This is, I think, only my second post on this forum, but I think this is the point I'm most interested in.
What do Oriental Orthodox individuals (not necessarily the Church as a whole) see as the differences between themselves and the Eastern Orthodox.
In my time in the Eastern Orthodox tradition I've been taught there are no substantial differences, however I also know Catholics are taught that about both of our Churches, and from the EO position I can say that just isn't true.
I read a post by Fr. Peter in which he says our bishops have concluded we have substantially the same faith. Do the faithful (who know something about both Churches) agree with this?
I'm just curious, does the sole issue of faith revolve around Chalcedon/2nd Ephesus or does it go much further than that?
As I said in my introductory post, I briefly attended the Orthodox Christian Fellowship group at University, and it was mostly copts. The one thing I noticed was that they seemed perfectly at ease with the OCA worship (obviously no Communion), in a way that I can't say I am when in a Protestant or Catholic setting.
Comments
I'm just curious, does the sole issue of faith revolve around Chalcedon/2nd Ephesus or does it go much further than that?
As far as I know it does not. Personally I would say we are relatively close and I think if/when the churches are united it'll start with the EOC and the OOC.
None regarding faith and dogma. The differences are merely rituals.
Differences between Eastern and Oriental are ritual and dogmatic. Though a formula for agreement has been introduced and has been agreed on, it has not been formally accepted.
Thanks.
I personally find it a passion of mine to truly unite. I think the first step of uniting is for individuals to stop being afraid of each others' churches and truly be brothers and sisters.
I attend Greek Orthodox Vespers on Tuesdays and Antiochian Orthodox Great Compline with a dear Spiritual father of mine on Thursdays here on Campus. The Eastern Orthodox students also come and attend Coptic Club with us. Our youth are starting to become friends, and we are encouraging each other to become one church from the little things first.
I pray for our churches on a daily basis, and hope that one day they will be in full unity.
To me we are one family. :)
I think that there are differences of history, of 'style', and of culture, but these are able to be comprehended within a substantial and sufficient unity in Faith. I thought this for the 14 years I was Orthodox but not a priest, indeed most of the things I have written were written when I was not a priest.
Father Peter
I think this speaks well for our future. We agree on the distinctions, and agree that it is substantially the same faith.
Tishori: I think I'll have to find my way to a Coptic liturgy sometime soon, perhaps after Pascha.
My experience has been that once a Catholic or Protestant hears I am Coptic, the first question is "What is Coptic?" When an EO hears I am Coptic, the first question is "Why are you a monophysite?" Even liberal EO continue to call Copts monophysites or Eutychites. OR if they acknowledge that Copts are not monophysites, then then proceed to say the only way to unity is to accept the remaining 4 councils. This cannot happen since Chalcedon (and to some degree the other councils) explicitly condemns us.
It's one thing to say we have the same faith, it's another to acknowledge and elevate someone you have considered an enemy. Take another example, imagine 2 brothers were in a 20 year battle where the older accused the younger of murdering his wife. The younger brother was exonerated with DNA evidence and released from jail. The older brother continues to believe he murdered his wife. Every attempt by the younger brother to reconcile is refuted by the older brother who insists that the younger brother must acknowledge the original verdict that called the younger brother a murderer. An outsider can argue with the older brother and say "You guys are brothers. You have the same DNA substance." (which is similar to people who say EO and OO have the same faith). The fact is the older brother cannot reconcile and accept the person he hated for 20 years. Nor can the older brother expect the younger brother to acknowledge and hold as true the verdict that sent him to jail.
Maybe my example is oversimplified and maybe I am biased against EO. Maybe other Copts have very different experiences with EO discussions. Everyone wants unity. However, some attach conditions that really go against ecumenical "brotherly" love.
This is just my observations. I pray that I am wrong so we can be united as true brothers again.
Other than that it is just style and language I think.
Firstly, we do have the same faith, yet different formulas for expressingt it. When it comes to the topic of the nature oif chirst, the term we use to define it is different from that which the easter church uses to define it. That is what caused the division. It was a complete misunderstanding which was escalated by political issues.
It is sad that because of some misunderstandings, some 1500 years later, we are still battling about this. Both churches have made a common declaration of faith, and have, in this declaration, stated their intent on becoming one again, and lifting anathemas placed on one another. However, after every point which mentions the lifting of anathema, or the possibility of official acceptance between one another, it says that the method by which this will be done will be discussed at a later date. No later date was finished.
Since the Ecumenical Patriarch cannot bring only the greek church into unity with the Oriental church, but all of the eastern churches including Russian Orthodox, Ukranian Orthodox, etc. he must have all the patriarchs of these churches agree to unify before he can officialy agree. H.E Metropolitan Bishoy of The COC mentions that H.H. Patriarch Bartholemew has asked him to speak to these Patriarchs soon, and try to find some common ground.
As for the famous problem, "THE MONKS OF MOUNT ATHOS" they are very dedicated saintly people, who are worried that too much will change that shouldn’t change. They are careful not to allow anything wrong into the church and so they are not too willingto be in full communion just yet. And they do have a strong say in these matters.
I was also told that from the Oriental side, The Ethiopian orthodox Tewahdo Church is not willing to merge just yet, but I do not understand this too much. If anyne has more information on them, please share!
In all honesty, I fully believe that the Eastern Church is a true, and loyal church to the beliefes of the bible, and that they have kept the true faith for the past 2000 years just as the Oriental Church has. The rest is political, and trivial in my own eyes (though I am sure that the governing authorities in the church see it differently, and are most likely correct). However, although we share the same faith, we are not in full communion, and must abide by the rules our church sets out for us, so partaking in each others sacrements is not yet permissable.
-ReturnOrthodoxy
I always consider Copts as my family in Christ and always defend the Coptic name where ever I go. There's this awesome and wholesome sense of piety which nurtures my relationship with the Lord and my fellow man (yeah, non-inclusive language, so what?...lol). The joy of the monks is so heart lifting (some EO monks need to lighten up...lol) that it's forever ingrained in my soul. I remember going to a Coptic Orthodox Church in Queens, NY and meeting an Egyptian sun-kissed monk who was looking, not at me, but INTO me, with such spiritually intense eyes!
I was had a Coptic fiance whose family opened their arms to me (which blew her mind since they never were happy with any of her past "candidates"- Egyptian or not) and I basked in the warmth of their hospitality. Unfortunately they moved away and I lost contact with them. I enjoy the online movies of Coptic saints and read HH Pope Shenouda's writings. The example of devoted Copts has fed my EO faith and I thank you all for that! God bless!
keep working, keep praying and visit churches from the other group and talk to people there after and bring greetings from your church.
if everyone visited one church from the other group every year or two, it would make a huge difference.
there can only be unity if the people are supporting the clergy
:)
Mabsoota, you are absolutely right. Actually I am Coptic Orthodox but I took theological studies at an Eastern Orthodox Academy and I participate in the Greek and Antiochian Orthodox churches events from time to time. I brought some other Copts and a few of them were shocked (kind of scandalized) that in their tradition, the clergy do not remove their shoes while at the altar. On the other hand, the Greeks were confused as to why the Copts were crossing themselves in a'semi-Catholic' fashion. However the more we experience the other, we can realize beneath the surface we are not so different from each other after all.
The clergy do remove their shoes at the altar. That's a pretty strict rule actually in the Coptic Church. The people going to receive communion also must remove their shoes.
PK
[quote author=Timothym link=topic=11166.msg138448#msg138448 date=1306193712]
Mabsoota, you are absolutely right. Actually I am Coptic Orthodox but I took theological studies at an Eastern Orthodox Academy and I participate in the Greek and Antiochian Orthodox churches events from time to time. I brought some other Copts and a few of them were shocked (kind of scandalized) that in their tradition, the clergy do not remove their shoes while at the altar. On the other hand, the Greeks were confused as to why the Copts were crossing themselves in a'semi-Catholic' fashion. However the more we experience the other, we can realize beneath the surface we are not so different from each other after all.
The clergy do remove their shoes at the altar. That's a pretty strict rule actually in the Coptic Church. The people going to receive communion also must remove their shoes.
PK
PK, I was talking about the Greek Orthodox and the Antiochian Orthodox who do not have this in their tradition. Cheers
My EO friend and I are working on a book detailing why there needs to be unity. In essence we are one church, there is no actual schism other than in the minds of men. We cannot discount what our church fathers said and believed. We adhered to the Cyrillian definition while the Antiochian view was different. Both sides were defending the faith against any possible Nestorianism, we cannot fault them for that. In hindsight the schism lies in semantics not in reality. It is the same doctrine, the same body and blood, the same sacraments, everything. Professing a schism with your mouth is a sin.
Ioannes, I don't understand what you mean by "professing a schism with your mouth is a sin". Are you saying acknowledging the schism is a sin? Or wanting to stay in schism is a sin?