THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
doctrines connected with the Creed of Chalcedon is seen in the following commentaries on the confession of the Catholic faith found in all copies of their prayer-books used by the clergy and laity:
Wherefore, since we, in common with all other Orthodox Christians, confess the same God and the same Christ, it is most necessary to show what the Armenian Church
teaches concerning the chief articles of the
4. Armenian Christian faith, namely, of God, one in three
° persons, of the incarnation, person, office, and
Confession merits of Christ, with all other doctrines con-
of Faith. nected withthese. For from this may be seen
whether or not the Armenians teach, as they
have been charged continually by their opponents, the here-
sies of the Monophysites and of the Monothelites, who assert that in Christ there is only one nature and only one will.
I. We confess, and with our whole (most perfect) heart believe in, the Father, God (who is) not created, not begotten, but without beginning (who) also is begetter of the Son, and breather forth of the Holy Spirit.
II. We believe in the Word (of) God, (who is) not created, (but) begotten, and (who has his) beginning from the Father, before the worlds. Who is neither posterior nor less, but as the Father is Father, so also is the Son (truly) Son.
III. We believe in the Holy Spirit, (who is) not created (and) not of time; not begotten, but breathed forth from the Father, of the same essence with the Father, and of the same glory with the Son.
IV. We believe in the Holy Trinity, one nature, one Godhead—not three Gods but one God—one will, one kingdom, one sovereignty, maker of things visible and invisible.
V. We believe in a holy Church, a remission of sins, and a communion of saints.
VI. We believe (that) one of the three persons, the Word (of) God, begotten of the Father before the worlds, in time came into the Virgin Mary, the mother of God (Theotokos), took of her blood, and united it with his Godhead (divinity), dwelt patiently nine months in the womb of that pure Virgin, and was made (or became) perfect man, in spirit (or soul), and mind, and body; one person, one figure (or appearance), and united in one nature. God was made (or became) man, without change, without alteration; conception without seed, and generation without corruption. And as there is no beginning to his Godhead (divinity), so also is there no end to his humanity; for Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, and to-day, and even forever.
VII. We believe (that) our Lord Jesus Christ, having gone about on the earth, after thirty years, came to baptism; (that) the Father bare witness, ‘“‘This is my beloved Son,’’ and the Holy Spirit, in the likeness of a dove, came down (above him). (That) he was tempted of Satan and overcame him; preached the salvation of men, labored in the body, hungered and thirsted; and after that, of his own free will, came into (his) passion, was crucified, dead in the body, but alive in his Godhead (divinity). His body was laid in the grave, united with his Godhead (divinity), and in spirit he went down into Hades in his undivided Godhead (divinity), preached to the spirits, spoiled Hell (i.e., Hades) and set free the spirits. After three days, he arose from the dead, and appeared to the disciples.
VIII. We believe (that) our Lord Jesus Christ ascended to heaven in that same body, and sat at the right hand of God (the Father), and that he is to come (again) in the same body, and with the glory of the Father, to judge the living and the dead; that is also the resurrection of all men.
IX. We believe also in the retribution for works (done in the body); to the righteous, life everlasting, and to sinners, everlasting torments.
The Armenian Church teaches constantly that Christ the Savior is God-Man, ‘“‘perfect God and perfect man.” But when, as a consequence of the error of Eutyches, unceasing controversies were evoked throughout the entire Hast, the Armenian Church introduced into its confession, to controvert his heresy, “in spirit (or soul), and mind, and body,” thereby declaring that the human nature of Christ consists of all the essential parts that constitute man, truly and really, and not in appearance only. Furthermore as (the words) “spirit and mind (or intellect)” are understood (by all) to be synonymous in meaning, they therefore explain each other. The word “spirit” (in Armenian) is used for the uncreated spirit, and for the created spirit or soul while the word “mind” is used for the intellect or conscience,
the whole of which, taken together, constitutes a complete, perfect, and true man. For as Gregory of Narek says,* “since our human nature was not corrupted by sin in part alone, but wholly, in spirit (or soul), mind, and body, so also did the Word assume it wholly and unite it with himself”’ (with his divinity). This, therefore, was taught by the Armenian Church in opposition to the monothelite Apollinaris, as is later asserted by Nerses IV. (q.v.). Neither is the body without mind, as Apollinaris said, that God the Word dwelt in the body as a statue without spirit (Fortescue, ut sup., pp. 256-258). And the same patriarch, in his formula of faith, submitted to the Emperor Emmanuel Comnenus, declares‘ also that the words ‘‘one person, one figure (or aspect)’’ were added against the error of Nestorianism. Wherefore, says he (Fortescue, ut sup., p. 274), “do we not sever, like Nestorius, the one Christ into two natures and two parts,” quoting the words of Gregory Nazianzen, “‘he is not one, and another, but one by that mixture (union)’’; adding also the declaration of that same orthodox father, “‘that it is clear that Christ is double in nature but not in personality’’ (ef. NPNF, 2 ser., vii. 209, 312).
Thus do the Armenians teach the two generations or births, the one from the Father before the worlds, and the other from the holy Virgin in the fulness of time, but they also confess the two natures (as inseparable, i.e., the Communicatio idiomatum) when mention is made either of the one or the other abstractedly; for they confess that the divine nature of Christ, which is of the essence of the Father, is united in the Word with human nature. Therefore Nerses IV. says, “‘ thou who, when giving proof of thy human nature during that night, wast greatly troubled with fear.’”” And again, when mention is
made of the person of the Son of God 5. Armenian and of man, in a concrete sense alone,
Teaching Armenian fathers declare fearlessly on the Two that he has one nature (i.e., person-
Natures. ality) by reason of the intimate union
(of the two natures within himself); wherefore to the confession of faith were added the words, ‘he is united in one nature.” All the ceaseless controversies, during the centuries after the rejection of the Council of Chalcedon by the Armenians, between them and their opponents, the Greek defenders of its dogmatic conciliar declaration, were evoked by the use of this term to define the incarnation of the Word. These words, added to the confession of faith after Cyril of Alexandria had used them in his controversy with Nestorius (i.e., the Alexandrine phrase of Athanasius, “‘ the one nature of the Word made flesh ”’), as adopted by an orthodox father, were thenceforth defended by the Armenians, even though their adversaries, by citing the words against them, seemingly proved that the Armenian teaching on the incarnation and the person of Christ was heterodox, and Eutychian or Monophysitic. But during this same period when the Armenians began to use this term against the assumed Nestorianizing teaching of the Creed of Chalcedon, Severus, later the anti- Chalcedonian patriarch of Antioch, was likewise using it against those who sought to support the doctrine of Chalcedon by citations from the writings of Cyril. Athanasius declares (De incarnatione, vol. i1.): ‘ We confess the Son of God to be God according to the Spirit, and man according to the flesh; not two natures in the one, and only one nature to be worshipped and another not (cf. the
* Fortescue, ut sup. p. 273.