Council of Chalcedon

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

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 a single 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
..... 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 ?
An explicit doctrine of the humanity's in-existence in the hypostasis of the Logos which is, however, not yet denoted by the term enhypostatos emerges, as will be seen, in the Chalcedonian patriarch Anastasius I of Antioch.
concrete individual ([GREEK TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] -- an axiom often used by miaphysites in their attacks on Chalcedonian Christology(30)) and that therefore the doctrine of one prosopon or hypostasis in two natures is merely a disguised Nestorianism, since it necessarily implies two prosopa.
45) Evidently, he finds himself in a similar position as John of Caesarea and is obliged to respond to the misconceived interpretation of the Chalcedonian definition of two natures in Christ by which it is insinuated that the two natures are [GREEK TEXT NOT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], which would lead to a doctrine of two hypostases.
The understanding of the origins of the Greek Bible (or Septuagint, the basis for all Chalcedonian Orthodox Old Testament Bible versions) and the various reception aspects of the New Testament in the early Church canon deserve at least a few paragraphs in this expansive work.
Look elsewhere for a critical view of Chalcedonian Orthodox theology and its self-concept of the origins of Christianity, reception and tradition histories, and relations with the West.
13 written previously, was primarily dedicated to polemics with the Monophysites from the Chalcedonian position.
Even the Chalcedonians agree as regards to this, namely that `Christ' is indicative of the two natures(13).
Now if Chalcedonians regard it as necessary to speak of two natures of Christ in order to avoid confusion, one must also speak of one nature because of the union.
McIntyre seeks to demonstrate the abiding validity of the Chalcedonian Christology (of affirming one "person" and two "natures").
The author's methodology lies in selecting two groups of contemporary theologians and then examining their discussion in order to identify the place of the Chalcedonian formula within their Christologies.
How well his brand of "low" Christology falls within the parameters of the Chalcedonian formula and contemporary Orthodox and Roman Catholic positions is open to questioning.
Toward a Contemporary Interpretation of the Chalcedonian Definition," Lux in Lumine: Essays for W.