欢迎来到《教父的道路》。 Welcome to The Way of the Fathers.
我是吉姆·帕潘德里亚。 I'm Jim Papandrea.
本播客由天主教文化制作。 This podcast is a production of Catholic Culture.
请在catholicculture.org订阅我们的通讯 Sign up for our newsletter at catholicculture.org
/newsletter。 slash newsletter.
今天我们继续异端系列，第十五集，聂斯托留和聂斯托留主义。 Today we continue our series on the heresies with episode 15, Nestorius and Nestorianism.
在上一集，我谈到亚波里拿留，他试图以这样的方式描述 耶稣基督，认为耶稣不能犯罪，因为他没有自由意志。 In the last episode, I talked about Apollinarius, who had tried to describe Jesus Christ in such a way as to argue that Jesus could not have sinned because he had no free will.
换句话说，他的人性是没有意志的人性。 In other words, his human nature was a nature without a will.
因此，亚波里拿留提出的基督不完全是人。 And so Apollinarius proposed a Christ who was less than fully human.
这显然是不可接受的，因此被宣告为异端。 Naturally, this could not be acceptable, and it was declared a heresy.
但钟摆继续摆动，有人不仅回应了亚波里拿留，还过度反 应，试图通过陷入另一个异端来避免或防止一个异端。 But the swinging of the pendulum continued, as there were those who not only responded to Apollinarius, but overreacted and tried to avoid or prevent one heresy by falling into another one.
我说的当然是聂斯托留和他的追随者。 Of course, I'm talking about Nestorius and his followers.
聂斯托留正确地看到了亚波里拿留基督论的问题，因为它削弱了基督的人性。 Nestorius rightly saw the problems with Apollinarius' Christology because it diminished the humanity in Christ.
亚波里拿留描述的耶稣是神性遮盖了人性，取代或 消除了人性的部分，特别是人类的心思和意志。 Apollinarius described a Jesus in which the divinity overshadowed the humanity and replaced or canceled out part of the humanity, specifically the human mind and will.
但聂斯托留说，在试图纠正亚波里拿留模糊基督神性和人性界限 时，他矫枉过正，走向另一个极端，提出基督两性之间的彻底分 离，以至于他似乎在谈论两个基督，一个神性的，一个人性的。 But Nestorius said, in trying to correct Apollinarius' blurring of the line between Christ's divinity and humanity, he overcorrected and went to the other extreme, proposing a radical separation between Christ's two natures, to the point where he seemed to be talking about two Christs, a divine one and a human one.
和亚波里拿留一样，聂斯托留也是尼西亚正统反对亚略主义的支持者。 Now, just like Apollinarius, Nestorius was himself a supporter of Nicene orthodoxy against Arianism.
正如亚波里拿留因亚略主义而不安，以至于发明了新的异端，同 样，聂斯托留因亚波里拿留主义而不安，也发明了新的异端。 And just as Apollinarius had been so disturbed by Arianism that he invented a new heresy of his own, well, in the same way, Nestorius was so disturbed by Apollinarianism that he invented a new heresy as well.
公元428年，聂斯托留成为君士坦丁堡的主教。 And in the year 428 AD, Nestorius became the Bishop of Constantinople.
对聂斯托留来说，亚波里拿留的问题不仅在于它使耶稣不完全是人。 For Nestorius, the problem with what Apollinarius was saying was not only that it made Jesus less than fully human.
聂斯托留还担心，将道成肉身描述为人性与神性的结合，可能会暗示神性发生了变化。 Nestorius also worried that by describing the incarnation as a union of the human with the divine, that might somehow imply that the divine had changed.
换句话说，聂斯托留试图避免任何可能损害神性不变性的东西。 In other words, Nestorius was trying to avoid anything that might compromise the immutability or unchangeability of the divine nature.
听起来他似乎在试图保护基督的神性不与人性过多接触。 And it sounded like he was trying to protect Christ's divine nature from too much contact with humanity.
因此，他用强调性分离的语言谈论基督的两性，甚至说 可以通过福音书将耶稣所做所说的一切归于某一性。 And so he talked about the two natures of Christ in language that emphasized the separation of the natures, even to the point of saying that one could go through the Gospels and assign everything Jesus did and said to one nature or the other.
看似人性的事归于他的人性，看似神迹的事归于他的神性。 Things that seemed human got assigned to his human nature, and things that seemed miraculous got assigned to his divine nature.
亚波里拿留被视为模糊了基督内神性和人性的界 限，神性重叠并遮盖了人性，导致人性减损。 Apollinarius was seen as blurring the line between the divine and human in Christ, with the divine overlapping and overshadowing the human, resulting in a diminished human nature.
可以说，人性和神性之间的统一过多，缺乏足够的区分来保持各自性情的完整性。 You might say too much unity between the human and the divine, and not enough distinction to preserve the integrity of each nature.
聂斯托留主义对此作出反应，这是正确的，但聂斯托留走 向另一个极端，提出了后来被视为两性之间过多的分离。 Well, Nestorianism reacted against that, and rightfully so, but Nestorius went to the other extreme, proposing what will come to be seen as too much separation between the two natures.
他超越了区分，达到分离的地步，因此削弱了两性的结合。 He went beyond distinction to the point of separation, and so he diminished the union of the two natures.
这样做时，他实际上做了类似亚略的事。 And in doing that, he actually did something similar to what Arius had done.
亚略削弱了圣父和圣子的合一，说圣父和圣子的结合只是意志的结合。 Arius had diminished the unity of the Father and Son, saying that the union of the Father and Son was only a union of wills.
只要圣子顺服圣父的旨意，他们就合一。 As long as the Son submits to the will of the Father, they are united.
聂斯托留也做了同样的事，但对象是两性。 Nestorius did that same thing, but with the two natures.
他削弱了圣子内神性和人性的合一，说神性和人性的结合只是意志的结合。 He diminished the unity of the divine and human within the Son, saying that the union of the divine and human was only a union of wills.
只要人性意志顺服神性意志，他们就合一。 As long as the human will submits to the divine will, they are united.
但最终，这使基督位格的合一依赖于意志的合作。 But in the end, it makes the unity of Christ's very personhood dependent on a cooperation of wills.
聂斯托留并不是亚略派。 Well, Nestorius was not an Arian.
他确实相信圣子的完全神性，也相信圣子的完全人性，反对亚波里拿留。 He did believe in the full divinity of the Son, and he believed in the full humanity of the Son against Apollinarius.
但在道成肉身中神性和人性的结合上，他强调区 分胜于合一，仿佛必须保护神性不受人性影响。 But when it came to the union of the divine and the human in the incarnation, he emphasized distinction over unity, as if he had to protect divinity from humanity.
现在，还不完全清楚聂斯托留将此推到何种程度，他的追随者可能比他走得更远。 Now, it's not entirely clear just how far Nestorius took this, and his followers after him may have pushed it farther than he ever did.
除此之外，当时在术语上也有一些混淆。 And on top of all of that, there was also some confusion at the time over terminology.
问题在于，聂斯托留从未接受加帕多家教父所澄清的 希腊术语，即拉丁语中实质和位格的希腊对应词。 The problem is Nestorius had never gotten on board with the Greek technical terms that the Cappadocians had clarified, that is, the Greek equivalence of the Latin terms for substance and persons.
甚至圣奥古斯丁也曾指出，在这些问题上，希腊语和拉丁语之间的翻译是困难的。 And even St. Augustine had remarked that it was difficult to translate between Greek and Latin on these issues.
这部分是因为希腊语更为细腻，希腊词通常有更狭 窄的意义范围，但翻译时有更多希腊词可供选择。 And that's partly because Greek is a more nuanced language in the sense that Greek words often have a narrower range of meaning, but there are more Greek words to choose from when you translate.
所以可以说，用希腊语处理这些问题比用拉丁语更难。 So it would be true to say that it's harder to do all this in Greek than it is in Latin.
史蒂夫·马丁曾说过，「这并不算夸张」，所以这里确实有一些翻译上的失误。 Steve Martin used to do a bit where he said, "Well, it wouldn't be too much of an exaggeration to say," so there was an element of things getting lost in translation here.
但最终，当聂斯托留谈论基督的两性时，听起来他是在说基督是两位。 But at the end of the day, when Nestorius talked about the two natures in Christ, it sounded like he was saying Christ was two persons.
他描述基督两性的方式让人困惑，问道，他是在试图创造一个四位一体吗？ His way of writing about the two natures in Christ made people scratch their heads and ask, is he trying to make a four-person Trinity?
圣父、神性的圣子、人性的圣子和圣灵？ Father, divine Son, human Son, and Spirit?
我不认为他是这样，但听起来像是这样。 Well, I don't think he was, but it sounded like it.
最终，他似乎在将耶稣分为两部分。 And in the end, he seemed to be splitting Jesus in two.
问题在于，聂斯托留似乎在说基督有两个个性，一种双重主体性， 其中神性和人性以这样的方式互动，一方面暗示两性可能相互冲突 ，另一方面使两性的结合依赖于人性意志对神性意志的顺服。 What's at stake here is that it sounded like Nestorius was saying Christ would have two personalities, a kind of double subjectivity in which the divine and human interacted in ways that, on the one hand, implied that the two natures could be at odds with each other, but on the other hand made the very union of the two natures rely on the submission of the human will to the divine will.
正如亚略主义对待圣父和圣子一样，聂斯托留现在对待圣子的位格。 So just as Arianism had done with the Father and Son, so now Nestorius did to the person of the Son.
他使两性的结合显得脆弱而不确定。 He made the union of the two natures seem fragile and tentative.
具有讽刺意味的是，他最终做了他批评亚波里拿留所做的事情。 And ironically, he ended up doing exactly what he had criticized Apollinarius of doing.
也就是说，他削弱了耶稣的自由意志，至少是人性的耶稣。 That is, he diminished the free will of Jesus, or at least the human Jesus.
总结一下，如果像形态论和亚略主义这样的三位一体异端未能正确阐明三个位格之间合一 和区分的平衡，形态论有过多的合一而缺乏区分，收养说和亚略主义有过多的区分以至于 分离而缺乏合一，那么现在基督论异端也有同样的问题，但在基督位格内的两性上。 So, to summarize a bit, if the Trinitarian heresies like modalism and Arianism failed to correctly clarify the balance of unity and distinction between the persons of the Trinity, modalism had too much unity and not enough distinction, adoptionism and Arianism had too much distinction to the point of separation and not enough unity, well, now the Christological heresies had the same problem, but with the two natures within the person of Christ.
亚波里拿留主义对两性缺乏足够的区分，因此失去了人性的完整性。 Apollinarianism did not have enough distinction between the two natures and therefore lost the integrity of the human nature.
聂斯托留主义试图通过对两性提出过多的区分来保护性情 的完整性，以至于分离，使耶稣基督听起来有多重人格。 Nestorianism tried to protect the integrity of the natures by proposing too much distinction between the two natures to the point of a separation, making it sound like Jesus Christ had multiple personalities.
如果你认为没有平信徒会关心这场辩论，它实际 上对每个基督徒的灵修生活有非常实际的影响。 Now, in case you're tempted to think that no layperson would care about this debate, it actually had very practical implications for the devotional life of every Christian.
教会长期以来一直以神之母的名号祈求圣母马利亚的代求。 You see, the Church had a long-standing tradition of praying for the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary under the title of Mother of God.
这个希腊复合词你可能听过，就是Theotokos，神的母亲， 即怀抱或生下神的那位，更确切地说，是在她腹中怀着神的那位。 Now, the fancy Greek compound word for this, you may have heard it, is Theotokos, the God-bearer, that is, the one who bears or gives birth to God, or more precisely, the one who carried God in her womb.
这可能最初来自以利沙伯对马利亚来探望她时的问候。 It probably originally comes from Elizabeth's greeting to Mary when Mary came to visit her.
在路加福音第一章，以利沙伯对马利亚说：「我主的母到我这里来，这是从哪里得的呢？」 In Luke chapter 1, Elizabeth says to Mary, "And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?"
我们有一篇书面的祷告称马利亚为神之母，至少可以追溯到三世纪中叶。 And we have a written prayer to Mary in which she is called the Mother of God that goes back at least to the middle of the third century.
这祷告名为《Subtuum Praesidium》，意为「在你保护下」。 It's called the Subtuum Praesidium, which means "under your protection."
因此，在五世纪聂斯托留的时代，称马利亚为神之母的传统已经是古老的传统。 So the tradition of referring to Mary as the Mother of God was already an ancient tradition in the time of Nestorius in the 5th century.
然而，作为君士坦丁堡主教的聂斯托留试图阻止信徒使用这个称号。 And yet, Nestorius, as the Bishop of Constantinople, tried to prevent the faithful from using this title.
他建议使用另一个称号，Christotokos，基督的母亲。 He suggested an alternate title, Christotokos, the Christ-bearer.
他这样做的理由是，他认为Theotokos，神之母，听起来像是暗示神有了开始。 And his stated reason for this was that he thought the title Theotokos, Mother of God, sounded like it implied that God had a beginning.
但当然，没有人真的认为这是它的意思。 But of course, no one really thought that's what it meant.
大家都知道它的意思，马利亚是耶稣神性和人性的母亲。 Everyone knew what it means, that Mary is the mother of Jesus' divine nature as well as his human nature.
但聂斯托留无法接受这个奥秘，我们可以称之为有限的神性，即 基督的神性是无所不在的，但也矛盾地包含在马利亚的腹中。 But Nestorius could not accept this mystery, the mystery of what we might call circumscribed divinity, that is, the divine nature of Christ, which is omnipresent, but paradoxically also contained within the womb of Mary.
在我看来，这是我们信仰中最伟大的奥秘之一。 This is, in my opinion, one of the greatest mysteries of our faith.
但聂斯托留无法接受。 But Nestorius could not accept it.
他再次认为必须保护神性不受任何变化或限制的暗示。 And again, he was thinking that he had to protect the divine nature from any suggestion of change or limitation.
因此，聂斯托留教导说，只有基督的人性在马利亚的腹中。 And so Nestorius taught that only the human nature of Christ was in Mary's womb.
他说基督的神性从未在马利亚的腹中。 He said that the divine nature of Christ was never in Mary's womb.
这就是神性和人性之间的分离。 And there you have it, this separation between the divine and the human.
聂斯托留声称两性如此分离，以至于在马利亚的腹 中不合一，只有人性在马利亚的腹中，而非神性。 Nestorius claiming that the two natures were so separate that they were not united in the womb of Mary, that only the human nature was ever in Mary's womb, not the divine nature.
从中你也可以看到，神之母这个称号，如同所有关于马利亚的教义，至少同样关乎基督。 You can also see from this how the title Mother of God, like all the Marian doctrines, is at least as much about Christ as it is about Mary.
在这种情况下，它关乎基督内神性和人性的合一。 In this case, it's about the unity of the divine and human in Christ.
神的道取得了人性，这发生在马利亚的腹中。 The divine Word acquired a human nature, and this happened in the womb of Mary.
神性来过一个真实而完全的人性生活，从他在马利亚腹中的受孕开始。 And the divine nature came to live a true and fully human life, beginning with his conception in Mary's womb.
因为从道成肉身的那一刻，也就是他的受孕开始，两性就不可分割。 Because from the moment of the incarnation, which is his conception, the two natures are inseparable.
神性真正来住在人性生活中。 The divine nature really comes to live in a human life.
人性因与神性的结合而被提升和荣耀。 And the human nature is elevated and glorified by the union with the divine.
这里还有一个教义，称为性情相通，描述两性各自从对方接受某些东西的方式。 Now, there's yet another doctrine here called the communicatio idiomatum, which describes the ways in which each of the two natures receives something from the other.
我们不会详细展开，只是说聂斯托留也拒绝了这一点。 And we won't take the time to unpack all of that in detail, except to say that Nestorius rejected that too.
那么，哪些教父回应了聂斯托留主义，这种分离两性、损害基督位格完整性的异端呢？ So, who were the Church Fathers who responded to Nestorianism, this separation of the two natures that compromised the integrity of Christ's personhood?
有两位主要的教父参与了这场争论，至少根据我们现存的文献，一位在西方，一位在东方。 There were two main Church Fathers who weighed in on this controversy, at least in terms of documents we still have, one in the West and one in the East.
在西方，有约翰·卡西安，他实际上是受罗马主教教宗刻肋斯定的委托来驳斥聂斯托留的。 In the West, there was John Cassian, and he was actually called upon by the Bishop of Rome, by Pope Celestine, to refute Nestorius.
教宗委托他写了一篇名为《论主的道成肉身反对聂斯托留的七卷书》的文献。 The Pope commissioned him to write a document called Seven Books on the Incarnation of the Lord Against Nestorius.
但与亚略争论一样，这场争论的大部分发生在东方。 But, like the Arian controversy, most of this controversy was going on in the East.
西方有特土良，他澄清了拉丁术语，西方有诺瓦蒂安，他 也澄清了基督内神性和人性的关系以及性情相通的教义。 The West had Tertullian, with his clarification of the Latin terms, the West had Novation, who also clarified the relationship of the divine and human in Christ and the doctrine of the communicatio idiomatum.
到这时，西方还有圣奥古斯丁。 And by this time, the West also had St. Augustine.
公平地说，西方使用拉丁语，这是一种更简单、不易混淆的语言。 And to be fair, the West was also working in Latin, which is an easier and less confusing language.
但在东方，有伟大的神学家亚历山大的区利罗。 But in the East, there was the great theologian Cyril of Alexandria.
他在公元412年至444年间担任亚历山大主 教。他支持为圣母马利亚使用神之母的称号。 He was Bishop of Alexandria from 412 to 444 AD. And he championed the title Mother of God for the Blessed Virgin Mary.
因为正如他指出的，马利亚是基督整个位格的母亲，包括他的神性。 Because, as he pointed out, Mary is the mother of the whole person of Christ, including his divine nature.
她不是仅仅基督一半的母亲。 She is not the mother of half of Christ only.
因此，亚历山大的区利罗写了他著名的《论基督的合一》。 And so, Cyril of Alexandria wrote his famous treatise on the unity of Christ.
在其中他阐明，基督内神性和人性的结合必须在 他位格的层面上合一，形成一个单一的位格。 And there he clarifies that the union of the divine and human in Christ must be a unity on the level of his very personhood, resulting in a singular person.
我们称之为位格的结合，就是指位格的合一。 And we call that the hypostatic union, which just means a personal union.
关键是耶稣基督必须是一个位格，具有单一的个性。 The point being that Jesus Christ must be one person with a single personality.
否则，道就没有真正成为肉身。 Otherwise, the Word never really did become flesh.
所以，如果亚波里拿留主义不是真正的道成肉身，而更像是内住，那么聂斯托 留主义也不是真正的道成肉身，而是一种并置，就像沙拉酱瓶中的油和醋。 So if Apollinarianism is not really an incarnation, but more of an indwelling, Nestorianism is also not really an incarnation, but some kind of juxtaposition, like oil and vinegar in a salad dressing jar.
你可以把它们放在同一个瓶子里，甚至摇匀，但放在柜 台上，最终它们会分开，因为它们无法保持在一起。 You can put them in the same jar and even shake them up, but leave them on the counter and eventually they will separate out because they just can't stay together.
但道成肉身，道成为肉身，是两性的真实结合。 But the incarnation, the Word become flesh, is the real union of two natures.
神的道真正取得并来过一个完整人性中的真实人性生活。 The divine Word truly acquires and comes to live a real human life in a complete human nature.
亚波里拿留主义模糊了两性，削弱了人性。 Apollinarianism blurred the two natures and diminished the humanity.
聂斯托留主义将两性分开，从未允许永久的结合。 Nestorianism kept the two separate, which never allowed a permanent union.
但关键是，如果这不是道成肉身，那么道就没有真正成为我们的一员。 But the point is that if this is not an incarnation, then the Word never really became one of us.
但他必须成为我们的一员来拯救我们，因为我们已经知道，未被取用的就未被拯救。 But he has to be one of us to save us, because as we already know, what is not assumed is not saved.
所以，教宗刻肋斯定当然同意亚历山大的区利罗，因为位格结合的概念与西方的教导一致。 So, of course, Pope Celestine agreed with Cyril of Alexandria because the concept of the hypostatic union was consistent with what was being taught in the West.
事实上，我应该提到，当你听到早期教会东西方之间的差 异时，大多数情况下，亚历山大实际上更倾向于西方。 And in fact, I should mention that often when you hear about differences between the West and the East in the early Church, most of the time, Alexandria actually leans more toward the West.
在教会最早的几个世纪，护教士和早期神学家有时谈论两性时 说，神的儿子这个称号是神性的名称，人子是人性的名称。 Now, in the earliest centuries of the Church, the apologists and early theologians sometimes talked about the two natures by saying that the title Son of God is the name for the divine nature and Son of Man is the name for the human nature.
但到三世纪时，西方的诺瓦蒂安纠正了这一点。 But by the third century in the West, Novation had corrected this.
他说你不能这样做，因为实际上这两个称号都必须指整个位格。 He said you can't do that because actually both titles must refer to the whole person.
现在我们明白为什么澄清这一点很重要了。 And now we see why that was important to clarify.
因为无论耶稣做了什么、说了什么，都是基督整个位格做的、说的。 Because whatever Jesus did and said, the whole person of Christ did that and said that.
公平地说，聂斯托留在批评亚波里拿留时，有两点是正确的。 To be fair to Nestorius, in his critique of Apollinarius, he was right about two things.
道成肉身不仅仅是神的道穿上人性的外衣。 The incarnation is not just the divine Word putting on a human suit.
他也正确地指出基督的位格必须有两个意志。 And he was right that the person of Christ must have two wills.
两性意味着两个意志。 Two natures means two wills.
但聂斯托留错误地将两性的结合简化为两个意志的合作。 But Nestorius was wrong to reduce the union of the two natures to just a cooperation of the two wills.
对基督两性的正确理解是，它们以不可分割的方式结合。 The correct understanding of the two natures in Christ is that they are united in a way that is inseparable.
它们以不削弱任何一性完整性的方式结合，而这种结合不会导致耶稣有两个个性。 They are united in a way that does not diminish the integrity of either nature, and yet the union does not result in a Jesus with two personalities.
位格的结合是在他位格层面的结合。 The hypostatic union is a union on the level of his very personhood.
这是位格的合一。 It is a personal union.
他是一个位格，具有单一的主体性。 He is a single person with a single subjectivity.
虽然这似乎是个悖论，但位格的结合导致基督整个位格，包括 他无所不在的神性，都包含在他蒙福的母亲马利亚的腹中。 And, although it will seem like a paradox, the hypostatic union results in the fact that the whole person of Christ, both natures, including his omnipresent divinity, were contained within the womb of his Blessed Mother Mary.
最终，关于基督两性的争论和聂斯托留反对神之母的称号，导致了公元43 1年的第三次大公会议，即以弗所会议，就在圣奥古斯丁去世后一年左右。 Eventually, this controversy over the two natures of Christ and Nestorius' objection to the title Mother of God led to the Third Ecumenical Council, the Council of Ephesus, in the year 431, only about a year after the death of St. Augustine.
教宗刻肋斯定授权亚历山大的区利罗主持会议，约翰·卡西安作为教宗的代表出席。 Pope Celestine gave Cyril of Alexandria the authority to chair the council, and John Cassian attended as the representative of the pope.
但由于某种原因，聂斯托留的支持者迟迟未能到达以弗所。 But for some reason, the supporters of Nestorius were delayed in getting to Ephesus.
虽然区利罗尽可能地等待，事实上等了很多天，他们 最终还是在没有聂斯托留支持者的情况下开始了。 And although Cyril waited as long as he could, many days in fact, they did eventually start without Nestorius' supporters.
于是聂斯托留拒绝为自己辩护，徒劳地试图拖延进程，但最终聂斯托留退出了。 So Nestorius refused to defend himself, trying in vain to delay the process, but eventually Nestorius walked out.
可能在他缺席时，对他的指控有些夸大，但当他的支持者终于到达以弗所 时，他们另行召开会议，称之为会议，并将亚历山大的区利罗逐出教会。 And it may be that in his absence the charges against him were exaggerated a bit, but when his supporters finally arrived in Ephesus, they had a separate meeting, calling that a council, and they excommunicated Cyril of Alexandria.
于是由皇帝决定哪个会议是真正的会议。 Well, it was then up to the emperor to decide which meeting was the real council.
他短暂地将区利罗和聂斯托留都逮捕并拘留。 And for a short time, he had both Cyril and Nestorius arrested and in custody.
但显然教宗支持区利罗，所以他被释放，而聂斯托留被流放。 But it was obvious that the Pope sided with Cyril, and so he was released, and Nestorius was exiled.
真正的以弗所会议重新召开，谴责亚波里拿留主义和聂斯托留主义为异端。 The true council of Ephesus reconvened and condemned as heresies both Apollinarianism and Nestorianism.
会议确认了位格的结合，即耶稣基督是一个位格，具 有两性和两个意志，并确认了圣母的神之母称号。 The council affirmed the hypostatic union, that Jesus Christ is one person with two natures and two wills, and it affirmed the title Mother of God for Our Lady.
大约在这个时候，罗马建造了圣母大殿。 And it was at about this time that the great basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore was built in Rome.
圣母大殿，是献给圣母的最大、最伟大的教堂。 Mary Major, the largest and greatest church dedicated to Our Lady.
那么，现代有聂斯托留主义的版本吗？ So are there modern versions of Nestorianism?
有些学者会将其与伊斯兰教联系起来，伊斯兰教在以弗所会议约200年后出现。 Well, some scholars will make connections with Islam, which came along only about 200 years after the Council of Ephesus.
在地理上确实有一些联系，因为罗马帝国外的一些地区成为聂斯 托留派的避难所，而这些地方后来也成为主要的穆斯林地区。 And there are some geographical affinities since certain areas outside of the Roman Empire did become places of refuge for Nestorians, and those same places would also become predominantly Muslim.
但说实话，我不是伊斯兰教的专家，所以我不能 确定聂斯托留主义是否直接影响了伊斯兰教。 But to be honest, I'm not an expert on Islam, so I can't say for sure whether Nestorianism directly influenced Islam.
我将这留给其他人去研究。 I'll leave that up to others to try to sort that out.
但我确实认为现代有聂斯托留主义者，不是作为一个特定的宗教团体，而是 一群学者，他们使用或至少曾使用一种被称为「寻找历史耶稣」的方法。 But I do think that there are modern Nestorians, not so much as a specific religious group, but rather as a collection of scholars who use, or at least used to use, a methodology known as the quest for the historical Jesus.
这是一种误导性的尝试，试图从福音书中分离出历史性的材料和所谓非历史 性的材料。一群自称耶稣研讨会的学者实际上试图通过对福音书中的段落投 票，给每个段落分配概率，来创建一个耶稣真实或历史性言论的列表。 This was a misguided attempt to separate out from the Gospels the material that was historical from that which supposedly wasn't. And a group of scholars calling themselves the Jesus Seminar actually tried to create a list of the true or historical sayings of Jesus by voting on passages in the Gospels and assigning probabilities to each of them as to whether they thought Jesus actually said and did these things.
这是一种极其有缺陷的方法，但关键是，使其成为聂斯托留主义的是假设可 以将所谓历史的耶稣与所谓信仰的基督分开，仿佛它们是两个不同的实体。 It is a supremely flawed methodology, but the point is what makes it Nestorian was the assumption that you could separate the so-called historical Jesus from the so-called Christ of faith, as if those are two different entities.
我已经指出这其中有诺斯底主义的元素，但它也 非常聂斯托留主义，因为它假设有两个基督。 And I've already called this out for having an element of Gnosticism in it, but it's also very Nestorian, in the sense that there is this assumption that there are two Christs.
在这种情况下，人性的耶稣是真实的，而神性的基督 则是不同的，历史上难以验证，只能通过信仰接触。 In this case, the human Jesus is the real one, and the divine Christ is somehow a different one, less historically verifiable and accessible only by faith.
关键是，像聂斯托留主义一样，寻找历史耶稣假 设确实有两个基督，一个人性的，一个神性的。 The point being that, like Nestorianism, the quest for the historical Jesus assumes that there are really two Christs, a human one and a divine one.
当我攻读博士学位并研究所有这些材料时，我的教授常说： 「亚波里拿留主义提出的基督是穿着皮肤外衣的神的道。」 When I was working on my PhD and going over all of this material, my professor used to say, "Apollinarianism proposed a Christ who was the divine Word in a skin suit."
这就像把科尔维特的引擎装进福特嘉年华。 And that would be like putting a Corvette engine into a Ford Fiesta.
这是在所有《速度与激情》电影之前。 This was before all the Fast and the Furious movies.
聂斯托留主义提出的基督实际上是两个基督。 Nestorianism proposed a Christ who was really two Christs.
这就像两个人穿着马的服装。 That would be like two guys in a horse costume.
但当然，这两者都不是对耶稣基督真实身份的好描述。 But of course, neither one is a good description of who Jesus Christ really is.
如果你跟随我的超级英雄比喻，我们可以说亚波里拿留主义像钢铁侠，聂斯 托留主义像绿巨人，把耶稣变成一种化身博士，两个男人在同一个身体里。 And if you're following along with my superhero analogies, we could say that while Apollinarianism was like Iron Man, Nestorianism is like the Incredible Hulk, making Jesus into a kind of Jekyll and Hyde, two men in the same body.
但比这更重要的是，对我们今天的信仰有两个非常关键的影响。 But more important than that, are two very crucial implications for our faith today.
首先要重申的是，所有关于马利亚的教义至少同样关乎基督和基督论。 The first is to reiterate the point that all of the Marian doctrines say at least as much about Christ and Christology as they do about Mary.
在当前的情况下，马利亚作为神之母的角色和称号 的教义确认了基督的神性以及基督两性的合一。 For the present case, the doctrine of Mary's role and title as Mother of God affirms the divinity of Christ as well as the unity of Christ's two natures.
她不仅仅将耶稣的人性带入世界。 She did not just bring the humanity of Jesus into the world.
她将他的神性带入世界。 She brought his divinity into the world.
她将神的道带入世界。 She brought the divine Word into the world.
最后，所有这些对我们如何理解人类生命的开始有明确的影响。 And finally, all of this has clear implications for how we understand the beginning of human life.
因为道在受孕时成为肉身，因此耶稣的生命从受孕开 始就是人类生命，我们能对其他任何人说得更少吗？ For since the Word became flesh at his conception, and therefore the life of Jesus was a human life from conception, can we say any less of any other human?
我们必须从受孕的那一刻起就承认每个人的人性， 因为如果不这样做，那对道成肉身意味着什么？ We have to recognize the humanity of every person from the moment of conception, because if we don't, what would that say about the Incarnation?
主张一个人从受孕时起不是人，就意味着基督从道成肉身的那一刻起就不是人。 To argue that a person is not a person from the moment of conception would be to imply that Christ was not a human from the moment of the Incarnation.
下次《教父的道路》，我们将讨论优提克和基督一性派。 Next time on The Way of the Fathers, Eutyches and the Monophysites.
感谢收听。 Thanks for listening.
《教父的道路》由CatholicCulture.org制作。 Way of the Fathers is a production of CatholicCulture.org.
请查看我们的其他播客，包括《天主教文化有声书》，让经典天主教著作栩 栩如生；《标准》，天主教电影播客，从天主教视角深入分析伟大电影；以 及《天主教文化播客》，一个探索天主教艺术、文化和问题的访谈节目。 Check out our other podcasts, including Catholic Culture Audiobooks, bringing to life classic Catholic writings, Criteria, the Catholic Film Podcast, featuring deep analysis of great films from a Catholic perspective, and the Catholic Culture Podcast, an interview show exploring Catholic arts, culture, and issues.
你可以在CatholicCulture.org找到所 有这些，以及天主教新闻、评论、礼仪年资源等更多内容。 You'll find all of this, as well as Catholic news, commentary, liturgical year resources, and much more at CatholicCulture.org.