The Orthodox Church

[No*s]

*winces*

Yeah, that's a pretty blunt statement. There's no miaphysitism in that, but pure monophysitism. Thanks for the quote.

 

[Linus7]

Here are three quotes that are interesting to compare.

"I confess that before the union our Lord had two natures, but after the union I confess one single nature."
- Eutyches

"So we can say that the Divine nature united hypostatically with the human nature within the Virgin’s womb, but after this unity we do not ever speak again about two natures of Christ."

- Coptic Pope Shenouda III (The Nature of Christ, p. 5)

"After the Union, Christ was no longer in two natures. The two natures became united into one nature without separation, without confusion and without change. Thus He was at the same time perfect God and perfect man. This is the union of the natures in the Incarnation. After the union Christ is not two persons or two natures."

- From the Ethiopian Tawehedo web site

Kind of tough to say "without confusion" and yet maintain that, after the hypostatic union, Christ no longer has two distinct natures.

One wonders, too, how it is possible to speak of two natures before the hypostatic union (the Incarnation), since before then Jesus' human nature did not exist. Before the hypostatic union our Lord had only one nature - the divine. As soon as the hypostatic union occurred - in the womb of the Blessed Virgin - our Lord took on humanity and thus acquired a human nature, which was united inseparably to His divine nature in One Divine Person.

It is only after the hypostatic union that it makes any sense at all to speak of two natures in Christ, yet that is precisely when the Monophysites tell us it is impossible to speak of them.

Go figure!

 

[Linus7]

Here is another quote from Coptic Pope Shenouda III, the current leader of the Coptic Church.

"We believe in One Will and One Act: Naturally, as long as we consider that this Nature is One, the Will and the Act must also each be one." (The Nature of Christ, p. 22).

There you have it: Monophysitism (or Miaphysitism, if you prefer) and its product, Monothelitism.

 

[No*s]

Yes, those are the types of quotes from Shenouda that make me think "Monophysite." I read one that seems good, then later, read another that seems to strongly indicate monophysitism, and it has given me pause about communications. As I said, while I find the situation confusing, I'm not about to abrogate the traditional practice .

 

[Linus7]

Yes, those are the types of quotes from Shenouda that make me think "Monophysite." I read one that seems good, then later, read another that seems to strongly indicate monophysitism, and it has given me pause about communications. As I said, while I find the situation confusing, I'm not about to abrogate the traditional practice .

It is good to keep the heretical statements in mind when reading or hearing the ones that sound Orthodox.

If the Non-Chalcedonians were really Orthodox, they would accept the last four ecumenical councils.

They reject them precisely because Non-Chalcedonian Christology is heretical.

 

[No*s]

It is good to keep the heretical statements in mind when reading or hearing the ones that sound Orthodox.

If the Non-Chalcedonians were really Orthodox, they would accept the last four ecumenical councils.

They reject them precisely because Non-Chalcedonian Christology is heretical.

That's why in my looking at Orthodoxy I didn't stop at them. I didn't feel I could ever be sure of things. There seemed to be a lot of miscommunication, there was a schism (and no doubt who broke from who), and well, I had clear statements I could go on .

 

[No*s]

As a note, we need also to be careful about using the term "heresy" on this site...we all sign an agreement not to attack another religion, and well, using that word a bunch can very quickly be construed as that. We need to find other, more polite, ways to express our thoughts.

 

[Linus7]

As a note, we need also to be careful about using the term "heresy" on this site...we all sign an agreement not to attack another religion, and well, using that word a bunch can very quickly be construed as that. We need to find other, more polite, ways to express our thoughts.

I have no problem with being polite.

It should be recognized, however, that we Orthodox believe that the Orthodox Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ, and that, from the Orthodox perspective, certain teachings are considered heretical.

I don't see how stating that fact is attacking another religion. It is simply an assertion of an essential aspect of the Orthodox faith.

If we cannot use the words heresy, heretic, and heretical, we will have to avoid quoting the ecumenical councils and much that the Church Fathers wrote.

We should avoid ad hominem attacks and forays into the forums of other faiths.

 

[Linus7]

I guess I will try to substitute words like erroneous and false in place of the word heretical.

 

[No*s]

I have no problem with being polite.

It should be recognized, however, that we Orthodox believe that the Orthodox Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ, and that, from the Orthodox perspective, certain teachings are considered heretical.

I don't see how stating that fact is attacking another religion. It is simply an assertion of an essential aspect of the Orthodox faith.

If we cannot use the words heresy, heretic, and heretical, we will have to avoid quoting the ecumenical councils and much that the Church Fathers wrote.

We should avoid ad hominem attacks and forays into the forums of other faiths.

I understand, and I don't think you've crossed the line. It's just a caution...because I don't want to be the one that has to apply the rules, because I like you and would do so .

I guess I will try to substitute words like erroneous and false in place of the word heretical.

Even those you have to be careful with. Like I said, I'm not acting in Mod capacity...I'm just pointing it out before a bad situation comes up. The decision on words can be difficult, when you want to maintain an excucivist stance and at the same time participate in what is, basically, an ecumenical site.

Personally, I've enjoyed your posts thoroughly and have found them quite informative. I hope you post more, and I don't think you've crossed any line .

EDIT:

We can make points and maintain exclucivity, quote the Fathers, etc., but we have to be careful about how we do it. I've used the term "heresy" on this board before, but I've had to qualify it. It's a difficult thing on a board like this.

 

[Linus7]

I understand your position as a moderator, No*s.

I will try hard to avoid giving offense to anyone.