Search results

1

Obraz Boga Ojca w "De Trinitate" Nowacjana

100%

Jaśkiewicz G.

Vox Patrum

|

2008

|

vol. 52

|

issue 1

343-352

EN

II est tres difficile de parler de Dieu-Pere malgre notre connaissance theologiąue contemporaine. Chaque etre humain a un pere et donc se fait une image personnelle de la paternite. Ainsi nos images sont quelquefois differentes de celles des autres et peuvent detourner d’une veritable comprehension de Dieu-Pere. Dans la Bibie, on trouve beaucoup de rćferences par rapport a Celui qui se nomme comme „je suis qui je suis” (Ex 3,14) et Jesus, le Fils, nous revele pleinement son existence et son action. Novatien, le theologien tres ćrudit du IIIe siecle, nous explique cette verite de la foi et nous encourage tout d’abord a croire en Dieu le Pere, Createur du ciel et de la terre, ce qui n’etait pas evident pour les gnostiques. Novatien explique que la double conception de la creation n’a pas raison d’exis- ter. Le mai ne vient pas de Dieu-Createur mais de l’homme qui s’eloigne de Lui. Surtout, il a lutte contre Martion qui etait a la tete d’une secte qui, a cette epoque-la, rejetait l’Ancien Testament. Novatien rend hommage a Dieu le Pere et temoigne de Sa Providence. II souligne que personne ici bas n’est pere comme le Pere de Notre Seigneur Jesus Christ!

2

De trinitate Nowacjana wobec herezji patrypasjanizmu

100%

Sordyl K.

Vox Patrum

|

2008

|

vol. 52

|

issue 2

993-1010

EN

The paper is an analysis of Patripassianism using a historico-exegetical approach, with a special consideration given to Novatian’s tractate, De Trinitate. The Roman theologian differs considerably in his account of the Patripassian heresy from his two great predecessors, Hippolytus and Tertullian. The two authors’ discussion is often heated, with a very distinct, polemical tonę. In contrast, Novatian offers hardly any historical data. He only mentions Sabellius twice. The polemical tonę is morę moderate, the discussion less involved. A certain tracę of his critiąue of Patripassianism can be found in Novatian’s theology of the Logos. He does not organise his arguments according to divine economy or the notion of dispositio - which he knows and he uses. The Roman author presents Patripassianism in the following three chapters of his work: 26-28. Moreover, certain aspects of this teaching may be found in his discussion with ditheism, in chapters 30-31. According to Novatian, Patripassianism is a way of identifying the Father with the Son, which is done on the pretext of defending orthodox monotheism. The Roman theologian uses that as a key in his understanding, at the same time refuting charges of ditheism or negating the distinctiveness of the Son. His discussion with Patripassianism is mainly exegetical in nature. He shows the distinction that exists between the Father and the Son. He also refutes his opponents’ arguments that are based on their exegesis of the two Scriptures, John 10:30 and John 14:9. However, he does not discuss the problem of understanding theofany by Patripassians. In De Trinitate 12, 65 Novatian addresses the adherents of Filiopaterism, attempting to demonstrate their false argumentation. A careful analysis of this text leads to the conclusion that the polemic in this chapter of the tractate does not only apply to Filiopaterism but also to those who hesitate between Adoptianism and Patripassianism. In De Trinitate 24, 136 Novatian offers an exegesis of Lukę 1:35. In this exegesis he argues against Adoptianists, also including filiopaterism of Calixtus. There is no fully Patripassian exegesis in any point of Novatian’s argumentation. The Roman theologian also discusses relations between Adoptianism and Patripassianism. In both heresies he finds traces of Jewish influences, especially in the subject of antitriniatarian monotheism. A separate character of the heresy of Adoptianism and Patripassianism seems to be obvious to him. A bridge between them may be found in Filiopaterism, which is a blend of Adoptianism and Patripassianism in order to preserve radical monotheism. Novatian knew this position through his lecture of Against Praxeas and Refutatio.

3

Teologiczne znaczenie „monarchii” a pojęcie Boga w "De Trinitate" Nowacjana

100%

Sordyl K.

Vox Patrum

|

2009

|

vol. 53

521-539

EN

The Novatian’s tractate does not use the term, instead, the person of Sabellius takes a prominent place. Hence, in order to better understand Novatian himself, the present study demonstrates how the term was used by such authors as Tertullian, Hippolytus, or the author of the Refutatio. An attempt has also been made to establish the place that monarchy took in Patripassian theology. Novatian does not mention monarchy because his polemic against Patripassianism is in reality a confrontation with Sabellianism, as it was known in Rome in the first half of the third century. Novatian directly opposes Sabellius who, at least during his Roman period, did not use the concept to defend and substantiate his heresy. Patripassianism, such as Novatian came to know in Rome, was indeed Sabellianism. The Roman theologian refers to ideas contained in the term when he defends monotheism (against Gnostics and Marcion) and refutes the charges of ditheism from Patripassians. The author of De Trinitate continues his polemic against Gnostic and Marcionite dualism, when he acts in defense of monotheism and the creative act of God. He refers to the content of the term to rule out the existence of a god superior to the Creator. Divine agenesia guaranties, according to Novatian, that there is no god superior to God the Creator. The Roman author engages in a polemic with the Marcionite concept (the distinction between good and just God). He presents interrelationship between the goodness of God and creation. Evil originates in the free will of man, and is not connected with matter or attributed to God in His creative act. In order to refute Gnostic dualism, Novatian refers to the content of monarchy. In the same way he substantiates the immutability of God. In his view, the fundamental source of God’s immutability is His agenesia. Refuting the concept of eternal matter, not created by and independent from God, the Roman theologian once again uses the content of the term. In De Trinitate Novatian continues the line of thinking of these authors who developed the concept of monarchy. Novatian quotes Rom 11:36, which text is usually interpreted in the Trinitarian sense. The Roman author uses it to write about creative mediation of the Word. The Roman theologian also quotes biblical evidence for the divinity of Christ in his polemic with Adoptianists and Patripassians: Jn 1:1 (the key text of the theology of the Logos); Jn 1:14 (most frequently quoted text in De Trinitate) and Rom 9:5. Novatian points out that Scripture does not contradict itself, presenting both unity and diversity between the Divine persons.

4

Doktryna Nowacjana w traktacie "O Trójcy Świętej"

84%

Jaśkiewicz G.

Vox Patrum

|

2005

|

vol. 48

55-65

EN

L'auteur de cet article, qui a par ailleurs traduit cet ouvrage, en a egalement fait une synthese. Au debut de son article il precise des references biographiques et redecrit le milieu dans lequel evoluait ce pretre au IIIe siecle.

5

Kilka uwag o wczesnochrześcijańskiej krytyce rzymskich widowisk

67%

Zawadzka M.

Vox Patrum

|

2004

|

vol. 46

433-439

EN

Hac in dissertatione de tribus commentationibus, quae sunt Tertulliani, Novatiani atque Salviani Massiliensis disputatur necnon animus auctorum christianorum veterum erga circenses, munera ludosque scaenicos, qualis fuerit, multis exemplis demonstratur.

Refine search results

5 Vox Patrum

2 Jaśkiewicz G.

2 Sordyl K.

1 Zawadzka M.

1 2009

2 2008

1 2005

1 2004

Obraz Boga Ojca w "De Trinitate" Nowacjana

De trinitate Nowacjana wobec herezji patrypasjanizmu

Teologiczne znaczenie „monarchii” a pojęcie Boga w "De Trinitate" Nowacjana

Doktryna Nowacjana w traktacie "O Trójcy Świętej"

Kilka uwag o wczesnochrześcijańskiej krytyce rzymskich widowisk