1600 J. Pory tr. J. Leo Africanus Geogr. Hist. Afr. xvii. 391 The Cofti fearing, that to attribute two natures unto Christ, might be all one, as if they had assigned him two hypostases or persons, to avoid the heresie of the Nestorians, they became Eutichians.

1651 Bp. J. Taylor XXVIII Serm. i. 2 That two natures could be concentred into one hypostasis (or person).

1797 Encycl. Brit. VII. 43/1 He [sc. Eutyches] appeared to allow of two natures, even before the union.

1874 J. H. Blunt Dict. Sects 332/2 The Monophysites held that the two Natures were so united, that although the ‘One Christ’ was partly Human and partly Divine, His two Natures became by their union only one Nature.

1946 E. L. Mascall Christ, Christian & Church iii. 49 In no case is the divine nature seen acting in separation from the human. The two natures are distinct and their union is unimaginably intimate.

1977 D. Cupitt in J. Hick Myth of God Incarnate vii. 136 Liddon..did not see in the full two-natures doctrine any threat to the unity of Christ's person.

1982 Church Times 24 Dec. 8/3 The doctrine of the ‘two natures’ in the one person of Christ..does not mean that Jesus was in any sense schizophrenic, acting at one moment as man and the next as God.