Miaphysitism at Ephesus

The Council of Ephesus (431) was convened to establish the christology of the church and to fight the hoarde of Nestorians in the East. The hero of Ephesus, Cyril, was explicitly miaphysite (See my Examinations on my blog) and for this reason he is called the pillar of faith for his defense of the Miaphysite christology. Although Cyril is one of the most important Miaphysites, a number of other people at the Council were Miaphysite and even those who were invited professed Miaphysitism (See my writings on Augustine's Miaphysite theology).

Theodotus, Bishop of Ancyra, Saint

At Ephesus, Theodotus gave a number of homilies on Christology which all were held as doctrine and confirmed as Orthodox. But one of the main examples that is one of the most important is in the following:

"Do you know how the fire remained fire and became dew? What was seem was not two things not two natures, but one and the <same>."

[St. Theodotus of Ancyra; Homilies at Ephesus, Homily I]

We see here that St. Theodotus denies that there are two natures and confirms there is one and the same, even further we read this in the same homily:

"We do not think two, and we admit a single one.. Yet if you say one, but rationalize two, you have the concept battling with your word, So do not say two, separated by some difference."

[St. Theodotus of Ancyra; Homilies at Ephesus, Homily I]

and again he confesses the union:

"The virgin has become more glorious than paradise, for paradise was merely the planting of God, but she cultivated God himself in the flesh who decided on being combined to the nature of a human being."

[St. Theodotus of Ancyra; Homilies at Ephesus, Homily I]

But what is meant here by "combined"? Lest no one think that combination mean One in two, but One that is One, as he writes here:

"For the Jews did not crucify a mere man, neither did they nail the visible nature only, but they brought (their) daring to the God (who was) in it, had appropriated the sufferings of the United nature."

[St. Theodotus of Ancyra; Homilies at Ephesus, Homily II]

He establishes it was not the flesh they nailed to the cross, because there are not two things or two natures, but it was the United nature. This combination was a henosis, a becoming of one, yet as wee see, he clarifies there is a visible nature known while there are not two natures, this is a theoretical distinction.

"Where is he who divides Christ? Where is he who does equivocality to our mystery, and on the one hand says Christ (is) one, but on the other supposes two?"

[St. Theodotus of Ancyra; Homilies at Ephesus, Homily III]

We can fully affirm this is directed to the dyophysites, who had not yet overtaken the church of the west, because they admit One Christ yet say there are two natures. This itself shows they are enemies of the councils. 

Saint Theodotus was 100% Miaphysite in his christology, as he thought that saying two natures itself was a division, because there was a united nature. We can therefore assume Ephesus I was most likely Miaphysite.

The Statement of Reunion (St. Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria, and John, Bishop of Antioch)

The Statement of Reunion was to reunite the Church of Antioch and Alexandria, both confessing from two natures. While dyophysites argue that this is explicitly arguing that Christ is in two and from two, we look towards the historical context of this confession. 

Cyril gives us insight on what the Church of Antioch went on to confess with him, and he makes it abundantly clear that both parties confessed Miaphysitism.

"For what reason did the Bishop of Alexandria (i.e. Cyril) endure or even praise those who say that there are two natures?..Nestorius does not any longer confess the union as we do For we, when asserting the union, confess one Christ, one Son, the one and the same Lord, and finally we confess the One Incarnate Nature of God..Both reason and speculation know the division..those who speak of two natures are thinking thus also. Yet once we confess the union, those things which have been united are no longer separate from each other, but then there is one Son, and his nature is One as the Word Incarnate. The bishops from the East confess these doctrines, even though they are somewhat obscure concerning the expressions.. But the bishops from the East have said no such thing (as Nestorius said)."

[St. Cyril of Alexandria; Letter to Eulogius, PG 77:224-228, ACO 1 1 4 pp 35-37, Wickham pp 62-69.]

Cyril clarifies here that after the reunion, the bishops of the East confessed One incarnate nature of the Word and they confess that there is a distinction of Speculation and reason (En Theoria). Both parties confess the same thing and that is what the formula of reunion made clear, that BOTH were Miaphysites who confessed Christ is from two, In ONE!

Dioscorus, Bishop of Alexandria, Saint

St. Dioscorus of Alexandria who had attended Ephesus I with St. Cyril, as he was a student of Cyril and later went on to succeed him after his death, was a miaphysite. We read in the Letter of Dioscorus the following:

"Sufficiently indeed, as I consider, to the great confusion of Heretics, the Teachings of Holy Bishops and Orthodox Archbishops have proved the fatuity of the Affirmations of Heretics and shewn at the same time that it is an Impiety to speak of Two natures in God The Word Incarnate; for, they have excommunicated those who would this Doctrine (Two natures), and they have banished those who do not confess God The Word to be Consubstantial with Man, taking Flesh, although He remained unchangeable what He was before; as they had done with the rest of the heretics."

[St. Dioscorus of Alexandria; Letter to the Monks of Hennaton]

This was pretty clear and not much is need to be said.

Gregory, Bishop of Nazianzus, Saint

At Ephesus I, the letters of St. Gregory the Theologian were read and confirmed as Orthodox. These letters were Against Apollinaris and condemned two natures, as we read in the following:

"Yet there is no difference of person (God forbid!), for the two are one by being compounded, the Godhead having become man and the man having been 'deified' or however one might express it."

[St. Gregory the Theologian; Letter to Cledonius the Priest, Against Apollinaris, Epistle 101]

It is of great difficulty for the Dyophysites to overcome this, for they can't affirm his person is compounded nor can they affirm his essence was compounded for it goes against their ADS. The only way to accept it is to accept the One nature of the Word Incarnate was compounded out of two and is no longer two, and again if they say he meant person then they confuse the context:

"Then they accuse us of introducing two natures separated or opposing and dividing the surpassing and wondrous becoming of one (henosis)."

[St. Gregory the Theologian; Letter to Cledonius the Priest, Against Apollinaris, Epistle 102]

No commentary is needed, he denies they introduce two and affirm they have a becoming of one between the two.