Adolf von Harnack and Arthur Cushman McGiffert

Summary

Adolf von Harnack and Arthur Cushman McGiffert 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica (1911)

In his characterizations of persons, borrowed from Socrates, he is more dull and colourless. After Socrates he has indeed repeated the caution not to be too rash in discerning the finger of God; but his way of looking at things is throughout mean and rustic. Two souls inhabit his book; one, the better, is borrowed from Socrates; another, the worse, is his own.
Source: Wikisource

Adolf von Harnack and Arthur Cushman McGiffert 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica (1911)

It is probable that Sozomen did not approve of Socrates’s freer attitude towards Greek science, and that he wished to present a picture in which the clergy should be still further glorified and monasticism brought into still stronger pro- minence. In Sozomen everything is a shade more ecclesiastical—but only a shade—than in Socrates.
Source: Wikisource

Adolf von Harnack and Arthur Cushman McGiffert 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica (1911)

Theodoret's chief importance is as a dogmatic theologian, it having fallen to his lot to take part in the Nestorian controversy and to be the most considerable opponent of the views of Cyril and Dioscurus of Alexandria. For more than twenty years he maintained the struggle against the Alexandrian dogmatic and its formulae (Θεοτόκος, ένωσις καθ' ὑπόστασιν, μια ὑπόστασις, ένωσις φυσική, and the like) , and taught that in the person of Christ we must strictly distinguish two natures (hypostases) , which are united indeed in one person (prosopon) , but are not amalgamated in essence.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature