The Council of Chalcedon confessed Christ in two natures; the churches of Egypt and Syria heard in that formula a betrayal of Cyril of Alexandria and refused the council, and the imperial attempts to enforce it turned a quarrel of words into the oldest standing division of Christianity.
The parties
- The imperial church of Constantinople and Rome, defenders of the Definition
- The churches of Egypt and Syria, defenders of Cyril's one-nature formula
What was disputed
Christology: how the one Christ is confessed, in two natures or in one incarnate nature of God the Word.
Causes: doctrinal linguistic political
Key documents
- The Chalcedonian Definition (451)
- Cyril of Alexandria, On the Unity of Christ
What it produced
Resolution attempts
- The Henotikon of Zeno (482), an imperial attempt at reunion that failed
- The agreed Christological statements of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox dialogues (1989-1990), which found the ancient quarrel largely terminological
How each side understands it
The Oriental Orthodox hold that they never denied Christ's full humanity; the Chalcedonian side holds that it never divided Christ into two persons. Each side reads the other's formula through its own saints, and the readings differ.
Sources
Primary
- The Acts of the Council of Chalcedon (451).
Secondary
- V. C. Samuel, The Council of Chalcedon Re-Examined (1977).