I.

Historical Presuppositions
A. What needed to be defended?
1. There is a basic need to defend the basic unity of the
Godhead. God is not two or three gods, but One God. Much
of the theology during this period sought to protect this
unity. (up to around 382 AD)
2. Later on, there is also a need to protect the basic unity of
the Person of Jesus Christ. He is not two persons, one
divine, one human, but One Divine Person. (From 382-681)

B. How was revelation to be defended and doctrine to be

developed?
1. All of the theologians of the early Church had as their
starting point Sacred Scripture and the teaching of the
Apostles. These were definitive for the Church.
2. When they sought to proclaim the faith to those of the
Greco-Roman culture, the Fathers sought to use
philosophical categories to help explain the Truth of the
faith in a clearer and more precise way.
3. When disputes concerning the Truth of the Faith occurred,
Bishops and Theologians exchanged letters to try and
resolve the difficulty. If there was still an impasse over a
certain issue, they gathered in Synods to attempt to solve
the difficulty. If enough Bishops were gathered, it could
have impact upon the universal Church.

II. Cultural Worldviews at the Beginning of Christianity

A. Christians’ Self perceptions
1. Before 130AD, Christians felt misunderstood by the general
society and separated themselves from the pagan
environment. Their whole spirituality bore the marks of an
elitist and martyr’s mentality.
2. They were seen by some as a sect of Judaism until 130AD,
when the Christians were finally driven from the
Synagogues.

1
 3. The revelation of Jesus Christ was determined for them
from the consequences of Jesus’ religious experience, the
experience of Easter, by apostolic thought and a Christian
understanding of the OT.
4. From 130-325AD, Christianity began to withdraw from
Jewish apocalyptic tendencies. Theology became more open
to scientific methods of Greek philosophy.

B. Types of Jewish Christianity

1. In the First Century of Christianity, there were several
Jewish Christian groups in Palestine. The proclamation
“Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ,” was central to Jewish-
Christian Theology and the historical starting point for
Christological interpretation, the reason that early Christian
theology was Christology.

2. Types of these Jewish-Christian approaches to Jesus:

a. Ebionites: They acknowledged Jesus as a Prophet or
the Messiah, but nothing more.
b. Christian Jews who would consider Jesus to be God,
but who also believed that the Mosaic Law needed to
be kept and taken on by Gentile converts to
Christianity.
c. Jewish Christian community at Jerusalem. After the
Apostolic Council of Jerusalem in 51AD, circumcision
and full observance of the Law was not required of
Gentile converts. This constitutes a movement
toward Gentile Christianity, even if it includes
former Jews.
d. Jewish Christianity as a way of thought: This is
Christian theology characterized by Christian
imagery and thought, whether it is that of the OT
or rabbinic Judaism.

2
C. Transition of World-views
1. From the Apocalyptic world-view: This view saw the world in
two eras:
a. This Age, which is sin dominated and Transitory.
b. The Age to Come which is conceived as a celestial
world, completely governed by God.
c. Christians believed that with the Resurrection, the
world to come has already dawned. The revealed
mystery of God’s will id to be revealed in the
Parousia.
d. With the separation from Judaism, Christians
dropped this world view to an extent and gave up on
the imminent coming of Christ.
e. This view enables one to understand salvation as an
act of God’s saving mercy. But it can also restrict
this act of mercy to Israel.

2. To a Hellenistic world-view: In this view, the world of the

senses stands against the truly intelligible world. Salvation
consists in the liberation of the person from the corporeal
world and a return home through a purifying spirituality.
a. The individual had to strive to perfect virtue, of
which Christ served as Teacher and example. Less
emphasis was placed on the return of the glorified
Christ.
b. Christians regard God and the world as a hierarchy
of various levels.
c. The Messiah belonged to a different age and was
related to the creation of all things.
d. What was important before the creation of the
world was the Biblical theme in which the WORD
(LOGOS), Christ had always been with the Father
and were before all things.
e. The Word, or “Second God” could only have been
generated and was therefore visible. This generation
was differentiated from creation.

3
 f. This view sees salvation as a cosmic process and
gives it a more universalistic approach. Christ’s
salvation on the cross becomes the mediation of the
eternal LOGOS.

III. Second Century Christianity: Opponents and

Defenders (Apologists)
A. Early Opponents of a True Christology
1. Gnosticism: This overall heading consists of several Christian
sects and groups. They did have some principles in common:
a. It was ideal to recollect one’s own affinity to God in
true “Gnosis” (knowledge) and free oneself from this
world, while attaining salvation for oneself and the
whole cosmos.
b. The sects were very private and had secret “rites,”
which only the Gnostics understood.
c. The flesh and material things (including suffering)
were seen as evil, while the things of the Spirit and
ideas were good and to be desired.
d. It attempts to remove Jesus from history and turn
him into a Gnostic being (Demiurge).
2. One of the teachings that Gnostics proposed was that Jesus
really did not have a human body. It was a mere phantom or
illusion. Those who believed this teaching were known as the
Docetists, since to them, Jesus only seemed to have a bodily
existence.

B. Early Defender of Jesus’ Divinity and Humanity

1. Ignatius of Antioch: (+107AD) He was Bishop of Antioch in
Syria from 69-107AD). He was the first writer to refer to
the Church as “Catholic.” On his way to martyrdom in Rome,
he wrote Seven Letters which deal with Jesus Christ and
the structure of the Church.

4
 a. One of the main objectives of Ignatius’ Christology
was the repudiation of Docetism. He wrote that
Jesus “really ate and drank, was really crucified and
died.”
b. Ignatius frequently used the word “God” in referring
to Jesus.
c. “Communicatio Idiomatum:” This refers to the
“exchange of predication” in which divine attributes
are predicated of Jesus and human attributes of the
Divine Logos, (eg. Suffering God, God is born, etc.)
d. While Ignatius occasionally referred to Jesus as the
“Logos,” he more commonly used the expression
“Son.”
e. We are called to imitate Christ; conform ourselves
to Christ in martyrdom; Christ dwells in us.

C. Introduction of Logos Theology

1. Justin Martyr: (100-165AD) As a convert to Christianity and
a philosopher, he had to explain the Christian message to two
groups:
a. To the Jews: he had to explain that Jesus was the
Messiah
b. To the Greeks: That Christians were monotheists and
it was superior to philosophy and that Jesus as God
suffered.
c. Justin Martyr: Founder of Logos Theology. According
to Sacred Scripture, there is one history of salvation
embracing all of creation through the LOGOS,
through whom God has created everything and reveals
him to all. Through this revelation, accessible to all,
the LOGOS has triumphed over darkness and brought
light into the world. He achieved this victory through
his Incarnation, his first humble event.

5
 d. Only Jesus Christ is the fullness of the LOGOS. The
Logos concept was not only the bridge between
philosophy and theology, but more importantly
between God and the world. The LOGOS is
subordinate to the Father, but still God. Because of
the Pre-existence of the divine Logos, salvation is
universal.
e. Justin solved the difficulty of the suffering God
through the OT testimonia, namely the prophets. This
is seen especially in the suffering Servant Narrative
(Isaiah). “It was not an angel, not a man, but God who
saved us.”
i. Justin emphasizes the invincible reign of Christ
and his power is still manifest in the Church. All
of Jesus’ life reflected this theology of victory.
The incarnation is the summit of salvation

2. Irenaeus Of Lyons (+200) was the first to truly and

systematically take on Gnosticism in his work, Adversus
Haereses. He rethinks Justin’s view of salvation history and
secures his position by basing his teaching on Apostolic
Tradition, without which there is no true Gnosis of the Bible.
a. For Irenaeus, three things are united: Unity of God
the Creator and invisible Father, Unity of Christ, true
God and true man. Unity of material and spiritual
nature in humanity.
b. “Salus Carnis:” This doctrine is specifically against
the Gnostics since it speaks of salvation of the
flesh. Salvation consists in the fact that the human
person has achieves a state which God founded
him when he created him in his image and
likeness.
c. The human person reaches perfection when he has
become accustomed to bearing God and has
become a spiritual man, when in the knowledge of
the Son he has become a son and is able to
partake in God’s immortality

6
 d. Because of sin, we have lost the likeness to God,
although we have still retained the divine image. The
Incarnation accomplishes two things:
i. Salvation and union with God.
ii. Restoration in which we truly become
Children of God and grow in spiritual
freedom. We grow beyond what we
lost in Adam’s sin.

e. Recapitulation: Christ has recompensed Adam’s sin,

that he has linked the end with the beginning and
that he has united the whole human race. Not only
has the beginning been restored, but surpassed
through the grace of Christ.
f. He defended the Tradition against the Gnostics by
stating that you cannot sever the heavenly from the
earthly and that One and the same Person who is God
and man, Word and Flesh.
g. He sought to determine what was consonant with the
Faith of the Apostles as it has been handed down.
Apostolic teaching continued to live in the Church
and this tradition is the norm for Christian faith.
Among the Apostolic Churches, that of Rome was
pre-eminent for Irenaeus.

IV. Origen and the School of Alexandria

A. Origen: The First Systematic theologian
3. Origen of Alexandria (185-254): He was greatly influenced
by Platonic philosophy and tied so closely to it that some of
his works were suspect. This was particularly the case
regarding the pre-existence of souls and the eternity of the
world. In spite of this, much of theology for the next two
hundred years was both a positive and negative reaction to
him.

7
 4. The Logos is the Mediator:
a. Using the position of Middle Platonism, the
transition from the One to the Many necessitates a
Mediator who belongs to both worlds. The role of
the Mediator is appropriated by the Logos. The Son
is Wisdom and Word. To the Father he is Wisdom,
to the World he is Word.
b. The Logos has two external functions:
1. In creation, he is the link between God and the
world.
3. In salvation history, the Logos is behind all human events and
unites them all with himself, while not violating their freedom.
4. The human person needs to accommodate himself to the Logos
to see the Father because his openness has been marred by
sin. The Logos stands behind all intellectual knowledge and
created the requirements which help us attain salvation for
ourselves and the world.
5. If the Logos reveals the invisible God everywhere by his
presence full of light, he does it in the highest way by means of
his Incarnation through Mary. With this the accommodation to
humanity is fulfilled. The Word has to accommodate himself to
the needs of individuals.

B. Jesus is the LOGOS Incarnate

1. Origen believes that Jesus has a human soul. As this soul was
always attached to the Word, it did not fall from God like other
spiritual beings. It remained always attached to the Logos.
2. Jesus death as “Sacrifical Kenosis”
a. The Mediatorship of the LOGOS must entail an
emptying which has reached its height at the death
of Jesus. The Word in death took upon the sin of
the world.
b. Jesus’ death was sacrificial because he sacrificed
himself, surpassing all people in sacrificial self-
surrender.

8
 3. Jesus’ resurrection: “Spiritualizing of human nature”
a. Jesus descended into Hell to set the just free
b. His appearance to the disciples led them to the
fullness of the truth.
c. The ascension of Jesus is the glorification of the
whole of humanity.

VI. Crisis of Origenism leads to the First Ecumenical

Council
A. Theological Crisis
1. Origen’s Logos theology exerted a powerful influence on
the Eastern Church. Through his reinterpretation of the
Baptismal faith involved placing the Logos between God
and the world, some risks arose for orthodoxy.

B. Intra-Origenist Crisis over Logos Theology

1. The Original Purpose of Logos theology was to explain the
universal Salvation through Jesus Christ. This is Justin and
Tertullian.
2. Origen’s reinterpretation of LOGOS Theology was used to
describe the relationship between God and the world.
There were 3 central reasons for this:
a. OT testimonia concerning the issue of creation.
b. John’s Gospel places Christ at the beginning of
creation.
c. Cosmological climate regarding the movement from
the “Many to the One.”
3. There developed a crisis concerning the “creatio ex nihilo”
and the generation of the LOGOS. Since God created the
world out of nothing, it was already maintained that the
LOGOS emerged neither from nothing nor matter, but
from the very ousia of the Father, which Origen fully
confirmed.
2. The LOGOS could no longer be placed between God and the
world. He had to be assigned either to the human sphere or
the divine sphere.

9
 3. Arius (250-336), placed the LOGOS, Jesus on the side of
creation. He was not God. He found disciples of his position
and begins to teach it. “Jesus was not God, there was a time
when he was not.” He took up his argument against
Alexander, the Bishop of Alexandria in 320AD.

VII. Fourth Century Christianity: The Council of

Nicea (325AD)
A. Christianity in a New Context
1. In this new period, persecution gives way to toleration
under the Emperor Constantine, who granted an Edict of
Toleration in 313AD. Pre-Constantinian theology was set
in the context of persecution and martyrdom. The major
enemy was without.
2. The Church itself was structured in terms of five
Patriarchates, which resembled Imperial structure. These
were Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria and
Jerusalem.
3. The Faith that was settled at Nicea did these things:
a. Settled the question of the divinity of Christ.
b. Proved decisive for faith in the true divinity of the
Holy Spirit.
c. Pointed the way toward formulating the doctrine of
Jesus Christ as true God and true man.
d. Made a deep impact on Church worship and
Spirituality.

B. Major Groups involved in the dispute

1. Anti-Origenists: Following Monarchian theology, they
thought in terms of one hypostasis and rejected Origen’s
approach to the Trinity in terms of Three
hypostases (Persons).
2. Origenists: There were three basic groups who to a
greater or lesser part disagreed with each other. Common
to the group was Origen’s notion of hypostasis and

10
 cosmologically oriented LOGOS Theology.

a. Arius and Friends

c. Moderate Origenists under Alexander of Alexandria,
including his secretary Athanasius.
.

C. The Council of Nicea (325AD)

1. In 320, a dispute arose between Bishop Alexander of
Alexandria and one of his presbyters Arius. Their dispute
brought to a head the crisis of Origen’s LOGOS Theology.
2. In developing the Origenist theology of the LOGOS, Arius
placed the LOGOS on the side of creation. Alexander upheld
Christ’s eternal divinity and required the help of the anti-
Origenists to help stop Arius’ error.
3. In 324, a preliminary Council was held in Antioch to discuss
the situation and the Bishops decided that Jesus is
“begotten of the Father,” and therefore God. They rejected
Arius’ claims.
4. The Council at Nicea will not completely solve the crisis,
because the Emperor Constantine demanded a complicated
procedure for the other Bishops to accept the teaching.

D. Central Characters
1. Arius (250-336). He was a student of Lucian of Antioch and a
presbyter in the city of Alexandria. He taught that the Pre-
existent LOGOS cannot be equal to the Father, who alone is
uncreated.
a. Jesus was created out of nothing like all creatures.
b. Jesus is the First Creature. He was created before
time while all other creatures came into being
through him in time. Jesus is only a secondary God.
c. Arius based his argument on Proverbs 8:22, which
speaks of Wisdom being created by God before all
creation.

11
 d. Among many of the phrases Arius used to support
his position, some were:
i. “The Son had a beginning”
ii. “There was a time when he was not”
iii. “The Son is from nothing”

2. Athanasius of Alexandria (296-373): He was the secretary

of Alexander when the controversy began and succeeded him
as Bishop.
a. His Theology stressed the Incarnation and
Deification.
b. We could return to God only on the condition we can
encounter Christ directly, which was made possible
by the Incarnation.
c. The human situation improves so much through the
Incarnation that we are seen as a new creation. This
process of deification (theosis- sharing in the divine
nature), is a new creation that would have never
happened without sin.
d. In order to save us, Christ had to be substantial with
the Father as well as with humanity. He stresses the
phrase that Christ is “homoousios” (of the same
substance) with the Father.
e. This does not necessarily mean for Athanasius that
Jesus possessed a human nature like ours in all
aspects. He questioned whether, for example, Jesus
possessed a human soul.

E. The Council Itself

1. The Emperor Constantine called the Synod and presided over
it himself.
2. The Creed produced by the Council took the Form of a
Baptismal Symbol (Creed).
3. The Nicene Creed professed the following doctrinal beliefs:
a. Jesus Christ is “only-begotten,” “Generated and not
created.”

12
 b. Christ can only be worshipped if he is God.

c. Jesus is “homoousios” with the Father. He shares the

essence (ousia) of the Father.
4. The term “homoousios was added because Arius himself had
refused it. It expresses the full equality of the Son with the
Father based on Eternal generation.
5. It for the most part accepted the Logos-Sarx Christology
(Word-Flesh), stressing the fact that the LOGOS and the
human flesh were linked together, “the LOGOS was wrapped
in human flesh.”
a. Logos-Sarx theology seemed to largely define the
Alexandrian school of theology.
b. The Weakness of this position will later be seen in
that while it protects the divinity of Jesus, it does
tend to lessen his humanity.
6. The Formula that would define the council besides the word
“homoousios” would be “consubstantial with the Father.”

VIII. Aftermath of Nicea to Constantinople I (381AD)

A. Nicea’s Unresolved Difficulties
1. After the Council and their rejection of Arius, he went East
towards Asia Minor and Palestine and found supports of his
position.
2. With the Death of Constantine in 337, his three Sons took
over the Empire. Constantius who ruled in the East was
Arian, which meant that often Nicene bishops were exiled
and replaced with Arian Bishops.
a. In the West, Constans and Constantine II were
Nicene. In addition, as the tribes from the North
were converted to Christianity, many of them were
baptized by Arian Bishops.
3. The issue concerning the Father and the Son was mainly a
Trinitarian issue and there were basically four groups
disputing the question of the Son’s divinity:
a. Radical Arians: They were known as the Anomoeans,
since both believed that in no way was the Son like
the Father.

13
 b. Homoousiosians: They accepted Nicea and accepted
only one Hypostasis.
c. Homoiousioans: While they accepted Nicea, they
believed that Homoousios could be seen as a kind of
Sabellianism, so they changed the term to that “of a
similar substance.”
4. In 362, there was an attempt to reconcile these groups at
the Synod of Alexandria.

B. Synod of Alexandria (362AD)

1. The Homoousians and the Homoiousians came together to
work out an acceptable compromise.
a. When the Radical Arians denied the divinity of
Christ, the Homoiousians moved away from them.
b. The Anti-Arian Emperor Julian replaced the Arian
Bishop Constantius in 361.
c. The Homoiousians dimissed the Arian doctrine and
accepted the formula: “Of a similar nature in all
things” “Homoiousios kata panta.”
d. The Homoousians abandoned their allegiance to the
Sabellians and tolerated the Homoiousians.

2. As a Compromise, the Meletians, who held for the Three

Persons “Treis Hytpostaseis” while the Eustathians, who held
for divine unity, were allowed to keep One essence, “Mia
Ousia.” Thus, both recognized that the Trinitarian mystery
needed two parts, the Oneness of Divinity and the
Threeness of Personhood.
3. In an attempt to bring the Empire back into the unity of
Faith, the Emperor Theodosius called for a Synod at
Constantinople in 381, in which only the Eastern Bishops
showed up.

14
 4. The Council dealt with these issues:
a. Filling the vacant See of Constantinople
b. Ending the Antiochene Schism
c. Dividing ecclesiastical jurisdiction by political
frontiers.
d. Solemnly anathematize all heresies already
condemned.
e. Win over the Macedonians who denied the divinity of
the Holy Spirit.
5. Conclusions of the Synod (Later accepted as Ecumenical
Council)
a. An article was added to the Creed that included the
Holy Spirit and which placed the Spirit on the side
of divinity
b. The Tome of Constantinople was issued which
defined the Trinitarian Faith as such: The One
duty, power, ousia of the Father, Son and Holy
Spirit and their divine dignity must be accepted
in three complete hypostases or prosopa. “Mia
Ousia in Treis Hypostaseis.”

Beginnings of the Christological Question:

1. With the council of Nicea, Christ’s divinity was firmly
established. He is unchangeable God rather than a divine
heavenly being

A. Changeable man/ Unchangeable God

1. The Arians solved this difficulty in this way:
a. Since the Word was not true God, it was acceptable that
this changeable being united with changeable creatures.
b. Taking over the LOGOS Sarx framework, they had less
difficulty in explaining how the LOGOs used flesh as a
mere tool that was devoid of human freedom.

15
 2. Athanasius had to explain how the unchangeable had become
liable to change. He kept to the LOGOS framework, but
because he regarded the soul as the image of the LOGOS, he
assumed that he could, iun the case of Jesus, he could dispense
of the soul as a mere image.
3. For Athanasius, the True God became man, but not true man,
that it why it is no incarnation in the sense of becoming man.
4. It was sufficient for Jesus to be “LOGOS ENSARKOS” because
it assured for the human soul “apatheia” and the human body
“aphtharsia.” He did not need Jesus who with his obedience and
loving surrender preceded man on the way to God.
5. While Nicene theology did not grasp the meaning of the true
Incarnation, it substantially contributed to the later
formulation of the question. In its concern to safeguard the
question of divine generation from all inadequacy, it resulted in
the doctrine of the two natures. Because the two natures were
referred to as divinity and humanity in abstract terms, the
whole human nature demanded to be taken into account.

B. Apollinaris of Laodicea (390AD)

1. He carried the Unitarianism of the LOGOS Sarx framework
to its logical conclusion by expressly denying that Jesus had
a human soul.
2. Using Trinitarian language to explain this Christological
mystery, he spoke of One Hypostasis of the Son, (the
LOGOS) which according to him took the place of Jesus’
soul.
3. He wanted to safeguard the sinlessness of Christ and
exclude any conflict between his two wills by speaking of one
ousia or physis, thus confusing the terminology.
4. As a result of this, not only were miracles attributed to the
LOGOS, but suffering also was and thus achieved its value
for salvation.
5. Apollinaris was opposed by Diodore of Tarsus, who began
the Antiochene School of Theology. In the first phase of
its resistence, it was the human nature that was at stake.

16
 6. In this respect, the axiom”Quod non assumptum, non
sanatum” came into the limelight. “What is not assumed is
not healed; what is united to God is saved.” This was first
applied to the Gnostics and them to the Arians, who joined
the Apollinarians in denying the human soul in Jesus. For the
Antiochenes, accepting the full human nature meant
accepting all that it means to be human.
7. While the first Antiochene approach seemed to tear Christ
apart by postulating two sons, they continued to look for the
appropriate language that expressed the true Faith in Jesus
Christ.

C. Not One Person, But One Thing

1. By this statement of Gregory of Nazianzen, he went back to
the Trinitarian formula and pointed to the right way of
making Trinitarian and Christological dogma parallel, that
would prove instrumental in solving the question of Christ’s
unity.
2. The Cappadocians and Apollinarians were concerned with
finding a more profound basis for unity in Christ. They did
this by:
a. Keeping the traditional formula “one and the same.”
b. Used philosophical models, which sought to formulate
the unity of man composed as he is of body and soul.
c. Keeping in mind the soteriological implications of the
union of God and man in Christ.
2. Gregory was not concerned with the mutual interpenetration
of the two natures, but rather the deification of Christ’s
humanity which is the basis of his mysticism of the
deification of man.
3. The Antiochenes conceived of Christian life less of
deification by the Word Incarnate than the union of the
whole man, an inward overcoming of sin. Union of Christ
meant for them a communion of love (synapheia).

17
 4. This issue of Christ’s unity will not be really raised until the
battle between Cyril and Nestorius. Nestorius would
recognize that the problem of unity and duality could not be
dealt with on the same level. Cyril promoted the question
more than any one else in the East.

II. Great Christological Traditions

1. The Christological question about the One Christ, or the nature of
God’s Incarnation was chiefly a matter of concern for the Eastern
Churches. The West was less involved on the subject.
2. The issue was first addressed at the Synod of Alexandria in 362.
The controversy between Eustathius and Apollinaris blew up in
428 and led to the Council of Chalcedon in 451.
3. The two main groups that opposed each other were the
Alexandrians (Cyril and Apollinaris) and the Antiochenes (Theodore
of Mopsuestia, John Chrysostom , Diodore of Tarsus and
Nestorius). In political terms, there was an antagonism between
the Sees of Constantinople and Alexandria.
4. The West was less involved. Damasus and Ambrose distanced
themselves from Apollinaris and Pope Celestine I stood with Cyril
against Nestorius. Leo the Great wielded much influence on the
Council of Chalcedon. He summed up the Western Tradition with
“una persona in utraque natura.”

The Antiochene Tradition (LOGOS-Anthropos

Christology)
A. Basic characteristics (stress on distinction)
1. It shared the strong Semitic emphasis of St. John and Paul,
who presented Christ in existential, dynamic terms. Christ is
experienced in the totality of his person as the source of
God’s life in our souls.
2. As a Christology “from below” they are heavily influenced by
the Aristotelian notion of the human person. When they
view Christ, they see in him the divine Word, but also a
REAL MAN (LOGOS-ANTHROPOS): he is a complete
human being.

18
 3. They favor a more literal interpretation of the Scriptures.
In the Gospels, they see both natures at work in Jesus.
4. While they insist on the unity of the subject, they
understand between these two natures a kind of union
(henosis) that seems to be a moral union of will, as opposed
to the physical unity proclaimed by the Alexandrians. “God
dwells in Jesus like he dwells in us.”
5. In such a presentation, it is difficult to avoid the risk of
talking about two subjects, the LOGOS and the man
Jesus.

B. Theodore of Mopsuestia’s basic assumptions

1. His prime concern was the true faith. His Christology can be
described as “Deus Assumens and Homo assumptus.” For him,
there is a clear distinction between the divine and the
human in Jesus.
2. He seeks to avoid any intermingling of the two. He is
restrained in the use of terms such as “Incarnate God” and
“God bearing.” (Things which refer to the communnicatio
idiomatum). He is concerned to present Jesus as a whole
man, with a body and a soul.
3. He rejects the notion of two Christ’s and he expresses his
conception of unity by means of “One Prosopon.”
4. By prosopon, he means personhood in the result of the
union of the two natures together, rather than its origin.
This union is described as a “synapheia.”
5. It was in this sense that Nestorius was to speak of the
prosopon of union, which joins the two natures together,
including their respective prosopon, thus laying bare the
drawbacks of the Antiochene manner of speaking.

C. Soteriological consequences of the Antiochene School

1. For Theodore, behind everything there is the fundamental
idea of God, who is himself the Redeemer in his Son.

19
 a. The Son, “Deus Assumens” had led the “homo assumptus”
to perfection. The Son himself works only in
communion with the Father and the Spirit for the
salvation of mankind.
2. For Theodore, Salvation is not realized until the second age,
when those saved in the holy Spirit will be children of the
Father.
a. This is only possible in union with the “homo assumtpus.”
Who has already entered incorruptibility. It is most
important that the “homo assumptus” who in death and
resurrection has become high priest, continually
intercede for us in heaven.
3. The “Homo assumptus” led by the LOGOS through the grace
of the Holy Spirit, has changed into a new state of body and
soul. This transition to resurrection is understood in a
double sense:
a. Overcoming sin and death
b. It happened for the sake of our salvation.

Alexandrian Tradition (LOGOS-Sarx Christology)

A. Alexandrian characteristics (Stress on unity-
typological)
1. A predominant interest in the metaphysical investigation
of the contents of the faith.
2. A leaning toward Platonic Philosophy (especially middle
Platonism and Neo-Platonism)
3. The Allegorical understanding of Sacred Scripture
4. The person of the divine Word is a most sublime object of
intellectual contemplation.

B. Cyril: Follower of Athanasius and the Anti-Arian

Tradition
1. Renewal in Christ occurs from three perspectives:
a. Condemnation of sin.
b. Overcoming of corruption.

20
 c. Divine Childhood.

2. Through the assumption of the flesh by the LOGOS, there

has been accomplished an exclusion of sin, the return to
incorruptibility as well as a renewal in the participation in
the divine nature, in which we through the Spirit of the Son
become the children of the Father.
3. He speaks of Jesus’ soul as descending into the realm of the
dead to preach to the righteous.
4. He emphasizes not only the participation in the nature of
Christ on the grounds of the Incarnation, but also on the
participation in the Sonship of Christ. For him, the Christian
is akin to Christ physically because of common nature, but
also spiritually owing to the communication of the Spirit in
faith and in the Sacraments.

D. Soteriology of the Real Union of God and man

1. For Cyril “God the LOGOS did not come into a man, but
he truly became man, while remaining God.”
2. The Main idea of the deifying, or life-giving Incarnation
appears to be the most profoundly founded on the fact that
the Word really has been united with the flesh in a union
excluding any change. The Word as the life-giving power of
God has implanted itself in the flesh and therefore made
the grace of the Holy Spirit genuinely take root there .

The Latin Tradition DOUBLE CONSUBSTANTIALITY

1. This tradition is also Pre-Nicene and goes back to Tertullian.
Through Hilary, Ambrose and Augustine, it has also taken on
Anti-Arian traits.
2. This tradition stands between the 2 eastern traditions
because it emphasizes the distinction between the two
natures and acknowledged the Alexandrian principle of
“communicatio idiomatum.”

21
A. Leo’s Doctrine of Double Consubstantiality
1. When he was dragged into the argument between Flavian and
Eutyches, he judged the posotion of Eutyches to be
Monophysitist, since it denied the true humanity of Christ
and entailed theo-paschism.
2. In his Tomus ad Flavianum, he develops his notion of double
consubstantiality. Following the Creed, he showed that Jesus
was born of God and Mary and therefore possesses divine
and human characteristics and ways of acting without the
unity of the Person being called into question.
3. Leo is definitely aware that the kinship of Christ with the
Father is far more intimate than with mankind, and that the
two births are not to be compared with each other.

B. Soteriological Implications of Double Consubstantiality

1. While he emphasized the distinctions, the unity was always
kept in his mind.
2. The confession of personal unity, which was to pass through
the union of two natures, on the initiative of the Son of God,
is soteriologically significant. Leo supposed that the saving
act even in its human dimension was to be ascribed to the
Son of God. The foundation of Chirst’s mediatorhsip is
founded on the personal union.
3. Human frailty was able to endure suffering only because of
divine power. Jesus was able to accept the redeeming death
with full freedom and obedience because he was God and
man at the same time.
4. It is only through the personal unity of Christ that the just
could overcome the devil’s unrighteousness, of the infinite
value of the death of a sinless man, the overcoming of death
in the resurrection.

22
The Faith of Chalcedon
I. Final Point of Theological Controversy
A. Synods Leading Up to Chalcedon
1. There were several minor Councils which led up the Major
Council in 451:
a. 431: Double Council of Ephesus
b. 433: Accord of Antioch
c. 448: Synod of Constantinople under Flavian
d. 449: Synod of Ephesus under Dioscorus “Robber
Synod”
2. Two Ephesian Councils
a. The Council of Ephesus led by Cyril of Alexandria
condemned Nestorius’ Christological and Mariological
statements and proposed Mary to be “Mother of
God,” not simply “Mother of Christ.” Cyril’s view was
that the Word in a mysterious way is the subject of
the whole of Jesus’ life.
b. Rival Council of Ephesus: This Council was led by
John of Antioch and there was drafted a “Dy-
physite formula” proposed by Theodoret of Cyrus, a
rival of Cyril’s.
3. Formulary of Reunion: Accord of Antioch
a. This was a compromise document worked out
between the Two Ephesian Councils after the fact.
It was dominated by Antiochene Christology.
b. Though it expresses the Double Consubstantiality,
thus stressing the duality in Christ, it nevertheless
confesses One Lord and adopts the term
“THEOTOKOS,” which Nestorius rejected.
4. Flavian Synod of Constantinople (448)
a. This was called by Flavian to deal with Eutyches, a
monk who taught that before the Incarnation Jesus
had two natures, but that after the Incarnation he
only had one. For Eutyches to affirm two natures
after the Incarnation would be the same, in his view,

23
 as saying that there are two hypostases, persons in
Christ.
b. Theodoret of Cyrus responded by insisting on
distinction in natures, unity in prosopon. For him,
Christ, not the LOGOS was the common subject of
the divine and human sayings of Scripture. He then
accepted Cyril’s view that the Word is the sole
Person of Jesus Christ
c. Eutyches was condemned for not supporting two
natures in Christ. He appealed to Pope Leo and Leo
agreed with Flavian, sending a Tome outlining the
Western Christological position.
5. The Robber Synod Of Ephesus (449)
a. Dioscorus presided at this and pushed through
Eutyches theology of one nature after the
Incarnation. He also managed to get Flavian deposed
from office.
b. Hilary, a Papal legate managed to slip away to Rome
Leo responded by calling the Synod a “latrocinium” (a
band of robbers) and he refused to acknowledge the
new Patriarch of Constantinople. He required that
his own Tome and Cyril’s second Letter to Nestorius
be accepted as the true faith.

B. The Importance of Chalcedon

1. This definition of faith presents a compromise achieved in
political interests. It is more dogmatic than kerygmatic in
character and has become the norm for Catholic, Orthodox
and Protestant Christology.
2. It resulted in the official break with the Monophysite
Churches as well as the Nestorian Churches.

II. The Definition of Chalcedon

A. Structure of the Definition
1. The Document consists of six sections:
a. Introduction justifying the new definition
b. Nicene and Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed
c. Two letters of Cyril to Nestorius

24
 d. Tome of Leo the Great
e. The Definition Proper
f. Anathemas for those who reject the teaching

2. The Definition proper consists of two parts:

a. An interpretation of the Cyrillian formulary of
Reunion in 433
b. Develops in a more technical manner the doctrine
of the two natures

B. Individual Elements of the Definition

1. The definition describes what is to be said about the One
and the Selfsame Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ:
a. Part One: Jesus is perfect in humanity and
perfect in divinity: true God and True man.
b. Part Two: Jesus is to be confessed in two natures,
without confusion and without change, without
division and without separation. The difference of
the two natures is not cancelled by the fact that
they are united. We must acknowledge the
individual features of each of the two natures,
even though they come together in one person, or
one hypostasis.
2. The definition closes with the statement that the Council
in its faith wanted to keep to Sacred Scripture and
Tradition, as was laid down in Nicea and Constantinople.

C. The Main Message

1. There is one subject to deal with in the Definition: “One
and the same Lord Jesus Christ.” He is also named Son,
Only-Begotten, and LOGOS
2. TO this one subject all assertions are attributed:
a. Those of divinity and humanity
b. Double Consubstantiality
c. The two natures which remain distinct even after
the Incarnation.

25
 3. The relationship of the two natures is founded on the unity
of the Person or Hypostasis. It is not to be treated as a
natural unity (eg. Body and soul), but rather in the unity of
Person. The Council wants to define a double nature, the
divine and human consubstantiality, while safeguarding
fully its unity.

The Chalcedonian Formula

“Following then the Holy Fathers, we all with one accord teach that it should be
confessed that:
Jesus Christ is One and the Same Son,
The same perfect in Godhead, the same perfect in humanity,
True God and True Man, with a rational soul and body
Consubstantial with the Father as to his Godhead
And the same Consubstantial with us as to his humanity,
In all things like unto us, sin only excepted

Begotten of the Father before the ages as to his Godhead

but in the Last days, for us and for our salvation, of Mary the
Virgin Theotokos as to his humanity.
One and the Same Christ, Son, Lord, Only begotten
recognized in two natures (in duabus naturis; en duo physesin)
without confusion, without change, without division, without
separation. The difference in the natures being in no way
removed by the union rather the distinctive character of each
nature being preserved and coming together in one Person and
Hypostasis ( unam personam et subsistentiam)(hen prosopon kai mian
hypostasin) not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the Same
Son and only-begotten God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ
just as the prophets of old and the Lord Jesus himself taught us
and as the creed of the Fathers has handed down to us.”

26