Two natures of Christ.

[orthedoxy]

Did The Orthodox Church ever use the words two nature of Christ prior to Chelcedon?

[Pyotr]

Did The Orthodox Church ever use the words two nature of Christ prior to Chelcedon?

To my understanding, not as such. Just like "homousion" -- the term that was used in Nicea to say that the Son was "of the same essence or substance" as the Father -- was not used by the Church prior to Nicea but was incorporated to speak more precisely about exactly Who the Son was and what His makeup was, so the Church incorporated the idea of the Second Member of the Holy Trinity acting through two distinct (yet unified) natures.

[Maximus]

Yes, of course the Orthodox Church used the expression two natures of Christ prior to Chalcedon. St. Leo's Tome predates Chalcedon by at least three years, and the language was used by St. Cyril in his letter to John of Antioch and in the Formula of Union (433?) drafted by Blessed Theodoret of Cyrus and signed by St. Cyril.

The expression two natures of Christ was common enough in the Orthodox Church that it was used repeatedly by St. Flavian and others at the synod that tried and convicted Eutyches at Constantinople in 447 (448? You'll have to excuse me; I'm moving soon and all my reference books are packed in boxes).

It was used in the early Second Century by Tertullian and perhaps by others, but I will have to dig up the references.

St. Cyril mistakenly used the expression "one nature of the Word Incarnate" because he relied on Apollinarian forgeries that purported to be the work of St. Athanasius. Blessed Theodoret pointed out to him that those works were not authentic. St. Cyril later agreed and accepted the two natures terminology.

Monophysite partisans like Timothy Aelurus and Severus of Antioch were critical of St. Cyril in their writings because of this.

[Marjorie]

Yes, of course the Orthodox Church used the expression two natures of Christ prior to Chalcedon. St. Leo's Tome predates Chalcedon by at least three years, and the language was used by St. Cyril in his letter to John of Antioch and in the Formula of Union (433?) drafted by Blessed Theodoret of Cyrus and signed by St. Cyril.

Obviously (just having read a compilation of writings by St. Maximus the Confessor, one of my favorite saints), I'm for the Chalcedonian definition, but before the Non-Chalcedonians point it out... does it say "of two natures" or "in two natures" in the Formula of Union? I know that "of" two natures was in the letter to John of Antioch... it's my understanding that the Non-Chalcedonians accept the formula "of two natures" but not "in two natures."

In IC XC,
Marjorie

[Maximus]

Obviously (just having read a compilation of writings by St. Maximus the Confessor, one of my favorite saints), I'm for the Chalcedonian definition, but before the Non-Chalcedonians point it out... does it say "of two natures" or "in two natures" in the Formula of Union? I know that "of" two natures was in the letter to John of Antioch... it's my understanding that the Non-Chalcedonians accept the formula "of two natures" but not "in two natures."

In IC XC,
Marjorie

Here's a quote from St. Cyril's Letter to John of Antioch (433):

"With regard to the Evangelical and Apostolic expressions concerning the Lord, we know that men who are skilled in theology make some of them common to the one Person, while they divide others between the two Natures, ascribing those that are fitting to God to Divinity of Christ, and those that are lowly to His Humanity. On reading these sacred utterances of Yours, and finding that we ourselves think along the same lines—for there is one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism—, we glorified God the Saviour of all" (John Karmiris, Dogmatic and Creedal Statements of the Orthodox Church, Vol. 1, p. 154).

No insistence on the preposition of there. It seems clear that St. Cyril believed our Lord still has two natures.

Timothy Aelurus seems to have thought St. Cyril professed faith in the two natures of Christ:

"Cyril... having excellently articulated the wise proclamation of Orthodoxy, showed himself to be fickle and is to be censured for teaching contrary doctrine: after previously proposing that we should speak of one nature of God the Word, he destroyed the dogma that he had formulated and is caught professing two Natures of Christ" (Timothy Aelurus, "Epistles to Kalonymos," Patrologia Graeca, Vol LXXXVI, Col. 276).

That was Severus of Antioch's criticism of St. Cyril, as well:

"The formulae used by the Holy Fathers concerning two Natures united in Christ should be set aside, even if they be Cyril's" (Severus of Antioch, Patrologia Graeca, Vol. LXXXIX, Col. 103D).

[Marjorie]

Great quotes, thanks!

In IC XC,
Marjorie

[minasoliman]

Dear Maximus,

Can you provide me with the full context of the quotes you provided?

Thank you friend.

God bless.

[Marjorie]

http://www.orthodoxunity.org/document04.html <- Letter to John of Antioch

Maybe Maximus has the others in context but that's the only one I have.

In IC XC,
Marjorie

[minasoliman]

Thank you Marjorie.

God bless you.

[Marjorie]

Thank you Marjorie.

God bless you.

Right back at you! :)

In IC XC,
Marjorie

[orthedoxy]

Maximus
you've been accused of misrepresenting history in the OO forum do you care to reply there?