The Council of Chalcedon: Key Events and Incidents (451 AD)

Published on 31 December 2025 at 06:07

The Council of Chalcedon: Key Events and Incidents (451 AD)

  • Emperor Marcian convened the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD to resolve the theological chaos left by the "Robber Synod" of 449 and to establish a unified Christology that would stabilise the Eastern Empire.
  • The Council convened on October 4, 451 AD, at the Church of St Euphemia, located directly across the Bosphorus from Constantinople.
  • The assembly was attended by approximately 350 to 600 bishops, almost all from the East, along with three representatives from Pope Leo I of Rome; over 520 bishops were present for key sessions.
  • At the beginning of the first session, the Roman legates demanded that Patriarch Dioscorus of Alexandria be excluded from his seat among the bishops.
  • Dioscorus was ordered to sit in the centre of the room as an accused party.
  • The proceedings were often chaotic, with bishops frequently shouting at one another.
  • When the minutes of the previous "Robber Synod" of Ephesus II (449 AD) were read, many bishops who had participated in that earlier gathering confessed their errors and asked for pardon.
  • Dioscorus was served with three formal citations to appear before the council but refused to do so.
  • Because of this contumacy and his actions at the previous council, the assembly formally deposed and excommunicated him; he was later exiled to Gangra.
  • Historian V.C. Samuel notes in The Council of Chalcedon Re-Examined that Dioscorus was not deposed for heresy—he explicitly condemned Eutyches' view that Christ's flesh was different from ours—but for procedural refusal to appear before the council.
  • A pivotal moment occurred when Leo’s Tome was read to the assembly; the bishops famously shouted, "St Peter has spoken through Leo!" or "Peter has spoken through Leo!"
  • The assembly restored Theodoret of Cyrus and Ibas of Edessa to their offices.
  • This rehabilitation was done only after the council forced them to publicly anathematise (condemn) Nestorius.
  • Toward the end of the council, the bishops passed a rule known as Canon 28, which granted the see of Constantinople equal status and privileges to Rome.
  • The Roman legates were not present for this vote and later protested its inclusion, arguing that Rome's primacy was based on its apostolic foundation rather than its political status as the "New Rome".
  • Emperor Marcian and Empress Pulcheria attended the sixth session in person.
  • The bishops hailed them as the "New Constantine" and the "New Helena" for their roles in unifying the church.
  • Following the council's conclusion, an attempt to enforce the decision in Egypt led to massive rioting in Alexandria.
  • Thousands of people were reportedly killed in the ensuing struggle between imperial troops and the local population who remained loyal to Dioscorus.
  • The non-Chalcedonian population of Egypt refused to accept the new "Melkite" (Imperial) bishop appointed by Constantinople between 451 and 457 AD.
  • In 457 AD, the imperial bishop Proterius was mobbed and killed in Alexandria; the schism became violent and permanent.

The Core Christological Dispute

  • The controversy centred on how to describe Christ after the Incarnation.
  • The Chalcedonian Definition affirmed Christ exists "in two natures" (en dyo physesin); even after the union of God and Man, the two natures remain distinct—divinity does not stop being divinity, and humanity does not stop being humanity.
  • The final "Definition" used four famous adverbs—without confusion, without change, without division, and without separation—to describe how the two natures coexist in the single person (hypostasis) of Christ.
  • The Coptic/Alexandrian position insisted Christ exists "from two natures" (ek dyo physeon); once the union happens, one can no longer speak of "two", just as a human being is not described as "two natures" (body and soul) but as one living person.
  • To speak of "two" after the union implies a separation.

Western Perspective (Rome and Constantinople)

  • The primary authority for the council was Pope Leo I’s "Tome", a doctrinal letter which insisted that Christ is one person existing "in two natures" (human and divine), with each nature retaining its own properties without being changed or confused.
  • Leo argued that for salvation to work, Christ must be fully God (to pay the infinite price for sin) and fully man (to actually die).
  • If the natures were mixed into a new "third" thing, Christ would be neither truly God nor truly man, and salvation would fail.
  • Leo emphasised distinct operations: even in the one person of Christ, the natures retain their distinct properties.
  • He famously wrote, "The one [nature] sparkles with miracles; the other succumbs to injuries." (Tome of Leo, Section 4)
  • Example: As God, he raised Lazarus; as Man, he wept for him.
  • The West reacted against the heresy of Eutyches, who claimed Christ’s humanity was "swallowed up" by his divinity like a drop of vinegar in the ocean.
  • The "Two Natures" formula served as a hard boundary to ensure no one believed Christ’s humanity had disappeared.
  • The council was seen as a triumph of orthodoxy that successfully excluded Eutyches' Monophysitism.

Coptic/Oriental Orthodox Perspective (See of Alexandria)

  • The Oriental Orthodox perspective, represented largely by the Egyptian and Syrian delegates, viewed the phrase "in two natures" as a betrayal of the theology of St Cyril of Alexandria, fearing it would lead to the Nestorian error of splitting Christ into two separate beings.
  • They adhered strictly to the formula of St Cyril, the hero of the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD.
  • Miaphysitism preferred the term "Mia Physis tou Theou Logou Sesarkomene" ("One Incarnate Nature of God the Word").
  • They distinguished this from Monophysitism (single nature); the divinity and humanity were united in a real, inseparable union "without mingling, without confusion, and without alteration."
  • To Alexandrian theologians, Pope Leo’s statement that "The one nature does this; the other does that" was blasphemous because natures do not act; persons act.
  • If one says "the humanity wept" and "the divinity raised the dead", Christ is split into two subjects.
  • Counter-Example: When a human walks, one does not say, "His body walks, but his soul thinks"; one says, "The man walks." Similarly, it was the one Christ who both wept and raised the dead.
  • The Coptic Church views Dioscorus as a confessor who refused to bow to political pressure, while the West saw him as a tyrant who supported heretics.
  • The council was procedurally unjust, deposing Dioscorus for administrative reasons while rehabilitating known supporters of Nestorius, such as Theodoret of Cyrus.
  • The council's focus on Greek and Latin technical terms (physis and hypostasis) failed to account for linguistic sensitivities of the East, leading to centuries of unnecessary labels of "heresy" between groups that essentially shared a similar faith.

Timeline Leading to and Following the Council

  • 431 AD: Council of Ephesus—St Cyril of Alexandria defeats Nestorius; the phrase "One Nature of the Word Incarnate" is established as orthodox.
  • 448 AD: Condemnation of Eutyches—A local synod in Constantinople condemns the monk Eutyches for saying Christ’s humanity was absorbed.
  • 449 AD: The "Robber Council" (Ephesus II)—Dioscorus presides; Eutyches is rehabilitated, and Flavian of Constantinople is deposed; Pope Leo calls this a "synod of robbers".
  • 450 AD: Imperial Change—Emperor Theodosius II (supporter of Alexandria) dies; Empress Pulcheria and Emperor Marcian (supporters of Rome) take the throne.
  • 451 AD: Council of Chalcedon—The Tome of Leo is accepted; the "Chalcedonian Definition" affirms "Two Natures".
  • 5th–7th Century: The Coptic Church exists as a parallel, often persecuted, hierarchy under the Byzantine Empire until the Arab Conquest (641 AD).

Overall Significance and Modern Reflection

  • The Council of Chalcedon marks the most significant Christological schism in Church history, a division that remains formally in place between the Catholic/Eastern Orthodox (Chalcedonian) churches and the Coptic/Oriental Orthodox (Non-Chalcedonian) churches.
  • While initially viewed as a debate over heresy, modern scholarship—specifically the work of theologians like V.C. Samuel—suggests this was largely a "semantic tragedy" where two sides used different terminology to defend the same divinity and humanity of Christ.
  • The result was a permanent schism, where the Coptic, Syrian, Armenian, and Ethiopian churches became autonomous "Non-Chalcedonian" bodies, viewing the imperial church as having compromised the apostolic faith for political unity with Rome.
  • Analogy: The Council of Chalcedon was like a marriage contract written in two different languages; the West focused on the legal distinction between the husband and wife to ensure both were treated as real individuals, while the Oriental Orthodox insisted that the contract only mattered if it described them as one single family unit, fearing that a legal focus on their "twoness" would eventually lead to a divorce.

References and Further Reading

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Chalcedon 

«   »

Add comment

Comments

There are no comments yet.