Nestorius of Constantinople

Abstract

The understanding of how Nestorius’ career and teachings reveals much about how Christian orthodoxy was created in the conciliar epoch, how the names of individual “Fathers” came, very imperfectly, to denominate theological positions, and how even debates about the natures of Christ still resonate today. The anti-Chalcedonian sources show, unsurprisingly, no particularly nuanced understanding of Nestorius' work, although Severus of Antioch at least cited him and preserved fragments not known from elsewhere. The Chalcedonian sources had little or no reason to dwell on the details of Nestorius’ case. The modern, western reception of Nestorius begins with Martin Luther's work on Nestorius and Eutyches, which, surprisingly, upheld the traditional case against him and criticizes his failure to appreciate the so-called communicatio idiomatum. The expanded corpus of Nestorius’ writings available to western scholarship in the twentieth century provided the grounds for a rapprochement with the Church of the East.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.