No cover image. Read preview. Excerpt The present volume has no need to offer any lengthy biographical notice on St. Common types of primary sources include works of literature, historical documents, original philosophical writings, and religious texts. Read preview Overview. Anglican Theological Review, Vol.
See a Problem?
Outside of it there is no other God at all, neither inside of it is there a man that hath been made. It diminisheth not in its Person, neither doth it add thereunto. In it, which hath existed for ever, there never began [to exist] a Person, and there doth not pass away therefrom a Person who hath come to an end. Now therefore, one of the Persons of this Trinity came down by the mystery of depletion, and of the Holy Virgin became man.
Inasmuch as He was God, His nature was not changed in its being, and no addition to His Person took place, but He remained the Only-begotten, even after He had taken upon himself a body.
Freedom of religion - Wikipedia
For the act of coming into being did not introduce into the Only-begotten another first-born, but shewed that the firstborn of the Virgin was the Only-begotten of the Father; for He, Who was the Only-begotten through His birth from the Eternal, Himself became the firstborn by His birth of the Virgin, And since God the Word, Who is of the Virgin, is the Only-begotten, and since because He became man of the Virgin He is the firstborn, the Only-begotten is the firstborn, and the firstborn is the Only-begotten. And being Himself God, He is Son of God [and] Son of man; and Son of man [and Son of] God; Son of the Eternal [and] Son of the Virgin; Son of the Virgin [and] Son of the Eternal; the concealed revealed, and the revealed concealed; a spiritual corporeal Being, and a corporeal spiritual Being; a finite infinity; Who was upon the throne and was in the womb; Who was in the womb and was upon the throne; Son of God Son of man; Son of man Son of God; the visible invisible; the concealed xxxiii and invisible visible; the passible impassible; the impassible passible ; the dead living, and the living dead ; Who being in heaven was in Sheol, and Who being in Sheol was in heaven.
The Only-begotten is One Who hath no number among those who belong to heaven or among those who belong to earth, for the attributes of the Only-begotten belong to the Only-begotten, and not unto various others, as those who are in error say. For do not exalted things belong to the exalted? But to the exalted one who hath been abased belong lowly things; and of the God Who became man we must believe human things; of the hidden One who became revealed must we believe all contemptible things ; and to the infinite God Who of His own will became mortal man, and Who yet remained immortal God in His nature, belong suffering and death.
We anathematize the Council of Chalcedon 3 xxxiv because it anathematized the true Council 4 of three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers. We anathematize the Council of Chalcedon because it hath acted hypocritically, and because it hath exceeded all men in wickednessthe ancients, those who come next, and those who have been in these last days; the ancients with Cyril 5 in Ephesus, those who come next with Dioscorus 6 in Ephesus, 7 and those who have been in these last days in Chalcedon.
And we anathematize it also because it testified concerning itself and said that the canon of the Fathers commanded that anathema should be laid upon everyone who composed another faith. And we anathematize the Council of Chalcedon also because it anathematized Nestorius, although agreeing with him and with his doctrine. And we anathematize the Council of Chalcedon also because it received Leo 8 the wicked, of Rome, and because it anathematized Dioscorus the confessor of the orthodox faith, who had anathematized Leo the wicked, 9 and would not agree with him.
And we anathematize the Council of Chalcedon also because it received Ibas 10 and Theodoret 11 as orthodox.
And we anathematize the Council of Chalcedon also because it renewed the wicked tract and called it the true belief. And we anathematize the Council of Chalcedon also because it distinguisheth in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God, natures, and attributes, and functions, and celestial and terrestrial qualities, and Divine and human xxxvi properties. And it considereth Him [to be] Two, and it introduceth an idea of Four, and it worshippeth an ordinary man, and in every particular it findeth Him to be a creature, even as do the Jews and heathen, and it agreeth with the wicked Nestorius who is accursed and doomed to perdition.
For all these and for many other similar reasons we have anathematized and we will [always] anathematize the Council of Chalcedon. And it shall be anathematized, and heaven, and earth, and all the Church which hath been redeemed by the Blood and Resurrection of God shall say X. Now the wicked Council of Chalcedon met in the days of the heathen Emperor Marcian, in the year seven hundred and sixty-three A.
To those who "divide our Lord" Philoxenus propounded the ten following questions 12 If it be a demonstrable thing that Christ hath two natures, to which of them did the Virgin give birth? If the Son Who was born of the Virgin was called 'Emmanuel', which of the two natures carried off that name?source link
Discourses against Judaizing Christians
If two natures be defined in Christ, which of the two did the Magi worship? Saint Paul said, 'The weakness of God is stronger than men', and if Christ hath two natures what , weakness did God acquire? If the Cross of our Redeemer be the cleansing of our sins, and our redemption from deaththat is, if we ascribe these things to the human nature of Christhow can Isaiah be right in saying, 'Not a messenger, and not an angel, but the Lord Himself hath redeemed us'?
When God said, 'This is My beloved Son', which nature did He indicate as being that upon which it is right for us to call? When Christ took Peter, and James, and John up into a mountain and was transfigured before their eyes, which nature appeared in this glory?
Table of Contents
When the only son of the widow died and was taken to burial, which nature of Christ raised him to life again? If He Who was crucified in the days of Pontius Pilate is to be worshipped rightly, not only by us, but also by the celestial hosts, doth He not receive this worship as God?
- Liquid Surfaces and Interfaces.
- A Simple Guide to The Skin and Its Function (What You Need To Cover and Protect Your Body) (A Simple Guide to Medical Conditions)!
- Naked Truth (Sun, Sea and Submission Series, Book Three).
- A Discourse on the Transient and Permanent in Christianity by Theodore Parker?
- The Natural Menopause Solution: Expert Advice for Melting Stubborn Midlife Pounds, Reducing Hot Flashes, and Getting Relief from Menopause Symptoms.
- Far in the Wilds;
And of his uncompromising opposition to Nestorius and his followers the following brief extracts from a short tract of Philoxenus supply evidence. We should anathematize Nestorius, and his doctrine, and his books, and everything which hath been composed by him, and every person who hath been or is of his opinions. We should anathematize the book of the heretics his children, and those who hold the same opinion as Nestorius and Diodorus 14 who became Bishop of Tarsus. Now Diodorus was originally a Macedonian, 15 but when he had embraced the true faith and had come into the orthodox Church, he fell into the heresy of Paul of Samosata And we should anathematize Diodorus who became a disciple of this man, and also Theodoret who became Bishop of Cyrrhus.
We should accept the Henoticon which expelled all the additions and novelties which arose against the faith of the three hundred and eighteen and of the one hundred and fifty Fathers We should accept the Twelve Chapters which Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria, wrote against all the blasphemies of Nestorius, and which are also xxxix written in the Henoticon; and we should anathematize every one who agreeth with them, and also every solution of them [written by] the heretics. We should not mingle with heretics by any manner of means, by communion, or by the desire for salutation, or by the gifts which the churches are wont to make to each other, until we have truly anathematized by the Book all their doctrine, and all the works which have been made by man thereupon In another tract 19 , which is divided into twenty short chapters, Philoxenus summarizes his objections to the Nestorian doctrines, the following being the chief points of dispute If His own flesh, [that is] the Word, is not like unto all [other] created things, but it existeth in its own Person, then it must exist in its own Nature; and if in its own Nature, no other natural thing can be reckoned [with] His flesh, but the Nature of the Word which is incarnate is One.
If two natures of Christ exist, a Divine Nature, and a human nature, there should not be one worship for both. For if the human nature be accounted to be outside the Divine Nature, when thou worshippest the Divine Nature thou dost not worship the human nature, and if thou dost not worship it, it must be another thing, and if it be another thing it must be a created thing. If Christ be two natures then both must be xli composite. And if composite, then simple ; and if simple, then incarnate; and if incarnate, then one is in-carnate, and the other simple. What then are they?
If the Word, having become incarnate, be two Natures, the Word having become incarnate must also be two Persons; but if the Person of the incarnate Word be One, the Nature of the incarnate Word must also be One, because the Person of the Word is not inferior to His Nature, for as the Nature of the Word is Godhead, even so also is the Person of the Word Godhead.
If there be a Nature Who hath individual attributes, which the Person thereof hath not, or if there be a Person Who hath individual attributes, which His Nature hath not, then the attributes of the Nature belong to His Person, and the attributes of the Person belong to His Nature. If a Person existed Whose attributes did not belong to His nature, then His Nature could not exist; and again if a Nature existed Whose attributes did not belong to His Person, then His Person could not exist.
If the attributes of the Person belong to the Nature, and the attributes of the Nature belong to the Person thereof, how canst thou say that Christ is two natures? If thou sayest that Christ is two natures, a Divine Nature, and a human Nature, and One Person, and thou attributest to the Divine Person the attributes of the Divine Nature and the attributes of the human nature, how canst thou attribute terrestrial and celestial qualities to the Divine Person and yet put them away from the Divine Nature?
Is the Divine Person inferior to its Divine xlii Nature?