Andrew Louth - Syriac Christian Church

LIFE AND TIMES 9
occasion for the controversy was the legitimacy of the title Tbeotokos
(‘Mother of God’, literally ‘one who gave birth to God’), which
Nestorius could only accept with reservations. At a council held at
Ephesus in 431, regarded since as the third Ecumenical Council,
Nestorius was condemned for teaching ‘two Sons’—Son of God and son
of man—in Christ. Cyril’s success was probably not much affected by
the late arrival of the bishops of the East, led by the Patriarch of
Antioch, John, among whom Nestorius might have expected to find
some support. But when they at last arrived, they discovered the
council over. A couple of years later, Cyril reached an agreement with
these bishops of the East (that is, the diocese Oriens, the traditional
area of jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Antioch): in return for their
accepting the deposition of Nestorius, Cyril agreed to a formula (in a
statement called the ‘Formula of Reunion’) that emphasized the unity
of Christ, and accepted the legitimacy of Mary’s title of Mother of God,
but insisted that the Incarnate Christ was both ‘consubstantial with
the Father’ (the phrase from the Nicene Creed), and ‘consubstantial
with us’—the doctrine of Christ’s ‘double consubstantiality’—as an
expression of the belief that he is entirely God and entirely human.
Cyril died in 444. A few years later there was further controversy.
This time the matter involved an aged archimandrite of
Constantinople, Eutyches, who had interpreted Cyril’s doctrine of the
‘one Incarnate nature’ to mean that, after the Incarnation, there is
only one nature in Christ, a unique nature, that is not ‘consubstantial
with us’. He had been condemned at the local synod in Constantinople
(the ‘home synod’) by the Patriarch Flavian. Dioscorus leapt to his
defence, and set sail for Ephesus, hoping to repeat Cyril’s success of
431. On the earlier occasion Cyril had ensured the support of the Pope
of Rome. This Dioscorus neglected to do: and in fact Flavian had
reported his excommunication of Eutyches to the Pope (Leo the Great:
Pope from 440 to 461), and already received a letter that supported
his action and contained a succinct statement of Christological
doctrine: a letter usually known as the Tome of Leo. Dioscorus held a
council at Ephesus in 449, at which Flavian was condemned (and so
roughly handled that he died as a result). But this time it was not the
end of the matter. Two years later, a council was held at Chalcedon
(the fourth Ecumenical Council) that overturned the ‘Robber synod’ of
Ephesus. This council sought to reinstate the agreement Cyril had
reached in 433 with the bishops of the East, led by the then Patriarch
of Antioch, John. Had it simply done that the ensuing history might
have been less tumultuous. But it was necessary to incorporate the
doctrine of the Pope and the Tome of Leo, and this was done by saying
that ‘one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten [is]
acknowledged in two natures which undergo no confusion, no change,