Ecc514 - Orthodox Ukrainian jurisdictions

Lesson 2: Unity prior to the Slavic Expansion - 4

Ephesus (431 C.E.)

Cyril of Alexandria We could define the Second Council as a finalized schizmation point between Trinitarian and Non-Trinitarian Christians. We have pointed out that the Christology described did effect soteriology. This is not to say that in the great mercy of our Lord that those who do not accept the conclusions of this Council are unsaved or unsavable. However, it became the later practice of the church to equate the visible church with that of the church of the Councils as demonstrated by canons which flowed from the Council decisions. The others were heretics and were considered as "outside the church."

We will not attempt to place judgment on this matter here. This is a history lesson which simply points to that form of Christianity which was given to the land of the Rus in subsequent years. There were few who would subsequently appear with the level of sanctity as Gregory, which awarded the title "Theologus" only to two people in its history - first to John the Evangelist, and then to Gregory. By the time salvation would reach the Ukraine unity in the church was united politically as much as or even more so than it was united in any definitive proximity to Christ in terms of intimate knowledge. To rise in the church brought honor before men and with it worldly power.

Thus it was that even with the strength of the Council of Constantinople as authoritatively revealed in Gregory in a unity of the Holy Spirit reminiscent of the days of the apostles, that the Arian issue did not immediately go away. A little background helps explain this. Constantine died in 337, and his successor, Constantius, had been an Arian, who sent the ‘orthodox’ bishops into exile. At that time St. Athanasius of Alexandria, who had attended Nicaea as an elder, rose up. Sensing that the people were instinctively ‘orthodox’, whereas the hierarchy were veering back to Arianism, he stuck his neck out and earned for himself the motto ‘Athanasius contra mundum – Athanasius against the world’. One with a low view of the potential for humanity would tend to say that there was little humanity in Christ – ultimately that there was none at all. This is the erroneous doctrine of the ‘one nature of Christ, called ‘Monophysitism’: belief in one nature alone.

That is, if you ask the victors in these later controversies, that is what you would hear. But those defeated, not having much recourse to clarifying their positions would probably express their agreement at least that they were simply attempting to acknowledge and preserve the indivisibility of the nature of Christ in His full humanity and divinity, rather than in a divided humanity and divinity. Orthodox Christians today stand on the verge of accepting these statements as sound doctrine. Unfortunately, any such clarification was lacking in what became a third great ecumenical council. And a division among Christians resulted.

In days when worldliness prevailed in the church, unwillingness, poor communication, and dogmatic adherence to opinion ran in many directions. At the other end were those who saw so much humanity in Christ that the human Christ and the divine Christ become totally distinct persons. This is called ‘Nestorianism’, and is so named after Nestorius, a monk of Antioch appointed as Bishop of Constantinople quite ironically on the grounds that a simple monk would be less meddlesome.

Not.

Nestorius began hitting out at targets left, right and centre, notably the teaching that the mother of Jesus was ‘Theotokos’, meaning ‘God-bearer’, a title given to her from the earliest days. Nestorius said she could only be called ‘Christ-bearer’, which seemed to suggest that he was denying that Christ was God – or rather, only one "half" of Christ was God! We see this same complaint among many Bible believing Christians of today. They do not like to see undue honor given to the mother of our Lord. It goes against the grain which calls us to worship God alone. To title her "Mother of God" risks implying that she herself is not only God, but higher than God. So much more so is this a concern since she is revered as among those in heaven. Prayers, whether with her or to her, often seem like worship. The combination of these practices seems most insensitive to the instincts of those who do not wish in any way to place stumbling blocks before the weak minded.

Coming against the Nestorians came the very outspoken Cyril of Alexandria, who stated the obvious as he said that as Christ was God, and as Mary was Christ’s mother, therefore Mary was ‘Mother of God’. The Emperor, Theodosius II, not a particularly strong Emperor, really a weak man under the grip of his wife and his sister, called the Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus in 431 to resolve the issue. The West was also present in this third great Council having convened in synod in Rome and arriving in Ephesus with letters from Pope Caelestine. Cyril acted almost like the pope's ambassador. And in fact, is referred to as "Pope of Alexandria."

At Ephesus Cyril sought to resolve the rivalry between the centers of Antioch, which held a ‘low’ view of Christ, and Alexandria, which held a ‘high’ one. The Ephesus Council was a vindication of the claims of Alexandria. Poor Nestorius claimed he never got a fair trial. "I was summoned by Cyril, who assembled the council, by Cyril who presided. Who was judge? Cyril. Who was accuser? Cyril. Who acted as Bishop of Rome? Cyril. Cyril was everything." It was an odd statement coming from the Archbishop of Constantinople, especially considering Constantinople had just been elevated in stature to highest of all patriarchates save Rome.

Nestorius was sent back to his monastery. The Council of Ephesus declared Mary to be the Mother of God. Nestorius’ teaching was widely accepted, however, especially among the Assyrian Christians in what is now modern Iraq. The Orthodox liturgy today offers frequent prayers to the "Theotokos." Protestants who are offended by such prayers often feel more comfortable woshipping in Nestorian churches. However, it should be kept in mind that the emphasis is on the divinity of Jesus Christ, not the worship of Mary, which the Orthodox would agree is a heresy and a sin.