Chalcedon
#71
Exactly. :) Christ is one person in two natures...That have come together into an ineffable hypostatic union. So Christ is not two, but one Single Subsistent being composed of two natures and in two natures, that have been united in the one Person as a single being.

So all the activities of Christ are theandric: activities of God and man.

What would be the legitimate and Orthodox understanding of "One nature of the Word incarnate." that Constantinople II says is a legitimate expression of the faith?
Reply
#72

@ Gregory I

Denzinger 148: "...for us and for our deliverance, one and the same Christ only begotten Son, our Lord, acknowledged in two natures,' without mingling, without change, indivisibly, undividedly, the distinction of the natures nowhere removed on account of the union but rather the peculiarity of each nature being kept, and uniting in one person and substance, not divided or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son only begotten God Word, Lord Jesus Christ, just as from the beginning the prophets taught about Him and the Lord Jesus Himself taught us, and the creed of our fathers has handed down to us."
Reply
#73
(05-11-2011, 12:38 AM)Gregory I Wrote: What would be the legitimate and Orthodox understanding of "One nature of the Word incarnate." that Constantinople II says is a legitimate expression of the faith?

I would assume that is the one subsistent nature, i.e. one personal nature.  And that's how St Cyril understood physis - a subsistent nature.  Hence the confusion.
Reply
#74
Pheo says: "I would assume that is the one subsistent nature, i.e. one personal nature.  And that's how St Cyril understood physis - a subsistent nature.  Hence the confusion. "

One Person. 
Two natures.
One Divine.
One human.
The Divine co-substantial with the Father.
The human co-substantial with Our Lady.

 

Reply
#75
Yep wulfrano, we agree.  Like Walty said, there are probably some terminology differences.  We do believe in one Subsistence.

It's also pretty clear in the Chalcedonian Definition:
"We also teach that we apprehend this one and only Christ-Son, Lord, only-begotten — in two natures; and we do this without confusing the two natures, without transmuting one nature into the other, without dividing them into two separate categories, without contrasting them according to area or function. The distinctiveness of each nature is not nullified by the union. Instead, the "properties" of each nature are conserved and both natures concur in one "person" and in one reality [hypostasis]. They are not divided or cut into two persons, but are together the one and only and only-begotten Word [Logos], God, the Lord Jesus Christ."
Reply
#76
Agreed.  ;D
Reply
#77
Pheo has said: "Yep wulfrano, we agree.  Like Walty said, there are probably some terminology differences.  We do believe in one Subsistence."

Right!  One Subsistence.

"It's also pretty clear in the Chalcedonian Definition:
"We also teach that we apprehend this one and only Christ-Son, Lord, only-begotten — in two natures; and we do this without confusing the two natures, without transmuting one nature into the other, without dividing them into two separate categories, without contrasting them according to area or function. The distinctiveness of each nature is not nullified by the union. Instead, the "properties" of each nature are conserved and both natures concur in one "person" and in one reality [hypostasis]. They are not divided or cut into two persons, but are together the one and only and only-begotten Word [Logos], God, the Lord Jesus Christ."

Yes!

And Gregory I says it very well indeed:

"Exactly.  Christ is one person in two natures...That have come together into an ineffable hypostatic union. So Christ is not two, but one Single Subsistent being composed of two natures and in two natures, that have been united in the one Person as a single being.

So all the activities of Christ are theandric: activities of God and man. "

Yes!  Absolutely!



Reply
#78
Cyril used the term Physis, which is a kind of fuzzy word. It is equally translatable as either Person, or Nature.

So, I think, like we have agreed, the best translation is "being."

So, "One being who is the word incarnate." Is equivalent to Cyril's "One nature of the incarnate word."

Good? One Individual Subsistence that has all the properties of humanity and divinity united in a single being.
Reply
#79
(05-10-2011, 11:56 PM)wulfrano Wrote: @  Walty.

The Second Divine Person assumes a human nature.

Ahh, but the Athanasian Creed saith:
One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God.

-Athanasian Creed

p.s. I'm a fan of the Creed's strong language. ie. 'whoever does not hold the Catholic faith, cannot be saved." So simple in today's confusing world.
Reply
#80
(05-11-2011, 04:23 PM)randomtradguy Wrote: p.s. I'm a fan of the Creed's strong language. ie. 'whoever does not hold the Catholic faith, cannot be saved." So simple in today's confusing world.

I would assume you are not  a fan of Vatican II then  ;)
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)