What was the purpose of the Council of Chalcedon?

Historical Context

The Council of Chalcedon convened in AD 451 in the city of Chalcedon (across from Constantinople in what is modern-day Turkey). It is recognized as the fourth of the early ecumenical councils and was called by the Roman Emperor Marcian. The gathering responded to mounting doctrinal controversies regarding the nature of Jesus Christ, culminating in clarifications that continue to shape Christian thought.

A few decades prior, the Council of Ephesus (AD 431) condemned Nestorius, whose teaching overemphasized the distinction between the divine and human natures of Christ, effectively presenting Jesus as two separate persons. Soon after, a monk named Eutyches championed monophysitism, asserting that Christ had only one nature—primarily divine, thereby diminishing His humanity. These divergent viewpoints spurred the urgent need for a definitive statement on Christ’s nature.

Key Doctrinal Controversies

Multiple conflicts converged by the mid-fifth century:

1. Nestorianism: Nestorius sought to protect the full deity of Christ but ended up dividing His person to such an extent that He seemed almost two separate entities (divine Son and human Jesus). This division conflicted with scriptural teaching indicating a unified person (John 1:14: “The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us…”).

2. Eutychianism (Monophysitism): Eutyches contended that Christ’s divinity overwhelmed His humanity, leaving only one divine nature. Scripture, however, consistently presents Jesus’ humanity alongside His deity (Philippians 2:6–7: “…He did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant…”).

3. Balance of Christ’s Two Natures: Early believers recognized Jesus as both fully divine and fully human, seeing this affirmed throughout Scripture (e.g., Colossians 2:9: “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity dwells bodily…”). However, debates persisted as to how these two natures existed within the one person of Christ.

The Purpose of the Council

The Council’s main goal was to secure a precise and unified declaration of Christ’s person and work in harmony with Scripture. To achieve this:

1. Establish Orthodoxy: Church leaders affirmed that both Nestorianism and Eutychianism erred by failing to represent the full scriptural truth. The council aimed to protect the integrity of biblical teaching that Jesus is truly God and truly man.

2. Promote Unity: A cohesive doctrinal statement was necessary to unify believers under the conviction that God “has spoken to us by His Son” (Hebrews 1:2), who is one person with two natures. Fractured beliefs threatened the unity of the Church’s witness and teaching.

3. Safeguard Salvation Theology: Scripture indicates that salvation hinges on Jesus being fully God—able to atone eternally—and fully man—able to represent humanity (1 Peter 2:24: “He Himself bore our sins in His body on the tree…”). Any misrepresentation of Christ’s nature could undermine confidence in the sufficiency of His sacrificial work.

The Chalcedonian Definition

One of the most enduring outcomes of the council was the Chalcedonian Definition—often called the “Creed of Chalcedon.” Crafted with contributions such as Leo the Great’s “Tome,” it declared that Jesus is one person (Greek: hypostasis) with two complete natures—divine and human—“without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.” This statement underscored:

• Full Deity and Full Humanity: Christ’s deity was not diminished by His incarnation. At the same time, His genuine humanity was not overshadowed by His divine nature.

• Unity of Person: The Definition maintained that there is a single, indivisible person—Jesus Christ—consistent with biblical passages revealing Christ’s oneness.

• Consistency with Scripture: By combining verses such as John 1:14, Philippians 2:6–7, and Colossians 2:9, the council showed how the biblical record portrays two natures in harmony within one Lord.

Scriptural Foundations

The council’s resolution anchored itself in God's revealed word:

• John 1:1, 14 – “In the beginning was the Word… The Word became flesh…” affirms Christ’s eternal divinity and genuine humanity.

• Philippians 2:5–7 – Demonstrates that Jesus, “being in very nature God,” also “emptied Himself” in authentic humanity.

• Colossians 2:9 – Declares the fullness of deity present in Jesus’ bodily form, echoing the council’s stance on the total presence of deity and real humanity.

• Hebrews 2:14 – “Since the children have flesh and blood, He too shared in their humanity…” underscores Christ’s real, tangible human nature, enabling Him to be the perfect mediator.

Impact on Church History

The Council of Chalcedon’s decisions had far-reaching outcomes:

• Doctrinal Clarity: Chalcedon closed the door on teachings that compromised Christ’s nature. It fortified the Church in proclaiming the incarnate Son of God who came for the salvation of sinners.

• Unifying Statement: Although certain groups parted ways due to continued misunderstandings or political divisions, many believers in the broader Church recognized the Chalcedonian Definition as preserving biblical truth.

• Foundation for Confessions and Creeds: Subsequent doctrinal statements—including those that emerged in later Protestant confessions—built upon Chalcedon’s thorough articulation. This council remains integral to many denominational traditions that accept the early creeds.

Lessons and Relevance

The Council of Chalcedon reminds believers—and inquirers—of the seriousness with which the earliest Christians viewed the identity of Jesus. Misunderstanding the person of Christ leads to distortions in understanding God’s salvation plan. Grounding doctrine in Scripture ensures consistency with the revelation God has provided.

Furthermore, Chalcedon’s insistence on Jesus’ full humanity touches deeply on the empathy and relational aspect of salvation: “Therefore He had to be made like His brothers in every way, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest…” (Hebrews 2:17). This resonates in daily life by assuring believers that Christ truly understands and intercedes for human struggles.

Conclusion

The purpose of the Council of Chalcedon was to articulate a biblically faithful confession of Jesus Christ’s nature. Responding to conflicting teachings about Christ’s divinity and humanity, the council delivered a declaration that aligns with Scripture, particularly emphasizing that our Savior is undivided, fully God, and fully man.

Beyond simply clarifying doctrine, the Council of Chalcedon preserved the core of the gospel message, guarding against misunderstandings that could undermine the truth of salvation. In all things, it upheld the biblical principle that Jesus is both fully divine and fully human—yet is one person—fulfilling what is written: “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5).