The Threatened Series - 15

Let us look a little more closely at this Nestorius.  As we have seen,
he objected to the term 'Theotokos' (God-Bearer, Mother of God) applied
to the virgin Mary.  

>From ODCC:  "Opinion is widely divided as to what the doctrine of
Nestorius really was and how far it was heretical.  His sustained
objection to the term 'Theotokos" [incidentally, the word is stressed
Théotókos, not Theótokos] has traditionally been held to imply that her
asserted not only two different natures, but also two different
persons, in Christ, the one the man, born of Mary.  But we must not
overlook that he repeatedly affirmed the oneness of Christ, though he
preferred to speak of conjunction (synapheia) rather than of union
(henosis).  His fear of the Monophysite tendencies, which were actually
to come into the open a few years later, led him to reject Cyril's
conception of a hypostatic union (henosis kath' hypostasin) ,
substituting for it a union of the will (kat' eudokian).  The latter
term certainly savoured of Adoptionism, of which he was actually,
though unjustly, accused.  Certainly his zeal for upholding the
integrity of the two natures,  which he believed to be both
self-subsisting and therefore incapable of being physically united in
the Person of the God-man, caused him to fall into unguarded language,
and the fact that his own friends finally abandoned him supports the
view that, by trying to defend, he actually compromised the Antiochene
Christology."

I think the Church has not made matters easier by its use of the word
'hypostasis'.  In Aristotle, the Neoplatonists, and popular usage it
denotes 'objective reality' as opposed to 'illusion'.  This seems to be
the meaning at Hebrews 1:3 which calls the Son the 'character' of God's
'hypostasis'.  REB renders this 'the stamp of God's very being'. 
Vulgate has, 'figura substantiae eius', whence Douai 'figure of his
substance'.  AV (KJB) has, in a stunning mistranslation, 'express image
of his person.'

In early Christian usage it denotes 'being' and is not distinguished in
meaning from 'ousia'.  So in talking of the Trinity we say 'mia ousia,
treis hypostaseis' (one substance, three persons).  However the Fathers
could as easily have said, 'one hypostasis, three ousias).  Notice that
we translate 'ousia' as 'substance' and 'hypostasis' as 'person';  but
Latin 'substantia' is a calque, or literal translation, of 'hypostasis'
(hypo + stasis = sub + stantia).

In Trinitarian theology, 'hypostasis' means the 'person' (Father, Son
or Holy Spirit) as opposed to God's 'Being' or 'Essence'.   But in
Christological theology we talk of the 'hypostatic union';  we say that
the Son is 'of one substance' with the Father.  Now we are using the
word in precisely the opposite sense, and 'hypostasis' means God's
'Being'.  Whatever the merits of this terminology, it cannot be said to
avoid confusion.

In 431 the Emperor Theodosius II summoned a third Ecumenical Council,
held at Ephesus, in an attempt to settle the Nestorian controversy.  St
Cyril of Alexandria took the chair and began the proceedings before the
arrival of the Syrian bishops or indeed of the papal legates. Nestorius
was deposed from his see of Constantinople and excommunicated, his
doctrines condemned, and the Creed of Nicæa reaffirmed.  Furthermore
the Council gave formal approval to the term Theotokos.  This is
usually rendered in the west as 'Mother of God' and Catholics used it
every day in the 'Hail Mary':  'Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us
sinners now, and at the hour of our death.  Amen.'

Oriens.
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%