See also:Church council was convened in 431 for the purpose of taking authoritative
See also:action concerning the
See also:doctrine of the
See also:person of Christ . The
See also:councils of Nicaea and Constantinople had asserted the full divinity and real humanity of Christ, without, however, defining the manner of their union . The attempt to solve the apparent incongruity of a perfect union of two
See also:complete and distinct natures in one person produced first Apollinarianism, which substituted the divine
See also:Logos for the human vows or irvevua of Jesus, thereby detracting from the completeness of his humanity; and then Nestorianism, which destroyed the unity of Christ's person by affirming that the divine Logos dwelt in the man Jesus as in a
See also:temple, and that the union of the two was in respect of dignity, and furthermore that, inasmuch as the Logos could not have been
See also:born, to
See also:call Mary Beo-rorcos, " Godbearer," was absurd and blasphemous . The Alexandrians, led by Cyril, stood for the doctrine of the perfect union of two complete natures in one person, and made Oeorbrcos the
See also:shibboleth of orthodoxy . The theological controversy was intensified by the rivalry of the two patriarchates, Alexandria and Constantinople, for the primacy of the East . As
See also:bishop of Constantinople
See also:Nestorius naturally looked to the emperor for support, while Cyril turned to Rome . A
See also:Roman synod in 430 found Nestorius heretical and decreed his excommunication unless he should recant . Shortly afterwards an Alexandrian synod condemned his doctrines in twelve anathemas, which only provoked
See also:counter-anathemas . The emperor now intervened and summoned a council, which met at Ephesus on the 22nd of
See also:June 431 . Nestorius was
See also:present with an armed escort, but refused to attend the council on the ground that the
See also:patriarch of
See also:Antioch (his friend) had not arrived . The council, nevertheless, proceeded to declare him excommunicate and deposed .
When the Roman legates appeared they "examined and approved " the acts of the council, whether as if thereby giving them validity, or as if concurring with the council, is a question not easy toanswer from the records . Cyril, the
See also:president, apparently regarded the subscription of the legates as the
See also:acknowledgment of " canonical agreement " with the synod . The disturbances that followed the arrival of
See also:John, the patriarch of Antioch, are sufficiently described in the article NE ST ORI U S . The emperor finally interposed to terminate that scandalous strife, banished Nestorius and dissolved the council . Ultimately he gave decision in favour of the orthodox . The council was generally received as ecumenical, even by the Antiochenes, and the differences between Cyril and John were adjusted (433) by a "Union Creed," which, however, did not prevent a recrudescence of theological controversy . See Mansi iv. pp . 567-1482, v. pp . 1-1023;
See also:Hardouin i. pp . 1271-1722;
See also:Hefele (2nd ed.) ii. pp . 141-247 (Eng. trans. iii. pp . 1-114); Peltanus, SS .
Magni et Ecumen . Conc . Ephesini priori Acta omnia (
See also:Ingolstadt, 1576); Wilhelm Kraetz, Koptische Akten zum Ephes . Konzil . . . (
See also:Leipzig, 1904); also the articles NESTORIUS; CYRIL;
See also:THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA . The so-called " Robber Synod " of Ephesus (Latrocinium Ephesinum.) of 449, although wholly irregular and promptly repudiated by the church, may, nevertheless, not improperly be treated here . The archimandrite
See also:Eutyches (q.v.) having been deposed by his bishop, Flavianus of Constantinople, on account of his heterodox doctrine of the person of Christ, had appealed to Dioscurus, the successor of Cyril in the see of Alexandria, who restored him and moved the emperor
See also:Theodosius II. to summon a council, which should " utterly destroy Nestorianism." Rome recognizing that she had more to fear from Alexandria, departed from her traditional policy and sided with Constantinople . The council of 130 bishops, which convened on the 8th of
See also:August 449, was completely dominated by Dioscurus . Eutyches was acquitted of
See also:heresy and reinstated, Flavianus and other bishops deposed, the Roman legates insulted, and all opposition was overborne by intimidation or actual violence . The
See also:death of Flavianus, which soon followed, was attributed to injuries received in this synod; but the
See also:proof of the
See also:charge leaves some-thing to be desired . The emperor confirmed the synod, but the Eastern Church was divided upon the question of accepting it, and
See also:Leo I. of Rome excommunicated Dioscurus, refused to recognize thesuccessor of Flavianus and demanded a new and greater council .
The death of Theodosius II. removed the
See also:main support of Dioscurus, and cleared the way for the council of Chalcedon (q.v.), which deposed the Alexandrian and condemned Eutychianism . See Mansi vi. pp . 503 sqq., 6o6 sqq . ; Hardouin ii . 71 sqq . ; Hefele (2nd ed.) ii. pp . 349 sqq . (Eng. trans. iii. pp . 221 sqq.) ; S . G . F .
See also:Perry, The Second Synod of Ephesus (
See also:Dartford, 1881); l'
See also:Martin, Actes du
See also:brigandage d'Ephese (
See also:Amiens, 1874) and Le Pseudo-synode connu clans l'histoire sous le nom de brigandage d'Ephese (
See also:Paris, 1875) .
(T . F .
There are no comments yet for this article.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.