Ambiguous Christians and Their Useful Texts: Tatian, Bardaisan, Symmachus, and Rhodon in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History
Eusebius did not represent all heretics in the Ecclesiastical History as equally pernicious. This paper presents close readings of Eusebius’ chapters about three relatively benign heretics, namely Tatian ( Historia ecclesiastica 4,29), Bardaisan (4,30), and Symmachus (6,17), and I also explore Rhod...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
De Gruyter
2023
|
| In: |
Zeitschrift für antikes Christentum
Year: 2023, Volume: 27, Issue: 3, Pages: 413-448 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Eusebius, Caesariensis 260-339, Historia ecclesiastica
/ Tatian -172
/ Bardesanes, Edessenus 155-222
/ Symmachos, Bibelübersetzer ca. 2. Jh.
/ Rhodo ca. 2. Hälfte des 2. Jh.
/ Heresy
|
| IxTheo Classification: | KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity |
| Further subjects: | B
Rhodon
B Eusebius B heresiology B Symmachus B Tatian B Ecclesiastical History B Bardaisan B Quotation |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Eusebius did not represent all heretics in the Ecclesiastical History as equally pernicious. This paper presents close readings of Eusebius’ chapters about three relatively benign heretics, namely Tatian ( Historia ecclesiastica 4,29), Bardaisan (4,30), and Symmachus (6,17), and I also explore Rhodon ( Historia ecclesiastica 5,13), a student of Tatian whom Eusebius never labels a heretic. Three inferences emerge from these readings. First, rather than condemning all heretics as equally demonic, deceitful, morally depraved, and worthless, Eusebius considered some heresies less dangerous than others. Second, Eusebius commended some heretics’ useful writings, which in each case Eusebius quotes in his own œuvre; he thus retained some of Clement’s and Origen’s openness to heretics’ ideas. Third, the case of Rhodon shows that Eusebius assumed no obligation to classify all Christian thinkers as orthodox or heretical: as with Rhodon, Eusebius elides the ecclesiastical status of Tertullian and Ammonius ( Historia ecclesiastica 2,2,4; 6,19,9-10), two other Christians of questionable orthodoxy. For Eusebius, in sum, the usefulness of an author’s texts sometimes superseded the harm of that author’s questionable orthodoxy, especially when that author hailed from a less-harmful heresy or was not clearly a heretic. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1612-961X |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Zeitschrift für antikes Christentum
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1515/zac-2023-0025 |