Enhypostaton: Being “in Another” or Being “with Another”?—How Chalcedonian Theologians of the Sixth Century defined the Ontological Status of Christ’s Human Nature

This article focuses on the term enhypostaton. It makes the case that this term was originally coined in order to express three modes of being: “by itself”, “with another” and “in another”. The first and third of these modes could not explain the status of the flesh as a nature, which does not have...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Vigiliae Christianae
Main Author: Krausmüller, Dirk 1962- (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Brill 2017
In: Vigiliae Christianae
IxTheo Classification:KAD Church history 500-900; early Middle Ages
NBE Anthropology
NBF Christology
Further subjects:B Christology Chalcedonian Formula Enhypostaton Hypostasis John of Damascus
Online Access: Volltext (Verlag)
Description
Summary:This article focuses on the term enhypostaton. It makes the case that this term was originally coined in order to express three modes of being: “by itself”, “with another” and “in another”. The first and third of these modes could not explain the status of the flesh as a nature, which does not have a hypostasis of its own, since they denoted full-blown hypostases and mere accidents. By contrast, the second mode was tailored to the specific case of the human being where soul and body as complete natures come together to form a single hypostasis, which had traditionally served as a paradigm for the incarnation.
ISSN:1570-0720
Contains:In: Vigiliae Christianae
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/15700720-12341306