- Jan 26, 2007
- 41,563
- 20,082
- 41
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
He never used it in the same way Chalcedon did or how Leo’s Tome did, the idea of one nature doing something and another doing something else is absolutely foreign to his writings, Saint Cyril speaks of the One Christ doing everything and everything he does is done either through his own humanity or divinity such as his suffering on the cross through his humanity however Cyril makes it clear that Christ suffered through his humanity not that the human nature suffered and the God didn’t die like how the Tome of Leo describes Christ. there’s nothing wrong or Un-Orthodox with dyophysitism per say. Chalcedon condemning Nestorius doesn’t mean it doesn't mean it wasn’t influenced by Antiochian Christology in one way or another, Chalcedon would have to condemn Nestorius even if it didn’t want to anyway because it has to make itself appear to continue the anathemas issues at Ephesus if it is to make itself Ecumenical. Leo was so great a friend to Cyril that he supported Theodoret of Cyprus a Nestorian that supported Nestorius’s removal of the title Theotokos for the blessed virgin. The Chalcedonians still regard him as blessed on their calendar despite condemning his writings against Cyril for some odd reason. By the way condemning heresy doesn’t mean you can’t fall into it yourself the biggest example would be Apollonarius who raged against the Arian heresy only to fall into another one himself or Eutychus who raged against the Nestorian heresy only to fall into heresy himself.
yes he did. in his letter to Theodoret of Cyrrhus he absolutely did, as well as his letter to Nestorius with his 12 Anathemas. he absolutely says that each nature operates uniquely.
St Leo actually calls out Theodoret of Cyrrhus (who is not blessed by us), in his letters to Eutyches. St Leo actually encourages Eutyches to keep up the fight against lingering Nestorians.
seriously, you need to stop.
Upvote
0