From: nabil@cae.wisc.edu (Nabil Ayoub) Subject: Re: Monophysites and Mike Walker Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering Lines: 127 Hello src readers, Again the misconception that Copts among other Oriental Orthodox Churches believe in Monophysitism pops up again. We had a discussion about it a while ago. In article db7n+@andrew.cmu.edu (D. Andrew Byler) writes: > >The proper term for what Mike expresses is Monophysitism. This was a >heresy that was condemned in the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD. It >grew up in reaction to Nestorianism, which held that the Son and Jesus >are two different people who happened to be united in the same body >temporarily. Monophysitism is held by the Copts of Egypt and Ethipoia >and by the Jacobites of Syria and the Armenian Orthodox. Then OFM comments : > > >[These issues get mighty subtle. When you see people saying different >things it's often hard to tell whether they really mean seriously >different things, or whether they are using different terminology. I >don't think there's any question that there is a problem with >Nestorius, and I would agree that the saying Christ had a human form >without a real human nature or will is heretical. But I'd like to be >a bit wary about the Copts, Armenians, etc. Recent discussions >suggest that their monophysite position may not be as far from >orthodoxy as many had thought. With my appreciation to the moderator, I believe that further elaboration is needed. This is an excerpt from an article featured in the first issue of the Copt-Net Newsletter : Under the authority of the Eastern Roman Empire of Constantinople (as opposed to the western empire of Rome), the Patriarchs and Popes of Alexandria played leading roles in Christian theology. They were invited everywhere to speak about the Christian faith. St. Cyril, Pope of Alexandria, was the head of the Ecumenical Council which was held in Ephesus in the year 430 A.D. It was said that the bishops of the Church of Alexandria did nothing but spend all their time in meetings. This leading role, however, did not fare well when politics started to intermingle with Church affairs. It all started when the Emperor Marcianus interfered with matters of faith in the Church. The response of St. Dioscorus, the Pope of Alexandria who was later exiled, to this interference was clear: "You have nothing to do with the Church." These political motives became even more apparent in Chalcedon in 451, when the Coptic Church was unfairly accused of following the teachings of Eutyches, who believed in monophysitism. This doctrine maintains that the Lord Jesus Christ has only one nature, the divine, not two natures, the human as well as the divine. The Coptic Church has never believed in monophysitism the way it was portrayed in the Council of Chalcedon! In that Council, monophysitism meant believing in one nature. Copts believe that the Lord 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 St. Cyril of Alexandria. Copts, thus, believe in two natures "human" and "divine" that are united in one "without mingling, without confusion, and without alteration" (from the declaration of faith at the end of the Coptic divine liturgy). These two natures "did not separate for a moment or the twinkling of an eye" (also from the declaration of faith at the end of the Coptic divine liturgy). The Coptic Church was misunderstood in the 5th century at the Council of Chalcedon. Perhaps the Council understood the Church correctly, but they wanted to exile the Church, to isolate it and to abolish the Egyptian, independent Pope. Despite all of this, the Coptic Church has remained very strict and steadfast in its faith. Whether it was a conspiracy from the Western Churches to exile the Coptic Church as a punishment for its refusal to be politically influenced, or whether Pope Dioscurus didn't quite go the extra mile to make the point that Copts are not monophysite, the Coptic Church has always felt a mandate to reconcile "semantic" differences between all Christian Churches. This is aptly expressed by the current 117th successor of St. Mark, Pope Shenouda III: "To the Coptic Church, faith is more important than anything, and others must know that semantics and terminology are of little importance to us." Throughout this century, the Coptic Church has played an important role in the ecumenical movement. The Coptic Church is one of the founders of the World Council of Churches. It has remained a member of that council since 1948 A.D. The Coptic Church is a member of the all African Council of Churches (AACC) and the Middle East Council of Churches (MECC). The Church plays an important role in the Christian movement by conducting dialogues aiming at resolving the theological differences with the Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Presbyterian, and Evangelical Churches. [...] As a final note, the Oriental Orthodox and Eastren Orthodox did sign a common statement of Christology, in which the heresey of Monophysitism was condemned. So the Coptic Orthodox Church does not believe in Monophysitism. Peace, Nabil .-------------------------------------------------------------. / Nabil Ayoub ____/ __ / ____/ / / Engine Research Center / / / / / / Dept. of Mechanical Engineering ___/ __ / / / / University of Wisconsin-Madison / / | / / / Email:ayoub@erctitan.me.wisc.edu _____/ __/ _| _____/ / '-------------------------------------------------------------' [As I mentioned in a brief apology, the comment quoted above from me is confused. I appear to say that Nestorius was monophysite. As Andrew Byler correctly stated it, the Nestorians and monophysites were actually opposite parties. The point I was making, which Nabil explains in some detail, is that some groups that have been considered heretical probably aren't. Chalcedon was a compromise between two groups, the Alexandrians and Antiochenes. It adopted language that was intended to be acceptable to moderates in both camps, while ruling out the extremes. I agree that there were extremes that were heretical. However in the course of the complex politics of the time, it appears that some people got rejected who didn't intend heresy, but simply used language that was not understood or even was mispresented. And some seem not to have jointed in the compromise for reasons other than doctrine. There are groups descended from both of the supposedly heretical camps. This posting discussed the descendants of the Alexandrians. There are also a remaining Nestorians. Like some of the current so-called monophysites, there is reason to believe that the current so-called Nestorians are not heretical either. They sheltered Nestorius from what they saw as unfair treatment, but claim they did not adopt his heresies, and in fact seem to follow more moderate representatives of the Antiochene tradition. --clh]