In my second post on this subject, advocated a dual thesis, contrary both to the legend as the general use, namely , on the one hand, more than a clash between pagans and Christians it was a conflict between different groups of Christians , and on the other hand, more than an ideological conflict between science and religion, between reason and faith, it was a political conflict between different factions fighting for power . The first question, only add to what a witness said late, which appears in the Suda -great-century Byzantine encyclopedia X-suggests that it was a conflict between different groups of Christians when Cyril characterizes as "bishop of the opposite faction ( have antikeiménên hairesin ). The term used hairesis is precisely the origin of the term heresy , and refers to a group of believers who hold a particular view on one or more items of the same doctrine . In this sense, the testimony of a contemporary of Hypatia, Philostorgius, affects the same when we say that "it was shattered by the advocates the homousios ", understood as the triumphant followers of the creed of Nicaea, which definitively established the consubstantiality the Father and the Son, against Arians, Origen, and other heresies. "Hypatia belonged to one of these groups of heretics? This suggests a final testimony that, while obviously a fake, it does express what appears to have been a view held by some or something very close to the death of Hypatia. I refer to an alleged letter to Cyril Hypatia, in which he asks for understanding of Nestorius ideas about the nature of Christ, implicitly siding with them. As Dzielska says, "seems the end of antiquity comes a legend linking Hypatia to Christianity maverick "(DZIELSKA 2006:36). Of course, if it may be considered too militant Hypatia as a maverick group of Christians, not so in the case of his most famous student, Sinesio, who, despite being a bishop, he professed, as we shall see, a form certainly heterodox Christianity.
0 comments:
Post a Comment