What Is a Composite Hypostasis? Leontius of Jerusalem, Maximus the Confessor and the Nestorian Challenge
At the Fifth Ecumenical Council the concept of a ‘composite hypostasis’ was enshrined in dogma. This implied that after the incarnation the divine and human natures had the status of parts that constituted a single whole. In order to make this concept intelligible a comparison was drawn with the hum...
Опубликовано в: : | Scrinium |
---|---|
Главный автор: | |
Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
Язык: | Английский |
Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Опубликовано: |
Brill
2022
|
В: |
Scrinium
|
Другие ключевые слова: | B
Babai the Great
B John Maxentius B Maximus the Confessor B Leontius of Jerusaiem B Nestorian |
Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
Итог: | At the Fifth Ecumenical Council the concept of a ‘composite hypostasis’ was enshrined in dogma. This implied that after the incarnation the divine and human natures had the status of parts that constituted a single whole. In order to make this concept intelligible a comparison was drawn with the human compound where two different natures, the soul and the body, formed one being. In the seventh century Maximus, the foremost Chalcedonian theologian of the time, came to the conclusion that the differences between the incarnated Word and a human individual were too great for a strict comparison to be useful. Yet he continued to defend the notion of composition. Indeed, his views on this point have been lauded as an important step in the development of doctrine. This article seeks to show that composition itself had become problematic, and that it was relentless Nestorian polemic that induced Maximus, and his contemporary Leontius of Jerusalem, to change their understanding of the concept. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1817-7565 |
Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Scrinium
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/18177565-bja10045 |