There were number of Councils in the medieval periods.
There were at least seven Ecumenical Councils and first Council was held in
Naecia in 345 problem was the Arian Controversy. Second Council was held in
Constantinople. This was held in 381. Main issue was personality of Holy Spirit
and humanity of Christ. Third Council was held in Ephesus in 431. Major issue
was the unity of Christ’s personality. Fourth Council was held in Chalcedon in
451 and the issue was the two nature of Christ. Fifth Council was held in
Constantinople in 553. Main issue was monopolistic issue, those who rejected
two natures of Christ and insisted on one nature. The Sixth Council also held
in Constantinople in 680. Here the issue was monothelite issue-one will of
Christ. Seven Council was held in Naecia. Here the issue was image controversial.
This council dealt with three major problems-
Theological, Christological, and Anthropological.
Theological
Issues: (i). The relation of son to the father. The main concern was the various
relations in person in trinity. Main concern was related but father and the
son. It made a major issue in the church. Some of the church fathers were
already mentioned like Tertullian. He insisted the unity of essence in the
three personalities as the correct in the trinity. The question is are they
different or they are unity? He said they are unity. Necian Council are of the
presbyter. Arias brought this question in three hundred and 18 bishops known of
Alexander discussed with his presbyters. The unity of trinity and in the
Council Arias brought this issue. He was scholar and ascetic a popular
preacher. He did not like servant preacher like Alexander. He said that bishop
did not distinguished between these three persons. He did not see that there
was three gods. At the same time, he said that they must be distinguished from
each other. Consequently he developed his own doctrine of trinity and made some
damage to the person of Christ. Person of Christ in the trinity Christ
suffered. The deity of Christ is suffered. The problem of Arian was not willing
to give same author the Christ that he gave to the father. He said that son is
subordinate to the father. That means Christ is made up of different essence.
Therefore father is superior and son is subordinate. Therefore Council is
called to discuss this issue. In the council Arias insisted that Christ is
created out of nothing (ex-nehilia). Christ was not from eternity to eternity
but he was created. He as the result of the creative activity of the part of
the father. He also said Hetro-ousious and homo-ousious. But in John 1:1 there
was a beautiful description of logos. In the beginning was a logos that means
pre-existence. Co-eternal, the logos was with God -co-equal. John 1:14 logos
was made flesh and dwelt among us. That is the Christology of John. However
Arias denied all these things. He would make Christ Divine but not Deity.
Divine is like God but the Deity is only one almighty. If Christ is not deity
how did he get divine nature? Arias would say Christ get divine his virtues of
obedience and good qualities. He misinterpreted the same version. Phil 2 which
says that God also exhorted him. This can be interpreted in two ways. Arias
would say exhorted was due to obedience. Arias forgot something. Even before
Christ came into the world he was God. Arias robbed Christ of his deity.
Second view was presided by another person called
Athanasius who is considered as champion of Orthodox view, who studied in the
School of Alexandria. He said that Christ exisited from all eternity. He is of
the same essence within father. And his idea was homo-ousios. Athanasius argued
if Christ is anything less than deity, he cannot be our savior. Only a divine
cannot be savior but deity can be a savior (based on John.1:11).
Middle view: Eusebius of Caesarea was one
of the Church historian and scholar. He led the largest party in the Council
because he wanted to avoid the controversies. He emphasis compromise view. He
said that Christ was not created but begotten by father before time in
eternity. Christ was not of the same substance but a light substance of the
father. Similarly the Council was impressed with this man and his idea became
basis for Naecian Creed.
At the same time Naecian creed was not entirely viewed
of Eusebius’ view. The creed little differed from Eusebius’ view because the
creed emphasis the unity with father and the son. It says that Jesus God of
God, light of light, true God. Basically that was the creed that little
differed. Between 325-361, there was again a strong reaction against orthodox
view. It seems defeat of Arianism was a temporary victory. Arianism gained upon
one again. Therefore another council was formed which is known as Council of
Constantinople in 381. This council reinforced the view that was held at
Council of Naecia. Again in 451, the Council of Chalcedon was formed. It seemed
faith was reinforced. Actually what is known as Naecian Creed was accepted by
Constantinople in 381. State began to dominate even upon the theological matters
of the Church. Church is leveled as imperial church.
Theological
issues:
(i). Relationship between father and Holy Spirit: One bishop of Constantinople known as
Macedonius 341-360. He started teaching a new doctrine (p-134). He made
hierarchy of trinity of father-son-Holy Spirit. The deity of Holy Spirit was
questioned. This was discussed in Constantinople and condemned his view. And
therefore we see when the creed of Constantinople i.e. Naecian creed when it
was recited as third council of Toledo in 589 there added a word “and the Son.”
In other words Holy Spirit is equal, co-eternal and co-substance with the
father and the Son. This controversy called Filioque controversy.
Christological
Controversies:
Who is Christ? What is his nature? What is his
personality The Alexandrian School emphasis the deity of Christ whereas the
Antiochan School the humanity of Christ. Some major Christological
controversial are:-
(a). Apollinarianism:
A converted teacher of rhetoric and bishop of Laodocea. He developed his
own peculiar doctrine of natures of Christ. When he was at the age of 60 he
developed this doctrine. This person was orthodox view in the beginning but
later he says that Christ had two body and soul
but in Christ the logos took two places of human spirit. He wanted to
take two nature of Christ of divine-humane. In doing so he minimized humanity
of Christ. He made Christ semi-divine and semi-humane. Not completely humane.
He said God is deity without body. Council of Constantinople condemned this
view.
(b).
Nestorianism: Fade Nestorius was scholarly won and became patriarch of
Constantinople. He disliked the name “Theodokos” means God bearer. He wanted
Chrsitotokos as the named Mary. This would make Mary the mother of human aspect
of Christ. By arguing this he said that in Jesus Christ divine and human nature
were combined in a mechanical union rather than organic union. He said that
Christ is man in whom the human and the divine united in mechanical union.
Christ was perfect man but morally connected with deity. Not in essence but
only a moral connection with deity. Christ was a God bearer not a God man. New
Testament it says that Christ God man but he was not willing to accept it. He
said that Christ simply bearing God. Council held in Ephesus in 431 and
condemned this view. However this did not stop this controversy. His ideas were
influenced in the Eastern Church. His missionaries went to China, Persia and
India.
(b). Eutychianism:
This idea was spread by Eutyches who was monk from Constantinople. He insisted
that after incarnation of after Jesus taking the human body the divine and
human were fused into one nature. He say that Jesus lost human nature after
fusion but the New Testament did not say so because New Testament says that he
was hungry, slept, tired, wept. This was made human attributes. He robed true
nature of humanity. This was condemned in the Council of Chalcedon in 451. In
the same council also formulated biblical Christology in the light of the
Scripture teaching. This said Christ is truly divine and truly man. Two nature
of Christ are without confusion without change or without separation. This two
nature are brought together harmoniously in one person with one essence by incarnation.
(c).
Monothelite: If Christ has one nature or does he have two? Some people
thought that Jesus has two wills. If that is the case how does this two wills
function? Is this will subject to the divine will? Different opinions and
answers came out. The Council of Constantinople in 680 settled this
controversy. The Council said that since Christ has two natures he also have
two wills. But two wills in Christ exist in a harmonious unity in which human
will is subject to the human will. This was more on Eastern Church. They were
taken up this controversy that the Church lost the real burden for the mission
that the Church spreading of Gospels. Also their theology was in stagnant.
Anthropological
Controversies:
Doctrine of mand and particularly man’s salvation.
There is difference between Eastern Theologians and the Western Theologians.
Eastern Theologians dealt with the philosophical problems , theological and
Christological issues. Whereas Western theological were more practical. They
dealt with the things practical and nature. One such practical problem was man’s
will and salvation. What part that human will play in the Salvation? Is
salvation offered by God? Or does human have a part in that? This question was
started by a British monk Pelagius in 360-420. This British monk came to Rome
and started preaching about salvation how man be saved. Few years later, he met
St Augustine in South Africa. And he found that Augustine would not agree with
his idea of man’s Salvation. He was vanished from Rome.
His teachings:
His
teachings are called Pellagianism. First of all human will have a place in
man’s Salvation. Second, each man has created as Adam was created. Therefore he
or she has power to choose good or evil. Each soul is separated. Therefore it
is not contaminated by the sin of Adam. There were different ideas about the
place of soul in human being. One idea
was God implanted the soul in each new human being at the time of his birth.
Another idea was both soul and body are transmitted to their children through
their parents. Other words children accepted through hereditary. Plegius said that
the sin of Adam is not contamitted and therefore each child is not affected by
sin. If it is the case what would be the universality of sin? He said that it
is the weakness of his flesh and there is no original sin. Another he also said
that Adam did not passed on each
generation to each tendency. By doing this Pelegius was trying to explain the
origin of sin. Each human being is free to cooperate with God in the process of
their Salvation and holiness. And also he said that man can use certain aids
such as Bible, reason and the other examples of Christ for salvation. Since there is no original sin
infant baptism is not essential thing in Salvation. These teachings of Pelegius
became strong and strong and attracted many people.
St Augustine bishop of Hippo thought that it should be
stopped and opposed very strongly mainly because Augustine thought that
Pelegius denies the doctrine of grace.
Pelegius did not have much grace in his teachings. Augustine always
emphases doctrine of grace in Salvation.
St. Augustine
and his opposition to Pelegius: He was one of
the greatest personalities in the history of Christianity and was bishop of
Hippo in Africa. He challenged the teachings of Pelegianism. Some of the
writings of Augustine are Ante-Pelegius Teachings. He said that the
regeneration of Salvation is exclusively the work of Holy Spirit. Man who was
originally created in the image of God had a freedom to choose good and evil.
Because he chose evil, Adam’s sin bound all men because he was the head of the
human race. Man’s will is entirely
corrupted by the fall. So much so that he is totally deprived and unable to do
anything about the matter of his Salvation or to exercise his or her will in
the process of Salvation. He believed that all inherited sin through Adam and
no one can escape from original sin. Salvation can come through the elect
through the grace of Christ. God must energize his will to accept his grace
which is only to whom he has elected through Salvation. He also said that God’s
grace is irresistible. The teachings of Pelagius were condemned at Ephesus in
431. And no doubt the teachings of Augustine helped in condemning the teachings
of Pelagius.
All these semi major ecumenical Councils dealt with
three major issues-Theology, Christology and Anthropology. These Councils to a
large extent helped the churches to preserve the unity of the church. However,
it was at the expense of the freedom of the Spirit that was shown the
characteristics of the early church. Christians were now in the position of
some authoritative statement regarding their faith and how to interpret the
Scripture. At the same time, there some disadvantages also, i.e., from now on
people although had the same orthodox teachings or they were orthodox in faith which
did not line up the ethical implication of that way. The must all remember one
day that creed and conduct goes hand in hand. There were some elements who felt
that the Church can resolve to violence and persecution to keep pure faith. The
emperor acted as an arbitration of the different views of the Council. From now
on for the next almost 1000 years the Church in the state issue dominated most
of Church’s history culture for good and bad.
.jpg)
