sign in sign up
<<
Home , Eutyches, Eutychianism

– God and Man

The Journey Toward Understanding

Part seven – the final word

Antioch Alexandria

“Word-man” Vs. “Word-flesh”

Christology • Jesus is fully divine, fully human, • Jesus is fully divine, fully human, but also two Persons but one Person • Led some to suggest Jesus is a man • Cyril had not stated this clearly, who cooperated with the Son of God said only one nature after union

The problem

I. (378-454) and the Second (449)

A. Eutyches’ View of Christ

Jesus is a hybrid of humanity and divinity • If Jesus is not human, he cannot represent humans, pay humans’ debt • If Jesus is not divine, he cannot reveal God, nor possess infinite righteousness

B. The Church’s Response to Eutyches Flavian of

1. The Synod at Constantinople (448)

• Eutyches challenged by Flavian, bishop of Constantinople • Flavian convened synod at Constantinople to condemn

2. The “Robber Synod”

• Eutyches manipulates Theodosius II, who convenes council at Ephesus (449) • Leo’s “Tome” sent, Flavian

attempted to read it, was beaten to death • Ephesus II reversed condemnation of Eutyches

Leo I of Rome

(“The Great”)

3. The Backlash of Ephesus II

• Leo horrified by outcome,

insists on a new council Latrocinium

“Robber Council” • Calls new council without Imperial support • Council convened by ,

consort of Theodosius II’s daughter

Marcian II. The Council of (451)

A. The Definition of Chalcedon

1. The Rationale Behind the Definition

• Some bishops weary of debating heresies, simply wanted to reaffirm Nicene (i.e., acknowledge Jesus is fully divine, fully human, but did not want to speculate how the

natures “unite”) • Some bishops felt it was necessary to find biblically accurate way of speaking of the relationship between the human and divine natures of Christ (not necessarily how they relate, but at least expressing something about the relationship)

2. The Content of the Definition

The Definition of Chalcedon

In agreement, therefore, with the holy fathers, we all unanimously teach that we should confess that our Lord Jesus Christ is one and the same Son, the same perfect in Godhead and the same perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, the same of a rational soul and body, consubstantial [or, of one nature] with the Father in Godhead, and the same consubstantial [or, of one nature] with us in manhood, like us in all things except sin; begotten from the Father before the ages as regards His Godhead, and in these last days, the same, because of us and because of our salvation begotten from the Virgin Mary, the [or “God-bearer”], as regards His manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, made known in two natures without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, the difference of the natures being by no means removed because of the union, but the property of each nature being preserved and coalescing in one prosopon and one hypostasis [or one person and one essence] – not parted or divided into two prosopa, but one and the same Son, only-begotten, divine Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets of old and Jesus Christ Himself have taught us about Him and the creed of our fathers has handed down.

B. The Aftermath of Chalcedon

1. The Responses to Chalcedon

a. The Western Response

b. The Eastern Response

• Some refused to accept Chalcedon

2. The Genius of Chalcedon

“Chalcedon declared Jesus Christ one who and two whats.” (Roger Olson, The Story of Theology, 232)

• Not exhaustive, but knew we cannot fully explain the Incarnation • Purpose was to limit speculation, establish boundaries for orthodox Christian belief