Christology in the 3rd-5th Councils - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 27
About This Presentation
Title:

Christology in the 3rd-5th Councils

Description:

Therefore they are equally condemned and anathematized by the Church of God, who divide or part the mystery of the divine dispensation of Christ, ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:150
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 28
Provided by: JeffreyM81
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Christology in the 3rd-5th Councils


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

2
Arius and Julian
  • Human attributes as proofs of lack of Divinity.
  • For Arius Christs birth, human weakness, and
    death are indications that he is not fully divine
  • For Julian, Christs death shows the Logos is not
    Divine. He suggests that Diodore tries to argue
    the two are separate.

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 360s-370s
  • 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
  • Chrysostoms 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
  • Paulis 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 29 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 deathHe
    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 Antiochs recommendation to compromise.
  • August 430 Roman synod condemns Nestorius,
    November Alexandrian Synod condemns Nestorius.
  • Cyrils 3rd letter to Nestorius contains 12
    anathemas.
  • Cyrils 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 Christs 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 Divinitythe 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 Ariusfor 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 mothernor God who was buried in a
    tombbut 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
  • XCs Flesh is of the Logos not of another person
    Logos suffered, died and rose.

13
Cyrils 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 Leos 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 incapablethe Creator and Lord of
    everything willed to be among mortalsfor without
    defect each nature retains its property
  • Ch.4 - The Son of God descending from his seat in
    heaven enters this lower worldbecause 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 injuriesit
    does not belong to the same natureto 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 Leos 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 Leos
    Tome and constructs a new formula that combines
    Cyrils and Leos 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
Zenos 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 manhoodhomoousios
    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 sufferingsare 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 Leos
    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 Christs ignorance
    leads to their condemnation of Leos 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 Logoswho was begotten of
    the Father in a timeless mannerin these last
    days for us and for our salvation came down from
    heaven and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and
    the holy glorious Theotokosand was born of her.
    He is the Lord Jesus Christ, One of the Holy
    Trinity homoousios to God the Father in His
    Divinityand 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.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com