Social networks and the origenist controversy: the case of Anastasius I of Rome, Jerome, and Paulinus of Nola

Abstract

Attention to the complexities of social networks at the time of the first Origenist controversy at the end of the fourth century reveals that while both Jerome and Anastasius I, bishop of Rome, were anti-Origenist, they had differing attitudes towards Paulinus of Nola. Jerome was suspicious of him because of Origenist associates, while Anastasius seems to have held him in high regard. It is argued here that it is too simplistic to divide participants in this controversy into pro- and anti-Origenist camps and to expect that those within each camp all shared the same outlook and evaluation of others. Personal attitudes towards others usually are shaped by more than one issue, and different issues hold different significance for different people. In the case of Anastasius, it would appear that he was unaware of potential Origenist sympathies held by Paulinus, did not place the same importance on his network of contacts as Jerome did, and/or was more influenced by his social standing as a member of the elite than by suspicion about possible Origenist affinity.