The Number and Authority of the Ecumenical Councils in the Second Helvetic Confession
Whilst Bullinger’s CHP accepts the decisions of the first four ecumenical councils, no description has been produced concerning their criteria. Based on the common features of Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon, the Apostles’ Council of Jerusalem would fit the pattern, with one exception:...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Sciendo, De Gruyter
2023
|
| In: |
Perichoresis
Year: 2023, Volume: 21, Issue: 3, Pages: 40-54 |
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity KAG Church history 1500-1648; Reformation; humanism; Renaissance KCC Councils KDD Protestant Church NBF Christology |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | Whilst Bullinger’s CHP accepts the decisions of the first four ecumenical councils, no description has been produced concerning their criteria. Based on the common features of Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon, the Apostles’ Council of Jerusalem would fit the pattern, with one exception: it had neither been convened nor supervised by secular rulers. Why did the strongly Bible-oriented Reformers fail to ‘renumber’ the ecumenical councils starting with the one in Jerusalem, as they did e.g. with the Decalogue or the sacraments? Apparently, they acquiesced in the already established state of affairs to appease the contemporary secular powers, whilst preserving Chalcedon’s Christological and soteriological heritage. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2284-7308 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Perichoresis
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.2478/perc-2023-0021 |