Pseudo-Anthimos, O svaté církvi. Svědectví o polemice Markella z Ankýry s eusebiány?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article deals with a short polemical treatise De sancta ecclesia (SE). It offers a translation of the whole treatise into Czech and an analysis of SE, especially of its second half, in which the teaching of the Arians and the Eusebians is rejected. In the prologue of SE, the one Catholic church is distinguishes from heresies. A catalogue of older heresies follows, in which the author of SE sees the origins of the wrong Arian and Eusebian opinions. In the second half of SE, several Arian and Eusebian expressions and statements are condemned. Each of the statements is linked with a statement of an older heretic. SE could hardly be written before the third quarter of the fourth century, because it mentions the dispute about the divinity of the Holy Spirit. The author of SE, at least in the present form, could not be Anthimus, as it is assumed in the manuscripts, because Anthimus was martyred in the Great Persecution under Diocletian. The author of SE was familiar with the dispute between Marcellus of Ancyra and the Eusebians in the thirties of the fourth century, but also with the way, how Athanasius of Alexandria argued against the Eusebians (especially in the third of his Orations Against the Arians). On the contrary, arguments based on the analysis of quotations from the Bible, often used by Marcellus, are almost completely¨missing from SE and in the quotes of the statements of the Eusebians expressions are found not used in the debate between Marcellus and the Eusebians and known from the treatises of Athanasius. Marcellus of Ancyra could be the author of SE (as it is assumed by the modern scholars) on the condition that in SE Marcellus accepted partly the ay, how Athanasius argued against the Eusebians, and that he resigned to his favoured argumentation from the Bible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".