I. The Threefold Summons at Late Antique Church Councils

The threefold summons of an absent defendant in the context of synodal proceedings – which had been admittedly formed by influence from the respective process in Roman law – is an important component of the ecclesiastical judicial procedure. In this paper I examine in detail all the extensive narratives of threefold summonses preserved in conciliar acts of the fifth and sixth centuries, that is, the cases of Nestorius of Constantinople and John of Antioch at the council of Ephesus (431), the case of the archimandrite Eutyches at the Resident Synod of Constantinople (448), the case of Athanasius of Perrhe at the local synods of Hierapolis (early 440s) and Antioch (445) as well as at the Council of Chalcedon (451), the case of Dioscorus of Alexandria at the Council of Chalcedon, and the case of Anthimus of Constantinople at the Resident Synod of Constantinople (536). In the final part I proceed to an assessment of this process’ evolution over the period in question. The principal conclusion is that by the time of Justinian the ecclesiastical threefold summons procedure had become consolidated and systematised.

Two Prosōpa, one Prosōpon; the Christology of Nestorius of Constantinople

This paper will outline the controversy of Nestorius versus Cyril concerning the enumeration of persons in the Incarnate Christ. Key terms of the debate will be identified with the aim of establishing their meaning according to Nestorius. It will then be argued that Nestorius of the Bazaar remained committed to the basic tenets of orthodox Christianity as his commitment to true and complete natures (fully God, fully man), a single unified subject (a single Person in Christ), and a mutual use of attributes formed the basis of his Christology, even if their theological reconciliation came short of a complete and perfect synthesis.

Antioch and Alexandria

The opposition between theologians centered in Antioch and those centered in Alexandria, both in their ways of interpreting Scripture and in their understandings of Christ’s person, is well known, if often somewhat exaggerated by modern scholars. Antiochene exegetes tended to insist more than their Alexandrian counterparts on the importance of seeing each biblical passage in its context within the longer narrative of Israel’s history, and to search for practical, moral applications, while Alexandrian interpreters tended to be more interested in the theological and spiritual meaning. More importantly, Antiochene theologians tended to see the fullness of salvation as eschatological, Alexandrians as present and accessible in the Church; as a result, Antiochenes tended to emphasize more the boundaries between God’s life and creation. The chapter looks at works of Diodore of Tarsus, his pupil Theodore of Mopsuestia, Nestorius of Constantinople, Theodoret of Cyrus, Didymus the Blind, and Cyril of Alexandria.

Unidade e diversidade na Antiguidade Tardia: a atuação do imperador Teodósio II na controvérsia em torno da natureza do corpo de Cristo entre Cirilo de Alexandria e Nestório de Constantinopla (428-450 d.C.) * Unity and diversity in the Late Antiquity

<p><strong>Resumo:</strong> Esse artigo analisa a atuação do imperador Teodósio II (408-450) no conflito teológico que emergiu durante o seu governo e ficou conhecido pela historiografia como Controvérsia Nestoriana. Tal conflito foi protagonizado pelos bispos Cirilo de Alexandria e Nestório de Constantinopla, que divergiam acerca do relacionamento estabelecido entre as naturezas divina e humana do Cristo encarnado. Uma vez que formulações teológicas dessa natureza, na Antiguidade Tardia, serviam de suporte para formulações ideológicas de sustentação e unidade do poder imperial, pretendemos destacar o papel de centralidade do imperador como mediador desse conflito.</p><p><strong>Palavras-chave:</strong> Antiguidade Tardia – Conflito político-religioso-administrativo – Controvérsia Nestoriana.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Abstract:</strong> This article analyzes the performance of the Emperor Theodosius II (408-450) at the theological conflict that emerged during his government and got notorious by historiography as Nestorian Controversy. Such a conflict was led by the bishops Cyril of Alexandria and Nestorius of Constantinople, who diverged about the relationship established between the divine and human natures of the incarnate Christ. Since theological formulations of such nature were used in Late Antiquity to support ideological formulations of sustaining and unity of the imperial power, we aim to highlight the role of centrality of the Emperor as a mediator in this conflict.</p><p><strong>Keywords:</strong> Late Antiquity – Political, religious and administrative Conflict – Nestorian Controversy.</p>

The Christological controversy between Nestorius of Constantinople and Cyril of Alexandria

brak