Dear HoldenCaulfield (wow, what a nickname... I love JDS!... even though The Catcher is not my most favorite book of this author...),
Thank you, I like the book as well.
yet, it is somewhat different from the mainstream formula of Eastern Orthodoxy, "two natures joined in one Hipostasis without confusion, without change, without division, without separation."
Right of course, however he understood the importance of Christian unity and later made some balancing statements to John of Antioch in which he talked to two natures, but he still stressed the unity above all things. So has the OOC Anathematized this letter of St. Cyril? It seems like they would have to as it is agreement with the Chalcedonian position.
"He is also called the Man from heaven, being perfect in his Divinity and perfect in his Humanity, and considered as in one Person. For one is the Lord Jesus Christ, although the difference of his natures is not unknown, from which we say the ineffable union was made." (St. Cyril of Alexandria; Epistle to John of Antioch)
St. Cyril even uses the same language as St. Leo the Great of Rome later uses in his Tome.
"To the same purpose the all-wise Peter also said when he wrote of Christ as having "suffered in the flesh," and not in the nature of his ineffable godhead. In order that he should be believed to be the Saviour of all, by an economic appropriation to himself, as just said, he assumed the sufferings of his own Flesh." (ibid.)
"the Son of God is said to have been crucified and buried, since he suffered these things not in the divinity itself whereby the Only-begotten is co-eternal and consubstantial with the Father, but in the weakness of the human nature." (St. Leo the Great of Rome; The Tome of St. Leo)
For me I have seen the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon as a balencer between the Alexandrian and Antiochene schools of thought, which both if taken too far can lead to Apollinarianism and Nestorianism respectively.