And it has been said that the dogma was proclaimed, when it was proclaimed, because it affirmed the divinity of Christ at a time when liberal Protestantism--followed within a generation or two by Catholic modernists--were rejecting it and the whole mindset of the early councils, as Greek essentialsm.
“And it has been said that the dogma was proclaimed, when it was proclaimed, because it affirmed the divinity of Christ at a time when liberal Protestantism—followed within a generation or two by Catholic modernists—were rejecting it and the whole mindset of the early councils, as Greek essentialsm.”
No kidding! I never knew that, but I will agree that it certainly might tend to reinforce exactly that. I doubt any Eastern Christian could, at least since Ephesus (where we condemned poor old Pelagius btw), doubt the divinity of Christ.You understand that such a thing could only happen in the West, where the idea of some sort of sissy, wimp Christ seems to have taken root as opposed to the Eastern concept of the Pantokrator! :)But tell me, what was seen as deficient about Ephesus? I feel constrained to say that messing around with what the Ecumenical Councils proclaimed has seldom turned out good for the West (filioque, for example).