Communion With the Christ:: A Very, Very Brief History of the Church: Part 10

"Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me"Hebrews:10:5

"In the Begining Was the Word and the Word was With God and was God" John: 1:1

"Who do people say the Son of Man is?" Matthew: 16:13b

Many modern Christians may not be aware as to how many of the Church's doctrine or theology came into being.

Understand, that there is a difference between doctrine and theology. Doctrines are what we believe to be true but theology tells us why we believe they are true.

When Theology is expounded upon many Christians find themselves lost in the discussion and many may not really understand the conversation, but theology has, from the very inspection of the Church held an important role in what the Church understands especially about the person of Jesus Christ.

The Church's understanding of the Person of Jesus as the eternal Son of God and the Second Person of the Trinity and the Divinity of the Holy Spirit was resolved at the Councils of Nicea 325 AD and Constantinople 381 AD.

Christological Discussions

The Conversation(s) about who and what Jesus is and what his entrance into the stream of human history meant and has accomplished and what changed in humanities relationship with God, due to Jesus' entrance into history, needed to be conducted.

This ongoing conversation(s) focused the early Church upon the Person and work of Jesus and helped to explain why and how a Palestinian Jews from a small rural village in the Provence of Galilee who had been born around 4 BC under Roman occupation could bring to pass Salvation for the human race through his life, death and resurrection and changed all things forever.

This was an important subject for many Church leaders in the formative years of the post-Apostolic Church. The early Church knew and understood that Jesus was God, yet many things were not fully clear as to just how this was true.

"For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known"1Cor:13:12

The Nature of God

As the Primitive Apostolic Church spread out across the Roman Empire and was preaching a message about Jesus and the One True God, they would encounter Polytheistic Pagans who worshiped multiple deities. These pagans, when they heard Christian ministers preaching about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit would charge Christians of preaching about three gods, rather than One God.

This assertion by these Polytheistic Pagans, that Christians worshiped three gods not one, forced the Church to come to an understanding and solid explanation regarding the nature of God and to form a statement that supported this understanding based upon what Scriptures was then available to them and their own personal experience with the Resurrected Jesus and the Presence of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

As time passed and the conversations regarding this One true God were carried out over the years and that this, One true God has revealed himself to humanity in the person of Jesus Many divergent views emerged which often brought controversy into the Church. One of these controversies was Arianism which began due to the teachings of an Elder named Dr. Arius and his views regarding Jesus Christ and the nature of God.

Arianism

Dr. Arius was an Elder of the Church who was born around 250 AD, in Libya, Dr. Arius served as Priest in Alexandria Egypt at the Church of the Baucalis. Dr. Arius took the position that there was a "point of time" in eternity-past when there was only God the Father, and that the Son of God was a created being and subordinate to the Father and not co-equal nor co-eternal and that the Holy Spirit did not have "personhood" but rather is a power which emulates from God as light does from a candle.

Arius' views which sparked the heated debate and controversy within Church had, as did many others issues, the effect of causality; that is, the controversy forced the Church to consider just what did it believed and understand, and thought about, regarding a whole host of issues primarily, what did the Church understand regarding the person of Jesus Christ?

Council of Nicea

Arius' divide became so contentious that it caused the Church's Bishops to come together at Nicea in the Provence of Bithynia in 325 AD to attempt to resolve the issue.

The First Council of Nicea was of major importance for the Church, it was the first very major council aside from what we read in St. Luke's account in Acts:15. The Church as a whole came together with representation from all quarters of the Church for the purpose of arriving at a consensus of understanding among them all regarding the issues which confronted them all.

The following discussions led to the formation of the Nicean Creed which helped to define the Church's understanding of the nature of Jesus Christ and his relationship with and in the God-Head. The Nicean Creed became a barometer of Orthodox Christian Doctrine.

Though the understanding of the Triune nature of God was found as early in the epistles of Bishops Polycrap and Ignatius, both of which had been taught by the Apostle of John, the full treatment of the Trinity would not come until the Council of Constantinople in 360 AD .

Views of the Eastern Church at that Time

As the Church affirmed the truth that Jesus was and is God incarnate and even now sits in the Heavens and from which he continues to direct the Church and from whence he will return to the Earth and extend the rule of God over all things, there were some in attendance at Council of Nicea who took an opposite view.

The question of all questions that framed any and all Theological questions, now and then, is "how is Jesus fully God yet fully Humanity?" How is Jesus one with the Father and the Holy Spirit yet distinct, that Jesus' nature was that of the "hypostatical union".

In the Eastern Church of that day there were two predominate views, both agreed that Jesus was and is fully God, but the issue was how was the one who is eternally God a man who emerged at a given point in human history?

The two views which are historicity labeled Alexandrian and Antiochene. Each of these schools of thought were in agreement that Jesus was, and is fully God.

Alexandrians

The School of the Alexandrians stressed that the revelation of truth which Jesus brought had to emerge out of the divinity of Jesus and in order to maintain this stance was to diminish his humanity. They looked upon Jesus as a divine revelator, therefore the Alexandrians focused upon his divinity, for did not Jesus say that "before Abraham was "I AM"?.

Antiochene

The Antiochene School viewed and stressed Jesus' humanity; their reasoning was, that for Jesus to be the Savior of the human race he had to be human. They understood that God dwelt within Jesus but they did not want his humanity to be in any way diminished, after all Jesus' most used title for himself was "the Son of Man"?

View of the Western Church

There was little controversy within the Western Church over this as was in the east regarding the nature of Jesus. The Western Church used Tertullian 's explanation of Jesus, that in the person of Jesus there was two undiminished natures united in one person making Jesus Fully God and Fully Human; meaning the "hypostatical union".

Controversy

The beginnings of the controversy regarding the nature of Jesus had its roots even before the discussion about the Trinune nature of God came to a conclusion. Apollinaris from Laodicea, was one of those who supported the Nicene position of the Trinity.

Apollinaris sought to explain how the Logos or the Word of God, the Second Person of the Trinity, was incarnate in the person of Jesus. Apollinaris' explanation was that Jesus was human in every respect, expect, that Jesus did not have a "human soul" but rather the divine Logos, the Word of God was the "soul" in the humanity of Jesus.

Though some followers of the Alexandrine school found this explanation to their liking, for this view would allow Jesus to speak fully as God and his humanity would merely be an accommodation to us.

Many others, however, saw the weakness in Apollinaris' explanation, and they recognized that this would make Jesus something "other than fully human". A component of humanity would have been omitted from the person of Jesus; therefore, Jesus could not save humanity for he would be something "other than fully human".

Those adherents of the Antiochene School did not find it a satisfactory explanation. They insisted that Jesus' humanity should not be diminished in any way, which in their understanding Apollinaris' explanation did just that, if Jesus was not fully human, he could not save humanity.

Ultimately the explanation of Apollinaris was reject by the Church after discussions and conversations within local Church Councils and among the Bishops.

Continuing Controversy

A Bishop named Nestorius had become the Patriarch of Constantinople in 428 AD. Nestorius embraced the Antiochene School of thought. The Council which had been held in Constantinople declared that the Patriarch of that city should have the same level of influence in the Eastern Church as did the Bishop of Rome held in Western Church. This view was in accordance with culture of that time, as Rome was the capital of the Empire, especially in the West and the Church at Rome status reflected those influences embodied in the Bishop of Rome, so was Constantinople the eastern Empires' capital therefore the Patriarch of that city should command the same level of influence.

The Bishops in Alexandria and Antioch did not like being relegated to subordinate positions and wanted to expand their influence in the eastern Church. This desire for greater influence within the Church of the east caused great posturing and politicking as each of the Churches sought to insert their candidate in the office of Patriarch of Constantinople so as to perpetuate their own views and influence within the Church.

Nestorius, being of the Antiochene School of thought, became the Patriarch of Constantinople. His enemies who were primarily of the Alexandrian School sought to undermine him and capitalize on any and all mistakes that Nestorius might make. They found opportunity to destabilize Nestorius when he said that Mary the mother of Jesus should not be referred to as the Theotokos which means the "bearer of God”. Nestorius said that Mary should rather be called Christotokos which means the "bearer of Christ".

The Real Issue

The true issue was really not about Mary or how she should be viewed, but was in truth about Jesus and his nature. Nestorius was bringing Jesus' humanity in to view by citing him as Christ, as the one who saves humanity. This was reflective of Nestorius' Antiochene view which focused upon the humanity of Jesus. The Antiochene view did not want Jesus' deity to overshadow his humanity, they wanted it understood that Jesus was a real human being along with the whole of humanity and that Jesus is one of us.

Nestorius attempted to expound upon his pronouncement regarding Christ in a statement that did more to cloud the issue than clarify it. Nestorius said that in Jesus were "two natures and two persons”, one being divine and the other being human. The human was born of Mary but the divine was not. This made many uncertain as to the soundness of Nestorius' teaching and leadership within the Church.

Council of Ephesus

The Alexandrian opposition lead by Bishop Cyril with support from the Western Church and with the help from the Emperors Valentinian III and Theodosius II wanted to address the issue. A Council was called for and the leadership of the Church gathered at Ephesus in 431 AD.

Nestorius' main supporter John of Antioch was delayed for two weeks. The Council decided to move forwarded with the discussion in spite of protest from some of the Bishops. Nestorius was not given the opportunity to even to defend himself nor was his position given full and unbiased treatment. The Council then declarer that Nestorius was a heretic and he was to be removed from his office.

After the events of the Council Nestorius' supporters arrived, they held a Council of their own and declared that Bishop Cyril was a heretic. Bishop Cyril and his supporters reissued their proclamation that Nestorius and his supporters were the heretics.

Unhappy, with the results and the accusations found among each of the councils Emperor Theodosius had both John and Cyril arrested and declared that each council and their decisions were invalid. At first, Nestorius would not be removed and would be given his full status.

The two parties then "negotiated" a statement called the "Formula of union” to address the nature of Jesus which each of the parties agreed to in 433 AD. Nestorius, however would be removed from his office, he then spent the remainder of his life in exile going to the ancient city of Petra in Jordan.

Benediction: May each and all look ever mindful to the Holy Word of God which speaks always to us regarding God' Son Jesus Christ, today tomorrow and forevermore. Amen.