Fwd: Re: why monofisit?
- --- In OzInterOrthodoxUnity@y..., "Peter Farrington"
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 hearFrom the very beginning when this hymn was used in the 5th century it
> 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.(!)
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 alsoNone of the Oriental Orthodox Churches believe this. It is a
> 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.
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 saintBut did bishop Ilarion investigate what the Oriental Orthodox meant
> 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.
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 themWho has told you such a thing! Certainly no-one who is an Orthodox
> 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
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 TrinituYou have completely misunderstood almost everything that the Oriental
> was in safer(!!).this is completli heretical for us.if
> someone can explane me more the non-chaledonia point
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
--- End forwarded message ---