Which Early Christian Heresy Are You?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

You are Monophysitism!

Monophysitism (literally, "one-nature-ism") taught that Christ's human and divine natures were not distinct but dissolved together into a single hybrid nature; it is also known as "Eutychianism" after its most famous proponent, the fifth-century abbot Eutyches. Monophysite beliefs emerged as a reaction against the earlier heresy of Nestorian, which taught that Christ's divine and human natures remained wholly separate. Eutychian beliefs were condemned at the Council of Chalcedon in 451, which embraced a dyophysite position: Christ's human and divine natures, while remaining distinct, formed an inseparable and indivisible union within a single person and substance (Greek: "hypostasis"). The Chalcedonian belief in a "hypostatic union" of Christ's two natures is shared by Catholic, Orthodox and most Protestant churches, representing a consensus position that denies the extremes of both Monophysite and Nestorian Christology.

Although Monophysite beliefs were officially condemned at Chalcedon, the Monophysite controversy led to a schism which separated the so-called Oriental Orthodox churches from the remainder of Christendom, including the modern-day Coptic, Ethiopian, Eritrean, Syriac, Malankara Syrian, and Armenian churches. While these churches reject the authority of the council of Chalcedon, they deny that their doctrine is formally heretical in the sense taught by Eutyches, and often strongly object to the characterization of their beliefs as "monophysite."

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

link

It's very silly, but has lots of big and obscure words, so it will please some of you.



Nestorianism was mine.

Nestorious never taught that heresy. He was Orthodox.

That's a defensible position, but you can hardly just state it as fact.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

link

It's very silly, but has lots of big and obscure words, so it will please some of you.



Nestorianism was mine.

Nestorious never taught that heresy. He was Orthodox.

That's a defensible position, but you can hardly just state it as fact.

The problem is Cyril's supporters suppressed much of what Nestorious actually thought. If anything the Roman Catholics have a problem because they hold Mary as a co-mediator with Jesus. Acts 4:12 and Romans 10:9-10 blow that all the way to kingdom come.

Mediatrix and Co-Redemptrix aren't quite the same concept. Co-Redemptrix is difficult to square with the verses you cite, yeah, and there's a good reason why it isn't dogma.

The alleged problems with Nestorius's teachings went beyond Mariology anyway. His rejection of the Theotokos title was the crux of a fundamentally Christological issue.