Additional/Miscellaneous Notes (Coptic Interpretations of the Fourth Ecumenical Council)
|Oriental Orthodox (Non-Chalcedonian) perspective, which may differ from an Eastern Orthodox (Chalcedonian) understanding.|
1. St. Cyril of Alexandria called the Blessed Holy Virgin Mary the Theotokos, Mother of God, not mother of the human nature of Christ. From the soteriological viewpoint, if only an ordinary man without a trace of sin (and not the Incarnate Logos) died on the cross, then this would not be enough as an atonement for the (infinite) sin of mankind against the infinite God.
2. The Non-Chalcedonian, Oriental Orthodox were habitually represented by their Chalcedonian opponents as denying all reality to the human nature of Christ after the union, but this is definitely not true and was never the case.
3. There is a difference between the word "will" taken to mean the faculty, mere velleity or wish, and the same word taken to mean the decision taken by the will (the will willing vs. the will willed; also voluntas ut natura [thelesis] as opposed to voluntas ut ratio [boulesis]). In case of Christ, the Incarnate Logos, there was definitely one will willed (willed will). The Chambesy 1990 Agreement reads, "Both families agree that the Hypostasis of the Logos became composite by uniting to His divine uncreated nature with its natural will and energy, which He has in common with the Father and the Holy Spirit, created human nature, which He assumed at the Incarnation and made His own, with its natural will and energy. Both families agree that the natures with their proper energies and wills are united hypostatically and naturally without confusion, without change, without division and without separation, and that they are distinguished in thought alone. Both families agree that He who wills and acts is always the one Hypostasis of the Logos incarnate."