christology in the 3rd-5th councils

1. Christology in the 3rd-5th Councils By Prof J Macdonald June 2007

3. Origen on First Principles Origen Alexandria and Caeseria 195-253AD Logos assumes the unfallen Christ nous His conception offered an answer to Arius and Julian, but effectively split Christ into two people.

4. Diodore Bp. Of Tarsus Prominent Priest in Antioch 360�s-370�s Opposed Julian the Apostate Supported Pat. Meletius when exiled by Constantius and Valens. Bp. Of Tarsus 378 Prominent at Council 381 Emphasized separation of Christ and Logos Conflict with Apollinaris Important Biblical Commentator emphasizing literal meaning

5. Apollinaris Bp. of Laodicea 360-390 Born in Syrian Laodicea in 315 son of priest and grammar teacher from Beirut 346 Excommunicated by Arians for supporting Athanasius. 360 chosen Old Nicean bp. Of Laodicea allied with Paulinus of Antioch against Meletius Rewrote OT and NT with father in classical style when Julian forbids Christians to teach the pagan classics. Wrote refutation of Porphyry (lost) and response to Julian. Attacked separation of Christ into two people (Logos and XC nous) by making the Logos the soul of Christ. 362 to synod of Alexandria disagreement with Athanasius over Christology 363 Profession of faith with unusual Christology 374 Teacher of Jerome in Antioch, ally of Basil 377 at Rome, 379 Antioch, 381 Constantinople, and 382 Rome councils condemn Apollianaris� doctrine Attacked by Gregory of Nyssa 382 and Diodore of Tarsus Apollinaris� and his disciples writings survived under names of fathers. �One incarnate nature� introduced under name of Athanasius. Died 390

6. Athanasius and Gregory Nazianzus Tomus of Alexandrian council of 362AD tries to reconcile those of Apollinarin and Diodoran parties by rejecting 2 persons and soulless Christ. 372AD Athanasius responds to conflict of Apollinarin and Diodoran parties in pro-Nicean synod in Achaea. Letter to Epictetus condemns division of Christ into two. The crucified one is God. 383AD Gregory condemns both Diodoran and Apollinaran postions in letter to Cledonius: �Christ is one thing and another thing, not one person and another person�, �Mary is Mother of God�. �What is not assumed is not healed� Logos exists as a human soul does not assume a separate human person. These letters become the canonical in future controversy, used at Ephesus and Chalcedon.

7. Theodore Bp. of Mopsuestia fl.383-428 Student of Diodore. Teacher of Nestorius Chrysostom�s fellow student of Libanius and monastic. Bp. Of Mopsuestia 392-428 Anti-Eunomian Anti-Apollinarian: The assumer and the assumed, On the Incarnation c. 390 In catechetical lectures and commentary on John he presents a two subject Christology but tries to soften Diodoran 2 sons, by arguing for a union in one prosopon, so we speak of one Son. Logos is not the one who suffers. The man Jesus is worshiped due to his close association with the Logos. Modern controversy over reliability of Greek extracts versus Persian Syriac translations. However, overall writings support criticisms of his two subject Christology. Defended Julian of Eclanum against Augustine.

8. Theodore of Mopsuestia Texts On the Incarnation c. 390AD �Since (the one who was assumed) had already been found worthy of the union, he obtained all that could properly be obtained by a man united to the Only Begotten and Ruler of the universe, and was counted worthy of higher gifts than the rest of humanity as the endowment of the union came to be his.� Fragment 6 Book 7 �When we speak of the nature of God the Word as complete and of his person as complete (for there is no hypostasis without its person). Moreover, the nature of the man is complete, and likewise his person. But when we consider the union, then we speak of one person. Fragment 7 book 8 On the Nicene Creed � he constantly receives adoration from all creation because of his close union with God the Word. p 54 �Paul�is speaking of Christ who is from the Jews according to the flesh and that he is naming neither the nature of the Godhead of the Only Begotten, nor God the Word who was from the beginning: p. 64 �It was not Divine nature which received death, but it is clear that it was that man who was assumed as a temple to God the Word� p.66 �They rightly ascribed the sentence �to judge the living and the dead� to the prosopon of the man who was assumed on our behalf so that they should show us the honor that came to the temple of God the Word.� P. 80 �He will come again through the same man who has been assumed , because of the ineffable union that that man had with God� p. 81 �Apart from God he tasted death for every man� as translation of Heb 2:9 p. 86 The Godhead was separated from the one who was suffering in the trial of death, because it was impossible for him to taste the trial of death�He Himself was not tried with the trial of death but He was near to him. P. 87

9. Nestorius Pat. Of Cpol 428-431 Becomes Patriarch of Cpol in 428 Suggests �Christotokos�, condemns �Theotokos� (429) and initiates violence against his critics. 430 Nestorius has bishop anathematize use of �Theotokos�. Cyril writes in defense of �Theotokos� Nestorius deposes his opponents in Constantinople as heretics Nestorius 2nd Letter to Cyril objects to Divine Person Suffering. Nestorius asks for a council to try Cyril despite John of Antioch�s recommendation to compromise. August 430 Roman synod condemns Nestorius, November Alexandrian Synod condemns Nestorius. Cyril�s 3rd letter to Nestorius contains 12 anathemas. Cyril�s anathemas attacked by Anderew of Samosata and Theodoret of Cyrus as Apollinarian, esp. #12. 431 Council in Ephesus condemns Nestorius, Convocation under John of Antioch condemns Cyril. 431 Colloquy after council condemns Nestorius and absolves Cyril and John of heresy

10. Cyril 2nd Letter to Nestorius � 430AD Ch.3 � We affirm that the Logos united to Himself according to hypostasis, � flesh ensouled with a rational soul and became man, and He was called the Son of Man, not by mere favor or goodwill, nor as in the assumption of mere appearance (prosopon), and that on the one hand the natures that came together to form a true unity are different, but from them is one Christ and Son, not that the differences are taken away through the union� Ch.4 � Thus it is said He was born and existed before the ages from the Father and was born according to the flesh from a woman� Ch. 5 Thus we say He suffered and resurrected, not as if God the Logos suffered blows, piercing of nails, or other wounds in His own nature (for Divinity is impassible, because it is also bodiless) but since what became His own body suffered these things, again He is said to suffer Himself on our behalf; for the impassible one suffered in the body� Ch. 7 � This is why the Holy Fathers called the Holy Virgin Theotokos, not as if the nature of the Logos or His Divinity received the beginning of its existence from the Holy Virgin, but because of the rationally ensouled holy body being born from her to which the Logos was united by hypostasis He is said to be born in the flesh.

11. Nestorius 2nd Letter to Cyril 430AD: Ch. 6 � For the [Logos] whom you first called impassible and not in need of a second birth you later introduced as passible and recently born, as if the natural properties of God the Logos were removed by His conjunction with the Temple� Ch.7 �[Christ�s] birth and the sufferings are not passed down to us as if they applied to the Divinity but to the humanity. Thus the Holy Virgin should be called the Christotokos not Theotokos �Obviously God the Logos was not the Son of David� �to attribute to the Divinity�the properties of the flesh that is associated with it, birth, suffering and death, is either the error of paganism or from a spirit sick with the madness of Apollinaris and Arius�for this notion must say that the incarnation results in God the Logos nursing, growing, fearing the passion, needing help from an angel, not to mention circumcision, sacrifice, sweating, hunger,�all of these things if they are attributed to Divinity are merely lies� Quaternion 16: I worship the one who submitted to death along with the Deity in so far as is a cooperator with the divine majesty. For it was not God himself who was fashioned within a mother�nor God who was buried in a tomb�but since God was in the one assumed, the assumed man was conjoined to the one who assumed him, thus he is called God along side of him. At Council of Ephesus 431AD Nestorius refused to identify the hypostasis of the Son as the subject of Christ. Also said �It is not possible to call the baby Jesus God�.

12. Cyril of Alexandria-3rd Letter to Nestorius 12 anathemas� Nov. 430 Mary is Theotokos Logos hypostatically united with flesh Rejects XC as conjunction of hypostases, vs. one natural union Rejects sayings divided between 2 hypostases and 2 prosopons Rejects �God bearing man� (later authors prefer �man-bearing God�) Rejects Logos is the God and Master of XC Rejects Jesus a man activated or glorified by Logos Rejects man should be worshipped along with Logos Rejects XC glorified by HS as a foreign power Rejects XC as a different high priest than Logos XC�s Flesh is of the Logos not of another person Logos suffered, died and rose.

13. Cyril�s Letter to John of Antioch-433AD Ch. 5 - We confess our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God, perfect God and perfect man of a reasonable soul and body, born before the ages according to Divinity and in these last days for us and our salvation from the Virgin Mary according to his humanity. He is homoousios with the Father according to Divinity and homoousios with us according to humanity. For there was a union of two physes on account of which we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord� We confess that the Holy Virgin is the Theotokos because God the Logos became incarnate and was made man and from this conception united to Himself the temple taken from her.

14. Cyril 1st Letter to Succensus - c. 435AD Ch.7 Theoretically speaking, only as appears to the eyes of the soul, concerning the manner of the incarnation of the Only Begotten, we say that two physes were united but there is only one Christ and Son and Lord, the Logos of God made man and incarnate. We can take as our example the synthesis which makes us men. For we are composed of body and soul and we see two natures, one of the body and another of the soul, but there is one man from the union of both.

15. Pope Leo�s Tome to Flavian 449AD Ch.3 � Therefore the properties of both natures and substances that have come together in one person are preserved �so that Christ Jesus might from one element by capable of dying and from the other incapable�the Creator and Lord of everything willed to be among mortals�for without defect each nature retains its property� Ch.4 - The Son of God descending from his seat in heaven �enters this lower world�because he who in His own sphere is invisible became visible in ours� The impassible God did not disdain to be passible Man, and the immortal One to be subjected to the laws of death � For each form does the acts which belong to it in communion with the other; the Word performing what belongs to the Word and the flesh carrying out what belongs to the flesh; one of them shines with miracles the other succumbs to injuries�it does not belong to the same nature�to be transfixed with nails, and to open the gates of paradise.. Ch.5 Accordingly on account of this unity of Person which is to be understood as existing in both the natures, we read the Son of Man came down from heaven �the Son of God is said to have been crucified �that the properties of the Divine and the human nature might be acknowledged to remain in him without causing a division.

16. Robber Council -449AD 448AD in opposition to Theodoret of Cyrus Archimandrite Eutyches denies the survival of the human nature after the union. Eutyches is condemned by Pat. Flavian of Constantinople and appealed to Rome. Flavian and Theodoret are condemned and Flavian dies of beating at 2nd Council of Ephesus in 449AD under Dioscurus Pat. of Alexandria who suppresses Leo�s Tome. 450AD Emperor Theodosius II dies. A new council is called by Emperor Marcian. 451AD Council of Chalcedon deposes Dioscorus, restores Flavian and Theodoret, accepts Leo�s Tome and constructs a new formula that combines Cyril�s and Leo�s terminology.

17. Formula of Chalcedon-451AD Following the Holy Fathers we teach one and the same Son our Lord Jesus Christ,�complete in humanity and complete in Divinity, truly God and truly man, of a reasonable soul and body, homoousios with the Father in Divinity and homoousios with us in humanity, similar to us in everything except sin, born before the ages from father in Divinity, but born in these last days for us and our salvation from the virgin Mary the Theotokos in humanity. One and the same Lord Christ, the only begotten son, is known in two physes unconfusedly, unchangeably, undividedly, inseparably; nothing of the distinction of natures taken away through the union, but rather the property of each physis is preserved and is gathered together in one prosopon and one hypostasis, not being distinguished or divided into two prosopons�

18. Monophysite Schism After Chalcedon many Eastern Cyrillians reject Chalcedon as favoring Nestorius� doctrines as West supports Theodoret and opponents of Cyril. 482AD Emperor Zeno endorses Henotikon based on theology of Cyril which unites East but is rejected by Rome. 511AD Emperor Anastasius, as a result of war with Persia, gradually abandons Henotikon to demand anathema of Chalcedon. Severus made Patriarch of Antioch 512AD

19. Zeno�s Henotikon � 482AD Affirms Ephesus I (omits Ephesus II and Chalcedon) Condemns Nestorius and Eutyches Accepts the 12 anathemas of Cyril �We confess that the only begotten Son of God, himself God, who truly assumed manhood�homoousios with the Father in respect to His Divinity and with us in respect to humanity; that He descended and became incarnate of the �Theotokos, is one and not two; for we affirm both his miracles and the sufferings�are those of a single person.�

20. Severus Pat. Of Antioch 512-518AD � Letter Count Oecumenius We do not anathematize those who confess the properties of the natures of which the one Christ consists, but those who separate the properties, and apportion them to each nature apart �and He is divided by the fact that they speak of two natures after the union, with the natures which have been cut asunder into a duality and separated into a distinct diversity go the operations and properties �as the words of Leo�s impious letter state in what he said ��the Word doing what belongs to the Word and the body doing what belongs to the body�. Comes to require anathema of Chalcedon for communion.

21. Restoration of Chalcedon and attempts are reunion. Justin becomes Emperor in 518 deposes Severus and restores communion with Rome. Development of �Neo-Chalcedonian� Theology emphasizing the agreement of Cyril and Chalcedon: Nephalius, John the Grammarian, John of Scythopolis Justinian attempts to reunite Monophysites with Chalcedon based on Cyril. 519AD Scythian monks: �one of the Holy Trinity suffered for us�, finally accepted by Pope John II in 533AD Colloquy in 533 encourages possible reunion 536 Condemnation of Anthimus and Severus following controversy over Christ�s ignorance leads to their condemnation of Leo�s doctrine of two activities in Christ. Justinian condemns �three chapters�: Theodore of Mopsuestia and anti Cyril writings of Theodoret and Ibas in 544. Justinian writes On the Right Faith in 551AD Justinian Calls 5th Ecumenical Council in Chalcedon 553AD

22. Emperor Justinian � On the Right Faith - 551AD We confess �the Divine Logos�who was begotten of the Father in a timeless manner�in these last days for us and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the holy glorious Theotokos�and was born of her. He is the Lord Jesus Christ, One of the Holy Trinity �homoousios to God the Father in His Divinity�and homoousios to us in his humanity. The same one in His flesh is passible and in his Divinity impassible. For He who took upon Himself suffering and death is not someone other than the Logos, but the impassible and eternal Logos of God Himself submitted to being born in human flesh, and He accomplished all things. Wherefore we do not believe that the Divine Logos who performed is one and the Christ who endured the passion another, but we confess that our Lord Jesus Christ in one and the same Divine Logos of God who was incarnate and became man, and both miracles and the Passion are His which he voluntarily bore in the flesh.

23. Council of Constantinople-553AD 2. If anyone shall not confess that the Word of God has two nativities, the one from all eternity of the Father, without time and without body; the other in these last days, coming down from heaven and being made flesh of the holy and glorious Mary, Theotokos and always a virgin, and born of her: let him be anathema. 3. If anyone shall say that the wonder-working Word of God is one [Person] and the Christ that suffered another; �but that he was not one and the same our Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, incarnate and made man, and that his miracles and the sufferings which of his own will he endured in the flesh were not of the same [Person]: let him be anathema. 4. If anyone shall say that the union of the Word of God to man was only according to grace or energy, or dignity, or equality of honour� speaking thus clearly of two persons, and only designating disingenuously one Person and one Christ when the reference is to his honour, or his dignity, or his worship; if anyone shall not acknowledge as the Holy Fathers teach, that the union of God the Word is � made synthetically and hypostatically, and that therefore there is only one Person, to wit: our Lord Jesus Christ, one of the Holy Trinity: let him be anathema. �

24. 5th Council on �One Person�. 5. If anyone understands the expression "one only Person of our Lord Jesus Christ" in this sense, that it is the union of many hypostases, and if he attempts thus to introduce into the mystery of Christ two hypostases, or two Persons, and, after having introduced two persons, speaks of one Person only out of dignity, honour or worship, as both Theodorus and Nestorius insanely have written; if anyone shall slander the holy Council of Chalcedon, pretending that it made use of this expression [one hypostasis] in this impious sense, and if he will not recognize rather that the Word of God is united with the flesh hypostatically, and that therefore there is but one hypostasis or one only Person, and that the holy Council of Chalcedon has professed in this sense the one Person of our Lord Jesus Christ: let him be anathema. For since one of the Holy Trinity has been made man, that is, God the Word, the Holy Trinity has not been increased by the addition of another person or hypostasis.

25. 5th Council on Theotokos 6. If anyone shall not truly, but only falsely, call the holy, glorious, and ever-virgin Mary, the Theotokos, or shall call her so only in a relative sense, believing that she bare only a simple man and that God the word was not incarnate of her, but that the incarnation of God the Word resulted only from the fact that he united himself to that man who was born [of her]; if he shall calumniate the Holy Synod of Chalcedon as though it had asserted the Virgin to be Theotokos according to the impious sense of Theodore; or if anyone shall call her anthropotokos or Christotokos, as if Christ were not God, and shall not confess that she is exactly and truly the Theotokos, because that God the Word who before all ages was begotten of the Father was in these last days made flesh and born of her, and if anyone shall not confess that in this sense the holy Synod of Chalcedon acknowledged her to be the Theotokos: let him be anathema.

26. 5th Council � �in 2 natures� and �from 2 natures� 7. If anyone using the expression, "in two natures," does not confess that our one Lord Jesus Christ has been revealed in the divinity and in the humanity� but shall take the expression � so as to divide the elements, or � does not content himself with taking in a theoretical manner the difference of the natures which compose Him� but shall make use of the number [two] to divide the natures or to make of them Persons properly so called: let him be anathema. 8. If anyone uses the expression "of two natures," confessing that a union was made of the Godhead and of the humanity, or the expression "the one nature made flesh of God the Word," and shall not so understand those expressions as the holy Fathers have taught, that is: that of the divine and human nature there was made an hypostatic union, whereof is one Christ; but from these expressions shall try to introduce one nature or substance [made by a mixture] of the Godhead and manhood of Christ; let him be anathema. � Wherefore there is one Christ, both God and man, homoousios with the Father as touching his Godhead, and homoousios with us as touching his manhood. Therefore they are equally condemned and anathematized by the Church of God, who divide or part the mystery of the divine dispensation of Christ, or who introduce confusion into that mystery.

27. 5th Council � Theopaschite and Theodore 10. If anyone does not confess that our Lord Jesus Christ who was crucified in the flesh is true God and the Lord of Glory and one of the Holy Trinity: let him be anathema. 12. If anyone defends the impious Theodore of Mopsuestia, who has said that the Word of God is one person, but that another person is Christ, vexed by the sufferings of the soul and the desires of the flesh, �. And, again, this same impious Theodore has also said that the union of God the Word with Christ is like to that which, according to the doctrine of the Apostle, exists between a man and his wife, "They twain shall be in one flesh." � If, then, anyone shall defend this most impious Theodore and his impious writings, in which he vomits the blasphemies mentioned above, and countless others besides � let him be anathema.