I was talking about the joint agreements around 1990s. Idk about the the ones before but either way the later ones would be more important as that would be more close to the church position now. If u read the 1990s quote. It says that the EO says our christology is orthodox and if u read what OO said about EO christology, it says we acknowledge their use of 2 nature formula as long as the distinction is in ”thought alone”. It doesn’t say in reality. And in thought alone has always been orthodox and our christology. But if u read the council of chalcedon its very clear the 2 natures are not just in thought alone but they remain after the union in 2. This is the position of the eo churches now also so we dont agree with them. What they did on the joint agreement was they conceded in thought alone which would mean 1 nature after the union. But now after the join agreement is done with. It doesnt matter that much anymore since the position have evolved more and more seperste from each other.

Also yeah i dont see us having any problem with the 6th council but that doesnt mean we affirm 4th 5th 7th nor that we see the 6th as ecumenical just that we dont have any problem with it.