Andreae and Beza at the Colloquy of Montbéliard

R. Cross
{"title":"Andreae and Beza at the Colloquy of Montbéliard","authors":"R. Cross","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198846970.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter describes the debate between Jakob Andreae and Theodore Beza at the Colloquy of Montbéliard (1586). Andreae defends a Brenzian account of the hypostatic union, and modifies his view so that it conforms more closely to Brenz’s own view that the divine powers themselves are in some sense possessed by the human nature. Beza accepts the supposital union. He outlines the ways in which Andreae’s account of the distinction between concrete and abstract nouns might lead to theological difficulties, and shows that a Brenzian view of the communicatio, coupled with a restriction on the set of divine attributes that can be communicated to the Son of Man, results in a Christology that is inconsistent with Chalcedon.","PeriodicalId":360748,"journal":{"name":"Communicatio Idiomatum","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communicatio Idiomatum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198846970.003.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter describes the debate between Jakob Andreae and Theodore Beza at the Colloquy of Montbéliard (1586). Andreae defends a Brenzian account of the hypostatic union, and modifies his view so that it conforms more closely to Brenz’s own view that the divine powers themselves are in some sense possessed by the human nature. Beza accepts the supposital union. He outlines the ways in which Andreae’s account of the distinction between concrete and abstract nouns might lead to theological difficulties, and shows that a Brenzian view of the communicatio, coupled with a restriction on the set of divine attributes that can be communicated to the Son of Man, results in a Christology that is inconsistent with Chalcedon.
Andreae和Beza在montbassliard座谈会上
本章描述了Jakob Andreae和Theodore Beza在1586年的monbsamliard会议上的辩论。安德里亚为布伦兹对实体结合的解释辩护,并修改了他的观点,使其更符合布伦兹的观点,即神的力量本身在某种程度上是由人性所拥有的。贝扎接受了这个假想的结合。他概述了安德烈对具体名词和抽象名词之间区别的描述可能导致神学困难的方式,并表明,布伦齐的交流观,加上对可以与人子交流的神性属性集的限制,导致了与迦克顿不一致的基督论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信