>
> If you look back as far as 330 when Constatinople was the heart of
> the
> Orthodox Christianity, then we know that the Patriach of
> Constantinople was
> the most senior of the four Eastern Patriachs, the others being
> Jerusalem,
> Antioch and Alexandria
Thank you for your very interesting posting. I think though that there
are one or two "fine tunings" we might make. Constantinople could
hardly be called the heart of Orthodox Christianity in 330, for the
city was only founded in this year. Its bishop was not at that time
regarded as a patriarch; patriarchal powers were formally conferred on
him at the Council of Chalcedon of 451, though the Pope objected. You
mention that Nestorius believed in "Two natures" of Christ. This is
true, but then so do all mainstream Christians. The Council of
Chalcedon affirmed that Christ is recognised in two natures, which are
united "unconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably".
Nestorius emphasised the division of the two natures to the extent that
Christ became, in effect, two different people. The "indivisibly,
inseparably" of the definition were clearly intended to counter the
views of Nestorius. Even so, the Alexandrians were unhappy with what
looked to them suspiciously like Nestorianism, and they became
"monophysites" (believers in "one nature").
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
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|