NESTORIANISM

By Rajesh Lopez

Introduction.

In this article I shall be giving a brief account of a Christological heresy, which

arose in the 5th century in the Christian church. I will be giving an account of the
background context of the heresy, the theological thought of the heresy, why the church
declared it a heresy and the implication of this heresy on the church.

The background against which the heresy took root.

In the early church the dogmas and the doctrines of the church were in a
developmental stage. The theological concepts were gray areas; there was no universally
accepted teaching of the church. The main theological thinkers during this time came
from two schools of theology
a) The Alexandrian School.
b) The Antiocene School.
These two schools were always at logger-heads with each other as far as the theological
teaching was considered, each had a conflicting opinion over the others teaching. The
powerful party won in these conflicts and the oppositions view was branded as a heresy
and their promoters were called heretics. During this time two types of heresies prevailed
in the church.
a) Christological heresies
b) Heresies based on Rigorism.
It is in the following background that Nestorianism came into existence.

What is the Heresy?

Among the christological heresies there were three heresies, which were based on
the nature of Christ - (Divine or Human) namely, Monophystism, Monotheletism and
Nestorianism. (1)
Nestorianism was fathered by Theodore of Mopsuetia and was later on carried on
and developed by Nestorius his student both belonging to the Antiochene school. The
Antiochene school stressed on the human nature of Christ and was influenced by the
thinking of Aristotle, on the other hand the Alexandrian school stressed on the divine
nature of Christ and was influenced by the teachings of Plato. (2) According to Nestorius
Christ was a man who contained God in himself (Theodochos) and ‘incarnation’ was just
‘an dwelling of the Logos in the man Jesus’. His teaching implied that, in Christ there are
two person, one divine (Logos) and the other human (Jesus) and two son ships, one
begotten of the Father, and other born of Mary. Similarly he said that Virgin Mary was
not the ‘Mother of God’ (Theotocos) but only the ‘mother of a man called Christ’
(Christotocos). He argued that how can God be born of a human creature. (3)
Nestorius believed that the Alexandrian thinking jeopardized the integrity of the human
nature of Christ. He quotes Luke 2:25f, while suggesting that Jesus became perfect by
what he had achieved as a human being- ‘born lived and suffered as a human and not
divine.’ (4)

Why the Church declared it a heresy?

As a popular outcry broke out against the teachings of Nestorius, Cyril of

Alexandria rushed in to condemn Nestorianism. According to Cyril if Mary is not the
‘Mother of God’ (Theotocos) then there is no incarnation, Cyril and his followers held
the view that, “Christ was one divine person but of two distinct natures; one divine and
the other human not mixed and confounded but intimately united”. (5) Cyril and his
followers were against the Antiocene teaching that Jesus Christ was the result of union
between the divine son of God and the man Jesus, which seemed to suggest that there
were two persons in Jesus. Similarly they were against the Nestorians because they
refused to call Mary the ‘Mother of God’ (Theotocos).
Nestorianism was condemned initially by Celestine the Bishop of Rome in 430
and a year later, in 431 at the council of Ephesus Nestorianism was declared a heresy by
Cyril with the support of Theodsius the Emperor.

What possible lessons can we learn from this?

I feel that the Christological argument on the nature of the person Jesus Christ
was totally uncalled for. It has resulted in many problems and divisions in the church. We
are called to be true followers of the teachings of Christ and not to get involved into
Philosophical debates on the nature of the person Christ. I’d like to quote the thoughts of
some modern day historians like A Harnack and F. Loofs, they say that, Nestorius never
spoke of ‘two sons’ neither did he consider Christ just a man. They feel that if the ideas
and vocabulary used by both parties were neatly clarified and well defined than this big
schism in the church could have been avoided. (6)
Remarkably the scriptures attribute the birth and passion of Jesus to his humanity
and not his divinity – the same view that was held by Nestorius.
 END NOTES

1. J. A. BIRKHAEUSER, History of the Church, Ratisbon : Fredrik Purtet and Co.,

1888, p. 201

2. T. P. NEILL, R.H. SCHMANDT, History of the Catholic Church, Milwaukee:

The Bruce Publishing Company, 1957, p. 86

3. J. A. BIRKHAEUSER, History of the Church, Ratisbon : Fredrik Purtet and Co.,

1888, p. 201-202.

4. ------------, “Nestorianism,” Encyclopedia of Religion, New York: (Macmillan

Publishing Co.) Volume – 1 and 2, p. 373.

5. J. A. BIRKHAEUSER, History of the Church, Ratisbon : Fredrik Purtet and Co.,

1888, p. 203

6. ------------, “Nestorianism,” New Catholic Encyclopedia, New York: (Mcgraw

Hill Publication) Volume 10, p. 347.