times to defend himself; and on his refusal, condemned him after examining his writings, and hearing competent witnesses as to his sentiments *. There never was a cause more fully discussed by the church; for the violent opposition offered to the decrees of the synod of Ephesus at first by John of Antioch and his party, caused the judgment of the church to appear suspended for a time; and then, after mature examination, the emperor and all the church united in ratifying the condemnation of Nestorius. The doctrine approved by this synod and received by the universal church, is contained in the epistle of St. Cyril of Alexandria to Nestorius, which was read in the synod, and approved by every one of the bishops ". This epistle was also approved universally in the church. The synodal epistle of St. Cyril to Nestorius, concluding with twelve anathemas against the several Nestorian errors, was also read in the council", and authorized, as well as the former, by the synodal letter to the emperor; and though some persons pretended that it was incautiously worded, it was afterwards approved, together with the former epistle of St. Cyril, by the great council of Chalcedon ". The fifth oecumenical synod afterwards condemned the writings of Theodoret against St. Cyril's epistles. The doctrine of the incarnation taught by the epistles of St. Cyril, and approved by the catholic church, is as follows: "The great and holy synod (of Nice) said, * Harduin. Concil. t. i. p. 1359-1362; 1387-1395. 1 Fleury, liv. xxvi. s. 34. m Harduin. i. 1363—1387. n Harduin. i. 1395. • Ibid. 1439-1443. Definitio Fidei, Syn. Chalc. Harduin. Conc. t. ii. p. 451. 9 Collat. viii. Harduin. iii. 188 -202. that He who was begotten of the Father as the onlybegotten Son by nature; who was true God of true God, Light of Light, by whom the Father made all things; that he descended, became incarnate, and was made man, suffered, rose on the third day, and ascended into the heavens.' These words and doctrines we ought to follow, in considering what is meant by the Word of God being incarnate and made man.' "We do not say that the nature of the Word was converted and became flesh; nor that it was changed into perfect man, consisting of body and soul: but rather, that the Word, uniting to himself personally flesh, animated by a rational soul, became man in an ineffable and incomprehensible manner, and became the Son of man, not merely by will and affection, nor merely by the assumption of one aspect or appearance; but that different natures were joined in a real unity, and that there is one Christ and Son, of two natures; the difference of natures not being taken away by their union. ... It is said also, that He who was before all ages, and begotten of the Father, was born according to the flesh, of a woman:' not as if his divine nature had taken its beginning from the holy Virgin . . . but because for us, and for our salvation, He united personally to himself the nature of man, and proceeded from a woman; therefore He is said to be born according to the flesh.' . . . . So also we say that He suffered and rose again,' not as if God the Word had suffered in his own nature the stripes, the nails, or the other wounds; for the Godhead cannot suffer, as it is incorporeal: but because that which had become his own body suffered, He is said to suffer these things for us. For He who was incapable of suffering was in a suffering body. In like manner we understand his death.'. . . Because his own body, by the grace of God, as Paul saith, tasted death for every man, he is said to suffer death," &c." The acts of the synod of Ephesus are extant in all the collections of the councils. It accounted the Pelagians to be heretics, and made eight canons of discipline'. SECTION IV. THE SYNOD OF CHALCEDON. The fourth oecumenical synod, of 630 bishops, was assembled by the Emperor Marcian in 451, at Chalcedon. The legates of Pope Leo of Rome presided at the emperor's desire. This synod published a confession or definition of faith, in which the doctrine and creeds of the three preceding councils of Nice, Constantinople, and Ephesus, were confirmed; the epistles of St. Cyril of Alexandria, and that of Leo of Rome, on the incarnation, were approved: and the orthodox doctrine of the existence of two perfect and distinct natures, the divine and human, in the unity of the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, was clearly defined ". Eutyches, and Dioscorus bishop of Alexandria, who maintained that there was only one nature in our Lord Jesus Christ after the incarnation, or union of the divinity and humanity, were condemned as heretics by this council. Eutyches had been already condemned by the synod of Constantinople under Flavianus bishop of that see; who was in his turn deposed by Dioscorus Harduin. Concilia, t. i. p. 1274. Canon i. iv. See Routh's Opuscula. a Richer. Hist. Conc. General. t. j. c. viii. Natal. Alexander, sæc. v. Dissert. 11. b Harduin. Conc. ii. 451-455. On the authority of the Epistle of St. Leo, see Natal. Alexander, sæc. v. Dissert. 12. See the Epistle itself. Harduin. Conc. ii. 290, &c. Harduin. ii. 110, &c. and the pseudo-synod at Ephesus", called the Latrocinium, from the violence of its proceedings. The œcumenical synod of Chalcedon annulled the decree of this pseudo-synod, and though a few bishops of Egypt and Palestine, of the party of Dioscorus, opposed the orthodox doctrine, and founded the Monophysite sect; the infinite majority of the catholic church throughout the world received the doctrine of the oecumenical synod. This appears especially from the epistles of the bishops of all provinces which were obtained by the Emperor Leo seven years after the council, when all unanimously received and approved the doctrine of the synod of Chalcedon and the other œcumenical councils *. The doctrine taught by the synod of Chalcedon is as follows: "We confess, and with one accord teach, one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ; perfect in the divinity, perfect in the humanity; truly God and truly man; consisting of a reasonable soul and body; consubstantial with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the manhood; in all things like to us, without sin who was begotten of the Father before all ages, according to the Godhead; and in the last days the same born according to the manhood, of Mary the Virgin, Mother of God, for us and our salvation: who is to be acknowledged one and the same Christ, the Son, the Lord, the onlybegotten, in two natures, without mixture, change, division, or separation; the difference of natures not being removed by their union, but rather, the propriety of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one aspect and one person," &c. f d Ibid. p. 71, &c. Definitio Fidei apud Routh, Harduin. Conc. ii. 691-768. Opuscula, p. 425. The acts of the synod of Chalcedon still remain. Its canons of discipline were twenty-eight in number". SECTION V. THE SECOND SYNOD OF CONSTANTINOPLE. a The fifth œcumenical synod of 165 bishops, was convened by the Emperor Justinian in 553 to determine the controversy concerning the three chapters, or certain writings of Theodorus, Ibas, and Theodoret, which supported the Nestorian heresy. This synod received and confirmed the decrees of the four first oecumenical councils, and condemned the person and writings of Theodorus of Mopsuestia; the writings of Theodoret of Cyrus against the twelve chapters of St. Cyril of Alexandria, against the council of Ephesus, and in defence of Theodore and Nestorius; and the impious letter said to be written by Ibas to Maris the Persian, in which he denied that the Word became incarnate and was made man of the Virgin Mary, charged St. Cyril with heresy, accused the council of Ephesus of deposing Nestorius without examination, and defended Theodorus and Nestorius and their impious writings. The synod also added fourteen anathemas against these and other Nestorian errors. It appears then, that this synod is to be viewed as a supplement of the third; both being engaged in establishing the orthodox faith against the same errors. a It was received generally in the East, but some of Routh, p. 401, &c. Fleury, liv. xxxiii. s. 43. See Natalis Alexander, sæc. vi. Dissert. 3. De V synodi convocatione, præside, auctoritate. b Collatio viii. Harduin. Con cil. t. iii. p. 188-202; Fleury, liv. xxxiii. s. 50; see Nat. Alex. sæc. vi. Diss. 4. in proof of the justice of the sentence against the three Chapters. |