Abstract
Abstract This chapter considers some theologians who adopt the homo assumptus Christology, a pre-Chalcedonian Christology, from Augustine. The Franciscan John of Ripa argues that the divine person is the same as the human nature, such that something can be God without being the divine nature. As a result the divine person communicates the complete array of divine attributes to the human nature, not by informing the nature, but by being some non-informing formal cause of the nature. John Wyclif holds that there is some kind of identity between the divine person and the human nature, such that features of the human nature can be predicated of the divine person. Jan Hus copied the relevant parts of Wyclif’s Christology, and the position was condemned at the Council of Constance. The chapter includes with an account of the issue found in Thomas Netter of Walden, who attempts to show that various Augustinian and other texts appealed to by Wyclif admit of an orthodox interpretation. The chapter ends with an account of the Christology of Augustine Favaroni of Rome, and the explicit condemnation of the homo assumptus Christology at the Council of Basel.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
