History of Christian Thought: from Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon V.1 Pdf

FREE HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN THOUGHT: FROM BEGINNINGS TO THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON V.1 PDF

Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Other editions. Enlarge cover. Error rating book. Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem? Details if other :. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. A treatment of the evolution of Christian thought from the birth of Christ, to the Apostles, to the early church, to the great flowering of Christianity across the world. The first volume introduces the central figures and debates culminating in the Councils of Nicea and Chalcedon among which the theologies of the early church were hammered out. Get A Copy. Paperbackpages. Published July 1st by Abingdon Press first published More Details Original Title. A History of Christian Thought 1. Other Editions 8. Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Community Reviews. Showing Average rating 4. Rating details. More filters. Sort order. Jun 16, John Majors rated it really liked it. Nibbled on this a few pages each morning for the last nine months. A good way to start the morning, with a reminder of all the wrestling with definitions that have occurred since the beginning of Christianity. Some seem silly, but some are absolutely essential. This was a good read, though not nearly as engaging as his two volume work on Church History called "The Story of Christianity. So, so good. May 21, Bryan rated it it was amazing Shelves: science-and-religion-etc. This book was fascinating to me. The author gives good explanations of complex subjects that allows me to walk away from this book with History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 good understanding of early Christian theology. My religious beliefs have helped me through some tough times, and while everybody chooses their own way up the mountain, my faith has been a good path for me. Oct 12, Dan Glover rated it really liked it Shelves: biography-historytheology. This is a solid overview of the development of Christian theology. It is a bit too brief at times, but that is not so much a fault as the parameters of the set. It is an introduction and there is a helpful section at the end which suggests further, more detailed reading for each section the volume covers. Now for volume View 1 comment. Apr 16, Sean McGowan rated it really liked it Shelves: historytheology. Excellent volume on the first five centuries of Christian theology. Highly recommended. Looking forward to the other two volumes. Jun 30, Steve rated it liked it. Sep 23, Alexandr Gherman rated it really liked it. This is very informative book that you need to read as a student in Christian university. Jun 09, Rapp rated it liked it Shelves: church-history. In his series on the history of Christian thought, Justo Gonzales divides his story into three volumes. Volume 2 picks up the story with Augustine, History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 to the Reformation, and Volume 3 brings from the Reformation to the twentieth century. Gonzales writes interestingly and clearly, which will help a reader unfamiliar with church history attempt to place the many names and concepts h In his series on the history of Christian thought, Justo Gonzales divides his story into three volumes. Gonzales writes interestingly and clearly, which will help a reader unfamiliar with church history attempt to place the many names and concepts he or she will come in contact with. Many challenges faced the early church, as its leaders attempted to demonstrate the relevance of Jewish prophecies--and especially their all History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 fulfillment in Jesus Christ--within a Hellenistic context. Gonzalez simply illustrates the difficulty the early apologists faced in defending the faith in a Graeco-Roman setting: they would not worship Caesar because he was a man making himself God, yet they would worship Jesus, for there God had made Himself man. The attempts to translate Jewish concepts into a Platonic worldview had drastic consequences for the development of Christian thought: "In their History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 outlook, one senses a distance between the Christianity of the New Testament--especially that of Paul--and that of the Apostolic Fathers. References to Paul and the other apostles are frequent; but in spite of this the new faith becomes more and more a new law, and the doctrine of God's gracious justification becomes a doctrine of grace that helps History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 at justly" locationKindle version. Gonzales uses the idea incarnation to somewhat redeem the Hellenization of Christianity. As many are leaving the church today out of a sense of disconnection, this principle has timely application. But there is always the concern that a minimum be lost or added in translation. Gonzales argues that this was an ever present danger for the church fathers, who attempted to reconcile Judeo-Christian thought about God to Greek knowledge of the divine. The result was a marriage of both. As Gonzales traces the development of doctrines such as apostolic succession, the trinity, and Christology, it is easy to see how church politics came to play an increasingly dominant role. In his final chapter, "Apostolic or Apostate" Gonzales highlights the "Constantinization" of Christianity and its effect on Christian thought. Rarely was biblical revelation the deciding factor in doctrinal controversy; the rival sees in Alexandria, Antioch and Rome jostled for preeminence and frequently the emperor was the impetus behind a new creed Nicea and Chalcedon are two prominent examples. I found this book intriguing to read as it placed Christian thought effectively in context. Doctrine was and is not developed in a vacuum; often it is developed in response to teachings that are out of balance in one way or another, or outright heretical. The risk for teaching developed in the heat of debate, is that in the attempt to correct, someone will tend toward the other extreme. And so we often History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 the pendulum swinging back and forth through the centuries. I read the Kindle edition of this book, which was generally satisfactory, though there were a few irritations. Transliterations from Greek, German and other languages were often unreadable. Furthermore, sometimes a sentence would break off in the middle, only to be found at the end of the same or next paragraph. Though this sometimes required some real puzzling, it did not significantly interfere with the reading experience. Aug 11, Kyle rated it liked it. This was the first book I read in seminary. I remember it being a health mixture of overwhelming and invigorating at the same time. Overwhelming in that the world of Christian faith was much, much bigger than I possibly imagined. Matters of faith History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 practice were never as clear cut as the seemed. And those areas of disagreement were never as simple as I had thought. But, it was invigorating as I was being opened to the vast world of Christian theology. After re-reading this book five years later This was the first book I read in seminary. After re-reading this book five years later, many of my first impressions remain. The theology of the first years proves to be anything but uniform. In fact it was a tangled web of false starts, first steps, and lateral movements. It was a maze of closed doors that led to only more doors. It was a web of string in which pulling on one only moved the rest. Needless to say, the vast world of Patristic scholarship is endlessly complex and those wishing to read this volume and have immediate and profound understanding of the world of Patristic theology and thus the genesis of modern Christian thought will only come away disappointed and confussed. However, in Gonzolez's capable hands the reader is opened to the world of Patristic theology in such a way that he or she is able to perceive what was going on then and how complex and interrelated it all was. The reader is encouraged to get a taste and a glimpse of the origin of Christian thought. Overall this is an excellent book for anyone interested in Church history or doctrine. While reading it as whole can be overwhelming, it is an excellent reference to have on hand. I frequently reach for it to remind myself of say, Alexandrine verses Antiochian Christology, or to remind myself who Nestorius is. Feb 21, James rated it really liked it Shelves: church-history. Having finished the first of three volumes, I can say I enjoyed it a lot. History Christian Thought Volume 3 Revised: Justo L. Gonzalez: -

Autocephaly recognized universally de factoby some Autocephalous Churches de jure. An ecumenical council or oecumenical council ; also general council [1] is a conference of ecclesiastical dignitaries and theological experts convened to discuss and settle matters of Church doctrine and practice in which those entitled to vote are convoked from the whole world oikoumene and which secures the approbation of the whole Church. The word " ecumenical " derives from the Late Latin oecumenicus "general, universal", from Greek oikoumenikos "from the whole world", from he oikoumene ge "the inhabited world as known to the ancient Greeks ; the Greeks and their neighbors, considered as developed human society as opposed to barbarian lands "; in later use "the Roman world" and in the Christian sense in ecclesiastical Greek, from oikoumenospresent passive participle of oikein "inhabit"from oikos "house, habitation". Starting with the third ecumenical council, noteworthy schisms led to non-participation by some members of what had previously been considered a single Christian Church. Thus, some parts of Christianity did not attend later councils, or attended but did not accept the results. Bishops belonging to what became known as the Eastern Orthodox Church accept only seven ecumenical councils, as described below. Bishops belonging to what became known as the Church of the East only participated in the first History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 councils. Bishops belonging to what became known as Oriental Orthodoxy participated in the first four councils, but rejected the decisions of the fourth and did not attend any subsequent ecumenical councils. Acceptance of councils as ecumenical and authoritative varies between different Christian denominations. Disputes over Christological and other History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 have led certain branches to reject some councils that others accept. The Church of the East accused by others of adhering to Nestorianism accepts as ecumenical only the first two councils. Oriental Orthodox Churches accept the first three. While the Eastern Orthodox Church accepts no later council or synod as ecumenical, the Catholic Church continues to hold general councils of the bishops in full communion with the Popereckoning them as ecumenical. In all, the Catholic Church recognises twenty-one councils as ecumenical. Anglicans and confessional Protestants accept either the first seven or the first four as ecumenical councils. The doctrine of the infallibility of ecumenical councils states that solemn definitions of ecumenical councils, which concern faith or morals, and to which the whole Church must adhere, are infallible. Such decrees are often labeled as 'Canons' and they often have an attached anathemaa penalty of excommunicationagainst those who refuse to believe the teaching. The doctrine does not claim that every aspect of every ecumenical council is dogmatic, but that every aspect of an ecumenical council is free of errors or is indefectible. Both the Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic churches uphold versions of this doctrine. However, the Catholic Church holds that solemn definitions of ecumenical councils meet the conditions of infallibility only when approved by the Pope, [6] while the Eastern Orthodox Church holds that an ecumenical council is itself infallible when pronouncing on a specific matter. Protestant churches would generally view ecumenical councils as fallible human institutions that have no more than a derived authority to the extent that they correctly expound Scripture as most would generally consider occurred with the first four councils in regard to their dogmatic decisions. Church councils were, from the beginning, bureaucratic exercises. Written documents were circulated, speeches made and responded to, votes taken, and final documents published and distributed. A large part of what is known about the beliefs of heresies comes from the documents quoted in councils in order to be refuted, or indeed only from the deductions based on the refutations. Most councils dealt not only with doctrinal but also with disciplinary matters, which were decided in canons "laws". Study of the canons of church councils is the foundation of the development of canon lawespecially the reconciling of seemingly contradictory canons or the determination of priority between them. Canons consist of doctrinal statements and disciplinary measures—most Church councils and local synods dealt with immediate disciplinary concerns as well as major difficulties of doctrine. Eastern Orthodoxy typically views the purely doctrinal canons as dogmatic and applicable to the entire church at all times, while the disciplinary canons apply to a particular time and place and may or may not be applicable in other situations. Of the seven councils recognised in whole or in part by both the Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox Church as ecumenical, all were called by a Roman emperor. All were held in the eastern part of the Roman Empire. The bishop of Rome self-styled as "pope" since the end of the fourth century did not attend, although he sent legates to some of them. Church councils were traditional and the ecumenical councils were a continuation of earlier councils also known as synods held in the Empire before Christianity was made legal. These include the Council of Jerusalem c. The first seven councils recognised in both East and West as ecumenical and several others to which such recognition is refused were called by the Byzantine emperors. In the first millennium, various theological and political differences such as Nestorianism or Dyophysitism caused parts of the Church to separate after councils such as those of Ephesus and Chalcedonbut councils recognised as ecumenical continued to be held. The Council of Hieria ofheld at the imperial palace of that name close to Chalcedon in Anatolia, was summoned by Byzantine Emperor Constantine V and was attended by bishops, who regarded it as the seventh ecumenical council [13] The Second Council of Nicaeawhich annulled that of Hieria, was itself annulled at a synod held in in Constantinople under Emperor Leo History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1. This synod, presided over by Patriarch Theodotus I of Constantinopledeclared the Council of Hieria to be the seventh ecumenical council, [14] but, although the Council of Hieria was called by an emperor and confirmed by another, and although it was held in the East, it later ceased to be considered ecumenical. The Catholic Church does not consider the validity of an ecumenical council's teaching to be in any way dependent on where it is held or on the granting or withholding of prior authorization or legal status by any state, in line with the attitude of the 5th-century bishops who "saw the definition of the church's faith and canons as supremely their affair, with or without the leave of the Emperor" and who "needed no one to remind them that Synodical process pre-dated History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 Christianisation of the royal court by several centuries". The Catholic Church recognizes as ecumenical various councils held later than the First Council of Ephesus after which churches out of communion with the Holy See because of the Nestorian Schism did not participatelater than the Council of Chalcedon after which there was no participation by churches that rejected Dyophysitismlater than the Second Council of Nicaea after which there was no participation by the Eastern Orthodox Churchand later than the Fifth Council of the Lateran after which groups that adhered to Protestantism did not participate. Of the twenty-one ecumenical councils recognised by the Catholic Church, some gained recognition as ecumenical only later. Thus the Eastern First Council of Constantinople became ecumenical only when its decrees were accepted in the West also. In the history of Christianitythe first seven ecumenical councils, from the First Council of Nicaea to the Second Council of Nicaearepresent an attempt to reach an orthodox consensus and to unify Christendom. All of the original seven ecumenical councils as recognized in whole or in part were called by an emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire and History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 were held in the Eastern Roman Empire[10] [11] a recognition denied to other councils similarly called by an Eastern Roman emperor and held in his territory, in particular the Council of Serdicathe Second Council of Ephesus and the Council of Hieriawhich saw themselves as ecumenical or were intended as such. As late as the 11th century, only seven councils were recognised as ecumenical in the Catholic Church. Eastern Orthodox catechisms teach that there are seven ecumenical councils [25] [26] and there are feast days for seven ecumenical councils. It is unlikely that formal ecumenical recognition will be granted to these councils, despite the acknowledged orthodoxy of their decisions, so that only seven are universally recognized among the Eastern Orthodox as ecumenical. The Pan-Orthodox Council was sometimes referred to as a potential "Eighth Ecumenical Council" following debates on several issues facing Eastern Orthodoxy, however not all autocephalous churches were represented. Although some Protestants reject the concept of an ecumenical council establishing doctrine for the entire Christian faith, Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox all accept the authority of ecumenical councils in principle. Where they differ is in which councils they accept and what the conditions are for a council to be considered "ecumenical". The relationship of the Papacy to the validity of ecumenical councils is a ground of controversy between Catholicism and the Eastern Orthodox Churches. The Catholic Church holds that History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 by the Pope is an essential element in qualifying a council as ecumenical; [32] Eastern Orthodox view approval by the Bishop of Rome the Pope as being roughly equivalent to that of other patriarchs. Some have held that a council is ecumenical only when all five patriarchs of the Pentarchy are represented at it. Both the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches recognize seven councils in the early centuries of the church, but Catholics also recognize fourteen councils in later times called or confirmed by the Pope. The Catholic Church teaches that an ecumenical council is a gathering of the College of Bishops of which the Bishop of Rome is an essential part to exercise in a solemn manner its supreme and full power over the whole Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church accepts seven ecumenical councils[48] with the disputed Council in Trullo —rejected by Catholics—being incorporated into, and considered as a continuation of, the Third Council of Constantinople. To be considered ecumenical, Orthodox accept a council that meets the condition that it was accepted by the whole church. That it was called together legally is also an important factor. A case in point is the Third Ecumenical Councilwhere two groups met as duly called for by the emperor, each claiming to be the legitimate council. The Emperor had called for bishops to assemble in the city of Ephesus. Theodosius did not attend [51] but sent his representative Candidian to preside. Cyril was able to completely control the proceedings, completely neutralizing Candidian, who favored Cyril's antagonist, Nestorius. When the pro-Nestorius Antiochene delegation finally arrived, they decided to convene their own council, over which Candidian presided. Orthodox believe that councils could over-rule or even depose popes. It is their position that, since the Seventh Ecumenical Council, there has been no synod or council of the same scope. Local History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 of hierarchs have been called "pan-Orthodox", but History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 have invariably been simply meetings of local hierarchs of whatever Eastern Orthodox jurisdictions are party to a specific local matter. From this point of view, there has been no fully "pan-Orthodox" Ecumenical council since Unfortunately, the use of the term "pan-Orthodox" is confusing to those not within Eastern Orthodoxy, and it leads to mistaken impressions that these are ersatz ecumenical councils rather than purely local councils to which nearby Orthodox hierarchs, regardless of jurisdiction, are invited. John S. Romanidesand Fr. George DragasHistory of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 the Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs which refers explicitly to the "Eighth Ecumenical Council" and was signed by the patriarchs of ConstantinopleJerusalemAntiochand Alexandria as well as the Holy Synods of the first threeregard other synods beyond the Seventh Ecumenical Council as being ecumenical. Before the 20th century, the Council at Constantinople in AD was recognised as the 8th ecumenical council by people like the famous expert on Canon Law, Theodore Balsamon 11th centurySt. Neilos of Rhodes, St. Mark of Ephesus 15th centurySt. From the Eastern Orthodox perspective, a council is accepted as being ecumenical if it is accepted by the Eastern Orthodox church at large—clergy, monks and assembly of believers. Teachings from councils that purport to be ecumenical, but which lack this acceptance by the church at large, are, therefore, not considered ecumenical. The formulation of the Chalcedonian Creed caused a schism in the Alexandrian and Syriac churches. Reconciliatory efforts between Oriental Orthodox with the Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church in the mid- and late 20th century have led to common Christological declarations. The Oriental and Eastern Churches have also been working toward reconciliation as a consequence of the ecumenical movement. The Oriental Orthodox hold that the Dyophysite formula of two natures formulated at the Council of Chalcedon is inferior to the Miaphysite formula of "One Incarnate Nature of God the Word" Byzantine Greek : Mia physis tou theou logou sarkousomene and that the proceedings of Chalcedon themselves were motivated by imperial politics. The Alexandrian Churchthe main Oriental Orthodox body, also felt unfairly underrepresented at the council following the deposition of their Pope, Dioscorus of Alexandria at the council. It was the formulation of Mary as the Theotokos which caused a schism with the Church of the East, now divided between the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ancient Church of the Eastwhile the Chaldean Catholic Church entered into full communion with History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 in the 16th century. Both sides recognised the legitimacy and rightness, as expressions of the same faith, of the Assyrian Church's liturgical invocation of Mary as "the Mother of Christ our God and Saviour" and the Catholic Church's use of "the Mother of God" and also as "the Mother of Christ". While the Councils are part of the "historic formularies" of Anglican tradition, [64] it is difficult to locate an explicit History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 in Anglicanism to the unconditional acceptance of all Seven Ecumenical Councils. There is little evidence of dogmatic or canonical acceptance beyond the statements of individual Anglican theologians and bishops. We indeed and absolutely believe all Seven Councils are truly ecumenical and Catholic—on the basis of the received Tradition of the ancient Undivided Church of East and West. The Anglican formularies address only particular critical theological and disciplinary concerns of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and that certainly by design. Behind them, however, stands the universal authority of the Holy and Apostolic Tradition, which did not have to be rehashed or redebated by Anglican Catholics. Augustinenone [but Anglicanism] were willing to require, or even permit, their confessional stances to be judged by, or subordinated to, a hypothetical "patristic consensus" of the first four or five centuries of Christianity. But Anglicanism most certainly did, and does so to this day. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of Holy Scripture. The 19th Canon of asserted the authority of the Councils in this manner: "Let preachers take care that they never teach anything A modern version of this appeal to catholic consensus is found in the Canon Law of the Church of England and also in the liturgy published in Common Worship :. It professes the faith uniquely revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic creeds, which faith the Church is called upon to proclaim afresh in each generation. I, AB, do so affirm, and accordingly declare my belief in the faith which is revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic creeds and to which the historic formularies of the Church of England bear witness; and in public prayer and administration of the sacraments, I will use only the forms of service which are authorized or allowed by Canon. The Act of Supremacy made a distinction between the decisions of the first four ecumenical councilswhich were to be used as sufficient proof that something was heresyas opposed to those of later councils, which could only be used to that purpose if "the same was declared heresy by the express and plain words of the Many Protestants especially those belonging to the magisterial traditionssuch as Lutheransor those such as Methodiststhat broke away from the Anglican Communion accept the teachings of the History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 seven councils but do not ascribe to the councils themselves the same authority as Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox do. The Lutheran World Federationin ecumenical dialogues with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinoplehas affirmed all of the first seven councils as ecumenical and authoritative. Some, including some fundamentalist Christianscondemn the ecumenical councils for other reasons. Independency or congregationalist polity among Protestants may involve the rejection of any governmental structure or binding authority above local congregations; conformity to the decisions of these councils is therefore considered purely voluntary and the councils are to be considered binding only insofar as those doctrines are derived from the Scriptures. Read A History of Christian Thought Online by Justo L. González | Books

An exploration into the development of Christian thought and doctrine from the inception of Christianity through Chalcedon, focusing primarily on the development of Nicene theology and Chalcedonian A classic in Christian theological development every pastor and theologian should have this on their shelves. Gonzalez has a fantastic perspective on theological development that offers keen insight into the church's history. I recommend this for Protestant and Catholic writers alike. Justo L. A treatment of the evolution of Christian thought from the birth of Christ, to the Apostles, to the early church, to the great flowering of Christianity across the world. The first History of Christian Thought: From Beginnings to the Council of Chalcedon v.1 introduces the central figures and debates culminating in the Councils of Nicea and Chalcedon among which the theologies of the early church were hammered out. Volume 2 Volume 3 Roland H Bainton. List of Abbreviations. The Cradle of Christianity. The Theology of the Apostolic Fathers. The Greek Apologists. Challenge and Response. The Arian Controversy and the Council of Nicea. The Arian Controversy After Nicea. The Theology of Athanasius. The Great Cappadocians. Trinitarian Doctrine in the West. The Beginnings of the Christological Controversies. The Nestorian Controversy and the Council of Ephesus. The Council of Chalcedon. Clement and Origen. Western Theology in the Third Century. Eastern Theology After Origen. Apostolic or Apostate? Suggestions for Further Reading. Index of Subjects and Authors.