Quantcast Eastern Orthodox Christian Forum - Oriental Orthodox Christians are NOT Monophysite
Eastern Orthodox Christian Forum
Eastern Orthodox Christian Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Eastern Orthodox Forum
 General Discussions
 Oriental Orthodox Christians are NOT Monophysite
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
| More
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Pensees
Junior Member

USA
379 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2006 :  15:10:26  Show Profile  Visit Pensees's Homepage  Send Pensees an AOL message  Click to see Pensees's MSN Messenger address  Send Pensees a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
Oriental Orthodox Christians accept the Christology of St. Cyril of Alexandria, as accepted by the Church at large in the Council of Ephesus. In opposition to Nestorias, Cyril maintained that in Christ, there is "the one incarnate nature of God the Word," which is fully divine and fully human in one person.

quote:

The Council of Chalcedon abandoned Cyrillian terminology and declared that Christ was one hypostasis in two natures. However, in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, "Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin Mary," thus the foundation according to non-Chalcedonians is made clear. In terms of Christology the Oriental understanding is that Christ is "One Nature--the Logos Incarnate," of the full humanity and full divinity. The Byzantine understanding is that Christ is in two natures, full humanity and full divinity. (Just as all of us are of our mother and father and not in our mother and father, so too is the nature of Christ. If Christ is in full humanity and in full divinity, then He is separate in two persons as the Nestorians teach. Imagine your nature in your mother and your father; you are then two different people. If however your nature is of your mother and your father, then you are one person [1].) This is the linguistic difference which separated the Orientals from the Byzantines...
Before the current positive era of Eastern and Oriental Orthodox dialogues, Chalcedonians sometimes used to call the non-Chalcedonians "monophysites", though the Coptic Church denies that she teaches monophysitism, which she has always regarded as a heresy. They have sometimes called the Chalcedonian group "dyophysites". A term that comes closer to Coptic doctrine is "miaphysite" [3], which refers to a conjoined nature for Christ, both human and divine, united indivisibly in the Incarnate Logos. The Coptic Church believes that Christ is perfect in His divinity, and He is perfect in His humanity, but His divinity and His humanity were united in one nature called "the nature of the incarnate word", which was reiterated by Saint Cyril of Alexandria. Copts, thus, believe in two natures "human" and "divine" that are united in one hypostasis without mingling, without confusion, and without alteration. These two natures did not separate for a moment or the twinkling of an eye (Coptic Liturgy of Saint Basil of Caesarea).
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Church_of_Alexandria_(Coptic)#Council_of_Chalcedon



Peace.

Lover of Monasticism
Average Member

USA
919 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2006 :  15:50:19  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Well, you said that they are "Miaphysites." What exactly is that?

And I know that at least the Syrian "Orthodox" are still Monophysite.
Go to Top of Page

Pensees
Junior Member

USA
379 Posts

Posted - 11/08/2006 :  17:50:51  Show Profile  Visit Pensees's Homepage  Send Pensees an AOL message  Click to see Pensees's MSN Messenger address  Send Pensees a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
You may have heard someone who mispoke, but Syrian Orthodox Christians are not "Monophysite."
We are Miaphysite, meaning we believe that Christ is fully divine and fully human in one incarnate nature. This is the Christology that the Council of Ephesus accepted. Please see the explanation I provided in the previous post.

Edited by - Pensees on 11/08/2006 17:52:59
Go to Top of Page

parascheva1014
Moderator

USA
1401 Posts

Posted - 11/09/2006 :  12:56:11  Show Profile  Visit parascheva1014's Homepage  Send parascheva1014 an AOL message  Reply with Quote
Am I correct in the understanding that there are actually two Oriental Churches. One that shares Antioch with the Antiochians and has had reunification dialog with them and another that does not share communion with either Churches. It is my understanding that this third church is in fact monophysite where the first two are not and have come to the understanding that there are no theological differences between at this present time. The simply use different symantics to mean the same thing. Westerners are confused because they are more familiar with the monophysites. Also I believe that there is some debate between the Oriental Church and Antioch as to the monophysite past of the Oriental Church. The Oriental Church claims they have never been monophysite and Antioch claims that they once where but are not presently. Because of this they are at a stale mate as to the issue of Oriental Orthodox saints who are recognized heretics to the Eastern Orthodox.

I'm not familiar with the term Miaphysite.

An interesting note about this separate group who calls themselves oriental orthodox when they are in fact not. Not only will they conselebrate with the anglican church but they even have a church in communion with them in CA. I saw one of their "bishops" on TCT one day when a friend called and asked if the guy was Orthodox. It took me weeks to layer through all the politics to find out that the guy was sectarian oriental orthodox and not the same oriental orthodox who we refer to as the ones in dialog with Antioch. I with I could remember his web site but he completely bills himself as cannonicle orthodox even though he couldn't be further from it. He even clams to be from the church in dialog with antioch but when I traced his bishop and hierarchy it lead to this other oriental church. I had to get my friend who used to be head of USAID and goes to my church to explain it to me. It was wildly confusing.

I guess really we need to be clear about who we are actually talking about when we say "Oriental Orthodox" The same is also true for "Syrian Orthodox" that term could refer to Antiochians, the OO church, the sectarian OO church or any other church in Syria who wants to also say they are orthodox.

Edited by - parascheva1014 on 11/09/2006 13:16:07
Go to Top of Page

parascheva1014
Moderator

USA
1401 Posts

Posted - 11/09/2006 :  13:36:15  Show Profile  Visit parascheva1014's Homepage  Send parascheva1014 an AOL message  Reply with Quote
Oh yeah I remember... Mar Enoch aka Archbishop Veron Ashe. The Mar Thoma Orthodox Church outside of India. As near as I can figure he totally made that name up. Their web site was http://www.archbishopashe.com
Go to Top of Page

Pensees
Junior Member

USA
379 Posts

Posted - 11/09/2006 :  16:41:03  Show Profile  Visit Pensees's Homepage  Send Pensees an AOL message  Click to see Pensees's MSN Messenger address  Send Pensees a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by parascheva1014

Oh yeah I remember... Mar Enoch aka Archbishop Veron Ashe. The Mar Thoma Orthodox Church outside of India. As near as I can figure he totally made that name up. Their web site was http://www.archbishopashe.com



You have to be careful there. Many "independent Orthodox" groups claim to be linked to St. Thomas, but were in fact created by Anglican or Old Catholic bishops.

These are the real Indian Orthodox Churches in the United States:

www.indianorthodoxchurch.org

www.malankara.com

Edited by - Pensees on 11/09/2006 16:46:05
Go to Top of Page

Pensees
Junior Member

USA
379 Posts

Posted - 11/09/2006 :  17:06:27  Show Profile  Visit Pensees's Homepage  Send Pensees an AOL message  Click to see Pensees's MSN Messenger address  Send Pensees a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by parascheva1014


I'm not familiar with the term Miaphysite.



The Oriental Orthodox Communion, which includes the ancient Churches of Armenia, Egypt, Ethiopia, Syria and India, has never believed in Monophysitism and never will. For an explanation of what Oriental Orthodox Christians actually believe, which is the Christology of St. Cyril of Alexandria, please read this article:

Monophysitism: Reconsidered
Fr. Matthias F. Wahba
St. Antonius Coptic Orthodox Church
http://www.coptic.net/articles/MonophysitismReconsidered.txt

A Monophysite would deny the humanity or divinity of Christ, but as Oriental Orthodox Christians, we believe that Christ is fully divine and fully human and always have.

Peace.
Go to Top of Page

montasser
Starting Member

Egypt
36 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2006 :  16:37:34  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
dear brothers in Christ
about oriental church and monophysite this topic is discussed previously in general discussion forum, but we have to say that oriental orthodox churches are divided into churches sharing the same faith as Alexandria kike the Syrian church of Antioch, Ethiopian, Eritrean, Armenian, Syrian church of India, there's another churches which don't share the same faith as nestorian church present now in Iraq and India and south east Asia, the confusion about historian and saurian church is that both have the same syrian origin and both literature are wrote in Syrian, with the difference of the faith of both so not every manuscript wrote in Syrian represent Syrian orthodox church, Syrian churches in Syria and India share the same faith as Coptic church of Alexandria and the Syrian patriarch [mar agnatios zakka] is cited in Coptic liturgy with the Coptic pope,
the Coptic faith is summarized in the link cited above by pensees
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Church_of_Alexandria_(Coptic)
also an official site of Alexandria pope
http://www.copticpope.org/index.php
unfortunately mainly in Arabic

also oriental churches have many churches not present nowadays as Nubian church and church of north Africa
so a differentiation between church of Alexandria and churches sharing the same faith and other oriental church must be born in mind when speaking about oriental churches in general
more details are present in a book called
history of oriental Christianity's by Dr. Aziz Sorial Attya
Go to Top of Page

Pensees
Junior Member

USA
379 Posts

Posted - 11/14/2006 :  17:24:22  Show Profile  Visit Pensees's Homepage  Send Pensees an AOL message  Click to see Pensees's MSN Messenger address  Send Pensees a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
This article, by an Eastern Orthodox theologian, is on how the Oriental Orthodox are not, and never have been, "Monophysite" and why, as a result, communion should be restored between Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox Christians:

Beyond Dialogue: The Quest for Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Unity Today
Rev John H Erickson, Dean
http://www.svots.edu/Faculty/John-Erickson/articles/beyond-dialogue.html/

Peace.
Go to Top of Page

Lover of Monasticism
Average Member

USA
919 Posts

Posted - 11/14/2006 :  18:02:59  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I've got a major problem with the first article you posted, Pensees: their defense of Dioscoros, saying that he wasn't a heretic. If the Church condemned him as a heretic and still does, and the Church is the Pillar of Truth, is She wrong then? And even if he wasn't a heretic, he was still a murderer. He killed the Patriarch of Constantinople.
Go to Top of Page

macacic
Administrator

USA
2415 Posts

Posted - 11/14/2006 :  18:48:21  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Is there any movement within the Oriental Orthodox Church to acknowledge and accept the Fourth through the Seventh Ecumenical Councils? It's hard to imagine full communion without it.
Go to Top of Page

Pensees
Junior Member

USA
379 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2006 :  02:06:01  Show Profile  Visit Pensees's Homepage  Send Pensees an AOL message  Click to see Pensees's MSN Messenger address  Send Pensees a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by macacic

Is there any movement within the Oriental Orthodox Church to acknowledge and accept the Fourth through the Seventh Ecumenical Councils? It's hard to imagine full communion without it.



For us to accept Councils, especially ones that we weren't even invited to, we would first need to have the anathemas against us and our fathers lifted.
Go to Top of Page

Pensees
Junior Member

USA
379 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2006 :  02:07:30  Show Profile  Visit Pensees's Homepage  Send Pensees an AOL message  Click to see Pensees's MSN Messenger address  Send Pensees a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Lover of Monasticism

Pensees: their defense of Dioscoros, saying that he wasn't a heretic.



If he was a heretic, what we his heretical belief other than accepting the Christology of St. Cyril? If we really were Monophysite heretics, then so was St. Cyril of Alexandria and everyone in Ephesus who accepted his Christology, including Eastern Orthodox fathers.

Edited by - Pensees on 11/15/2006 02:13:21
Go to Top of Page

Aristokles
Senior Member

USA
1097 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2006 :  07:57:48  Show Profile  Send Aristokles a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Pensees

quote:
Originally posted by macacic

Is there any movement within the Oriental Orthodox Church to acknowledge and accept the Fourth through the Seventh Ecumenical Councils? It's hard to imagine full communion without it.



For us to accept Councils, especially ones that we weren't even invited to, we would first need to have the anathemas against us and our fathers lifted.



Seeing as the Coptic pope has definitely rejected ever accepting these councils, I'd say it will not happen...ever, maybe.
Go to Top of Page

Lover of Monasticism
Average Member

USA
919 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2006 :  10:22:31  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Pensees

quote:
Originally posted by Lover of Monasticism

Pensees: their defense of Dioscoros, saying that he wasn't a heretic.



If he was a heretic, what we his heretical belief other than accepting the Christology of St. Cyril? If we really were Monophysite heretics, then so was St. Cyril of Alexandria and everyone in Ephesus who accepted his Christology, including Eastern Orthodox fathers.


Hmm... I still think there's something you Orientals are not telling us, or are not understanding correctly, for us to continue to keep you out of communion. The Church does not error.


Something other than the councils: you would have to renounce all of your post-schism saints and accept ours. I know that this is quite an unthinkable task, and imagining what that would be like is we were the ones who had to do that, I can see what kinds of problems it would cause. The reason is because we cannot accept persons from outside the Church as saints.
Go to Top of Page

macacic
Administrator

USA
2415 Posts

Posted - 11/15/2006 :  15:03:22  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Aristokles

Seeing as the Coptic pope has definitely rejected ever accepting these councils, I'd say it will not happen...ever, maybe.
Well, that certainly leaves out the Copts but what about the rest of them?
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
| More
Jump To:
Eastern Orthodox Christian Forum © Eastern Orthodox Christian Forum Go To Top Of Page
Thispagewasgeneratedin0.17seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.07