“Miaphysitismus”: Anmerkungen zur ökumenischen Sinnhaftigkeit eines NeologismusCristianesimo nella storiaSyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference PortalThe National Endowment for the HumanitiesThe International Balzan Prize FoundationDavid A. Michelsoncbsc_adminRecord added to Zotero bycbsc_adminSyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference Portalhttp://syriaca.org/cbss/S8H6YHX4/tei
Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
2024-08-15-04:00
Born digital.
CREATED: This bibl record was autogenerated from a Zotero record.Dietmar W.Winkler“Miaphysitismus”: Anmerkungen zur ökumenischen Sinnhaftigkeit eines Neologismushttp://syriaca.org/cbss/S8H6YHX4https://www.zotero.org/groups/a_comprehensive_bibliography_on_syriac_studies/items/S8H6YHX4https://www.zotero.org/groups/4861694/items/S8H6YHX4Cristianesimo nella storia37:1201619-29The Christological dispute arose with the attempt to express the unity of the divinity and humanity in Christ in linguistic terms. As a result, those who opposed the dogmatic formulation of Chalcedon have been called Monophysites. The term is incorrect and misleading in this context. Since G. S. Assemani, scholars have tried to distinguish between real Monophysites, i.e. Eutychians, from those who held to the mia physis formula of Cyril of Alexandria. They are also called verbal Monophysites (A. Grillmeier), Diplophysites (C.D.G. Müller), or Henophysites (S.P. Brock). From the perspective of ecumenical dialogue the most acceptable term has proved to be Miaphysitism.
Winkler, Dietmar W. “‘Miaphysitismus’: Anmerkungen Zur Ökumenischen Sinnhaftigkeit Eines Neologismus.” Cristianesimo Nella Storia 37:1 (2016): 19–29.
Dietmar W. Winkler, ‘Miaphysitismus’: Anmerkungen Zur Ökumenischen Sinnhaftigkeit Eines Neologismus,Cristianesimo Nella Storia 37:1 (2016): 19–29.ChristologyIV-VII CEJacobitesMonophysitismXIX-XXI CEecumenismself-references