Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fwd: Re: why monofisit?

Expand Messages
  • Thomas Daniel
    ... wrote: My dear friend I hope I can explain a little about the Orthodox faith of the Oriental Orthodox christians. ... From the very
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 22, 2001
      --- In OzInterOrthodoxUnity@y..., "Peter Farrington"
      <peter.farrington@u...> wrote:
      My dear friend I hope I can explain a little about the Orthodox faith
      of the Oriental Orthodox christians.

      > from the life of the saint Sava(439-532)i can hear
      > abot some peter fulon who was a false antiochian
      > patriarh.he on the song
      > "Holu Father, holy strong Holu imortal" add the words
      > "who crificate on the cross for us."this is a 100%
      > blasfwem for us because that means that that whole
      > holu trinitu was crificate on the cros.(!)

      From the very beginning when this hymn was used in the 5th century it
      was always used in two different ways. The Church of Constantinople
      referred it to the Holy Trinity, while that of Antioch - and evidence
      suggests that it originated in Antioch not in Constantinople - used
      it as a hymn to Christ. Now if it is used as a hymn to Christ then it
      is perfectly acceptable to say that Christ has been crucified for us,
      since he is indeed Holy God. Now the hymn in this Christological form
      with the addition was used by supporters of Chalcedon at Antioch. How
      could Chalcedonians have used it at all unless it was being used as a
      Christological hymn? In the Oriental Orthodox Churches today it is
      still used as a hymn to Christ and there is no heresy in singing of
      Christ in these words as they were first used to address him. Equally
      there is no error in addressing them without the addition to the
      Trinity. This shows that much of the criticism of the Oriental
      Orthodox Churches has come from a lack of conversation with us, and
      assuming that it is clear what we are saying when in fact we are
      saying the opposite. St Sava is correct in saying that the additions
      should not be used if the hymn is addressed to the Trinity but he is
      incorrect if he is saying that it is wrong to address this hymn with
      the additions to Christ.

      >he also
      > claimed that the Gods natur almost (if i can expres
      > like this)"eaten"the human natutra of Crist.that whu
      > he is caled the monofisitt.

      None of the Oriental Orthodox Churches believe this. It is a
      blasphemy and a heresy. It has not been believed or taught by any of
      our fathers. In fact anyone who has ever said such a thing has been
      cast from our Churches. It is wrong to believe such things but we
      have never believed them and consider them a terrible heresy that
      destroys our salvation.

      > also from the life of saint
      > bishop Ilarion from meglen(12-13 sencuri)in the talks
      > whith the armenian colonists in macedonia he ask them
      > whu theu akceptesd the teachin of the curst
      > Eftihie,dioscurus and some mantacunion about thear
      > teachin that Cruist was hear on the earth whith some
      > kind of "special" body,spiritual one ,from the "
      > heaven" and simular.then they tell him (the armenians)
      > "the bodu of crist after was united whith God it
      > became one natura -Crist.

      But did bishop Ilarion investigate what the Oriental Orthodox meant
      when they use the term nature. They certainly do not mean that Christ
      is only god, or only human, or a mixture of the two. They mean that
      Christ is one reality, one being, not two. The body of Christ is a
      divine body, because it belongs to God and is glorified by union with
      Him, but it is still a human body, or rather a complete and perfect
      human being which finds its existence , its hypostatic state only in
      union with God the Word.

      > also i mant to expres the way how they cross them
      > selfs.whith two fingers.
      > we cross whith 3 finger which represents Hol.trin.and
      > the other 2 fingers are the two naturas of crist.
      > but they (non-chaled.)do that 100% oposit.whith two
      > fingers more ecsrested and whuith 3 other in the level
      > of the hand and whith that they want to say that the
      > whole holu truinitu incarnate in virgin mary!!thas

      Who has told you such a thing! Certainly no-one who is an Orthodox
      Christian in the Oriental Orthodox Churches. Why should we believe
      that the whole Trinity has been incarnated when it is a complete
      heresy and we have never taught such a thing. If your teachers had
      spoken with our fathers they would have discovered that such nonsense
      was never believed or confessed. It is God the Word who is incarnate
      of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and this we have always
      believed from the beginning. I could say that you having three
      fingers together shows that you believe that the Holy Trinity is
      incarnate in the Virgin Mary. Just because I say it doesn't make it
      true because it is not what you believe. What matters is how people
      explain their faith - people should not be accused of things they
      have not been given an opportunity to explain.

      The things you have accused us of are great heresies that we have
      never taught and have always anathematised.

      > means that on the crooss event the whole holu Trinitu
      > was in safer(!!).this is completli heretical for us.if
      > someone can explane me more the non-chaledonia point

      You have completely misunderstood almost everything that the Oriental
      Orthodox believe. Indeed what we believe is the opposite of
      everything you have accused us of.

      But this list, and others like it are designed to help us meet and
      talk so that we do not accuse each other of things that we actually

      I hope this helps just a little

      Peter Theodore
      --- End forwarded message ---
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.