Council of Chalcedon

(redirected from Chalcedonian)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Wikipedia.

Chalcedon, Council of,

fourth ecumenical council, convened in 451 by Pulcheria and Marcian, empress and emperor of the East, to settle the scandal of the Robber Synod and to discuss Eutychianism (see EutychesEutyches
, c.378–c.452, archimandrite in Constantinople, sponsor of Eutychianism, the first phase of Monophysitism. He was the leader in Constantinople of the most violent opponents of Nestorianism, among whom was Dioscurus, successor to St. Cyril (d.
..... Click the link for more information.
). It deposed the principals in the Robber Synod and destroyed the Eutychian party. Its great work, however, was its Definition regarding the nature and person of Jesus. Based upon the formulation given by Pope St. Leo I in his famous Tome to Flavian, it declared that, contrary to the view taken by Eutychianism (see EutychesEutyches
, c.378–c.452, archimandrite in Constantinople, sponsor of Eutychianism, the first phase of Monophysitism. He was the leader in Constantinople of the most violent opponents of Nestorianism, among whom was Dioscurus, successor to St. Cyril (d.
..... Click the link for more information.
) and MonophysitismMonophysitism
[Gr.,=belief in one nature], a heresy of the 5th and 6th cent., which grew out of a reaction against Nestorianism. It was anticipated by Apollinarianism and was continuous with the principles of Eutyches, whose doctrine had been rejected in 451 at Chalcedon (see
..... Click the link for more information.
, the second Person of the Trinity has two distinct natures—one divine and one human. It was also proclaimed that these two natures exist inseparably in one person. This difference was a major factor in the Monophysite schism that divided the East for centuries. The council produced 28 disciplinary canons important for canon law in both the East and West. However, the Roman Catholic Church did not admit the 28th canon, which made the patriarch of Constantinople second only to the pope in Rome in precedence, until the Fourth Lateran Council (1215).
References in periodicals archive ?
By contrast, for John Howard Yoder a theological ethics that elevates Jesus' life and teachings into church dogmatics will be "more radically Nicene and Chalcedonian than other views.
The Chalcedonian pattern of thought relates theology and its non-theological dialogue partners "without separation or division" (inseparable unity), "without confusion or change" (indissoluble differentiation), and "with asymmetrical ordering" (indestructible order).
McClendon's qualifications correspond to those of the Chalcedonian Definition: the two narrative identities may be separated for analysis ("without confusion"), but they cannot be divided ("without division or separation").
The religious vision of nature that Sherrard seeks to recover is specifically that of the tradition of Chalcedonian orthodoxy in Eastern Christian theology, and Sherrard's diagnosis of the modern situation, perhaps more than any other Guenonian analysis, stresses that the ecological crisis is rooted in a distorted anthropology.
However, the Klarer Unterricht rarely contrasted the "humanity of Christ" with the "deity of Christ," as it would have if Marpeck were dealing primarily with a Chalcedonian issue and thinking in Chalcedonian terms.
As Jenkins makes clear, the Nestorian, Monophysite, and Chalcedonian churchmen differed in Christology--but not in their readiness to use violence to compel truth.
He was an observer at the Second Vatican Council, one of the visionaries of the theological dialogue between the Chalcedonian and nonChalcedonian (Eastern and Oriental Orthodox) churches, a church historian who would read and interpret the signs of the times.
By the time of the Chalcedonian Council of 451 western Christianity held to one Godhead (one ousia, substance or being) in three hypostases, or persons, or modes of origin (the Son begotten, Spirit proceeding, Father neither begotten nor proceeding).
He wrote that the view he presents in Politics of Jesus "is more radically Nicene and Chalcedonian than other views.
The final two chapters are devoted to arguing that a particular reading of the Chalcedonian formulas about the Incarnation provide the most coherent account of how a divine individual could become human and that given God and human sinfulness, God would have good reasons (though neither moral nor metaphysical necessity) to become incarnate.
The dialogue between the Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian Churches, currently in progress, is gradually resolving many of the differences, largely through the realization that the two theologies had been kept apart not by formal contradiction but by misunderstanding resulting from cultural and linguistic factors.
The Chalcedonian decree condemned the Christological belief of the monophysites who believed that only the immutable divine nature of Christ defined his person to the exclusion of his full humanity.