Nestorianism

== Doctrine ==
[[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 [[Council of Chalcedon|Chalcedonian Churches]] (light purple), and the [[Miaphysite Churches]] (pink).]]
[[Image:nestorianism.svg|right|upright|thumb|A historical misinterpretation of the Nestorian view was that it taught that the human and divine persons of Christ are separate.<ref name=HoganDissentCreed>{{cite book |last=Hogan |title=Dissent from the Creed |pages=123–125}}</ref>]]

Nestorianism is a radical form of [[dyophysitism]],{{sfn|Burgess|1989|p=90, 229, 231}} differing from orthodox dyophysitism on several points, mainly by opposition to the concept of [[hypostatic union]]. It can be seen as the antithesis to [[monophysitism|Eutychian Monophysitism]], which emerged in reaction to Nestorianism. Where Nestorianism holds that Christ had two loosely united natures, divine and human, Monophysitism holds that he had but a single nature, his human nature being absorbed into his divinity. A brief definition of Nestorian [[Christology]] can be given as: "[[Jesus]] Christ, who is not identical with the Son but personally united with the Son, who lives in him, is one [[hypostasis (philosophy and religion)|hypostasis]] and one nature: human."<ref>Martin Lembke, lecture in the course "Meetings with the World's Religions", Centre for Theology and Religious Studies, [[Lund University]], Spring Term 2010.</ref> This contrasts with Nestorius' own teaching that the Word, which is eternal, and the Flesh, which is not, came together in a hypostatic union, 'Jesus Christ', Jesus thus being both fully man and God, of two ''[[ousia]]'' ({{lang-grc|[[:wikt:οὐσία|οὐσία]]}}) (essences) but of one {{transliteration|grc|[[prosopon]]}} (person).{{sfn|Hodgson|Driver|1925|p=}} Both Nestorianism and Monophysitism were condemned as heretical at the [[Council of Chalcedon]].

[[Nestorius]] developed his Christological views as an attempt to understand and explain rationally the incarnation of the divine [[Logos (Christianity)|Logos]], the Second Person of the Holy Trinity as the man Jesus. He had studied at the [[School of Antioch]] where his mentor had been [[Theodore of Mopsuestia]]; Theodore and other Antioch theologians had long taught a [[Biblical literalism|literalist interpretation of the Bible]] and stressed the distinctiveness of the human and divine natures of Jesus. Nestorius took his Antiochene leanings with him when he was appointed [[Patriarch of Constantinople]] by [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine]] emperor [[Theodosius II]] in 428.

Nestorius's teachings became the root of controversy when he publicly challenged the long-used title ''Theotokos''<ref name=":1">{{cite journal |first=Eirini |last=Artemi |title=Cyril of Alexandria's critique of the term ''Theotokos'' by Nestorius Constantinople |journal=[[Acta Theologica]] |volume=32 |issue=2 |pages=1–16 |date=December 2012|doi=10.4314/actat.v32i2.1|url=https://www.ajol.info/index.php/actat/article/viewFile/86003/75832 |access-date=2019-10-22 |doi-access=free}}</ref> ('God-Bearer') for Mary. He suggested that the title denied Christ's full humanity, arguing instead that Jesus had two persons (dyoprosopism),{{cn|date=April 2024}} the divine Logos and the human Jesus. As a result of this prosopic duality, he proposed {{transliteration|grc|[[Christotokos]]}} ('[[Christ]]-Bearer') as a more suitable title for Mary.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Palmer-Anghel |first=Martin |title=Kuan Yin: Myths and Prophecies of the Chinese Goddess of Compassion |last2=Ramsay |first2=Jay |last3=Kwok |first3=Man-ho |date=1995 |publisher=[[Thorsons]] |isbn=978-1-85538-417-0 |location=London |pages=22}}</ref>

He also advanced the image of Jesus as a warrior-king and rescuer of [[Land of Israel|Israel]] over the traditional image of the {{lang|la|[[Man of Sorrows|Christus dolens]]}}.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Neely |first=Brent |date=July 2017 |title=At cross purposes |journal=Transformations |volume=34 |issue=3 |jstor=90010414 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/90010414 |pages=176–213 |doi=10.1177/0265378816631552 |s2cid=171352591 |access-date=September 7, 2022}}</ref>

Nestorius' opponents found his teaching too close to the heresy of [[adoptionism]] – the idea that Christ had been born a man who had later been "adopted" as God's son. Nestorius was especially criticized by [[Cyril of Alexandria|Cyril]], [[Patriarch of Alexandria]], who argued that Nestorius's teachings undermined the unity of Christ's divine and human natures at the [[Incarnation (Christianity)|Incarnation]]. Some of Nestorius's opponents argued that he put too much emphasis on the human nature of Christ, and others debated that the difference that Nestorius implied between the human nature and the divine nature created a fracture in the singularity of Christ, thus creating two Christ figures.<ref>{{cite book |first=Jerry |last=Bentley |title=Old World Encounters: Cross-Cultural Contacts and Exchanges in Pre-Modern Times |url=https://archive.org/details/oldworldencounte00jerr |url-access=registration |location=New York |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |date=1993 |page=[https://archive.org/details/oldworldencounte00jerr/page/105 105]}}</ref> Nestorius himself always insisted that his views were orthodox, though they were deemed [[heresy|heretical]] at the [[Council of Ephesus]] in 431, leading to the [[Nestorian Schism]], when churches supportive of Nestorius and the rest of the Christian Church separated. However, this formulation was never adopted by all churches termed 'Nestorian'. Indeed, the modern Assyrian Church of the East, which reveres Nestorius, does not fully subscribe to Nestorian doctrine, though it does not employ the title ''Theotokos''.<ref name=BritannicaNestorius>{{cite encyclopedia |url=https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/409867/Nestorius |title=Nestorius |encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]] |access-date=January 29, 2010}}</ref>