Whom do Angels Serve? The Teaching of John Philoponus on the Angelic World in the Context of the Christological Controversy of the Mid Sixth-century
https://doi.org/10.31802/BCA.2020.8.4.004
Abstract
The paper uses the material of the treatise «On the creation of the world» («De opificio mundi») (AD 557–560) to examine the angelology of the sixth-century theologian and philosopher John Philoponus. A comparison is made between his teaching on angels and the teaching of Theodore of Mopsuestia; it is concluded that the key difference between them was the understanding of the function of the angelic world: whereas for the Antiochians the angel is addressed to creation and man as its crown, then for John Philoponus the angel is addressed to God. The traditional idea that the main object of criticism of John Philoponus was the treatise of Cosmas Indicopleustes «Christian Topography» is questioned. It is argued that the treatise «On the creation of the world» should be considered in the context of the Three-Chapter controversy which took place in the 530s–550s.
About the Author
T. A. Shchukin
Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology at the Russian Academy of Sciences;
the Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Timur A. Shchukin, Associate Researcher at the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology at the Russian Academy of Sciences; PhD student of the Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia
7th Krasnoarmeyskaya, 25/14, St. Petersburg 190005
References
1. Alieva O. V. (ed.) (2019) “Vasilij Velikij. Besedy na Shestodnev. Beseda pervaja” [“Basil the Great. Homilies on Hexameron. Homily One”]. Philosophy: Journal of the Higher School of Economics, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 195–244 (in Russian).
2. Benevich G. I. (2009) “Ioann Filopon” [“John Philoponus”], in G. I. Benevich, D. S. Birjukov (eds.) Anthology of Eastern Christian Theological Thought. Orthodoxy and Heterodoxia. Moscow: Nikeja; Saint-Petersburg: RHGA, vol. 2, pp. 33–54 (in Russian).
3. Clark T. L. (2008) Imaging the Cosmos: The Christian Topography by Cosmas Indicopleustes. PhD Thesis. Philadelphia.
4. Congourdeau M.-H. (2002) “L’embryon entre néoplatonisme et christianisme”. Oriens-Occidens: sciences, mathématiques et philosophie de l’Antiquité à l’Age classique, vol. 4, pp. 201–216.
5. Daley B. (ed.) (2017) Leontius of Byzantium. Complete Works. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. Daniélou J. (1953) Les anges et leur mission d’après les Pères de l’Église. Chevetogne: Éd. De Chevetogne.
7. Devreesse R. (1948) Essai sur Théodore de Mopsueste. Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Studi e testi; 141).
8. Devreesse R. (1959) Les anciens commentateurs grecs de l’Octateuque et des Rois. Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Studi e testi; vol. 201).
9. Elweskiöld B. (2005) John Philoponus Against Cosmas Indicopleustes. A Christian Controversy on the Structure of the World in Sixth-century Alexandria. Lund: Lund University Department of Classics and Semitics.
10. Fladerer L. (1999) Johannes Philoponos. De opificio mundi: Spätantikes Sprachdenken und christliche Exegese. Stuttgart; Leipzig: Springer.
11. Giet S. (ed.) (1968) Basile de Césarée. Homélies sur l’Hexaéméron. Paris: Cerf (SC; 26 bis).
12. Gleede B. (2017) “Christian Apologetics or Confessional Polemics? Context and Motivation of Philoponus’ De opificio mundi”, in G. Roskam, J. Verheyden (eds.) Light on Creation. Ancient Commentators in Dialogue and Debate on the Origin of the World. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, pp. 157–167.
13. Gracianskij M. V. (2016) Imperator Justinian Velikij i nasledie Halkidonskogo Sobora [Emperor Justinian the Great and the Legacy of the Council of Chalcedon]. Moscow: MSU (in Russian).
14. Greer R. A. (1961) Theodore of Mopsuestia, Exegete and Theologian. London: The Faith Press.
15. Hidal S. (1996) “Exegesis of the Old Testament in the Antiochene School with its Prevalent Literal and Historical Method”, in M. Saebø (ed.) Hebrew Bible. Old Testament. The History of Its Interpretation. I: From the Beginnings to the Middle Ages (Until 1300). Pt. 1: Antiquity. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 550–557.
16. Hoffmann P. (1987) “Simplicius’ Polemics”, in R. Sorabji (ed.) Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science. London: Duckworth, pp. 57–83.
17. Hoffmann P. (1987) “Sur quelques aspects de la polémique de Simplicius contre Jean Philopon”, in I. Hadot (ed.) Simplicius. Sa vie, son œuvre, sa survie. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, pp. 183–221.
18. Honigmann E. (1951) Évêques et évêchés monophysites d’Asie antérieure au VIe siècle. Louvain: Durbecq.
19. Jansma T. (1962) “Théodore de Mopsueste. Interprétation du livre de la Genèse. Fragments de la version syriaque”. Le Muséon, vol. 75, pp. 63–92.
20. Lang U. M. (2001) John Philoponus and the Controversies over Chalcedon in the Sixth Century. A Study and Translation of the Arbiter. Leuven: Peeters.
21. Lang U. M. (2005) “John Philoponus and the Fifth Ecumenical Council: A Study and Translation of the Letter to Justinian”. Annuarium historiae conciliorum, vol. 37 (2), pp. 411–436.
22. Lour’e B. M. (2013) “Dve iudejskie kosmologii: Kosma Indikoplov i rabbi Iuda bar Ilaj” [“Two Jewish Cosmologies: Cosmas Indicopleustes and Rabbi Judah bar Ilai”], in I. R. Tantlevskij (ed.) Iudaizm epohi Vtorogo Hrama, rannee hristianstvo i antichnost’. Vzaimodejstvie v istorii, literature i kul’ture i otrazhenie etogo perioda v kulturnoj pamjati Srednih vekov i Novogo vremeni [Second Temple Judaism, Early Christianity and Antiquity. Interaction in History, Literature and Culture and the Reflection of this Period in the Cultural Memory of the Middle Ages and Modern Times]. Saint-Petersburg: SPbSU, pp. 84–123 (in Russian).
23. MacCoull L. S. B. (1995) “The Monophysite Angelology of John Philoponus”. Byzantion, vol. 65, pp. 388–395.
24. MacCoull L. S. B. (2006) “The Historical Context of John Philoponus’ De opificio mundi in the Culture of Byzantine-Coptic Egypt”. Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum, vol. 9 (2), pp. 397–423.
25. MacCoull L. S. B. (2011) Documenting Christianity in Egypt, Sixth to Fourteenth Centuries. Farnham: Routledge.
26. Muehlberger E. (2008) Angels in the Religious Imagination of Late Antiquity. PhD Thesis. Indiana. Muehlberger E. (2013) Angels in Late Ancient Christianity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pearson C. W. (1999) Scripture as Cosmology: Natural Philosophical Debate in John Philoponus’ Alexandria. PhD Thesis. Cambridge (Mass.).
27. Peers G. (2001) Subtle Bodies. Representing Angels in Byzantium. Los Angeles; London: University of California Press.
28. Petit F. (1986) Catenae graecae in Genesim et in Exodum II. Collectio Coisliniana in Genesim. Turnhout: Brepols; Leuven: University Press, 1986 (CCSG; 15).
29. Petit F. (1987) “L’homme créé à l’image de Dieu. Quelques fragments grecs inédits de Théodore de Mopsueste”. Le Muséon, vol. 100, pp. 269–281.
30. Petit F. (1995) La Chaîne sur la Genèse. Édition intégrale. Vol. 3. Chapitres 12 a 28. Leuven: Peeters.
31. Šanda A. (ed.) (1930) Ioannis Philoponi Opuscula monophysitica. Beryti Phoenicorum: Gorgias Press.
32. Scholten C. (1996) Antike Naturphilosophie und christliche Kosmologie in der Schrift “De opificio mundi” des Johannes Philoponos. Berlin; New York: W. de Gruyter.
33. Scholten C. (ed.) (1997) Johannes Philoponos. De opificio mundi. Über die Erschaffung der Welt. Freiburg; Basel; Wien; Barcelona; Rom; New York: Herder, vol. 1–3 (FC; 23).
34. Schwartz E. (1939) Drei dogmatische Schriften Iustinians. München: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
35. Simonetti M. (2006) “Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca. 350–428)”, in C. Kannengiesser (ed.) Handbook of Patristic Exegesis. The Bible in Ancient Christianity. Leiden; Boston: Brill, pp. 799–828.
36. Smith G. A. (2008) “How Thin is a Demon?”. Journal of Early Christian Studies, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 479–512.
37. Straub J. (ed.) (1970) Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum. T. 4: Concilium universale Constantinoplitanum sub Iustiniano habitum. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, vol. 1.
38. Tonneau R. M. (1953) “Théodore de Mopsueste. Interprétation (du livre) de la Genèse”. Le Muséon, vol. 66, pp. 45–64.
39. Varlamova M. N. (2017) “Uchenie Aristotelja i Filopona ob elementah v kontekste spora o vechnosti neba” [“The Doctrine of Aristotle and Philoponus on the Elements in the Context of the Dispute About the Eternity of Heaven”]. RHGA Bulletin, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 55–68 (in Russian).
40. Wildberg C. J. (1988) Philoponus’ Criticism of Aristotle’s Theory of Aether. Berlin: W. de Gruyter.
41. Wiles M. F. (1970) Theodore of Mopsuestia as Representative of the Antiochene School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. Wolska-Conus W. (1962) Recherches sur la “Topographie chrétienne” de Cosmas Indicopleustès. Théologie et science au VIe siècle. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
43. Wolska-Conus W. (ed.) (1968) Cosmas Indicopleustès. Topographie chrétienne. T. 1. Livres I–IV. Paris: Cerf, 1968 (SC; 141).
44. Zaharopoulos D. Z. (1989) Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Bible. A Study of His Old Testament Exegesis. New York: Paulist Press.
Review
For citations:
Shchukin T.A. Whom do Angels Serve? The Teaching of John Philoponus on the Angelic World in the Context of the Christological Controversy of the Mid Sixth-century. Bible and Christian Antiquity. 2020;(4):72-100. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31802/BCA.2020.8.4.004
Views:
57
JATS XML
Email this article 