YouTube Transcript:
Imperial Christianity II

Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.

Video Transcript

Available languages:

View:

after the end of Christian persecution

and its Newfound Imperial recognition by

Constantine the institutional Christian

Church underwent profound

Transformations as we've seen some of

this transition came from the Imperial

government's favoring Christianity by

building places of worship and using

Bishops as Imperial advisors

but another component of the transition

was the desire for establishing

doctrinal Unity across the whole of the

faith often at the behest of the

Emperors themselves

but such a task was easier said than

done as the pre-imperial age of

Christianity had allowed for a wide

range of beliefs and Theological

positions in the name of surviving persecution

persecution

in this lecture we'll discuss the

evolution of Imperial Christianity and

the christological controversies of the

fourth and 5th centuries we'll take a

closer look at the theological

controversy of arianism and its

resolution at the Council of nicaea then

we'll turn our attention to the issues

of christology that provoked the later

councils of Ephesus and calcidin and how

they address the views put forward by

people like nestorius of constance Noble

and how they articulated a new complex

theology for the Christian faith

in the wake of the edicts of cerdica and

thessalonica Christians enjoyed a new

era free of persecution and gradually

favored status

broadly speaking most Christians agreed

that Jesus was the promised Messiah that

he died as a sacrificial atonement for

sin and that he was resurrected to

provide Believers with a future life in heaven

heaven

they baptized in the name of the father

and the Son and the Holy Spirit but

there were significant disagreements

about what exactly the father Son and

Holy Spirit were and how they related to

one another

was Jesus human was he Divine was he

both and if both how did that work how

could one be both human and divine

without his divinity being lessened or

diminished or without his Humanity being overwhelmed

overwhelmed

moreover if he was divine was Jesus

always that way was he a human who was

elevated to Divinity a position known as adoptionism

adoptionism

or was he a pre-existing being who was

given a physical body meaning he was incarnated

incarnated

there was no overarching Authority in

the Christian church nor before

Constantine any way of enforcing a

doctrinal theological uniformity on a

significant part of the Christian church

when early Christian teachers departed

from widely accepted beliefs it was said

that they became a sect or group the

Latin word for which is hirasis from

which we get the word heresy or that

they became heterodox those of different

belief rather than Orthodox meaning

right belief

but when such teachers like valentius or

montanus were shunned it was by specific

Bishops and congregations no Bishop

could exclude them from the whole of the

Christian Community they just didn't

have that level of authority

by the time of Constantine some of those

Bishops namely the five Patriarchs of

Rome Antioch Alexandria Jerusalem and

after it was constructed Constantinople

were beginning to claim a greater level

of authority but they also competed with

one another in such claims

two of the Eastern patriarchates Antioch

and Alexandria were particularly

Divergent in their theological positions

Antioch in Syria lay on the orantis

river in a fertile part of the river

valley it was at Antioch that followers

of Jesus were first called Christians

according to the book of Acts

the Bishops of Antioch such as Ignatius

who wrote to other Christian churches to

counsel them on their beliefs and

practices tinted toward a specific

theological position one which

emphasized Jesus's Humanity as the word

of God made man or in Greek the logos anthropos

anthropos

therefore some theologians who came out

of the entire Keen tradition tended

toward the position of adoptionism

but even here there was a spectrum in

its most simple form adoptionism just

emphasized that Jesus was mostly human

but in a more extreme version it

questioned whether Jesus before his

death was at all Divine arguing that

Divinity was something conferred or

bestowed on him

by contrast the theological tradition of

Alexandria in Egypt took a very

different position

Alexandria which had been founded by and

named for Alexander the Great developed

a Christian Community early on as it was

a major trade and intellectual Center

it was dominated by philosophical

traditions like platonism which

emphasized the spiritual over the

physical or empirical

thus Alexandria stressed Jesus's

Divinity that he was the logos sarks the

word made flesh or the incarnated word

the supporters here pointed to the

beginning of the Gospel of John which

declares that the word of God became flesh

flesh

again there was a spectrum one which

ranged from Simply acknowledging that

the Divine was given a human body to in

its extreme form suggesting that even if

he was incarnated in flesh that Jesus's

human nature was virtually swallowed up

or overwhelmed by his divine nature

an example of this was apolinaris of

laodicea who held that it was the death

of Jesus as a Divine that saved humanity

and so his divine nature the word

effectively replaced his human nature

others argued that like a drop of water

falling in the ocean his Humanity could

not help but be overwhelmed by his divinity

divinity

this latter position is known as

monophysicism that Jesus had one foosis

one substance or Essence

but again these were just two of the

most significant theological schools and

there was no universality or uniformity

to Christian belief

after his defeat of likenius as we've

noted Constantine sought to be a leader

of not just the Empire but also to

exercise a certain amount of authority

over the newly legal Christian Church

this is a practice known as Cesaro

papism to be both head of state and head

of religion

in particular Constantine was responding

to the widespread and popular teachings

of Arius a priest and theologian of

Alexandria in Egypt who had studied at

Antioch and tended toward more

adoptionist positions writing many

theological works and letters

Arius sometime between 315 and 320 had

openly begun to espouse The View that

Jesus was in essence a created being his

status as the Son of God was one that

was bestowed on him because Arius argued

how else could monotheism the belief

that God is singular be preserved

while Christ is worthy of praise and

worship he could not be God properly but

must be subordinate in some way

arguing this areas pointed to various

passages in the gospels which emphasized

how limited Jesus was and how he notes

his own subordination to God the Father

in 318 Alexander the bishop of

Alexandria convened a local Council of

Bishops known as a synod to discuss

arius's teachings and ultimately condemn them

them

but such a condemnation was not binding

on the whole Christian Community and

there were by this point a number of

Bishops who were sympathetic to arius's views

views

thus in 325 the year after defeating

like kenius Constantine called the first

ecumenical council of the entire

Christian Church at nicaea a town in

Asia Minor near the new capital of Constantinople

Constantinople

at the council as we've seen there was

vigorous debate about the Aryan position

generally speaking Arius and those who

agreed with him argued that Jesus was

homoi usios that his substance usios was

like homoyos God the contrary position

however argued that Jesus was homo usios

that he was the same homo substance

after vigorous debate the majority of

the council chose to adopt and issue a

statement of belief espousing the homo

usion position that Jesus was of the

same substance as God the Father

and indeed the Creed that nicaea issued

specifically targeted Arius in all but name

name

we believe in one God a declaration of

monotheism the Father Almighty maker of

heaven of all things visible and

invisible and in one Lord Jesus Christ

the son of God begotten of the Father

the only begotten that is of the essence

of the Father God of God light of light

very God of very God begotten not made

being of one substance with the father

homo usios by whom all things were made

both in heaven and on Earth who for us

men and our Salvation came down was

incarnate and was made man he suffered

and on the third day he rose again

ascended into heaven from thence he

shall come to judge the quick meaning

the living and the dead and in the Holy

Spirit notice that they're just saying

and we believe in the Holy Spirit there

is no articulation of what exactly that is

but to those who say there was a time

when he Jesus was not and he was not

before he was made and he was made out

of nothing or he is made of another

substance or Essence or the Son of God

is created or changeable or alterable

they meaning the Aryans or followers of

Arius are condemned by the Holy Catholic

meaning Universal and Apostolic Church

with this statement of belief though

nicaea didn't solve all controversies

and while this Creed bore Imperial

support and thus could be more easily

imposed on the whole empire arianism

still continued

even Constantine himself backed off of

his support of the Nicene formulation

and in 328 he allowed clergy who had

sided with Arius to return from exile

his own son constantius II was a

supporter of Aryans and even exiled one

of arius's most Avid critics athanasius

of Alexandria

but there's also a sense in which the

Nicene position created even more

problems it's one thing to Simply assert

that Christ the son has the same

substance as the father but how did that work

work

and is substance the same thing as nature

nature

with the accession of theodosius the

first the Nicene position gained a

strong supporter as we previously noted

theodosius issued the edict of

thessalonica which in addition to making

Christianity the only illicit religion

of the Empire established the Nicene

position as the imperially supported one

branding anyone who taught otherwise as

foolish Mad Men branded with the

ignominious name of Heretics who

deserved to suffer the chastisement of

the Divine condemnation and the

punishment of Imperial Authority

the edict also appealed to and

recognized the teachings of the Bishops

of Rome and Alexandria as Arbiters of

this Orthodoxy

in 381 the year after issuing the edict

theodosius convened a new ecumenical

council at Constantinople

this Council reaffirmed the Nicene

theology but issued a revised Creed with

additions about the person of the Holy

Spirit and removing many of the

references to arianism

these new editions about the Holy Spirit

though indicate a new focus of concern

both the gospels and the book of Acts

speak of the spirit of God or the Holy

Spirit but are quite vague in defining

what it is

the Council of Constantinople seemed to

indicate that it was worth the same

dignity as the father and the son but

did not clearly Define their relationship

relationship

both this Council and the next

ecumenical council the Council of

Ephesus in 431 relied heavily on the

writings of several prominent

theologians known as the cappadocian

fathers after the region of Central Asia

Minor from which they originated

these are basil of caesarea his brother

Gregory of Nissa and their close friend

Gregory of nazianas

theologically these authors contended

that ultimately any human attempt to

conceptualize the Divine was at best an

analogy as human languages simply

insufficient to capture the totality of God

God

therefore in accepting Jesus as both

human and divine language is

insufficient to explain this level of existence

existence

moreover they argued the Father the Son

and now the Holy Spirit should be

considered distinct persons but not

distinct beings

this Doctrine is known as the doctrine

of the Trinity a single God in three persons

persons

finally they argued that the substance

shared by the three persons of the

Trinity was a nature rather than a

tangible object

while the Creed of Constantinople became

widely accepted throughout the church

new Representatives attended from the

Western half of the Empire and even if

those that did attend 36 withdrew from

the council

but as with nicaea the positions of

Constantinople created further questions

or doctrines that needed clarification

while there was General acceptance of

Jesus's divine nature how did that

relate to his Humanity

when Jesus died on the cross what died

God certainly could not die so was it

just his human body and if so what

happened to his human nature

the docetist and non-6 you'll recall had

argued that because this was such an

impossibility Jesus's Humanity was

basically an illusion he didn't die but

only seemed to die

such unwillingness to allow for the view

that God could die was also what gave

birth to the adoptionist view of places

like Antioch

but where did these Natures come from

especially Jesus's human nature was it

given to him at Birth

how could Jesus if he were God have

always had a human nature even before

Humanity was created

here again there was a spectrum of

belief but let's highlight two of the

most significant figures in this debate

Cyril Bishop of Alexandria and his

contemporary and opponent nestorius

Bishop of Constantinople

Cyril in his writings verged on

monophysicism emphasizing The

Singularity of Jesus as both human and divine

divine

he and people like him thus referred to

Jesus's mother the Virgin Mary as giving

birth to a being that was divine and

accorded her the title of theotokos

Mother of God

nestorius on the other hand while not

contesting either the humanity nor the

Divinity of Jesus emphasized the

separation of the two which were

distinct and held together in a union he

called the prosupon or person of Christ

for notorious Mary gave birth to only

the human part of Jesus she as a human

couldn't have possibly given birth to

the Divine part of Jesus and therefore

should be called Cristo tokos mother of

Christ or anthropotokos mother of man

meaning the human part of Jesus

once again an ecumenical council was

called by the emperor theodosius II at

Ephesus in 431.

this Council ultimately sided with Cyril

asserting that Jesus had two full

Natures human and divine which were

never blurred or confused he was not

some sort of hybrid but both fully human

and fully God held together in a union

known as the hypostatic Union in

contrast to nistorius's prosopic Union

which emphasized their separation

now if this sounds confusing or like a

very subtle distinction

well it is but subtle though the

distinction is it's also important

because how one views the relationship

of Jesus's humanity and Divinity

indicates or determines who one thinks

was in charge of Jesus during the three

decades of his human life

further elaboration on the Orthodox

position came 20 years later when the

emperor marcian convened the Council of

calcedon a town just across the

Bosphorus from Constantinople in the

fall of 451 CE

several years prior the bishop of Rome

Leo the first had written a letter which

articulated his position that Christ

possessed to Nature's well-being one person

person

after again much debate the council

affirmed the nature of Jesus as a kind

of paradoxical mystery

Jesus was one in the same son the

self-same perfect in Godhead the

self-same perfect in manhood truly God

and truly man the self-same of a

rational soul and body co-essential with

the father according to the godhead the

self-same co-essential with us according

to the manhood Like Us in all things sin

apart before the ages begotten of the

father as to the godhead but in the last

days the self-same for us and for our

Salvation born of Mary the Virgin

theotokos as to the manhood

one in the same Christ son Lord only

begotten acknowledged in two Natures

unconfusedly unchangeably indivisibly

inseparably the difference of the nature

is being in no way removed because of

the Union but rather the properties of

each nature being preserved and both

concurring into one person and one

hypostasis not as though he was parted

or divided into two persons but one in

the self-same son and only begotten God

word Lord Jesus Christ

from his conception Jesus was both fully

human and divine in a union that was a

Divine mystery

so what's the point or effect of these

theological controversies

for one they were often profoundly

political with different Emperors

favoring positions on all sides of these debates

debates

moreover The ecumenical councils by

their very nature were in the process of

creating Orthodoxy the emphasis that it

was just as important to believe the

right things as it was to practice the

right way

they also represent an important and

vital step of articulating the nuts and

bolts of Christian doctrine especially

one is complicated as asserting that

Jesus was both fully human and fully divine

divine

but in placing this emphasis on right

believe and with those Orthodox

positions becoming ever more complex and

nuanced it meant that the realm of

Christian theology became increasingly

removed from the everyday life of many Christians

Christians

the cappadusian father Gregory of Nissa

wrote that during this period of

christological controversies everywhere

in the public squares at Crossroads on

the streets and Lanes people would stop

you and discourse at random about the

Trinity if you asked something of a

money changer he would begin discussing

the question of the begotten and the

unbegotten if you questioned a baker

about the price of bread he would answer

that the father is greater and the son

is subordinate to him if he went to take

a bath the bath attendant would tell you

that in his opinion the sun simply comes

from nothing

but the reality was that in the long run

theology became the purview of an

educated Christian Elite

it's also important to note the wide

variety and spectrum of possible belief

even as late as the 5th Century

despite the proclamations of various

councils there wasn't a singular

Christianity but many shades of belief

and even practice

nor did the condemnation of a council

mean that suddenly all other opinions disappeared

disappeared

Aryan historian and monophysite

theologies lingered for a long time

often outside the Roman Empire

the monophysite position was

considerably popular and remained in the

Eastern Mediterranean for much of the

Early Middle Ages while Arius was in

Exile at the time of the Council of

nicaea Christian missionaries who

espoused his views were frequently

responsible for the conversion of

Germanic tribes north of the Danube border

border

when those groups like the Goths

migrated into the Roman Empire they were

already Christian but followed the Aryan tradition

tradition

likewise nestorian and nestorian-leaning

Christian churches did not disappear

after the condemnation of his views at

the councils of Ephesus and calcedon

indeed the so-called historians or the

Church of the East largely agreed with

most other points of Christian doctrine

and practice and this tradition became

the dominant mode of Christianity in the

sasanian Persian Empire

it was also the main form of

Christianity that first began to spread

into Central Asia and by the period of

the Tang Dynasty Christian missionaries

from this tradition established

themselves in China

when Western European missionaries

arrived at the court of the Mongol khans

in the 13th century to try and convert

them to Christianity they found

Christians from the Eastern churches

already present at the Mongol Court foreign

Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps

Paste YouTube URL

Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.

Add to Chrome — Free

Works with YouTube, Coursera, Udemy and more educational platforms

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YouTube Transcript:Imperial Christianity II

Video Transcript

Paste YouTube URL

Transcript Extraction Form

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube Transcript:
Imperial Christianity II