Council of Ephesus

Canon 7 closes creed-making: it is unlawful to compose or bring forward any faith rival to Nicaea, on pain of deposition for clergy and anathema for laity. The Nicene symbol is described as established by the fathers assembled with the Holy Spirit — a Spirit-guaranteed conciliar standard. The council also receives Cyril's letters and Pope Celestine's judgment as authoritative.

WORTH CORRECTINGCanon 7 is heavily cited by later parties in the filioque dispute, but the council is addressing an exposition brought by the presbyter Charisius, not any Western addition.

"it is unlawful for any man to bring forward, or to write, or to compose a different (heteran) Faith."Canon 7

Affirms Mary as Theotokos and the unity of Christ's person against Nestorius, whose position it deposes. The council's work is the single subject of Christ rather than a formula about natures — the two-natures language proper arrives at Chaledon twenty years later. Cyril's Twelve Anathemas, attached to the acts, are pure Christology.

WORTH CORRECTINGRecorded as two-natures because it belongs to the Chalcedonian trajectory and explicitly rejects the two-persons alternative, but Ephesus itself does not use the two-natures formula. Read the stance as directional.

"it is unlawful for any man to bring forward, or to write, or to compose a different Faith."Canon 7

Ephesus condemns Pelagianism by name and by person rather than by exposition. The canons strip any metropolitan who has adopted the doctrines of Celestius, and depose any cleric maintaining the doctrines of Nestorius or Celestius. Celestius was Pelagius's leading disciple, so the council ratifies the Western condemnation of Pelagianism at the ecumenical level. It offers no positive account of the fall, the will, or grace.

WORTH CORRECTINGThe canons define nothing positive about human nature. This stance is the weakest anti-Pelagian floor the condemnation entails — grace is necessary, nature is damaged. The text does not adjudicate between wounded, prevenient and bondage; don't read it as excluding the stronger Augustinian position, and don't read it as endorsing it.

"If any of the clergy should fall away, and publicly or privately presume to maintain the doctrines of Nestorius or Celestius."Canon 4

Unlike the fourth-century councils, Ephesus is not innocent of this question — it condemned Celestius, Pelagius's leading disciple, by name, and so ratified the Western condemnation of Pelagianism at the ecumenical level. But the condemnation is by person, not by exposition. Nothing in the canons read here, or in Cyril's Twelve Anathemas, states on what basis God chooses. Augustine had died the previous year having written On the Predestination of the Saints; the category was fully available in 431 and this council did not take it up.

WORTH CORRECTINGRecorded as searched-and-not-located rather than never-framed, and the distinction is the point. For Nicaea and Constantinople the question had not yet been posed anywhere. For Ephesus it had been posed loudly, by a man the council was condemning the disciple of — and it still declined to answer.

"if any metropolitan of a province ... has adopted or shall hereafter adopt the doctrines of Celestius, this man shall have no power over the bishops of the province."Canon 1

Not located. Ephesus issued no creed of its own — canon 7 forbids producing another and ratifies Nicaea instead — and the canons read for this map (1, 4 and 7) with Cyril's Twelve Anathemas are occupied with Nestorius and Celestius. Baptism is not among them. The council's baptismal theology, if it has one, is Nicaea's by ratification rather than its own.

WORTH CORRECTINGAn honest limit rather than a finding: five of the eight canons were not read this pass. What can be said is that nothing baptismal appears in the doctrinal acts, which is where a council of this kind would put it.