Also, the problem here Father, is this: The Tome of Leo was not analyzed without Imperial and Papal pressure.
Pope Leo the Great wanted to make sure that the Council didn't compromise on his view of Orthodoxy whatsoever, and he saw the Tome as Orthodoxy. At the Council, when the draft of the Chalcedonian Definition of Faith was drawn up, the Bishops wrote "of / from two natures", to which the Papal Legates demanded that you write "in two natures", and you should either follow Dioscorus or Leo.
https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ijt/10-4_143.pdf
I still don't get why the Tome isn't Orthodox - after all, "in two natures" was used by Saint John Cassian to explicitly attack Nestorius - but still - the Ecumenical Council's weren't without politics.
Let's not forget that Cyril started the Council without the Antiochians and without the Romans.
