/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>560825

>Oriental Orthodox

stop using the politically correct term, they're monophysites.

>>560827

no

Heretically schismatic bros.

>>560837

This

>>560825

They're schismatics. They re-baptize Catholic and Protestant converts too.

>>560827

This.

Term doesn't make sense at all, oriental even means eastern. It like calling caths and protts "western Catholics" and "zapadnye Catholics"

I don't think about them at all.

>>560873

Didn't they recognize Catholic baptisms as valid after the Egypt attack?

>>560912

Yet EO and Oriental Orthodox/Coptic Orthodox aren't in full communion. I thought the EO denied that Copts were monophysites.

>>561020

>I thought the EO denied that Copts were monophysites.

Nope, Its for modern PC

>Yet EO and Oriental Orthodox/Coptic Orthodox aren't in full communion.

What was the point of this statement? Yes we are not. We dont even have same doctrines on many things, including nature of Christ. Why should both be called Orthodox? Thats why I used my analogy.

>>560985

Most of their bishops aren't willing to follow through.

>>560825

Pastoral Agreement between the Coptic Orthodox and Greek Orthodox Patriarchates of Alexandria (2001)

Since the Holy Synods of both the Coptic Orthodox Church and the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria and all Africa have already accepted the outcome of the official dialogue on Christology between the Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches, including the two official agreements: the first on Christology signed in June 1989 in Egypt and the second also on Christology and on the lifting of anathemas and restoration of full communion signed in Geneva 1990, in which it is stated that "In the light of our agreed statement on Christology…, we have now clearly understood that both families have always loyally maintained the same authentic Orthodox Christological faith, and the unbroken continuity of Apostolic tradition". It was agreed to have mutual recognition of the sacrament of Baptism, based on what St Paul wrote, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph 4:5)

But since up until now we are waiting for the responses of the Holy Synods of some other churches in both families, the restoration of full communion is not yet reached between the two sides of the bi-lateral dialogue. And due to the pastoral consequences and implications caused by mixed Christian marriages between the members of the two Patriarchates of Alexandria, having the majority of their people living in the same countries. Those marriages being difficult to perform in both Churches at the same time or in concelebration. The result is that many sensitivities are created between the two families of the partners of such marriage. Those sensitivities which can extend even after the marriage and may affect the relation between the two communities of churches.

For those mentioned reasons, the Holy Synods of both Patriarchates have agreed to accept the sacrament of marriage which is conducted in either Church with the condition that it is conducted for two partners not belonging to the same Patriarchate of the other Church from their origin. Both the Bride and the Groom should carry a valid certificate from his/her own Patriarchate that he/she has a permit of marriage and indicating the details of his/her marriage status up to date.

Each of the two Patriarchates shall also accept to perform all of its other sacraments to that new family of Mixed Christian Marriage.

It is agreed that the Patriarchate which shall perform the marriage shall be responsible for any marriage problems that may happen concerning this certain marriage, taking into consideration the unified marriage laws signed by the heads of Churches in Egypt in the year 1999.

Each Patriarchate shall preserve its right not to give its sacraments to any persons whom she does not find fulfilling its canons according to the Apostolic Tradition.

Petros VII Pope and Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa Shenouda III Pope of Alexandria and Patriarch of the See of St Mark

Bros in schism, imo

>>561082

They venerate the heretics Dioscorus and Severus. They are heretics.

>>561065

I was under the impression EO denied that Copts were monophysites, that's why I added the statement.

The difference between Oriental and Eastern Orthodox is purely a semantic distinction, and does not concern the substance of dogma. This is made clear by the Fifth Ecumenical Council, which issued an anathema against the criticisms directed against Saint Cyril of Alexandria's Twelve Anathemas (in chapter 3 of the work, Saint Cyril of Alexandria uses the term "natural union"–"union" here being "henosin", literally " one"–to describe Christ's Nature: "If anyone shall after the [hypostatic] union divide the hypostases in the one Christ, joining them by that connection alone, which happens according to worthiness, or even authority and power, and not rather by a coming together (συνόδῳ), which is made by natural union (ἕνωσιν φυσικὴν): let him be anathema."). This means that the mia physis formula was approved. The Fifth Ecumenical Council was not uncontroversial, however (since it made the Oriental Orthodox Christology valid), Pope Vigilius refused to attend on the grounds that it conflicted with the Council of Chalcedon, and after it proceeded without him, the Pope refused to accept its conclusions, and excommunicated Patriarch Menas, the Pope protesting that he spoke from Peter's Chair, which was the final authority in all matters; Pope Vigilius was then excommunicated by Patriarch Menas, and imprisoned by Emperor Justinian I, but the Pope eventually recanted and was reinstated. If you want to understand the distinction between miaphysitism (which the Oriental Orthodox subscribe to) and monophysitism (which both Eastern and Oriental agree is heretical), look as the differences in the prefixes: "mono" means "alone", "solitary", it's used in Luke 4:4 and 4:8. "Mia" is the feminine form of "heis", which just the adjective for "one" ("hen" when used as a noun); see John 17:21 for an example of its use. Not only is this formula acceptable, it is heresy to say it is not, and not just because of the Fifth Ecumenical Council (which merely witnessed dogma, it did not create it), but because henosis describes the communion between us and Christ: if we say Christ's humanity does not have henosis with his divinity (Communicatio idiomatum), then that says his Body and Blood do not have communion with his divinity, and to say such a thing seriously impacts theology of communion, and is ultimately Nestorian. Likewise it is absolutely heretical to suggest that it is invalid to describe Christ as having two natures, insofar as the phrase "two natures" is used strictly and solely to mean that Christ is both fully human and fully divine and that his humanity and divinity are not confused or "mixed", like with a demigod.

>>560825

Most of them have adopted the same Christology since Chalcedon, they're bros now

>>560825

Apostolic Bros in the same way EO are. A little goofy, maybe, but legitimate. Check this out: http://www.cnewa.org/default.aspx?ID=96&pagetypeID=9&sitecode=HQ&pageno=1

>Catholics and Oriental Orthodox now agree that, by means of different words and concepts, they express the same faith in Jesus Christ.

>>560827

Wrong. They're miaphysites.

>>560985

Yup.

https://www.ncronline.org/news/world/pope-francis-and-coptic-pope-agree-not-re-baptize