4 (74) 2017 | Адам әлемі 95
Apostolic Church, and that is why the Armenian Apostolic Church had critical
attitude to the theology of Apollinarius. And since any solution of a dogmatic
nature is not separated from other spheres of spiritual life, it is quite natural
to consider that in Christological debates the anti-Apollinarian position of the
Armenian Church has arisen from the creed of the Church.
The Armenian Church not only has a balanced and impartial attitude towards
all Christological heresis but also has a comprehensively rejected and condemned
disposition toward them from the theological viewpoint. Moreover, such balanced
dogmatic approaches are typical not only to dogmatic collections of the Armenian
Church, but also to the writings of Church Fathers and the doctrinal solutions
of Universal Church. And it should be noted that this particular conservatism
is not subjective, but, being based on the Christian faith and the doctrine, is
characterized by absolutely positively from the the theological viewpoint.
Research Methodology
The research of the theological debates of the Church can be studied through
rational and irrational approaches. Rational approach is the historical analysis,
philosophical, ecclesiastical and religious studies methodology. The irrational
approach allows analyzing the faith-related issues which is mostly connected
to the acceptance of the incarnation of the Logos and soterological viewpoint
of Christian churches. The article mostly used the historical and philosophical-
theological methodology to analyze the gradual development of theological
thought concerning the unity of human and divine natures in Christ, as well
as the complex relationship of two natures from the viewpoint of incarnation.
The analysis of political factors is also important to understand the real causes
of theological debates between Eastern and Western churches which were
mostly conditioned by different political agendas of those churches and their
representatives.
Formation of Initial Stage of Christological Debates
The first trend of the monarchian movement of the III century is commonly
referred to as a dynamic or ebionite monarchianism, but the title «ebionite»
reveals only the outer aspect of the problem. In fact, the ebionites had only
exterior similarity to this branch of monarchianism, since representatives of
this direction of the monarchianism rejected the eternal divine nature of Jesus
Christ, nevertheless, accepted his glorious birth by Virgin Mary. The doctrine
of the ebionism does not accept Jesus Christ as a Logos, whereas the idea of
Jesus Christ as a Logos has an important and central place within the history of
this monarchianic trend. In the early church monarchianism appeared within the
historical arena in the form of various doctrines and currents of Jewish Christianity
Hovhannisyan H. Armenian Apostolic Church and the commencment of Christological...
96 Адам әлемі | 4 (74) 2017
and the ebionite worldview overestimated the human nature of Christ, on the
basis of which the movement’s representatives completely rejected the divine
nature of Christ, or, at best, considered him as “adopted God” [
Sv. Irenii Lionskiy
1996, ch. I-II]
.
At the initial stage of theological debates (mid of III century), the pre-Nicean
doctrine of Christ-Logos was formed, which has almost no difference from the
discussed heterodoxies by its doctrinal features.
The pre-Christian philosophical understanding of «Logos» inevitably leads
to the idea of mediation: Logos is lower than God but highly exalted by all
creatures. This feature became the basis of Logos’ vision of the mediator of God
and of the creatures.
At the end of the II-III centuries in the Gnostic systems, under the influence
of Platonism, Aristotelianism and the ideological perceptions of Docetism were
completed, in which the divine and human nature were separated in the person of
Christ (Basilides) or human nature was characterized as «alienated» (Valentino)
[
Ivantsov-Platonov 1877, pp. 18-44
].
During the monarchial controversies of the second half of the III century
the Christological problems became more rational-conceptual. Although the
issues discussed in the theological doctrines were closely interconnected with
Trinitarian perceptions, it was evident that they had relative autonomy [
Baur
1843, pp. 86-113
]. Considering all these facts the German theologian A. Harnack
writes: „The deity of Christ was only a preparatory stage for the union of divinity
and humanity in the person of Christ. The whole dogmatic thought concentrated
on this issue.“ [Harnak 2001, p. 296). And it should be noted that this tendency
was a great danger, as the oppositionist doctrines also got a dogmatic nature.
By the formation of Christianity a completely new understanding of Logos
came forward, according to which Logos is the perfect revelation of God‘s
essence – the eternal image of God. John‘s gospel clearly points out that „In the
beginning was the God, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God“ (John
1: 1-2). However, the Christian perception of the Logos also had its „theoretical
opponents“ – the heterodoxies. If the doctrines of aloges and gnostics on the
Logos were overcome on the level of apologists, then the problem was quite
different under the monarchianic understanding of Logos.
The dynamist monarchian Paul of Samosata considered the Logos (equally
and the Holy Spirit) as „impersonal power of the united and indivisible God“.
In this way, he rejected not only the Trinity, but also doctrine of incarnation of
Jesus Christ. He separated the „Logos of the Divine Essence“ from „human-
Jesus gifted the highest virtue“ and developed the doctrine that „the Logos is the
wisdom of God the Father,“ and the human Jesus Christ was associated with the
Logos by Divine will only through „united action“ [Epiphanii, 1864 , col. 77].
Modalist monarchianist Sabellius insisted that „Logos is the Son, but at the
same time the Father“ (in other words Logos is presented as a combination). On
Религиоведческие и исламоведческие исследования
Достарыңызбен бөлісу: |
