L' eresia a Costantinopoli tra fine IV e inizio V secolo: Note su qualche fonte poco esplorata
In the conflicts over sacred space in Constantinople between the 4th and 5th centuries, the bishop John Chrysostom played a prominent role. There are at least three forms in which the relationship between the defense of orthodoxy and the control of sacred space was developed: the control of churches...
| Published in: | Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni |
|---|---|
| Subtitles: | L' eresia a Costantinopoli tra fine quarto e inizio quarto secolo |
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | Italian |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Morcelliana
[2019]
|
| In: |
Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni
|
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Nilus, Ancyranus -430
/ Monasticism
/ Poverty movement
/ Manichaeism
/ Orthodoxy
B John, Chrysostomus 344-407 / Monasticism / Church / Hierarchy |
| RelBib Classification: | KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity KBK Europe (East) |
| Further subjects: | B
Sacred Space
B MONASTICISM & religious orders B Manichaeans B monastic movement B Giovanni Crisostomo B Sacred Books B RELIGIOUS orthodoxy B Acemeti B Acoemetae B Manichei B movimento monastico B Nilo di Ancira B MONASTIC life |
| Summary: | In the conflicts over sacred space in Constantinople between the 4th and 5th centuries, the bishop John Chrysostom played a prominent role. There are at least three forms in which the relationship between the defense of orthodoxy and the control of sacred space was developed: the control of churches in urban areas, the conflict between monasticism and the urban context, the control of philanthropic housing. This paper aims to consider within what limits the work of Nilus Ancyranus, who is traditionally considered as a «disciple» of John Chrysostom, can contribute to clarify this context. In fact, his monastic works prove to be a precious source for the marginalization of pauperistic movements (in particular in his polemics against the Acoemetae) and for the relationships between monasticism and ecclesiastical hierarchy within urban areas. On the contrary, his enormous Correspondence confirms itself as an insidious and suspicious source. A critical analysis of the letters against the Manichaeans reveals that even these texts can hardly be authentic. It is therefore proposed that at least a part of the Correspondence by Nilus was actually written at a later date to cancel or reduce the memory of the conflict between Chrysostom and the monastic movement. (English) |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2611-8742 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni
|