Skip to content
Examined Doctrine
← ALL THEOLOGIANSCOUNCILS & CONFESSIONS

Council of Ephesus

431 · EARLY CHURCH · ECUMENICAL COUNCIL

Affirmed Mary as Theotokos and the unity of Christ's person against Nestorius. Closed creed-making beyond Nicaea, and condemned the Pelagian Celestius.

3 OF 18 DOCTRINES · 3 QUOTED · 2 PRIMARY-SOURCED
Scripture & Authority1 POSITION
Authority of ScriptureAFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE
Scripture with tradition and church te…

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.

READ IN A PRIMARY SOURCE

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.

Canon 7 — "it is unlawful for any man to bring forward, or to write, or to compose a different (heteran) Faith."
God & Christ1 POSITION
The person of ChristAFFIRMS°PRIMARY SOURCE
One person in two natures

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.

READ IN A PRIMARY SOURCE

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.

Canon 7 — "it is unlawful for any man to bring forward, or to write, or to compose a different Faith."
Salvation1 POSITION
Original sin & the human willINTERNALLY CONTESTED°DISPUTED READING
Nature wounded but not destroyed

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.

DISPUTED AMONG SCHOLARS

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.

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