The posted excerpt and the attached PDF are not serious history, but propaganda. For starters, the PDF contains a fraudulent "quotation" from Saint Leo's famous Tome to Flavian. Leo's Tome never said "Christ the two, the God and the Man, came." Including such a non-existent quotation in that article is outright slander against Saint Leo and the Council. Yes, certain passages from Saint Leo could be misinterpreted in a Nestorian direction. But Saint Leo also emphasized the oneness of Christ. This is the actual passage: "For He who is true God is also true man: and in this union there is no lie, since the humility of manhood and the loftiness of the Godhead both meet there. For as God is not changed by the showing of pity, so man is not swallowed up by the dignity. For each form does what is proper to it with the co-operation of the other; that is the Word performing what appertains to the Word, and the flesh carrying out what appertains to the flesh. One of them sparkles with miracles, the other succumbs to injuries." Again, such a passage from Saint Leo could be misinterpreted in a Nestorian direction, but Saint Leo also emphasized the oneness of Christ as one person in two natures. Saint Cyril used similar language.
Saint Cyril: Christ “says and does some things in a divine manner, as God; and other things He speaks again in a human manner, as man” (τὰ μὲν γὰρ θεϊκῶς φησὶ καὶ ποιεῖ, ὡς Θεός, τὰ δὲ ἀνθρωπίνως πάλιν ἀναδιδάσκει, ὡς ἄνθρωπος,Letter 4: Letter 2 to Nestorius [PG 77:44–45; FOTC 76]).
Saint Cyril and Archbishop John: “men who are theologians take the sayings about the Lord in the Gospels and apostolic writings and attribute some as common as pertaining to one person, and others they divide as pertaining to two natures [διαιροῦντας, ὡς ἐπὶ δύο φύσεων]. The sayings appropriate to God are attributed to the Godhood [θεότητα, deity, divine nature] of Christ and the humble sayings are attributed to His manhood [ἀνθρωπότητα, humanity, human nature]” (Cyril, Letter to John of Antioch).
“The flesh is the substrate, and suffering is naturally understood to fall on this while the Logos remains impassible” (Cyril, Second Letter to Succensus, in Cyril: Select Letters (ed. Wickham), 84–93, at 86 of the Greek text (chapter 2; Mark Julian Edwards 2015:).
“He underwent this common suffering of our nature, obviously according to the flesh (κατὰ τὴν σάρκα), although he was life by nature as God” (CyrAl, InJo XII, vol. 3, 96.2-5 [1068e; Loon 557]).
“Thus even if they predicate a humanity and divinity of Emmanuel, the humanity has still become proper to the Word, and one Son is understood along with it. But, since the inspired scripture says that He suffered in flesh, it is better that we too should speak in this way, rather than of His suffering in the nature of His humanity—albeit, if this also were not said in a perverse sense by some, they would be doing no wrong to the expression of the mystery” (Cyril, Second Letter to Succensus 5, in Cyril: Select Letters (ed. Wickham), 92. Mark Julian Edwards 2015). This means that "His suffering in the nature of His humanity" is an acceptable expression if not meant to divide the two natures. Saint Leo does not divide them, but distinguishes them.
Saint Athanasius also spoke similarly. Mark Julian Edwards refers to “the Athanasian rule that differentiates the works of Christ according to his divinity from the things that he does or undergoes as man” (Mark Julian Edwards, HTR 2015: 300).
I would prefer to post passages that refer more to the oneness of Christ, but I post these passages above to show that the Fathers (including Cyril) do make distinctions between the two natures similar to what Saint Leo did.
THE FORGED PASSAGE (ALLEGEDLY FROM SAINT LEO) IN THE ARTICLE ATTACHED BY HARALAMPOPOULOS
"Christ the two, the God and the Man, came. The first overwhelmed us with miracles, and the
second received the humiliation."
SAINT LEO'S ACTUAL PASSAGE IN A COMMONLY USED TRANSLATION
"For He who is true God is also true man: and in this union there is no lie, since the humility of manhood and the loftiness of the Godhead both meet there. For as God is not changed by the showing of pity, so man is not swallowed up by the dignity. For each form does what is proper to it with the co-operation of the other; that is the Word performing what appertains to the Word, and the flesh carrying out what appertains to the flesh. One of them sparkles with miracles, the other succumbs to injuries. And as the Word does not cease to be on an equality with His Father's glory, so the flesh does not forego the nature of our race. For it must again and again be repeated that one and the same is truly Son of God and truly son of man. God in that "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;" man in that "the Word became flesh and dwelt in us." God in that "all things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made:" man in that "He was made of a woman, made under law." (https://biblehub.com/library/leo/writin ... hatgpt.com).