Editing Monophysitism (section)

== Background ==

The [[First Council of Nicaea]] (325) declared that Christ was both divine ([[homoousios]], [[Consubstantiality|consubstantial]], of one being or essence, with [[God the Father|the Father]]) and human (was [[Incarnation (Christianity)|incarnate]] and became man). In the fifth century a heated controversy arose between the [[episcopal see|sees]] and theological schools of [[see of Antioch|Antioch]] and [[see of Alexandria|Alexandria]] about how divinity and humanity existed in Christ,<ref>{{cite book|author=Ted Campbell|title=Christian Confessions: A Historical Introduction|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=p2mUxxxGt_sC&pg=PA43|date= 1996|publisher=Westminster John Knox Press|isbn=978-0-664-25650-0|page=43}}</ref> with the former stressing the humanity, the latter the divinity of Christ. [[Cyril of Alexandria]] succeeded in having [[Nestorius]], a prominent exponent of the Antiochian school, condemned at the [[Council of Ephesus]] in 431, and insisted on the formula "one ''physis'' of the incarnate Word", claiming that any formula that spoke of two ''physeis'' represented [[Nestorianism]]. Some taught that in Christ the human nature was completely absorbed by the divine, leaving only a divine nature. In 451, the [[Council of Chalcedon]], on the basis of [[Pope Leo the Great]]'s [[Leo's Tome|449 declaration]], [[Chalcedonian Definition|defined]] that in Christ there were two ''natures'' united in one ''person''.<ref name="Kleinhenz2004">{{cite book|author=Christopher Kleinhenz|title=Medieval Italy: An Encyclopedia|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=E2CTAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT762|date=2004|publisher=[[Routledge]]|isbn=978-1-135-94880-1|page=762}}</ref>

Those who insisted on the "one ''physis''" formula were referred to as ''monophysites'' ({{IPAc-en|m|ə|ˈ|n|ɒ|f|ɪ|s|aɪ|t|s}}), while those who accepted the  "two natures" definition were called ''[[dyophysites]]'', a term applied also to followers of Nestorianism.