
The Glory of Kings: A Festschrift for James B. Jordan

Fyodor Dostoevsky
(Christian Encounters Series)

Athanasius
(Foundations of Theological Exegesis and Christian Spirituality)

The Four: A Survey of the Gospels

Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom

From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John

Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture

1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary

The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter

A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons

Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature

Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen

The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism

A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel

From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution

Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy

Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper

A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament

Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature

Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays

Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life

The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church
If the populace thinks at all about Antiochene and Alexandrian theology, then the popular view is that the Antiochenes are the more earthy of the two, the school more interested in and grounded in the human life of the man Jesus. In a 2008 essay in St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, Wheaton’s George Kalantzis contests this view. On the contrary, he says, the Antiochenes were the metaphysicians; the Alexandrians, especially Cyril, started from the gospel.
Kalantzis writes: “Divine transcendence, immutability, and impassibility are . . . essential in understanding the Antiochene concept of the Incarnation.” Alexandrians of course shared these assumptions, but they played a controlling role in Antiochene Christology that they did not in Alexandrian. The question Antiochenes asked was a metaphycial one: How can an impassible and immutable God take on humanity. To preserve the divine attributes, they posited a “dual subjectivity and predication” that extended to “a division of the dominical sayings.” Thus, “This division protected divine transcendence, and, at the same time, safeguarded the fullness of the ‘assumed man’ in the union. The problem it created, of course, was that such language was susceptible to the accusation it advocated ‘two sons’ – a charge they would deny strenuously.”
Kalantzis notes the irony that “Cyril, coming from the ‘allegorical school’ of Alexandria . . . would be more faithful to the Scriptural narrative of the Incarnation than his interlocutors in Antioch. . . . Unlike his counterparts in the East, Cyril was far less interested in the impassibility of God per se than he was with the narrative of the incarnation. . . . For Cyril what was most important was to protect the integrity of the Scriptural narrative itself – the narrative within which salvation occurs – not God’s transcendence or impassibility.”
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, February 23, 2012 at 3:48 pm
Permission is given to use material on this site, provided the source is cited, blog entries are republished in full, and the author is notified in advance.