Council of Ephesus (431)

STAMENKA E. ANTONOVA

Nestorius, an Antiochene monk, who was appointed as the archbishop of Constantino­ple in 428 by Emperor Theodosius, desired to eradicate what he saw as heresy in the capital city, especially the popular belief held there ( as well as in Alexandria) that the Virgin Mary was Theotokos, or Mother of God. Nestorius claimed that the Virgin Mary ought to be called only Christotokos, the Mother of Christ, and any other title given to her designated a false understand­ing of Christology, betraying (as he thought) a confusion of the divine and human properties in Jesus. Initially, Nesto- rius preferred to designate the Virgin Mary as Anthropotokos, Mother of the Man, but eventually chose to refer to her as Christotokos, Mother of Christ, as he sought to bring about unity in his divided church. The title Christotokos, however, was vehe­mently opposed not only by monks who came to Constantinople to protest, but also by the laity of the imperial capital, led at the time by Bishop Proclus. The teaching of Nestorius implied to his opponents, such as Cyril of Alexandria, that he was separat­ing the one person of Christ into two: a human Jesus and a divine Logos. St. Cyril of Alexandria garnered the support of Pope Celestine and began a campaign against Nestorius. Cyril penned several letters to Nestorius in order to explain and to persuade him of the orthodoxy of the Theotokos title, but he was criticized in return on account of these letters. Cyril sent on several of Nestorius’ sermons to Rome, where they were presented to John Cassian and occasioned the writing of his treatise On the Incarnation of God, a work that essentially rejected Nestorius’ teachings and confirmed Rome in its support of Alexandria. In order to vindicate himself, Nestorius asked Emperor Theodosius II to call a council, which convened at Ephesus in 431. Cyril of Alexandria, who was also appointed as the representative of Pope Celestine I, assumed the presidency and stirred the local populace against Nestorius, convincing the bishops to condemn his teaching as deeply heretical. When the epis­copal delegates from Antioch, who arrived too late to attend the opening ofthe council but who were sympathetic to Nestorius, heard about the outcome, they too con­vened their own council and condemned Cyril. The Roman church legates, who arrived even later, took the side of Cyril and supported the decisions of the first council. As a result of this predicament, Emperor Theodosius II decided to inter­vene and hold discussions at Constantino­ple, putting both Cyril and Nestorius under house arrest at Ephesus, and holding all the bishops there through the long summer. Eventually, he too took the side of Cyril of Alexandria. For several years afterwards, Antioch and Alexandria remained out of communion, but a reconciliation was brokered in 433 with the Formula of Union (in Cyril’s Letters as “Let the Heavens Rejoice”), according to which they agreed that Christ was one person (hypostasis) with two natures (physeis), one human and one divine. Nestorius’ deposition was confirmed and he was sent back to Antioch (eventually to be condemned to exile, as he would not cease protesting the justness of his cause). The Council of Ephesus was recognized as of ecumenical status at Chalcedon in 451, and set the terms of the fundamental Christology of the church, determining the agendas of the next three ecumenical councils to come. It was the last of the ecumenical councils to be adopted by the Oriental Orthodox Churches.

SEE ALSO: Christ; Ecumenical Councils; Episcopacy; St. Cyril of Alexandria (ca. 378–444); Theotokos, the Blessed Virgin

REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS

Aprem, M. (1978) The Council of Ephesus of 431.

Trichur, Kerala: Mar Narsai Press.

McGuckin, J. A. (2004) St. Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press.

Margull, H. H. (ed.) (1966) The Councils of the Church, History and Analysis. Philadelphia: Fortress, Press.

Tanner, N. P. and Albergio, G. (eds.) (1990) Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils. London: Sheed and Ward.