Contra Marcellum: Marcellus of Ancyra and Fourth-Century Theology (review)

Joseph T. Lienhard, S.J. Contra Marcellum: Marcellus of Ancyra and Fourth-Century Theology. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1999. Pp. xviii + 280. $59.95.

Contemporary scholarship on the development of doctrine within the context of the fourth-century Trinitarian Controversy continues to broaden the available picture of all of the various trajectories of Nicene and anti-Nicene theology. Joseph Lienhard's new work on Marcellus of Ancyra makes several positive contributions toward a genuine understanding of the stereotyped Marcellus, who was forever remembered in the anti-Marcellan pronouncement of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed of 381, "and of His Kingdom there will be no end. . . ." Lienhard, in this published version of his Habilitationsschrift, wishes to proceed beyond stereotypes of Marcellus to inquire into his actual role in debates surrounding the doctrine of the Trinity. The book contains parts of articles written and previously published by Lienhard, though the consideration of Marcellus found here is the product of reflection and polishing to produce an entire, coherent work.

Refining a theological matrix he has defined before, Lienhard concentrates on hypostasis as the one linguistic symbol which became a rallying point between two sides of the Trinitarian controversy: one group was convinced that God must be spoken of as one hypostasis, while the other group insisted that Christian doctrine required that God be defined with the plural form, hypostaseis. These two schools of thought are called miahypostatic theology and dyohypostatic theology within both his consideration presented of Marcellus' work Contra Asterium (including Marcellus' opponents in the Contra Asterium), and the theological opposition of the dyohypostatic tradition, especially from Eusebius of Caesarea and Christian writers following in the Eusebian theological legacy. In addition to the chapters on Eusebius and the legacy of his theological opposition to Marcellus, a chapter is also included on literature written against Marcellus but naming him as the figure "Sabellius." More important, at the mid-point of the book, Lienhard gives us a chapter on Marcellus and his doctrine after his initial deposition in 336.

Lienhard's book provides a well informed basis on which English-language scholarship on Marcellus can develop, while detailing a comprehensive summary and understanding of European--especially German--scholarship on Marcellus over the last century. Lienhard makes a unique contribution in his account of Marcellus and his theology, which places his work squarely within the context of fourth-century debates, and offers an analysis of Marcellus' theology that draws out the broader theological issues. Particularly useful, and the book's most original contribution, is the question of sensitivity to distinctions between pre-Incarnate and Incarnate Christologies, a very important analytical tool. Another useful feature of this book was the translation of significant passages from Eusebius of Caesarea, though the book suffers from the absence of key passages from the surviving fragments of Marcellus. These passages would have illustrated his distinctive doctrines, especially as Marcellus is the subject of this book through which Lienhard wishes to bring Marcellus' theology into the greater view of English-language scholarship.

Greater problems in the book involve Lienhard's apparent reassessment of the possible realistic deployment of miahypostatic theology after the end of the 350s. If the categories of miahypostatic and dyohypostatic are still accurate theological distinctions after the 350s, then some explanation would be needed. There is also a tendency in chapter 6, "Marcellus and His Doctrine after 336," to present everything that Marcellus received as critiques or condemnations as either misunderstood or unfair. The over-simplification of how Marcellus' opponents treated him seems to be consistently in Marcellus' favor, and by the end of the book Marcellus is presented as an heroic figure, who, for example, "finally snapped the great chain of being" (244). Another question arises over the ease with which Marcellus championed himself before Western bishops at Serdica in 343 (144-48); it could not have been as easy as Lienhard claims. The governing drama of...