Oops, I didnt mean to offend anyone. Forgive me.
I just want to clarify what i said by quoting a portion of the common christological statements the RC (Chalcedonian) have made with the OO (non-Chalcedon) and the common statement the RC have made with the Assyrians (non-ephesian but pro- Chalcedonian).
This shows what each community emphasizes and what they may find objectionable with each other. Chalcedonian Orthodoxy takes Antiochan thought which stressed the humanity of Christ and Alexandrian thought which stressed the divinity of Christ and from this arose the definition of Chalcedon, being against both extremes of Eutyches and Nestorius.
Here is the common statement between the RC and the Assyrians (found on the Assyrian church website):
..."Therefore our Lord Jesus Christ is true God and true man, perfect in his divinity and perfect in his humanity, consubstantial with the Father and consubstantial with us in all things except sin. His divinity and his humanity are united in one person without confusion or change, without division or seperation. IN HIM HAS BEEN PRESERVED THE DIFFERENCE OF THE NATURES OF DIVINITY AND HUMANITY, WITH ALL THEIR PROPERTIES, FACULTIES AND OPERATIONS. But far from constituting one and another the divinity and humanity are united in the person of the same and unique Son of God and Lord Jesus Christ who is the object of a single adoration."
Now here is the 1973 common statement between the RC and the Coptic Church (found on the Syrac Oriental Orthodox website):
"....We confess that our Lord and God and Savior and King of us all, Jesus Christ, is perfect God with respect to his divinity and perfect man with respect to His humanity. In him his divinity is united with his humanity in a real and perfect union without mingling without confusion without alteration without division without seperation. His divinity did not seperate from his humanity for an instant, not for the twinkling of an eye. He who is God eternal and invisible, became visible in the flesh and took upon himself the form of a servant. IN HIM ARE PRESERVED ALL THE PROPERTIES OF THE DIVINITY AND ALL THE PROPERTIES OF HIS HUMANITY, TOGETHER IN A REAL PERFECT INDIVISIBLE AND INSEPERABLE UNION."
See the difference? One attempts at preserving the distinction of the 2 natures of the one Christ (assyrians) while the other attempts to preserve the oneness of those two natures. In the Assyrian statement one can 'categorize ' various acts of Christ as belonging to his human or divine nature, while in the OO statement it simply is the one Christ acting. The OO statement is more Orthodox, we should not divide his works as if Christ is bi-polar -instead they simply belong to the one cohesive person who is Christ, on the other hand, theologically we fail miserably at such an attempt.
For Christ went voluntarily to the cross. Doesnt 'voluntarily' imply free human will as did when Christ prayed, "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."(Lk 22.42-43).
And isnt the Feast of the Transfiguration the commemoration of a metamorphosis of his Divinity to three apostles who visibly always say him as mere man ?