Dear Mina,minasoliman said:ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It is always the prosopon that is the center of all willing and acting, but to confess two centers of action is understood by us as serperation and therefore Nestorianism, which is obviously a misunderstanding.
I have great difficulty with this. If thelema (will) is an attribute of hypostasis (person) and not ousia (nature) then what was happening in the Agony in the Garden (I know, I have asked this before, but it still hasn't been answered in a way which supports the notion that Christ had only One Will.)
"And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,
Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground." ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
If Christ's One Hypostasis had only "one personal Will" (as the Anglican-Oriental Orthodox agreed statement says), then it must have been in perfect harmony with the will of the Father. But the repulsion He expresses towards His coming death in this passage shows that He struggled to align His Will with the Will of the Father. This is all the more stark in the original Koine where the phrase "if Thou be willing" uses the word "boulei" which is more correctly translated as "wishing", but the phrase "not my will but Thine be done" uses the word "thelema" which is the exact same word Christ uses in the Lord's Prayer "Thy will (thelema) be done on earth as it is in Heaven."
From an EO perspective, we would say that Christ was struggling to bring His Human Will in alignment with His Divine Will. It was explained on another thread that the OO position is that Christ had only one will, but his "natural human desire" didn't want to die......however, the "natural human desire" would best be described as "boulei" (wishing), but Christ used this word to ask the Father that if HE (the Father) was "wishing" ("boulei") to let this cup pass, however, not in accordance with the will (thelema) of Christ's human nature ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The EO position of the Two Wills therefore makes more sense.
Yes, Christ is One Hypostasis in Two Natures but the EO position is that these Two Natures are united without co-mingling or confusion. So when Christ was asleep, it was His Human Nature which slept- the Divine Nature does not sleep. The unity of the Two Natures does not mean that they were identical or acted identically. It means that they perfectly complemented each other and worked in synergy.