Nicea and Chalcedon
Background
Arius
Council of Nicea (325)
Chalcedonian Definition (451)
Athanasius
The key doctrines established:
The Son is of the same substance as the Father
The HS shares the nature of the Father and Son
Mary is the Godbearer or 'Theotokos'
Jesus Christ is fully divine and fully human
The Empire needed unity in the churches at this time - the fourth and fifth centuries saw the theological basis of Christian doctrine receive a definite shape which remains basic for Christian self-understanding today
Through most of Christian history, the doctrine of the Trinity has been the unquestioned - and unquestionable - touchstone of truly orthodox faith and teaching
Christ was criticised by the Pagans - he had been an object of worship since Paul's time, but many agreed he should be worshipped in second place
Irenaeus argued that the redemption and creation of humanity were the work of a single deity and humankind including Jesus had been created in the image of God
Dominant view at the time was that Father, Son and HS were all divine but distinct
In 318, Arius denied that the Father and Son were coeternal and of the same nature - instead he claimed that the Father existed before the Son and there was a time when Christ didn't exist
3 divine persons - but second and third only called God because they have some divine attributes - not divine by nature, but given divinity by God
Christ was constituted by God's will and counsel - preserves Christ's duality of nature: 'a perfect creature of God, but not as one of the creatures - an offspring, but not as one of the things begotten'
'He is neither eternal nor co-eternal nor co-unbegotten with the Father, nor does he have his being together with the Father'
Son is generated by the Father, so cannot be the same as the Father - a Christ who was fully God wouldn't feel pain or fear
Criticism: Christ elected to suffer in this way to share in our experience and become human
Constantine summoned a council attended by 250 bishops who issued a statement
'begotten from the Father unique that is from the substance of the Father...begotten not made'
Does not explain how natures work together
Once the council accepted these formulas, they became the law not only for the Church but for the empire
Opposed to Arius - tried to defend Nicea against Arius - claimed that if God and Christ are one and Christ less than divine, then this implies that God is less than divine
To claim Christ is not divine and then worship him is idolatry
Antiochene - baby Jesus was indwelt by God - 2 natures linked by empowerment
Pannenburg: Jesus the man first and foremost, obedient to God who is his father - resurrection confirms his identity as being one with the Father
Baillie: rejects starting from God - wants to develop a Christology from below, with starting on Jesus the man to develop the identity of Christ
Docetic Superman would come from a Christology from above - Baillie rejects this idea, and the idea that because the Divine word created all persons, it can be a person - Jesus must instead be someone who is scared/pained
If there was no humanity in Christ then his suffering was just an act, and fake
Similarities between Baillie and Schleiermacher - Christ is God-conscious to the utmost degree - for Schleiermacher the trinity is an outdated idea - the historical Jesus lived and died and we can only know about it through evidence
Wants to start with Jesus the man
Claimed that the Arian Christology made God impersonal and not the Biblical God who is involved in creation
It's an insult to Christ to make him an instrument of creation - Son of God must be a product of the Father's nature, not will, and hence must be eternal
The idea of the created word only applies to the human part of Jesus and not the divine part
If Christ is not fully God he cannot make us divine - Son must be of a different order of being to the Father - Father was transcendent, son is part of God's personality
The Church worships Christ so he must be God
Criticism: we are not made divine to the same extent as God, so Jesus needn't be fully divine
Criticism: sonship is often adoptive in the Bible, so Christ needn't be God's nature
Criticism: Church also worships saints who are not God
The incarnation was necessary because of sin, to redeem us, and therefore his humanity is not a weakness in doctrine -the Word exists so that our sin could die with him and we can share in his resurrection - no one else was free from sin, so no one else could save us
God's love for us is shown in his willingness to share in our condition - suffering is voluntary so his divinity is not impaired
Cyril's letters to Nestorius
'one nature' - union of Divine and human in Jesus Christ
word-flesh Christology - unity of God and Jesus - suffering not essential to human existence, so God voluntarily chose to suffer
Mary is the mother of God and Christ is consubstantial with us in humanity and the father in divinity - his deeds are sometimes human and sometimes divine
Nestorius: challenged the term 'Godbearer' and developed a word-man Christology - Mary as 'Christbearer'
God cannot have a mother - Mary bore a man
'Born from Mary the mother of God'
'the same perfect in divinity and the same perfect in humanity, the same truly man and truly God form a rational soul and body, consubstantial with the Father in his divinity and the same consubstantial with us in humanity, in all things like us except sin'
'Acknowledged in two natures unconfusedly, unchangeable, indivisibly, inseparably, the distinction of two natures in no way destroying the unity, but the particularity of each nature being preserved and coming together'
God and Christ are the same - the divine and human nature both operate in Jesus Christ - but how can Christ be fully God and fully man?
Cyril: unity is not predicated only of things that are naturally simple, but also of things that are produced by composition
Criticism: emphasis on the Divinity of Jesus has influenced people into thinking that the sole purpose of Jesus' miracles was to prove his divinity, when others would argue that the miracles have more important functions, such as demonstrating God's love or power
Criticised for focusing too much on the nature of Christ and not the meaning of his actions
Modern implications
Credal definitions no longer core to belief, but are foundations for theological Christologies
Jesus of history much more important due to secularism - also emphasised what Jesus did and the meaning - emphasis now on proving God's existence