Carlos R. Galvão-Sobrinho. Doctrine and Power
Theological Controversy and Christian Leadership in the Later Roman Empire
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9498987 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Tarmo Toom (0000-0001-6318-700X, Catholic University of America, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 119 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 1332-1333 |
| Publication date | 2014-10-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The American Historical Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-8762 • E-ISSN: 1937-5239 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/ahr/119.4.1332 |
| OpenAlex | W2323736206 |
| Language | PT |
This book is a learned, thoroughly researched, and original study of some less acknowledged non-theological aspects of the Arian controversies from the time of Emperor Constantine's conquest of the East to the death of Constantius II. It argues that the imperial quest for religious unity and the new socio-political circumstances of Constantine's time created conditions in which competing theological positions clashed with increasing violence and “murderous intolerance” (p. 3). To be clear, this book is not about the fourth-century Trinitarian theology. Rather, it is about how leading bishops and theologians reacted to the challenges and used power and violence to establish the legitimacy of their views, win over the masses, repress opposition and dissent, and secure their leadership. In Galvão-Sobrinho's words, “This study is less concerned with the theological aspects of the [Arian] dispute than with the manner in which church leaders responded to theological confrontation” (p. 187, n. 3). “The central argument of this study, then, is that the Arian controversy played an important role in the establishment of a new style of church leadership” (p. 5). This “new style” is further defined as “more forceful, assertive, and aggressive” (p. 5), “brash, enterprising, and combative” (p. 7), and “aggressive, bold, and militant” (p. 157). This raises a few questions. First, was there ever a deliberate adoption of a “leadership style” by the fourth-century bishops? Second, are the negative adjectives entirely adequate and exhaustive in every case? Could it be that at least some church leaders are also characterized with positive adjectives, such as “meek, peaceful, and merciful”?
Ancient history · Bishops · Dissent · Doctrine · Emperor · Ideology · Indoctrination · Legitimacy · Militant · Opposition (politics) · Political science · Politics · Power (physics) · Theology · Byzantine Studies and History · Classical Antiquity Studies · Historical and Religious Studies of Rome · History · Law · Philosophy · Religious studies
| Highly cited | No |
|---|