Christology

==Controversies and ecumenical councils (2nd–8th century)==
{{Main|First seven ecumenical councils}}

===Post-Apostolic controversies===<!-- [[Christological controversies]] redirects here -->
Following the [[Apostolic Age]], from the second century onwards, a number of controversies developed about how the human and divine are related within the person of Jesus.{{sfn|Fahlbusch|1999|p=463}}{{sfn|Rausch|2003|p=149}} As of the second century, a number of different and opposing approaches developed among various groups. In contrast to prevailing [[monoprosopic]] views on the Person of Christ, alternative [[dyoprosopic]] notions were also promoted by some theologians, but such views were rejected by the [[ecumenical councils]]. For example, [[Arianism]] did not endorse divinity, [[Ebionism]] argued Jesus was an ordinary mortal, while [[Gnosticism]] held [[docetism|docetic]] views which argued Christ was a spiritual being who only appeared to have a physical body.{{sfn|Ehrman|1993}}{{sfn|McGrath|2007|p=282}} The resulting tensions led to [[schism (religion)|schism]]s within the church in the second and third centuries, and [[ecumenical councils]] were convened in the fourth and fifth centuries to deal with the issues.{{Citation needed|date=January 2021}}

Although some of the debates may seem to various modern students to be over a theological iota, they took place in controversial political circumstances, reflecting the relations of temporal powers and divine authority, and certainly resulted in schisms, among others that separated the [[Church of the East]] from the Church of the Roman Empire.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Internet History Sourcebooks: Medieval Sourcebook |url=https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/ephesus.asp |access-date=2023-05-10 |website=sourcebooks.fordham.edu |at=Vol. XIV, p. 207 |archive-date=10 May 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230510235650/https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/ephesus.asp |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>The Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church, trans H. R. Percival, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd Series, ed. P. Schaff and H. Wace, (repr. Grand Rapids MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1955), XIV, pp. 192–142</ref>

===First Council of Nicaea (325) and First Council of Constantinople (381)===
In 325, the [[First Council of Nicaea]] defined the persons of the [[Godhead (Christianity)|Godhead]] and their relationship with one another, decisions which were ratified at the [[First Council of Constantinople]] in 381. The language used was that the one God exists in three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); in particular, it was affirmed that the Son was ''[[homoousios]]'' (of the same being) as the Father. The [[Nicene Creed]] declared the full divinity and full humanity of Jesus.<ref>Jonathan Kirsch, ''God Against the Gods: The History of the War Between Monotheism and Polytheism'' (2004)</ref><ref>Charles Freeman, ''The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason'' (2002)</ref><ref>[[Edward Gibbon]], ''The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'' (1776–1788), p. 21</ref> After the [[First Council of Nicaea]] in 325 the ''Logos'' and the second Person of the [[Holy Trinity|Trinity]] were being used interchangeably.<ref>''A concise dictionary of theology'' by [[Gerald O'Collins]] 2004 {{ISBN|0-567-08354-3}} pp. 144–145</ref>

===First Council of Ephesus (431)===
In 431, the [[First Council of Ephesus]] was initially called to address the views of [[Nestorius]] on [[Mariology]], but the problems soon extended to Christology, and schisms followed. The 431 council was called because in defense of his loyal priest Anastasius, Nestorius had denied the ''[[Theotokos]]'' title for [[Virgin Mary|Mary]] and later contradicted [[Proclus]] during a sermon in [[Constantinople]]. Pope [[Celestine I]] (who was already upset with Nestorius due to other matters) wrote about this to [[Cyril of Alexandria]], who orchestrated the council. During the council, Nestorius defended his position by arguing there must be two persons of Christ, one human, the other divine, and Mary had given birth only to a human, hence could not be called the ''Theotokos'', i.e. "the one who gives birth to God". The debate about the single or dual nature of Christ ensued in Ephesus.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Marthaler |first=Berard L. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TY3-aZIo9HEC&dq=council+ephesus+nestorius+theotokos&pg=PA114 |title=The Creed: The Apostolic Faith in Contemporary Theology |date=1993 |publisher=Twenty-Third Publications |isbn=978-0-89622-537-4 |pages=114 |language=en |access-date=14 March 2023 |archive-date=14 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231214055528/https://books.google.com/books?id=TY3-aZIo9HEC&dq=council+ephesus+nestorius+theotokos&pg=PA114#v=onepage&q=council%20ephesus%20nestorius%20theotokos&f=false |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite book| url = https://books.google.com/books?id=uDZaZJkkWgQC&dq=council+ephesus+nestorius+theotokos&pg=PA18| title = ''Mary and the Saints'' by James P. Campbell, 2005, pp. 17–20| isbn = 978-0829430301| last1 = Campbell| first1 = James P.| date = June 2010| publisher = Loyola Press}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=González |first=Justo L. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DU6RNDrfd-0C&dq=council+ephesus+nestorius+theotokos&pg=PA120 |title=Essential Theological Terms |date=2005-01-01 |publisher=Westminster John Knox Press |isbn=978-0-664-22810-1 |pages=120 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Hall |first=Stuart George |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TLyjrU3LPlUC&dq=council+ephesus+nestorius+theotokos&pg=PP7 |title=Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church |date=1992 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing |isbn=978-0-8028-0629-1 |pages=211–218 |language=en}}</ref>

The First Council of Ephesus debated [[miaphysitism]] (two natures united as one after the [[hypostatic union]]) versus [[dyophysitism]] (coexisting natures after the hypostatic union) versus [[monophysitism]] (only one nature) versus [[Nestorianism]] (two hypostases). From the Christological viewpoint, the council adopted {{transliteration|grc|Mia Physis}} ('but being made one', {{lang|grc|κατὰ φύσιν}}) – Council of Ephesus, Epistle of Cyril to Nestorius, i.e. 'one nature of the Word of God incarnate' ({{lang|grc|μία φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου σεσαρκωμένη}}, {{transliteration|grc|mía phýsis toû theoû lógou sesarkōménē}}). In 451, the Council of Chalcedon affirmed [[dyophysitism]]. The [[Oriental Orthodox]] rejected this and subsequent councils and continued to consider themselves as ''miaphysite'' according to the faith put forth at the Councils of [[First Council of Nicaea|Nicaea]] and [[Council of Ephesus|Ephesus]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Chafer |first=Lewis Sperry |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZFCoSSKTffcC&dq=Hypostatic+union&pg=PA382 |title=Systematic Theology |date=1993-01-01 |publisher=Kregel Academic |isbn=978-0-8254-2340-6 |pages=382–384 |language=en |access-date=14 March 2023 |archive-date=14 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231214060056/https://books.google.com/books?id=ZFCoSSKTffcC&dq=Hypostatic+union&pg=PA382 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="parry">{{Cite book |last=Parry |first=Ken |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fWp9JA3aBvcC&dq=Miaphysitism&pg=PA88 |title=The Blackwell Companion to Eastern Christianity |date=2010-05-10 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-1-4443-3361-9 |pages=88 |language=en |access-date=14 March 2023 |archive-date=26 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230326164816/https://books.google.com/books?id=fWp9JA3aBvcC&dq=Miaphysitism&pg=PA88 |url-status=live }}</ref> The council also confirmed the ''Theotokos'' title and excommunicated Nestorius.<ref name="KBaker">{{Cite book |last=Baker |first=Kenneth |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yBW8l1opH-oC&dq=Hypostatic+union&pg=PA228 |title=Fundamentals of Catholicism: God, Trinity, Creation, Christ, Mary |date=1982 |publisher=Ignatius Press |isbn=978-0-89870-019-0 |pages=228–231 |language=en |access-date=14 March 2023 |archive-date=14 December 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231214060149/https://books.google.com/books?id=yBW8l1opH-oC&dq=Hypostatic+union&pg=PA228#v=onepage&q=Hypostatic%20union&f=false |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name=Ephesus >''Mary, Mother of God'' by Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson 2004 {{ISBN|0802822665}} p. 84</ref>

===Council of Chalcedon (451)===
[[Image:Christological spectrum-o2p.svg|thumb|right|Christological spectrum during the 5th–7th centuries showing the views of the Church of the East (light blue), the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches (light purple), and the [[Miaphysite Churches]] (pink)]]

The 451 [[Council of Chalcedon]] was highly influential, and marked a key turning point in the christological debates.{{sfn|Price|Gaddis|2006|pp=1–5}} It is the last council which many [[Lutheran]]s, [[Anglican]]s and other [[Protestants]] consider ecumenical.<ref name="Olson1999">{{cite book |last1=Olson |first1=Roger E. |title=The Story of Christian Theology: Twenty Centuries of Tradition Reform |date= 1999 |publisher=InterVarsity Press |isbn=978-0-8308-1505-0 |page=158 |language=English}}</ref>{{sfn|Armentrout|Boak Slocum|2005|p=81}}

The Council of Chalcedon fully promulgated the Western [[Dyophysitism|dyophysite]] understanding put forth by [[Pope Leo I]] of Rome of the ''[[hypostatic union]]'', the proposition that Christ has one human nature ''([[physis]])'' and one divine nature ''(physis)'', each distinct and complete, and united with neither confusion nor division.{{sfn|Fahlbusch|1999|p=463}}{{sfn|Rausch|2003|p=149}} Most of the major branches of Western Christianity ([[Roman Catholicism]], [[Anglicanism]], [[Lutheranism]], and [[Calvinism|Reformed]]), [[Church of the East]],{{sfn|Meyendorff|1989|pp=287–289}} [[Eastern Catholic Churches|Eastern Catholicism]] and [[Eastern Orthodoxy]] subscribe to the Chalcedonian Christological formulation, while many branches of [[Oriental Orthodox Churches]] ([[Syriac Orthodox Church|Syrian Orthodoxy]], [[Coptic Orthodoxy]], [[Ethiopian Orthodox]]y, and [[Armenian Apostolic Church|Armenian Apostolicism]]) reject it.{{sfn|Armentrout|Boak Slocum|2005|p=81}}{{sfn|Espín|Nickoloff|2007|p=217}}{{sfn|Beversluis|2000|pp=21–22}}

Although the [[Chalcedonian Creed]] did not put an end to all christological debate, it did clarify the terms used and became a point of reference for many future Christologies.{{sfn|Armentrout|Boak Slocum|2005|p=81}}{{sfn|Espín|Nickoloff|2007|p=217}}{{sfn|Beversluis|2000|pp=21–22}} But it also broke apart the church of the [[Eastern Roman Empire]] in the fifth century,{{sfn|Price|Gaddis|2006|pp=1–5}} and unquestionably established the primacy of Rome in the East over those who accepted the Council of Chalcedon. This was reaffirmed in 519, when the Eastern Chalcedonians accepted the [[Pope Hormisdas|Formula of Hormisdas]], anathematizing all of their own Eastern Chalcedonian hierarchy, who died out of communion with Rome from 482 to 519.

===Fifth–Seventh Ecumenical Council (553, 681, 787)===
The [[Second Council of Constantinople]] in 553 interpreted the decrees of Chalcedon, and further explained the relationship of the two natures of Jesus. It also condemned the alleged teachings of [[Origen]] on the pre-existence of the soul, and other topics.<ref group=web>{{cite web|url=http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8068|title=The Fifth Ecumenical Council – Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America|access-date=5 March 2015|archive-date=26 March 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150326234328/http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8068|url-status=live}}</ref>

The [[Third Council of Constantinople]] in 681 declared that Christ has two wills of his two natures, human and divine, contrary to the teachings of the [[Monothelites]],<ref group=web>{{cite web|url=http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8069|title=The Sixth Ecumenical Council – Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America|access-date=5 March 2015|archive-date=26 March 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150326234332/http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8069|url-status=live}}</ref> with the divine will having precedence, leading and guiding the human will.<ref>''The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology'' by Alan Richardson and John Bowden (1983) {{ISBN|0664227481}} p. 169</ref>

The [[Second Council of Nicaea]] was called under the Empress Regent [[Irene of Athens]] in 787, known as the second of Nicaea. It supports the [[veneration]] of [[icon]]s while forbidding their worship. It is often referred to as "The Triumph of Orthodoxy".<ref group=web>{{cite web|url=http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8071|title=The Seventh Ecumenical Council – Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America|access-date=5 March 2015|archive-date=24 March 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150324035845/http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8071|url-status=live}}</ref>