polemicist with MonophysitesOleg Davydenkov0St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University for HumanitiesTheodore Abu Qurrah c. 750 — c. 830 A. D., Bishop of Harran, the founder of the Melkite theological tradition, is mainly known in modern patrology as an apologist for Christianity in the face of Islam, Judaism and Manichaeism. However, researchers often overlook the fact that Abu Qurrah was primarily an Orthodox theologian who saw the main purpose of his activities in the positive exposition of the Orthodox faith, as well as in polemics with heterodox Christians Monophysites, Nestorians, Maronites. Of all heresies, Theodore considered the most dangerous the moderate Monophysitism of Severus of Antioch. This article discusses the argument of the Bishop of Harran against the Severian doctrine of one composite nature of the incarnated God the Word. We come to a conclusion that Theodore was not only aware of the patristic tradition of criticising the Severian concept of the composite nature, but also enriched it. Of the ten arguments that he presented against this doctrine fi ve do not occur, at least explicitly, in the Byzantine Chalcedonian tradition. Abu Qurrah complements the argument against the concept of the composite nature with a criticism of the Severian use of the anthropological paradigm and tries to establish the limits of its use in the Orthodox Christology.http://periodical.pstgu.ru/en/pdf/article/4631MonophysitismChalcedoniansSeveriansMelkitesChristologyone composite natureanthropological paradigm |
| spellingShingle | Oleg Davydenkov Theodore abu Qurrah As a polemicist with Monophysites Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия I. Богословие, философия Monophysitism Chalcedonians Severians Melkites Christology one composite nature anthropological paradigm |
| title | Theodore abu Qurrah As a polemicist with Monophysites |
| title_full | Theodore abu Qurrah As a polemicist with Monophysites |
| title_fullStr | Theodore abu Qurrah As a polemicist with Monophysites |
| title_full_unstemmed | Theodore abu Qurrah As a polemicist with Monophysites |
| title_short | Theodore abu Qurrah As a polemicist with Monophysites |
| title_sort | theodore abu qurrah as a polemicist with monophysites |
| topic | Monophysitism Chalcedonians Severians Melkites Christology one composite nature anthropological paradigm |
| url | http://periodical.pstgu.ru/en/pdf/article/4631 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT olegdavydenkov theodoreabuqurrahasapolemicistwithmonophysites |