Until now the period following the Council of Nicea has remained a dark age of early Christian history. This is partly due to the fact that Eusebius' last and important works, Contra Marcellum and De Ecclesiastica Theologia, have not sufficiently been studied. Comparatively little interest has also been given to the Pseudo-Athanasian text Contra Arianos IV. Careful study and comparison of these works against the background of the post-Nicene debate between Asterius, Marcellus, Eusebius and Photinus, has revealed that (as A. Stegmann already proposed in 1917) Contra Arianos IV was written in about 340 and formed a Nicene critique of Marcellus, his pupil and opponents. Therefore, Stegmann's suggestion of the authorship of Apolinarius of Laodicea needs further investigation. This study on Contra Arianos IV sheds new light on the years between Nicea and the synods of Rome and Antioch (340/341).

This is the first English translation of the last two theological works of Eusebius of Caesarea, Against Marcellus and On Ecclesiastical Theology. The first text was composed after the deposition of Marcellus of Ancyra in 336 to justify the action of the council fathers in ordering the deposition on the grounds of heresy, contending that Marcellus was “Sabellian” (or modalist) on the Trinity and a follower of Paul of Samosata (hence adoptionist) in Christology. Relying heavily upon extensive quotations from a treatise Marcellus wrote against Asterius the Sophist, this text provides important information about ecclesiastical politics in the period before and just after the Council of Nicea, and endeavors to demonstrate Marcellus’s erroneous interpretation of several key biblical passages that had been under discussion since before the council. In doing so, Eusebius criticizes Marcellus’s inadequate account of the distinction between the persons of the Trinity, eschatology, and the Church’s teaching about the divine and human identities of Christ. On Ecclesiastical Theology, composed circa 338/339 just before Eusebius’s death, and perhaps in response to the amnesty for deposed bishops enacted by Constantius after the death of Constantine in 377 and the possibility of Marcellus’s return to his see, continues to lay out the criticisms initially put forward in Against Marcellus, again utilizing quotations from Marcellus’s book against Asterius. However, we see in this text a much more systematic explanation of Eusebius’s objections to the various elements of Marcellus’s theology and what he sees as the proper orthodox articulation of those elements. Long overlooked for statements at odds with later orthodoxy, even written off as heretical because allegedly “semi-Arian,” recent scholarship has demonstrated the tremendous influence these texts had on the Greek theological tradition in the fourth century, especially on the orthodox understanding of the Trinity. In addition to their influence, they are some of the few complete texts that we have from Greek theologians in the immediate period following the Council of Nicea in 325, thus filling a gap in the materials available for research and teaching in this critical phase of theological development.

Focusing on Gregory's Trinitarian thought, his fascinating minor treatises are analysed in detail. Supporting studies deal with theological and philosophical concepts as well as with the context, e.g. his writings against Apolinarius.

How central is narrative to human experience? to Christology? What is the significance of Mark's turn to narrative in the development of the Christian Scriptures and of the return to narrative in liberation theology as exemplified in the Mexican American experience? How does the move toward more conceptual language in the Creed and in Aquinas' Summa theologiae relate to the foundational priority of narrative? In exploring such questions this book maintains the primacy and centrality of narrative in communicating the significance of Jesus. Mark and Guadalupe, both communicating through the power of narrative, frame the Creed, which is a symbolic evocation of John's narrative, and the Summa, which even in its systematization assumes the foundational narratives. Thus, the Fathers of the Church and Thomas Aquinas, no less than the Gospel authors and Juan Diego's heirs, are seen to be on a "narrative-quest."

Through a careful examination of his extant sermons, some of which survive in Latin and others in classical Armenian, this book invites readers to hear a bishop's voice from the mid- fourth century, an important period in late antique Christianity

Tradition and the rule of faith are particularly apt themes for this collection of studies. The essays are written in honor of Joseph T. Lienhard, S.J., renowned American patristic scholar whose research and writings have focused on this particular theme.

Scripture Re-envisioned discusses the christological exegesis of biblical theophanies and argues its crucial importance for the appropriation of the Hebrew Bible as the Christian Old Testament. The Emmaus episode in Luke 24 and its history of interpretation serve as the methodological and hermeneutical prolegomenon to the early Christian exegesis of theophanies. Subsequent chapters discuss the reception history of Genesis 18; Exodus 3 and 33; Psalm 98/99 and 131/132; Isaiah 6; Habakkuk 3:2 (LXX); Daniel 3 and 7. Bucur shows that the earliest, most widespread and enduring reading of these biblical texts, namely their interpretation as "christophanies"— manifestations of the Logos-to-be-incarnate—constitutes a robust and versatile exegetical tradition, which lent itself to doctrinal reflection, apologetics, polemics, liturgical anamnesis and doxology