Faith that is rooted in adverbs.
Faith that is rooted in adverbs.
A brief word on the Definition and Chalcedon.
In 451 A.D., the Council of Chalcedon was convened in order to reach a verdict on the prevalence of Christological confusion that had persisted within the church since the Councils of Nicaea (325 A.D.) and Constantinople (381 A.D.). The decades following the adoption of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed saw some doctrinal relief but, likewise, bred new objections that warranted sharper theological precision. Thanks in large part to the involvement of Bishop Leo and his Tome, which articulated and attested to the coexistence of Christ’s deity and humanity in the person of Jesus, the Definition of Chalcedon was crafted as a codified response to the bifurcation of the Son of God, resulting in what Justin S. Holcomb says is “the most significant Christological statement of the faith the church had yet produced” (54). This accomplishment is primarily seen in what are known as the “four Chalcedonian adverbs,” each of which was uniquely employed to combat the bedlam of Christological extremism.
The first of these adverbs is ἀσυγχύτως, or “without confusion,” which affirms the fact that Christ’s human and divine natures are not mixed or blended. Rather, they remain distinct yet unified in the incarnate Son of God. This affirmation sought to dispel the fanciful notions of Apollinarius of Laodicea who became infamous for his repudiation of a human mind in the person of Jesus. According to Apollinarius, Jesus’s lack of a human mind preserved his divinity. In so doing, however, he aggravated the confusion surrounding Christ’s identity while also diminishing his humanity. “By removing the human mind,” Steven A. McKinion notes, “Apollinarius preserved God’s activity in Christ, but he destroyed the salvation the Son came to provide” (37). Therefore, “without confusion” allows the church to understand that Jesus Christ is no mere assemblage of human and divine components. Instead, he is the perfect incarnate Son of God.
The second Chalcedonian adverb is ἀτρέπτως, or “without change.” This theological language maintains that Christ’s humanity and divinity remain unaltered despite their union in the person of Jesus. Neither are diminished or transformed when the Word of the Father takes on flesh and dwells among us (John 1:14). Affirming that Christ was “without change” addresses the misconception put forward by Eutyches who understood there to be only one nature in Jesus. According to Eutyches, when the Son of God became incarnate, his humanity was fully assimilated into his deity, resulting in a synthesized Christ with a single nature. The Chalcedonian theologians, however, understood the views of Eutyches to be incompatible with the biblical revelation of the Son of God who is fully human and fully divine.
Similarly, the third and fourth Christological terms in the Definition of Chalcedon are ἀδιαιρέτως and ἀχωρίστως, or “without division” and “without separation,” respectively. These terms stress the indissoluble union of Christ’s deity and humanity. In a mysterious wisdom known only to the triune God, when the Son of God became incarnate, his divine nature and his human nature were perfectly united yet still distinct in the person of Jesus. “Chalcedon,” Holcomb concludes, “asserted that there was a real union between the divine and human natures that existed in one personal life; the life of Jesus of Nazareth, who was the eternal Logos” (57). Accordingly, the errors of Nestorianism and extreme forms of Antiochene Christology, which compartmentalized the identity of the Son of God into the deity of Christ and the humanity of Jesus, were dismissed by retrieving the biblical understanding of the indelible union of Christ’s two natures in the person of Jesus.
Works cited:
Justin S. Holcomb, Know the Creeds and Councils, KNOW Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014).
Steven A. McKinion, “Jesus Christ,” Historical Theology for the Church, edited by Jason G. Duesing and Nathan A. Finn (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2021).