Nestorius

Taken from my recent book “The De-Judaization of the Image of Jesus of Nazareth (the Virgin Mary) at the Time of the Holocaust: Ensoulment and the Human Ovum” (Thomas Blüger, Xlibris 2021). This paper follows the image of the Virgin Mary in relationship to the Jewish people from the early beginnings of Christianity till just before the papal encyclical on Mary Ineffabilis Deus in 1854.

وضع نسطور أثناء وجوده بالمنفى رسالة قام فيها بتبرير نفسه ونسبها إلى هيراقليدس الدمشقي، احتراساً من إحراقها. فعرف ايفاغريوس سكولاستيكوس (594–536) بوجودها14. فلم يسلم الكتاب على أصله اليوناني الى أيامنا هذه. بيد ان جاثليق كنيسة المشرق مار أبا الاول الذي ذكره كوزماس انديكوبليفتس باسم باتريكيوس، ساح في رحاب بيزنطية كثيراً في أعوام 525-533 وجلب منها مؤلفات نسطور الى بلاد فارس. وفي اعوام539 -540 تمت ترجمة »كتاب هيراقليدس «الى السريانية فأصبح قسماً من تراث كنيسة المشرق على حين نسيه الغرب نسياناً مطلقا. ...

There is no doubt that one of the biggest conflicts in the history of the Church is the Christological controversy that culminated in the fifth century. This controversy is forever linked to the names Cyril of Alexandria and Nestorius of Constantinople. Shortly after he was elected as Patriarch of Constantinople in 428, Nestorius opened the door to great controversy when he refused to call the Virgin Mary Theotokos (Mother of God). The main part of the conflict between Cyril and Nestorius was about the two natures of Christ, and this appeared in the Mariology controversy which took the largest share of their disputes, in the Fifth-Century Christological controversy. So, this paper will attempt to focus on the Christological controversy through the Marian controversy as an example and trays to answer many questions like Was Nestorius a heretic? Was he the main reason for the Christological controversy and the division of the church in the fifth century? How did the political conflict background between the Church of Alexandria and Antioch play the main role in this controversy? This paper will argue that the main reason of the Christological controversy was the historical background of the political conflicts between the two churches. And this is through looking at the background of the early life of the two bishops, and the controversies over the term Theotokos that led the events to the council of Ephesus in 431 A.D.

This dissertation explores the implications of the christology of Cyril of Alexandria for contemporary evangelical spirituality.
Cyril’s christology is traced through his soteriology to his spirituality, giving attention to the foundations and boundaries christology provides for soteriology and spirituality in Cyril’s thought. Consideration is given to how Cyril has been appropriated in the Reformed tradition before exploring how Cyrillian thought can chasten and enrich contemporary evangelical spirituality.
Cyril’s single subject christology unites the two natures of Christ in the single personal subject of the Word, allowing for a communication of properties. Cyril thus preserves the distinction of Christ’s natures whilst avoiding a division between the natures.
Cyril’s christology provides the foundations and boundaries for a soteriology in which deification is a central feature and presents the anthropological dimension of salvation as participation in Christ. Through participation in Christ believers become by grace what Christ is by nature, resulting in the restoration of the divine image in holiness and incorruptibility. Only if the Word is the personal subject of Christ can believers participate in the divine life.
Cyril’s christology and soteriology provide the foundations and boundaries for a spirituality in which the Eucharist is a central feature and emphasises the Christian life as participation in Christ. In the Eucharist believers truly participate in Christ, by faith and the agency of the Spirit, and Christ thus imparts his life to them. Only if the flesh believers feed on in the Eucharist is that of the Word can it be efficacious to impart life to those who receive it.
Whilst Cyrillian soteriology and sacramentology are alien to contemporary evangelical thought, aspects are evident within earlier Reformed thought. Most notable is John Calvin, who demonstrates Cyril’s thought to be compatible with and complementary to a Reformed framework.
Cyril’s thought chastens evangelicalism where its focus has been overly narrow and neglected important aspects of soteriology and spirituality. Cyril encourages evangelicals to widen their focus from ‘conversionism’ to the whole of the Christian life, and from ‘crucicentrism’ to the whole work of the incarnate Christ. Cyril challenges evangelicals to consider how their almost exclusive soteriological focus on forensic aspects, and neglect of participatory aspects, has resulted in a minimisation of sanctification and the Lord’s Supper in evangelical spirituality.
Cyril’s thought can enrich evangelicalism through his vision of the Christian life as participation in the divine, which is a more deeply personal account of of the Christian life than is typically found in evangelical spirituality. Cyril’s account of participation in Christ can encompass both juridicial and transformational aspects of soteriology, connect theology and spirituality, and recover the importance of Lord’s Supper as a true means of communion with Christ and appropriation of his benefits.
An appropriation of Cyril’s thought is recommended as beneficial to evangelical spirituality.

The Eucharist is central to Christian doctrine. This may be seen by comparing Oriental Orthodox and Reformed doctrines of the Eucharist.
The Eucharist and debates over it have never simply involved how we speak of the Sacrament in itself. They are always connected to Christological debates as well. This is because our belief about Christ’s Person and Nature lie behind and are revealed in our Eucharistic doctrines.

“Gathering a mob of rustics, [Memnon] has convulsed the city, sending his clerics to the houses of the most God-beloved bishops and uttering countless dire threats” (ACO I.1.5, 121). This passage reveals an underlying common understanding of markers of urbanity: of urban vs. rural, civilised vs. uncivilised, the use and abuse of urban infrastructure. In this paper, I argue that one may identify a certain ‘rhetoric of urbanity’ when it comes to the documents and proceedings of the Council of Ephesus 431 CE. One may distinguish three categories, pertaining to 1) urban vs. rural (civilised-uncivilised, discipline, lawlessness), 2) urban audience (crowds, mobs, marches, unrest), and 3) urban infrastructure (public manifestations, hiding, separation). Both Cyril’s and Nestorius/John’s parties employ these categories in their rhetoric to cast their antagonists as anti-urban as opposed to themselves as civilised urbanites. I will demonstrate by an analysis of the documents of the Council of Ephesus that on the basis of a ‘rhetoric of urbanity’ there exists a particular shared understanding of urbanity that is used as a tool in ecclesial-political disputes.

This article offers a historical analysis of different attitudes toward Nestorius of Constantinople which became "traditional" and which formed opposing tendencies in various branches of Christianity. The main focus of the article is on the origins of veneration of Nestorius in the East-Syriac tradition as well as on the frequent attempts of those who condemn Nestorius to erase his name from the books of the Church of the East.

本文章以对聂斯脱利不同的态度为研究对象。随着时间所有的态度成了“传统的”， 而在不同的基督教的宗派里形成了互相对立的立场。文章关注聂斯脱利在东方亚述教会里的所给予的尊敬、经常责备聂斯脱利的人士 怎样试图在东方亚述教会的课文上取消他的名字的问题。

This invited paper (soon to be reviewed) proves that Eucharistic transubstantiation is simply a Greek-patristic term developed out of ancient Eucharistic catechesis of Cyril of Jerusalem by Leontios of Jerusalem (c. 538). The terminology and theory developed into an advanced theory of substance-to-substance change and was thereafter neglected in extant Byzantine discussions until George-Gennadios Scholarios revivified the discussion occasioned by his preparation for the Eucharistic debates at Ferrara-Florence. "Transubstantiation" is a Greek and entirely "Eastern" Orthodox term that enjoys a fully historical and patristic pedigree before the terms invention in the Latin Medieval period around 1140 AD.

In questo volume è stata studiata in maniera complessiva la parentesi orientale della controversia pelagiana (411-431). La ricerca è divisa in due parti. Nella prima, sono stati esaminati i rapporti che i principali esponenti del movimento pelagiano (Pelagio, Celestio e Giuliano d’Eclano) hanno intrattenuto con i vescovi orientali con cui sono entrati in contatto (Giovanni e Prailo di Gerusalemme, Attico di Costantinopoli, Cirillo d’Alessandria, Teodoro di Mopseustia e Nestorio). In questo modo è stato possibile delineare una geografia dell’accoglienza e del respingimento dei membri del movimento pelagiano. Infatti, è soltanto al termine di questa indagine storica, durante il Concilio di Efeso (431), che anche in Oriente il pelagianesimo è diventato unanimemente un’eresia da condannare.
Nella seconda parte della ricerca sono stati analizzati i principali teologi e polemisti anti-pelagiani di lingua latina residenti in Oriente. Si tratta di Girolamo, Orosio, Heros e Lazzaro, accusatori di Pelagio durante il sinodo di Diospoli (415) e di Mario Mercatore. Questi autori sono stati messi a confronto con Agostino d’Ippona allo scopo di dimostrare la pluralità delle posizioni teologiche e delle rappresentazioni retoriche del pelagianesimo tra i suoi oppositori. Si è dimostrato, infatti, che opporsi al movimento pelagiano non ha significato necessariamente condividere in pieno una teologia di stampo agostiniano, nè la medesima impostazione retorica di Agostino.

"Cyril of Alexandria was not only one of the finest Christian theologians of his day, he also stands out in the ranks of the greatest patristic writers of all generations as perhaps the most powerful exponent of Christology the church has known. Nestorius was enthroned as archbishop on April 10th 428. The contemporary historian Socrates called Nestorius a proud and ignorant man whose innate and undisputed oratorical power masked a weakness of incisive thought. Nestorius argued that Theotokos did not do justice to the fact that, strictly speaking, Mary was not the mother of God but rather the mother of the man whom Christian faith recognizes as divine and thus calls God. On the other hand, the term Anthropotokos acknowledges that Mary is the mother of this man but can itself be taken to suggest that he is merely a man, which again is offensive to orthodox Christian faith in the deity of Christ. In Cyril’s letters against to Nestorius, Cyril not only defends the title Theotokos against accusations that it was reviving the heresy of Apollinariusm, but he denies the very legitimacy of using alternative Christological schemes a such as the «association of personas» the Antiochian thinkers had spoken of. For Nestorius, the language of the exchange of properties was generally suspect, and often odious. He found, in the expressions «Mother of God» and «God suffering», little more than an ignorant piety that had cut so many corners in its implications that it stood very close to pagan mythical conceptions of the deity. For him, God the Logos raised the dead Lazarus, while the man Jesus wept at the tomb.
In Nestorius’ letter to Cyril, he argues that Cyril was right to teach the two natures were united in one person, and right to say that the divinity cannot suffer in itself, but that when he goes on to speak of the deity  «participating in suffering» he undoes all his good work. Cyril insists that while of itself human nature is not powerful but passible, in its union with the godhead, as in the dynamic act of Incarnation, the human nature of the Logos thereby becomes an instrument of omnipotent power and thus, in a real thought paradoxical sense, an omnipotent instrument. It is at once powerful and fragile, majestic and humble. One of his favorite phrases is: «The Logos suffered impassibly».
Christ had two natures. Jesus Christ was both fully human and fully divine. Cyril insists that Mary, the mother of God, should be called Theotokos. If Jesus was only human, Cyril argues, and God was elsewhere, the Incarnation, the Word become flesh, would be meaningless. Cyril plunges into the debate with sharp invective, addressing one document «To Nestorius, the new Judas».
"

The intention of this essay is twofold; to extend the time period of my earlier essays on Mary and the biblical heritage and to sketch the developments in the early Church, in spite of their burdens of motifs relating to the Jewish people, so that we can understand our history with an insight into the Church's roots and prepare for a better future in Christian- Jewish relations.

Visit Marian Studies online at http://www.mariologicalsociety.com/Marian%20Studies.html

I aim to work with the involvement of the Constantinopolitan bishop Nestorius (428-431) with a group of Pelagians that appealed to him against the condemnations they suffered in the West. My goal is to discuss the implications of the relationship between doctrinal debate and ecclesiastical politics in the fifth century in order to show how these two instances kept a tight bond between them. This episode shows how the definition of “heresy” then could be adapted to the ecclesiastical interests of the people involved, especially if their condemnation or acquittal could be mobilized to strengthen the legitimacy of the episcopal authority of the leaders of the main sees

This article considers the involvement of the East Syriac churches— Chaldean Catholic and Church of the East—in the modern ecumenical movement, in particular Chaldean Patriarch Louis Raphael I Sako's efforts to further ecumenical discussion and encourage a policy for the sustainable development of Christianity in Iraq. The importance of recent ecumenical activity derives partly from re-engagement with Christological and ecclesiological beliefs of over 1500 years standing dating from the Council of Ephesus, and partly from massive demographic changes which Christians of the East Syriac traditions have undergone in the last 100 years: currently as much as 60 percent of their populations reside outside of Iraq particularly in North America, Europe, the Levant and Australasia.

Nestorius, who was excommunicated in the first council of the Ephesus while he was the patriarch of Constantinople because he believed that the Christ has two persons, was always referred to as the believer of this idea that was attributed to him. As in the cases of the heretics, his books were burnt, so his views were only available in the books of his opponents. When the Syrian translation of his book was discovered, scholars have an opportunity to evaluate his real views afresh. After describing the of Nestorius briefly, this article aims to determine the real Christological view of Nestorius and to evaluate the image the western Christian Church has attributed to Nestorius over centuries in the light of his book The Bazaar of Herakleides.

Սելեզնյով, Նիկոլայ. Արեւելքի Ասորական Եկեղեցու Քրիստոսաբանությունը. Դիոդորոս Տարսոնացի. Թեոդորոս Մոպսուեստացի. Մար Նարսայ. Նեստոր / Ռուսերենից թարգմանեցին եւ ծանոթագրեցին Տ. Շահե Վրդ. Անանյանը, Ցոլակ Սրկ. Հարությունյանը // Էջմիածին: Պաշտօնական Ամսագիր Ամենայն Հայոց Կաթողիկոսութեան Մայր Աթոոոյ Սրբոյ Էտմիածնի. Ս. Էջմիածին. 12 (2015): 24–54.

That early Christians all but universally held the doctrine of divine impassibility is uncontroversial. But, as Susan Wessel has recently argued, early Christians were also concerned to cultivate compassionate feelings and compassionate behavior toward the poorest and most vulnerable. How did this program for affective formation square with an understanding of God? In this article, I will explore the writings of Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376-d. 444), and specifically his Christology, with this question in mind. My thesis is that Cyril’s presentation of Christ’s impassibility is congruent with the early Christian formation of a compassionate, loving Christian affectivity. Indeed, Cyril’s Christology sets the trajectories for a more Christologically centered affective formation that we find in the writings of Maximus the Confessor.

Հիմ նա կան սկզբնաղբ յուր նե րի վեր լու ծու թյուն դոգ մա յի ձե ւա վոր ման պատ մու թյան հա մա տեքս տում Մար Բա բայ Ռաբ բա (Մեծ) Մ ար Բա բա յի (551-628 թթ.) աստ վա ծա բա նա կան «Գիր միու թեան վասն աս տո ւա ծու թեան եւ մարդ կու թեան եւ դի մի [Ք րիս տո սի]»...

The God Word became truly human. He had the real human nature (body and soul),
but without propensity to sin. Jesus Christ was the incarnate Word of God. He was
born of the Virgin Mary and conceived by the Holy Spirit. His divinity is manifest in
the extraordinary circumstances of His birth and, in particular, in the preservation
of the virginity of the Theotokos. His humanity is guaranteed in that He was born
of a woman, a real historical person. Nestorius of Constantinople rejected the title
Theotokos for the mother of the incarnated Word. He insisted that Mary as a human
being could give birth only to a human being, and not to God. He persisted in calling
the Virgin Mary Christotokos. This teaching jeopardised the salvation of the human
race. Cyril of Alexandria disproved this erroneous belief and supported the reason
why the mother of God should be called Theotokos.
Acta Theologica
2012 32(2): 1-16
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/actat.v32i2.1
ISSN 1015-8758
© UV/UFS
<http://www.uovs.ac.za/ActaTheologica>

The present research addresses matters concerning the relationship between Church and state during Theodosius II, analyzing especially the case of legitimization of the imperial authority found in the first half of the fifth century when the empress Pulcheria tried to identify herself with the Virgin Mary before her subjects in order to further maintain the state control alongside her brother, Theodosius II. This paper also attempts to connect the problem of the political experiment with the development of a Marian devotion in Constantinople as a solution for pagan cults‟ inculturation, reassessing Nestorius‟ reaction parallel with the position of Epiphanius of Salamina.

Between Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages, Christianity has undergone profound transformation. This transformation did not only took place externally, in the sense of a new state of the church in society, but also internally in the sense of a change in the teaching of the church. The most serious changes took place in Christology, which was transformed from 'low' to 'high' Christology. This first volume of the study traces these changes in the understanding of the divinity of Christ, and seeks to explain the motives why, at the beginning of the fourth century, the 'Son of God' was still believed to be subordinate to the Father in every respect, but towards the middle of the fifth century he was seen as 'God the Son' whose divinity could hardly be distinguished from that of the Father. The position of Christ in relation to the Father changed in the course of the smaller and larger Christological controversies by successive emphasis on the divinity of Christ which caused Christology to develop from subordinatianism to homoousianism. In the four chapters of this volume, the four phases of this process are examined, with the analysis of two to three persons involved in each particular controversy (Alexander, Athanasius and Arius, Apollinaris and Diodorus, Nestorius and Cyril, Eutyches, Dioscorus and Theodoret). For these persons it is not only shown how they participated in the concrete controversies and which Christology they represented, but also what immediate consequences this Christology had for their own understanding of the Eucharist.