Part 58 (1/2)
The following extracts are from the creed which was presented at the Council of Ephesus, 431, and was written by Theodore of Mopsuestia, the greatest theologian of the party which stood with Nestorius. Although it does not state the whole doctrine of Theodore, yet its historical position is so important that its characteristic pa.s.sages belong in the present connection.
Bibliographical and critical notes in Hahn, _loc. cit._
Concerning the dispensation which the Lord G.o.d accomplished for our salvation in the dispensation according to the Lord Christ, it is necessary for us to know that the Lord G.o.d the Logos a.s.sumed a complete man, who was of the seed of Abraham and David, according to the statement of the divine Scriptures, and was according to nature whatsoever they were of whose seed He was, a perfect man according to nature, consisting of reasonable soul and human flesh, and the man who was as to nature as we are, formed by the power of the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin, born of a woman, born under the law, that he might redeem us all from the bondage of the law [Gal. 4:4] who receive the adoption of sons.h.i.+p which was long before ordained, that man He joined to himself in an ineffable manner.
And we do not say that there are two Sons or two Lords, because there is one G.o.d [Son?] according to substance, G.o.d the Word, the only begotten Son of the Father, and He who has been joined with Him is a partic.i.p.ator in His deity and shares in the name and honor of the Son; and the Lord according to essence is G.o.d the Word, with whom that which is joined shares in honor. And therefore we say neither two Sons nor two Lords, because one is He who has an inseparable conjunction with Himself of Him who according to essence is Lord and Son, who, having been a.s.sumed for our salvation, is with Him received as well in the name as in the honor of both Son and Lord, not as each one of us individually is a son of G.o.d (wherefore also we are called many sons of G.o.d, according to the blessed Paul), but He alone in an unique manner having this, namely, in that He was joined to G.o.d the Word, partic.i.p.ating in the Sons.h.i.+p and dignity, takes away every thought of two Sons or two Lords, and offers indeed to us in conjunction with the G.o.d the Word, to have all faith in Him and all understanding and contemplation, on account of which things also He receives from every creature the wors.h.i.+p and sacrifice of G.o.d. Therefore we say that there is one Lord, namely, the Lord Jesus Christ, by whom all things were made, understanding princ.i.p.ally G.o.d the Word, who according to substance is Son of G.o.d and Lord, equally regarding that which was a.s.sumed, Jesus of Nazareth, who G.o.d anointed with the Spirit and power, as in conjunction with G.o.d the Lord, and partic.i.p.ating in sons.h.i.+p and dignity, who also is called the second Adam, according to the blessed Apostle Paul, as being of the same nature as Adam.
(_f_) Theodore of Mopsuestia, _Fragments_. Swete, _Theodori epis. Mops. in epistulas b. Pauli commentarii_, Cambridge, 1880, 1882.
In the appendix to the second volume of this work by Theodore there are many fragments of Theodores princ.i.p.al dogmatic work, _On the Incarnation_, directed against Eunomius. The work as a whole has not been preserved. In the same appendix there are also other important fragments. The references are to this edition.
P. 299. If we distinguish the two natures, we speak of one complete nature of G.o.d the Word and a complete person (p??s?p??). But we name complete also the nature of the man and also the person. If we think on the conjunction (s???fe?a) then we speak of one person.
P. 312. In the moment in which He [Jesus] was formed [in the womb of the Virgin] He received the destination of being a temple of G.o.d. For we should not believe that G.o.d was born of the Virgin unless we are willing to a.s.sume that one and the same is that which is born and what is in that which is born, the temple, and G.o.d the Logos in the temple. If G.o.d had become flesh, how could He who was born be named G.o.d from G.o.d [_cf._ Nicene Creed], and of one being with the Father? for the flesh does not admit of such a designation.
P. 314. The Logos was always in Jesus, also by His birth and when He was in the womb, at the first moment of his beginning; to His development He gave the rule and measure, and led Him from step to step to perfection.
P. 310. If it is asked, did Mary bear a man, or is she the bearer of G.o.d [Theotokos], we can say that both statements are true. One is true according to the nature of the case; the other only relatively. She bore a man according to nature, for He was a man who was in the womb of Mary.
She is Theotokos, since G.o.d was in the man who was born; not enclosed in Him according to nature, but was in Him according to the relation of His will.
(_g_) Nestorius, _Fragments_. Loofs, _Nestoriana_.
The fragments of Nestorius have been collected by Loofs, _Nestoriana_, Halle, 1905; to this work the references are made.
It now appears that what was condemned as Nestorianism was a perversion of his teaching and that Nestorius was himself in harmony with the definition which was put forth at Chalcedon, a council which he survived and regarded as a vindication of his position after the wrong done him at Ephesus by Cyril; _cf._ Bethune-Baker, _Nestorius and His Teaching_, Cambridge, 1908.
P. 252. Is Paul a liar when he speaks of the G.o.dhead of Christ and says: Without father, without mother, without genealogy? My good friend, Mary has not born the G.o.dhead, for that which is born of the flesh is flesh. A creature has not born the Creator, but she bore a man, the organ of divinity; the Holy Ghost did not create G.o.d the Word, but with that which was born of the Virgin He prepared for G.o.d the Word, a temple, in which He should dwell.
P. 177. Whenever the Holy Scriptures make mention of the works of salvation prepared by the Lord, they speak of the birth and suffering, not of the divinity but of the humanity of Christ; therefore, according to a more exact expression the holy Virgin is named the bearer of Christ [Christotokos].
P. 167. If any one will bring forward the designation, Theotokos, because the humanity that was born was conjoined with the Word, not because of her who bore, so we say that, although the name is not appropriate to her who bore, for the actual mother must be of the same substance as her child, yet it can be endured in consideration of the fact that the temple, which is inseparably united with G.o.d the Word, comes of her.
P. 196. Each nature must retain its peculiar attributes, and so we must, in regard to the union, wonderful and exalted far above all understanding, think of one honor and confess one Son. With the one name Christ we designate at the same time two natures. The essential characteristics in the nature of the divinity and in the humanity are from all eternity distinguished.
P. 275. G.o.d the Word is also named Christ because He has always conjunction with Christ. And it is impossible for G.o.d the Word to do anything without the humanity, for all is planned upon an intimate conjunction, not on the deification of the humanity.
(_h_) Gregory of Nyssa, _Contra Eunomium_, V, 5. (MSG, 45:705.)
The Christology of the Cappadocians.
The Cappadocians use language which was afterward condemned when given its extreme Alexandrian interpretation. Hefele, 127, may be consulted with profit.