A common misconception about the Oriental Orthodox Church is that it’s Christology is ‘Monophysite’, meaning, that She followers the erroneous teachings of Eutyches of Constantinople that Jesus’ humanity had disappeared into His Divinity.
On the contrary, the Church teaches that Jesus Christ is Fully God and Fully Man; but One Concrete and Composite Nature from Two. This form of Christology is known as ‘Miaphysitism’, which has its basis in the teachings of the Early Church Fathers.
Below is an explanation of our Church’s Christology is more detail by His Holiness Pope Shenouda the Third, followed by a Florilegium on this dogmatic teaching.
His Holiness Pope Shenouda III: By ‘One Nature’, we mean a real union. This does not involve mingling as of wheat and barely, nor confusion as of wine and water or milk and tea. Moreover, no change occurred as in the case of chemical reaction. For example carbon dioxide consists of carbon and oxygen, and the nature of both changes when they are combined; each loses its properties which distinguished it before the unity. In contrast, no change occurred in the Divine or Human nature as a result of their unity. Furthermore, unity between the two natures occurred without transmutation. Thus, neither did the Divine nature transmute to the human nature, nor did the human nature, transmute to the Divine nature. The Divine nature did not mix with the human nature nor mingle with it, but it was a unity that led to Oneness of Nature. St. Cyril the Great used this analogy and so did St. Dioscorus. In the case of ignited iron, we do not say that there are two natures: iron and fire, but we say iron united with fire. Similarly, we speak about the nature of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Incarnate God, and we do not say “God and man”.
In the union of iron with fire, the iron is not changed into fire nor fire into iron. Both are united without mingling, confusion or alteration. Although this situation is not permanent in the case of iron, and here is the point of disagreement, but we only want to say that once iron is ignited with fire, it continues to retain all the properties of iron and all the properties of fire. Likewise, the nature of the Incarnate Logos is One Nature, having all the Divine characteristics and all the human as well. – (The Nature of Christ, Pg. 7).
Saint Athanasius: Christ will be called perfect God and perfect man: not as if the divine perfection had been converted into a human perfection which is an impious notion; nor as if we acknowledged two ‘perfections’ separate from each other, which is alien to true religion; nor again by way of ‘advance’ in virtue, and an accession of righteousness, God forbid! But by way of an unfailing existence, so that the two should be one, perfect in all things, the self-same God and man. – (On The Incarnation Against Apollinarius Book 1, Translated by members of the English Church; Oxford: James Parker & Co., and London: Rivingtons, 1881, with emphasis).
For the Lord exhibited flesh and blood, and bones, and a soul in pain and agitation and distress. Now one cannot say that these things are natural to Godhead: but they came to belong to Godhead by nature.. ..but he who is by nature God was born man, that these two might be one, perfect in all things, exhibiting his birth as natural and most true. -(On the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Against Apollinaris, Par 7).
We confess that he is the Son of God and God in the Spirit, and man in the flesh. We do not confess that this single Son is two natures, one to be worshiped and one not to be worshiped. He is rather one incarnate nature of the Word, and is to be worshiped, with his flesh, with a single worship. There are not two sons, one the true Son of God who is worshiped, and the other a man from Mary who is not worshiped, but who has become a son of God by grace in the way that men do. – (Quoted by St. Cyril, A Defense of the Twelve Anathemas, Eighth Anathema).
The Council of Ephesus: If anyone divides in the one Christ the hypostases after the union, joining them only by a conjunction of dignity or authority or power, and not rather by a coming together in a union by nature, let him be anathema.” – (Third Anathema).
St Gregory Nazianzen: If anyone does not believe that Holy Mary is the Mother of God, he is severed from the Godhead. If anyone should assert that He passed through the Virgin as through a channel, and was not at once divinely and humanly formed in her (divinely, because without the intervention of a man; humanly, because in accordance with the laws of gestation), he is in like manner godless. If any assert that the Manhood was formed and afterward was clothed with the Godhead, he too is to be condemned. For this were not a Generation of God, but a shirking of generation. If any introduce the notion of Two Sons, one of God the Father, the other of the Mother, and discredits the Unity and Identity, may he lose his part in the adoption promised to those who believe aright. For God and Man are two natures, as also soul and body are; but there are not two Sons or two Gods. For neither in this life are there two manhoods; though Paul speaks in some such language of the inner and outer man. And (if I am to speak concisely) the Saviour is made of elements which are distinct from one another (for the invisible is not the same with the visible, nor the timeless with that which is subject to time), yet He is not two Persons. God forbid! For both natures are one by the combination, the Deity being made Man, and the Manhood deified or however one should express it. And I say different Elements, because it is the reverse of what is the case in the Trinity; for There we acknowledge different Persons so as not to confound the persons; but not different Elements, for the Three are One and the same in Godhead. – (Letters: Division I).
St. Cyril of Alexandria: For we confess, he says, that he is Son of God and God according to the Spirit, Son of Man according to the flesh, not that the one Son is two natures, one to be worshipped and one not to be worshipped, but one nature of the Word of God, incarnate and worshipped with his flesh with one worship, not two Sons. – (Oratio ad dominas PG, 76,1201-1336).
HERMIAS – Should you not therefore distinguish in any way?
ST. CYRIL – Certainly not. And especially not to speak of two after the union and conceive each of them separately. It is necessary to know, as a result, that the mind contemplates some distinction of natures, for divinity and humanity are certainly not the same thing, but at the same time to admit, concerning these concepts, the both coming together into union.” – (Christological Dislocue with Hermias the Priest).
If the union is a genuine one, then there can in no way be two; Christ is to be understood only as a single, solitary individual arising out of both.”- (Defense of the Twelve Anathemas Against the Oriental Bishops and Theodoret).
This objection is yet another attack on those who say that there is one incarnate nature of the Son. They want to show that the idea is foolish and so they keep on arguing at every turn that two natures endured. They have forgotten, however, that it is only those things that are usually distinguished at more than a merely theoretical level which split apart from one another in differentiated separateness and radical distinction. Let us once more take the example of an ordinary man. We recognize two natures in him; for there is one nature of the soul and another of the body, but we divide them only at a theoretical level, and by subtle speculation, or rather we accept the distinction only in our mental intuitions, and we do not set the natures apart nor do we grant that they have a radical separateness, but we understand them to belong to one man. This is why the two are no longer two, but through both of them the one living creature is rendered complete. – (Second Letter To Succensus).
“If anyone dares to say that Christ was a God-bearing man and not rather God in truth, being by nature one Son. even as “the Word became flesh” and is made partaker of blood and flesh precisely like us, let him be anathema.”- (12 Anathemas Attached to Third Letter to Nestorius, Anathema 5).
When we have the idea of the two elements of the one and unique Son and Lord Jesus Christ, we speak of two natures being united: but after the union, the duality has been abolished and we believe the Son’s nature to be one, since he is one Son, yet become man and incarnate. – (Letter 40, to Acacius, Bishop of Melitine, (CPG-5340)).
They also said the following: ‘If there is one incarnate nature of the Word then it absolutely follows that there must have been a mixture and confusion, with the human nature in him being diminished or “stolen away’ as it were.’ Once again those who twist the truth are unaware that in fact there is but one incarnate nature of the Word. – (2nd Letter to Succensus, (CPG-5346)).
“Nevertheless having been ineffably and indescribably united, he exhibited to us the Son’s single nature, although, as I have said, it was one incarnate nature.” [Note: ‘Single Nature’ in this context does pertain to specifically Christ’s Divinity, as Eutyches blasphemously taught, but the One Composite Nature] – (2nd Letter to Succensus, CPG-5346).
St Gregory The Theologian: Foolish is he or she who does not worship the ever-existing Word of God, the Lord, as equally God with the supernal Father. Foolish is he or she who does not worship the Word, the Lord, a human here appearing, as equally God with the heavenly Word. The one divides the Word from the great Father, the other our human form and fleshiness from the Word. Though being God, the Father’s Word took on our human being, to mingle it with God, and be little amongst earthlings. He is one God out of both, being so human as to make me God, instead of human. Be merciful, O wounded one on high! Let that much suffice you. What more have I to do with an ineffable mind and mixture? Both are God, you mortals, be content with reason’s limits. If, then, l’ve won you over, much the better. But if you blacken the page with many myriads of words, come, and I’ll inscribe these little verses upon tables with letters from my carving pen, which have no blackness in them. -( On God and Man, On the Incarnation of Christ, Poem 1.1.11).
St. Malchion: I asked you a question. Since you speak of Wisdom and Word, and say that one human being participates in Word [and] Wisdom and another one lacks [them], do you say [in the case of Christ] that it is in virtue of participation in these, or because the Word itself and the Wisdom descended upon him? For substance and participation are not alike. For that which is by substance is like a part of the whole individual, who became our Lord through the combination of God and human being, whereas that which is by participation is not like a part of the one in which it exists. – (Fragments from the Stenographic Report of the Discussion between Malchion and Paul: Dialogue between Paul and Malchion).
St. Mark the Monk: Even if you say “he was begotten,” that does not mean that God is “bare” or that Christ is “a mere human being.” Scripture does say that Christ was begotten, but it also says that the divine and the human were united in him. Thus does Holy Scripture everywhere confess him, not as God here and as a human being there, but one Christ Jesus, from both God and human being. Thus too you will find him everywhere in Holy Scripture: Jesus Christ, whom we profess and in whom we believe.
St. Theodotus of Ancyra: How did he impoverish himself on our behalf?Let those who separate the manhood from God the Word, parting him who was united by mention of natures, who say Christ is “two things,” introducing for their defense a merely invented unity – let them tell us.- (Second Homily on Birth of Jesus Christ our Savior (Homily at Ephesus) (ACO 1.1.2: 86, 30-33 Schwartz)).
Acacius of Melitene: Despise the Church, but either by your own Presence, or by directing some with the most surprising and exultant tribune, faithful and zealous men from among your members, let everyone be forced to publicly anathematize the dogmas of Nestorius and Theodore: especially those who say two natures after the union, properly each one working. For of those who are in Germany I have found some experienced, indeed refusing to say two sons, but indeed not refusing to say two natures. Wherefore if it be granted, that it may be said and taught by them, that each nature worketh by itself, and this indeed is suffered, but that remaineth impassive, there is no other thing than to confess two sons again, and bring in the parts. I therefore beg your incomparable and devoted soul to God: watch over the cause, taking time from the Lord Christ, and complete the union of the Churches without scandal and without scar or stain. – (Epistle to Cyril, concerning the peace which was made betweer him and the eastern bishops).
St. Gregory Thaumaturgus: And it is the true God, the unincarnate, that was manifested in the flesh, perfect with the true and divine perfection, not with two natures; nor do we speak of worshipping four (persons, viz., God, and the Son of God, and man, and the Holy Spirit.- (Fragment of Declaration of Faith).
“But the person of the Son is composite in its oneness (unita est), being one made up of two, that is, of divinity and humanity together, which two constitute one.”- (On the Trinity).
We anathematize those who separate the worship, making one divine and one human, and those who worship the man born of Mary, as if He were separate from the God who came from God. refusing to confess that God was incarnate but instead claiming that a man was merely united with God .. For God, having taken on human flesh, maintains His pure and divine energy, as an undefeated mind with the sufferings of the soul and the flesh. He rules over the flesh and its movements divinely and without sin. He is not only unconquered by death but also the one who destroys death. He is the true God, manifest in the flesh, perfect in true divine perfection-not two persons, nor two natures. For we do not say there are four to be worshiped: God, the Son of God, man, and the Holy Spirit. Therefore, we anathematize those who blaspheme in such a manner, those who place a man within divine worship. – (On the Faith in Parts, Cod. Vat. Gr. 1431, Maii Coll. t. VII, D. 174).
St. Ephrem the Syrian: Your story has steps of every size, for every person. To the lowest step I approach, though I presume. Your begetting is sealed within silence: Whose mouth will presume to rush toward it? Though your nature (kyana) is one, its interpretations are many. [There are] narratives exalted, intermediate, and lowly… Your exalted narrative is concealed beside your Begetter.. For if John, that great one, called out, “I am unworthy of the straps of your sandals, my Lord,” Then, like the sinful woman, I will take refuge In the shadow of your garment, dwelling inside of it.”- (Hymns on Faith 10:3).
St. Basil of Caesarea: In all this we do not speak of two, God alone and a man alone (for they are one), but we consider the nature of each conceptually. – (Against Eunomius IV).
St. Theodotus of Ancyra: How did the Egyptians’ river become blood, the nature of the water remaining unchanged? For the Hebrews were using it as water but for the Egyptians the Nile became blood and, remaining what it was, became what it was not. How did Egypt’s light become darkness, not by being quenched but remaining what it was? For it was day to the Israelites and pure light surrounded them, but to the Egyptians, this light was darkness. The single visible light was simultaneously light and darkness, not being changed and becom ing it. A divine miracle occurred. The flame in Babylon became dew and both are seen in the activity, for the three young men were cooled by the dew whereas the Babylonians were burned by the flame. There were not two things or two natures but what was seen was one and the same thing. The righteous bear witness: Ask not the mode of God’s miracles. -(Second Homily on Birth of Jesus Christ our Savior (Homily at Ephesus)).
Believe, therefore, in accordance with what Scripture says, that he came in the flesh, not that flesh came; that he grew weary in the flesh, not that flesh grew weary; that he suffered in the flesh, not that flesh suffered; that he died in the flesh, not that flesh died; that he was crucified in the flesh, not that flesh was crucified; that he rose in the flesh, not that flesh arose; that he was taken into heaven in the flesh, not that flesh was taken into heaven; that he healed in the flesh, not that flesh healed; that he was seated at the right hand of God in the flesh, not that flesh was seated. And, in general, whenever Holy Scripture speaks about him bodily, you cannot show that it is speaking about the flesh as one part of the whole, but rather united. – (Counsels on the Spiritual life, Tim Vivian & Augustine Casiday).
St. Mark the Monk: I may believe that you too are capable of understanding Christ’s nature. – (Counsels on the Spiritual life, Tim Vivian & Augustine Casiday).
St. Gregory of Nyssa: On account of the union achieved between the flesh which is taken and the Godhead which takes, names are communicated and given to each mutually in such a way that the divinity is spoken of in human term and the humanity in divine terms. Thus Paul calls the Crucified One the Lord of Glory (1Cor. 2:8); and He who is adored by the whole creation, above, below and upon the earth, is called Jesus.”
St. Ignatius: Hasten to come together all of you, as to one temple, even God; as to one altar, even to one Jesus Christ, who came forth from One Father and is with One and departed unto One.” ( Letter to the Magnesians (A.D. 35-105) ch. 7).
St. Theodotus: Not one and another, but the same is no longer divided, no longer considered two after the union.. the things once contemplated two, the economy made one. So then, no longer say two after the indissoluble union. But if you say the name of the Son is one, and the name Christ is also one, and you say that by this name there are diverse significations of essences, you do not agree with the Fathers, who believed in one Lord Jesus Christ after the unity of God with man, the Fathers did not conceive two things.. The properties of the united are brought together into one. -(Exposition on the Creed of Nicaea, (CPG-6124), PG 77 1328C).
Synod of Antioch: But since He is substantially united with his human body, whatever happens to it [his bodyl, He [The Word | suffers, being the same in composition and in a substantial union with the flesh.- (268. C.E.), Acta, Dispute between Presbyter Malchion against Paul of Samosata,Fragment 11.
“But why add: ‘it is as in a temple that Wisdom was in Jesus Christ,’ unless the flesh contains Wisdom and not that they are united according to substance. In the same way, the Word also would be enveloped by Jesus Christ, and this would be another apart from the Word; and there would not be God and flesh united substantially the two making one.” – (268. C.E.), Acta, Dispute between Presbyter Malchion against Paul of Samosata, Fragment 23.
Pope Sylvester I: If someone wanted to cut down a tree at noon while the sun was shining, would the axe not strike the tree, which is entirely surrounded by the sunlight? Certainly, said Noah. Then Sylvester added: Can it happen that the sun itself is struck or cut, which entirely surrounds both the axe and the tree? Thus, in Christ, the body is indeed the tree, the axe is the passion. and the sun is divinity. Christ suffered, but His divinity did not undergo any diminishment because of the suffering.- (Unus ex primis Roma episcopis in altercatione cum judœis de Servatore nostro Jesu-Christo, PL 8 814).
But if the example given is not sufficient, I will add another. It is possible for a tree that contains within it the ray of the sun to be cut. When the tree is being cut, we observe that the iron of the axe first strikes the ray of the sun before it strikes the wood. However, although the light is present, it cannot be struck or severed -( Against the Jews, Preserved in Catena inedita ad Lucae Evangelium, (Coll. Maii, Vol. 8, II, p.26).
If however it is impossible to someone for there to be two in one, and to be simultaneously possessed of being crucified yet remaining enduring and in this to endure insult, I will try to show this through a human example. The roval purple was wool that was mixed with the blood of the shellfish. which gave it a purple color. When it was placed on the fingers and twisted to form a thread, what underwent the turning: the wool or the dye? It is clear that it was the wool. Therefore, one must view the wool with the humanity and the purple color with the divine Word unified in the suffering of the cross. I speak of a union that is unconfused, unchanging, and unalterable, which only He Himself fully understands. – (Against the Jews, Preserved in Catena inedita ad Lucae Evangelium, PL 8 814, (Coll. Maii, Vol. 8, II, p.26).
St. Hilary: and when it says, Christ died, and when it says, the Word was made flesh; The statement must not be robbed by the deceit of the reader’s interpretations. For where Christ is a man, there necessitates the Mediator between God and men: so that from each of the two (ex utroque), God and man, one might subsist; and there may be between man and God a mediator, confessing in himself the nature that is of both. (utriusque naturae) But when Christ has died, it follows, that he is risen, and is at the right hand of God. In his death is the weakness of our flesh, in his resurrection is the power of it, in sitting at God’s right hand is its dignity. – (De expositione epistola ad Timotheum).
Furthermore, the reason for the statements follows, so that he may have said both because he was both man and God.. And because through these higher things he preached about the nature in which He existed, [which is] from each of the two separate categories (discretim ex utroque in quo erat naturae genere), namely of God and of man. – (138 Psalmum, Par 23 (Treatise on Psalms Ch. 138, Ancient Christian Writers Series, Published by Paulist Press).
That He might teach that He should be believed as the Son of God and proclaimed as the Son of Man: speaking and acting as a man in all things that are of God, and then speaking and acting as God in all things that are of man: yet in such a way that in that very discourse {i.e speaking) of both kinds (utriusque generis), He never spoke without signifying both man and God.. Here, accordingly, the heretics find opportunity to deceive the simple and ignorant. These words, uttered as a man, they falsely refer to a weakness of his divine nature: And because the one who is speaking is one and the same, they contend that he has spoken all things about himself. Some of Christ’s sayings are from before his birth, others during his birth and coming death, and others from his continuing eternity. And indeed, we do not deny that all the speech which remains of his whole is to be of his Nature (totum illum, qui ejus manet, naturae suae esse sermonem). But if Jesus Christ is both man and God; not just God firstly, before He became man, nor then when he became man did he cease to be God, nor after he became man and God was he not wholly man wholly God: it is necessary that the mystery of his sayings be one and the same with that of his kind (unum atque idem necesse est dictorum ejus sacramentum esse, quod generis). – (On the Trinity, Book 9, Paragraph 6).
The Person of the Son is indeed united in his oneness, namely one out of two, that is, of divinity and humanity, the two constitute one. Nevertheless, divinity does not receive any increase from this, but the Trinity remains as it was. .. Neither were there two natures, but only one nature of the Holy Trinity before the incarnation of the Word. the Son: and the nature of the Trinity remained one also after the incarnation of the Son. But if any one, moreover, believes that any increment has been given to the Trinity by reason of the assumption of humanity by the Word, he is an alien from us, and from the ministry of the Catholic and Apostolic Church. – (A fragment from On the Trinity, PG 10 1123-1126, (CPG 1787), (Mai, Spicil. Rom., vol. ii. p. 696, 101).
St. Irenaeus: For just as the wood, which is the lighter body, was submerged in the water; but the iron, the heavier one, floated: so, the Word of God’s oneness with flesh, is a becoming one according to hypostasis and nature, the heavy and terrestrial, having been rendered immortal. – (Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenæus, #28 (org. 26, ms. in the Royal Library Catena on the Books of Kings, Codex 2145, fol. 149, Paris. gr. 194 (s. XIII) (Diktyon 49763, GA 304).
Faith Unto Ages 