Oriental Orthodox and the 451 A.D. Split!

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by nate, May 10, 2006.

  1. nate

    nate
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Chalcedonian Split 451 A.D.

    Recently in another thread the Chaldedonian Council and the Oriental Orthodox Churches which did not subscribe to the Council's Creed and in fact broke away from the rest of the Christian Church.

    For hundreds of years these churches were considered to be heretics especially by the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Churches. The two aforementioned churches labeled the Oriental Orthodox Monophysites even though the Oriental churches rejected this label.

    Instead the Oriental Orthodox churches prefer the label "Miaphysite".
    The Oriental Orthodox considered the Chalcedonian Creed to be a compromise with the Nestorians.

    Lately though the Oriental Orthodox have entered into discussions with the Eastern Orthodox churches~Link and in 1988 A.D. an official agreement was signed~Link.

    1. Taken from Wikipedia
     
  2. nate

    nate
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    0
    So do you guys consider the Oriental Orthodox to hold to a heretical view of Christology?
     
  3. Matt Black

    Matt Black
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    9,141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting one: part of the reason for the split was due to different linguistic terminology and certain things being lost in translation eg: IIRC there is no way of expressing 'two Natures in One Person' in the Armenian language. Also, despite the polemic of the 5th century, the Orientals today do pretty much espouse what the rest of us would consider orthodox Christology.

    So I would say on balance and today, no, not heretical.
     
  4. Doubting Thomas

    Doubting Thomas
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,616
    Likes Received:
    6
    I would tend to agree with Matt. Descendents of "schismatics"*...yes, but "heretics"...no.

    *I think overall the rejection by the OO of Chalcedon had more to do with an Alexandrian provincialism (clinging tenaciously to the literal words of a formula used by Cyril of Alexandria despite evidence of its Apollinarian origins) and some other linguistic factors--as Matt pointed out--than heresy.
     
  5. nate

    nate
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well it seems that those churches are very close to rejoining the "orthodox" Orthodox Church. I think this will be a good thing. And will increase the Orthodox Church to a membership of +300 million.
     
  6. nate

    nate
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    0
    DT,
    Was Cyril's view of Christ's natures wrong?

    I agree with you guys I would vote nay that today they do indeed hold to an orthodox doctrine of Christology.
     

Share This Page

Loading...