The “Chalcedonian definition” sets out an agreed formula for making sense of the identity of Jesus of Nazareth, which set out to safeguard his humanity, while affirming his divinity.
Following the holy Fathers, we all with one voice confess our Lord Jesus Christ to be one and
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
The “Chalcedonian Definition”
Just from $13/Page
the same Son, perfect in divinity and humanity, truly God and truly human, consisting of a
rational soul and a body, being of one substance with the Father in relation to his divinity,
and being of one substance with us in relation to his humanity, and is like us in all things
apart from sin.
The formulation was widely accepted by both the eastern and western churches, and has come to play a normative role in Christian discussions of the identity and significance of Jesus Christ.
68 The Early Church, 100–500
But not all were satisfied. The position generally (though slightly misleadingly) known as “monophysitism” held that Chalcedon had developed a position which failed to do justice to the divinity of Christ (2.1.6). Many in Alexandria felt that Chalcedon had not adequately safeguarded Christ’s divinity. The resulting monophysite controversies are somewhat technical theologically, making them difficult to explain simply. Yet perhaps the most important outcome was political: many of the churches of Egypt now considered themselves to be at odds with the churches of Europe and Asia.