Patrick's College, Maynooth, Ireland) provides an overview to the conference topic in the first essay, with subsequent topics including changes in the concept of pedagogical soteriology in early Byzantium to reflect the philosophy of Athanasius, the writings of Marcellus of Ancyra
A useful question may be to discern when he does not polarize, such as in his alliance with Marcellus of Ancyra
or at the terminological compromises in Alexandria in 362.
CONTRA MARCELLUM: MARCELLUS OF ANCYRA AND FOURTH-CENTURY THEOLOGY.
Although he was not a major figure in the fourth century, Marcellus of Ancyra became well known, and even notorious in the 50 years following the Council of Nicaea because of the mostly negative reaction to his teaching.
It includes prospective links between this period and Arius, Eustathius of Antioch, and Marcellus of Ancyra
It is very difficult to explain the seemingly paradoxical fact that this word, along with the explanation given by Constantine, was accepted by the "Arian" Eusebius, whereas it has left no traces at all in the works of his opponents, the leaders of the anti-Arian party such as Alexander of Alexandria, Ossius of Cordova, Marcellus of Ancyra, and Eustathius of Antioch, who are usually considered Constantine's theological advisers and the strongest supporters of the council.
It is no coincidence that at the council of the "Western" bishops held at Sardica in 343, where Ossius could freely express his thoughts in agreement with Marcellus of Ancyra, the word homoousios was totally ignored and replaced by mia hypostasis: "We have received and been taught, and we hold the catholic and apostolic tradition and faith and confession which teach, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost have one hypostasis.
For several decades after the Council of Nicaea, most Eastern bishops knew for sure that what Marcellus of Ancyra
had said about God was wrong; they were less certai about what was right.
Condemned and excommunicated by several fourth-century councils and synods, Marcellus of Ancyra
Marcellus of Ancyra
is a far from unknown figure, a kind of Massif Central in the history of the Arian controversy; with the big monograph of Klaus Seibt (1994) he has lately been in the news, subjected to a fresh examination that has weighed all the citations in Eusebius' polemic and brought into the reckoning the very probable attributions to him (e.
3) which creates the impression that Eustathius of Antioch was still alive in the last quarter of the fourth century (his death is usually dated before 337), and also that a connexion existed between Marcellus of Ancyra
and later Antiochene theology.
18-19 anathematizing `those who do not confess the Trinity of three [UNKNOWN TEXT OMITTED] in accordance with the truth,' Apollinarius' other contemporary Trinitarian foe is revealed: Marcellus of Ancyra
and his followers.