The making of miaphysite Churches in Syria and Egypt happened to be a long and complicated process. Before the stable ecclesiastical entities that we know today as the Syriac-Orthodox and the Coptic-Orthodox Church emerged in the course of the sixth century, the anti-Chalcedonian movement had been fragmented into numerous sects passionately fighting each other. In 518 the Council of Chalcedon was reinstated by the Emperor Justin. Rejecting the council's Christological doctrine presented the miaphysites with several questions that they could not agree on for quite a long period: to what extent could they remain obedient to an emperor who favoured a wrong doctrine of faith? Should they still acknowledge bishops who confessed to heretical teachings? From whom should one receive holy orders in the future? What about receiving the eucharist from Chalcedonian priests? In recent years the different ways in which to tackle these and similar questions in the anti-Chalcedonian camp, which touched on fundamental issues of the relationship of Church and State, Church and State-Church, have been the subject of important studies (for example those of Volker Menze and Philip Wood).

Yonatan Moss aims to take a fresh look at one of the main controversies that erupted among the anti-Chalcedonians shortly after 518. The dispute between Severus of Antioch and Julian of Halicarnassus, both exiled in Egypt, was about the question of whether Christ's body has been incorruptible from the very moment of the incarnation onwards or only after the resurrection and ascension. In the History of the dogma Julian's doctrine was labelled ‘aphthartodocetic’ and mostly treated as a late diversion of Christology in late antiquity. Moss develops a broader approach that he calls ‘stereoscopic’. Using his perfect knowledge of the sources he reveals striking parallels in the conceptions of Christology (in a strict sense), ecclesiology and the doctrine of the sacraments. Moss observes that all these fields are dealing with the ‘body’ of Christ: the physical, the social, the liturgical. A close reading of the sources benefits from the methodological insights of contemporary research into the social construction of body and ritual (for example the work of Mary Douglas, John Gager and Catherine M. Bell).

Wisely enough Moss does not bring the different fields of doctrine into causative relationships. What he is interested in are ‘correlative’ relationships. The conviction that Christ's body was corruptible before the resurrection seems to correlate with Severus’ attitude towards the Church of the empire (ch. ii). He vehemently rejected attempts to create separate ecclesiastical structures besides the official Church of the empire. Severus disapproved the plans of some miaphysites to ordain priests and even bishops for themselves. On the contrary, for Severus the Church of the empire still represented the one body of Christ even though it had partially fallen into heresy. The correlation that Moss detects here is that Severus admitted the existence of some ‘corruption’ in the Church as he did in the physical body of Christ.

Following this line of interpretation other views of Severus can be brought into unexpected correspondence. Severus rejected the rebaptising or rechrismation of converts from Chalcedonianism. Here too the principle ‘unity overrides purity’ can be underpinned with Severus’ Christological statements (ch. iii). The same is true for Severus’ insistence on retaining the names of Chalcedonian bishops in the dyptichs. It seems that Severus distinguished two aspects of the eucharist: the corruptible aspect of the sacramental substance in the present and an incorruptible aspect that will be manifested only at the eschaton (ch. iv). In a final chapter Moss also wants to establish correlations between shifts in Christology and the different approaches that Severus and Julian were following in their readings of the Fathers. Both constantly refer to the writings of Fathers of undisputed orthodoxy. Julian cited the Fathers as authorities, sometimes taking into account the need to situate them in their historical context. Inconsistencies could be, at least partly, explained by an appeal to historical circumstances. In his debate with Julian, Severus of Antioch avoided this kind of approach. He preferred other ways of dealing with passages that contradicted his own teaching. One of them was to correct textual ‘corruptions’ in patristic literature. Not surprisingly, Moss also establishes here too a correlation to Christology. This last chapter is perhaps less convincing than the others for it seems somehow artificial to represent the ‘body’ of patristic writings as correlating to the ‘body of Christ’.

Nevertheless the book provides us with a new key to Severus of Antioch as a theologian and as a church politician. However, the book also claims to draw a corresponding overall picture of Julian's theology. Due to the fragmentary transmission of Julian's writings this goal could not be completely achieved. Admittedly, there is strong evidence that Julian's support for separation from the Church of the Empire has its counterpart in his stressing of the incorruptibility of Christ's body. But the textual basis on which to reconstruct Julian's views remains extremely small when it comes to the questions of canonical orders or the understanding of the eucharist. The reader should keep this in mind when studying this extremely useful, learned and innovative book.