Council,  Canon

 1   3    |  personality alone; and that the natures conjoined for the purpose
 2   3    |    because the difference of the natures was eliminated or abrogated
 3   3    |          but rather that the two natures formed for us the one Lord
 4   3    |     wrought the union of the two natures, the panegyris of the salvatory
 5   4    |          boldly confused the two natures of Christ, the divine and
 6   4    |  Only-begotten (composed) of two natures unconfusably, inconvertibly,
 7   4    |         in the difference of the natures on account of the union,
 8   6    |         as He also possessed two natures — that is to say, in other
 9   6    |        nor the humanity, the two natures of Christ, remained without
10   6    |         the peculiarities of the natures should be refuted, which
11   6    |         will and the energy, the natures themselves should inevitably
12   7”,1 |       Son of God composed of two natures and in these two same natures
13   7”,1 |    natures and in these two same natures glorified; and we have driven
14   8”,23|      Savior derives (sc. His two natures), as who should say, the
15   8”,23|    Christ signifies both the two natures unconflated and the single
16   8”,23|      with respect to which these natures were inconflatably united.
17   8”,23|      doctrine concerning the two natures of the Logos incarnate,
18   8”,23|  humanity of Christ, and His two natures; and secondly, in order
19   8”,23|         theologically of the two natures of Christ and of the one
20   8”,23|       the assertion that the two natures are united indivisibly and
21   8”,23|        clearer notion of the two natures inconvertibly and unconfusably
22   8”,23|       Christians confess the two natures to be essentially united,
23   8”,23| definition). The expression ‘two natures’ denotes the difference
24   8”,23|     essence of the two conjoined natures, which are, to wit, the
25   8”,23|    signify the fact that the two natures when combined together did
26   8”,23|       alike, and each of the two natures remains undiminished in
27   8”,23|        call the union of the two natures in connection with Christ
28   8”,23|       have resulted from the two natures a single composite nature,
29   8”,23|          dogmatizes that the two natures of Christ were united, not
30   8”,23|       Christ composed of the two natures, distinguished as the divinity
31   8”,23|    existential and subsistential natures, or, that is to say, actual
32   8”,23|           that is to say, actual natures or real natures) after the
33   8”,23|           actual natures or real natures) after the union, by conjoining
34   8”,23|      true enough, there were two natures in Christ, but after the
35   8”,23|          Christ consisted of two natures, before the union, that
36   8”,23|         say, but not also in two natures, after the union, that is
37   8”,23|       And if Christ hath not two natures, as you say, how could He
38   8”,23|         since there are also two natures inherent in Him, of which,
39   8”,23|       single hypostasis with two natures, the Divine and the human,
40   8”,23|       being. For each of the two natures wills and energizes its