The Puzzle of Theodoret's Christology: A Modest Suggestion

This article suggests that the perplexities of Theodoret's Christologycan be understood well if one regards them as stemming not froma doctrinal evolution (as some scholars argue), but rather froma fundamental (but usually unnoticed) inconsistency that ispresent at all times in Theodoret's life. The inconsistencylies between his normal pattern for writing about Christ andthe way he sometimes writes of Christ when he is dealing withthe crucifixion. Theodoret usually sees the personal subjectof Christ (the one who acts and to whom the human experienceshappen) as the Logos himself, but at times when he discussesthe death of Christ, his strong view of divine impassibilityleads him to see the personal subject who undergoes sufferingand death as the man Jesus. The article substantiates its caseby reviewing the most significant twentieth-century scholarlyliterature on Theodoret and by examining his christologicalwritings from three different periods of his career: the yearsaround the Council of Ephesus (431–3), the year he wrotethe Eranistes (probably 447), and the years immediately priorto the Council of Chalcedon (448–51).