Nature of Christ Blog 23

Common Faith between Chalcedonians and Non-Chalcedonians (1)

Blog 23

• Both of them attempted to express the same identity of Christ as they wanted to display Him as consubstantial with God and consubstantial with mankind while remaining one unified person. [1] The union between the two natures did not alter either one’s particular characteristics, but the human nature was honored by the divine gifts. 
• Both of them condemned the heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches. 
• Both of them also reuse the terminology of the heretics, but refused their teachings. For example, Chalcedonians utilize “two natures,” although it was used by Nestorius, concerning his teaching of the division of Christ. However, they declined the existence of the division of Christ. Non-Chalcedonians employ “one nature,” which was used by Apollinarian when he wanted to describe how the divine nature of Christ was united to an incomplete human without a soul (mind). The same term was also used by Eutyches to describe the one divine nature of Christ, even though the non-Chalcedonians refused both of their teachings. 
• Both of them agreed that God, in His essence, is before all ages (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). Also, He is the same God who became incarnate and entered into the human world without any changes in His divinity. The incarnate God is an appearance of God on earth, “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9). 
  
  

  ---

  
  

  [1] William S. Frost, Chalcedonians and Monophysites, 2 https://dc.uwm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1049&context=rsso