Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'll give you an example of a divine person: God the Father. I'll give you an example of a human person: the apostle Paul.

According to Roman Catholic orthodoxy (note: cite it), is Jesus Christ a human person, a divine person, both, or none?

share|improve this question
Are you aiming at differences in the understanding of hypostatic union here or just trying to identify the RCC as Chalcedonian or not or something else? – Caleb Feb 22 '13 at 10:16
Nestorians believed Christ to be two persons: a human person and a divine person. Hence, they reject the term theotokos in reference to Mary, insisting she is only the mother of his humanity. This was considered heresy. I'd like to know what the RCC officially states about what kind of person Jesus is, whether human, divine, both or none, etc. I have no intent of discrediting the RCC; if anything, I respect the work it has done in establishing doctrine and unity, and so, I'm asking it first and foremost. – Simply a Christian Feb 22 '13 at 18:08
Answering according to your multiple choice may allow for and encourage an inaccurate interpretation. Christ is one person who is both fully human and fully divine. So, he's a human person, divine person, both, and by some interpretations, neither. I.e. ... all of the above? – svidgen Feb 25 '13 at 17:46
When you say "fully human," are you referring to "person" (hypostasis) or "nature" (ousia)? My question is worded accurately and does not encourage an inaccurate interpretation. Those familiar with Catholic doctrine should be able to answer sufficiently. I gave all possible choices. Divine person, human person, both, or none. Can you think of anything else that could have been offered as a choice? If so, please suggest it and I will consider editing the choices. – Simply a Christian Feb 25 '13 at 18:07

According to Chalcedonian Doctrine (that is shared by Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Protestant churches) Christ is fully God and fully human.

Christ is however one person which is both God and human. He isn't a person of God that dwelled in a separate human person (which is the teaching of nestorianism).

The Oriental Orthodox (e.g. Coptic) churches reject the teaching of Chalcedonian Council, however they mostly declare, they are not monophysitic. The argument here is partly about the meaning of the work 'nature'.

share|improve this answer
Can you please clarify if you are dismissing all the choices, or if you are affirming that he is a divine person, or a human person, or both? I cannot tell from your answer. It only mentions is that he is "one person..." I added "or none" in case you are dismissing all the choices. – Simply a Christian Feb 22 '13 at 9:33

In Chalcedonian Council, a letter from Pope Leo I called "Epistola Dogmatica", was endorsed which explains the mystery of the Incarnation.

Pope declared that :

“after the Incarnation what was proper to each nature and substance in Christ remained intact and both were united in one person, but so that each nature acted according to its own qualities and characteristics.”

Chalcedonian Council, also adopted a document saying:

We teach . . . one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, known in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.


share|improve this answer
up vote 3 down vote accepted

The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, 480, states,

Jesus Christ is true God and true man, in the unity of his divine person; for this reason he is the one and only mediator between God and men.

Ergo, the Lord Jesus Christ is a divine person.

share|improve this answer
That paragraph states that Jesus is true God and true man. I would interpret that as both human and divine. I would read the part in bold as explaining that the two natures are inseparable. – Belinda Jan 5 '15 at 17:59
@Belinda: that is right. Christ’s two natures are one according to the hypostasis (a.k.a. person): that is the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union in a nutshell. Hence Christ is a Divine Person (Hypostasis). – AthanasiusOfAlex Jul 1 at 19:51

There are two issues here, which can unfortunately interact in a confusing way.

Part 1: Christ is one Person. He is fully human. He is also fully divine. That's what it means to have those two natures. So both "divine" and "human" can be correctly used as predicate adjectives describing Christ.

Part 2: Theologians have decided to use only the greater of the two natures, namely the divine, as an attributive adjective for Him. So they call Him a divine person, and they do not call him a human person.

This decision leads to the linguistically strange situation that theologians say that Christ is a person, that Christ is human, but not that Christ is a human person.

share|improve this answer

My dear friends, the nature of Jesus, the Son of God, the Word that is the beginning of all things that exist and the Word that became "flesh" is 'Divine-Human'. His nature are inseparable. He revealed Himself for us in order for us to see the face of God. Moses saw the back of God, but He is the only-begotten Son who knows the Father and He and the Father is, therefore through Him we have been given the grace to know and see the Father.

share|improve this answer
Welcome to the Christianity.SE! Your current post does not meet this SE's standards for answering questions, because it mainly does not include references. It will also be helpful, if you could label your theology using theological terms instead of describing it. – Double U Feb 7 '15 at 17:56

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.