04.04.2013 Views

Coptic interpretations of the Fourth Ecumenical Council - Saint Mina ...

Coptic interpretations of the Fourth Ecumenical Council - Saint Mina ...

Coptic interpretations of the Fourth Ecumenical Council - Saint Mina ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

toge<strong>the</strong>r coming to a clear understanding that both families have always<br />

loyally maintained <strong>the</strong> same au<strong>the</strong>ntic Orthodox Christological faith, and <strong>the</strong><br />

unbroken continuity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> apostolic tradition, though <strong>the</strong>y may have used<br />

Christological terms in different ways. It is this common faith and continuous<br />

loyality to <strong>the</strong> apostolic tradition that has been <strong>the</strong> basis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

conversations held over <strong>the</strong> last two decades towards unity and communion.<br />

In 1964 a fresh dialogue began at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Aarhus in Denmark. This<br />

was followed by meetings at Bristol in 1967, Geneva in 1970 and Addis Ababa in<br />

1971. These were a series <strong>of</strong> non-<strong>of</strong>ficial consultations which served as steps<br />

towards mutual understanding.<br />

The <strong>of</strong>ficial consultations in which concrete steps were taken began in 1985 at<br />

Chambesy in Geneva. The second <strong>of</strong>ficial consultation was held at <strong>the</strong> monastery<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>Saint</strong> Bishoy in Wadi-El-Natroun, Egypt in June 1989. The outcome <strong>of</strong> this<br />

latter meeting was <strong>of</strong> historical dimensions, since in this meeting <strong>the</strong> two<br />

families <strong>of</strong> Orthodoxy were able to agree on a Christological formula, thus<br />

ending <strong>the</strong> controversy regarding Christology which had lasted for more than<br />

fifteen centuries.<br />

In September 1990, <strong>the</strong> two families <strong>of</strong> Orthodoxy signed an agreement on<br />

Christology and recommendations were passed to <strong>the</strong> different Orthodox<br />

Churches, to lift <strong>the</strong> ana<strong>the</strong>mas and enmity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> past, after revising <strong>the</strong><br />

results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> dialogues. If both agreements are accepted by <strong>the</strong> various<br />

Orthodox Churches, <strong>the</strong> restoration <strong>of</strong> communion will be very easy at all<br />

levels, even as far as sharing one table in <strong>the</strong> Eucharist.<br />

''As for its part, <strong>the</strong> <strong>Coptic</strong> Orthodox Church has agreed to lift <strong>the</strong><br />

ana<strong>the</strong>mas, but this will not take place unless it is performed bilaterally,<br />

possibly by holding a joint ceremony.'' (H.E. Metropolitan Bishoy,<br />

Metropolitan <strong>of</strong> Damiette and Secretary <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Holy Synod, <strong>Coptic</strong> Orthodox<br />

Church, and Co-chairman <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Joint Commission <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Official Dialogue,<br />

El-Kerasa English Magazine, May 1992, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 8).<br />

3. SYNOPSIS<br />

AARHUS 196 4<br />

+ Over 3 days, 15 <strong>the</strong>ologians from both families met in Aarhus in Denmark for<br />

informal conversations. They recognised in each o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> one orthodox<br />

faith.<br />

+ The well known phrase used by our common fa<strong>the</strong>r, St. Cyril <strong>of</strong> Alexandria<br />

''<strong>the</strong> one nature <strong>of</strong> God's Word Incarnate'' was at <strong>the</strong> centre <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

conversations. Through <strong>the</strong> different terminologies used by each side,<br />

<strong>the</strong>y saw <strong>the</strong> same truth expressed. On <strong>the</strong> essence <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Christological<br />

dogma <strong>the</strong>y found <strong>the</strong>mselves in full agreement.<br />

+ As for <strong>the</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> Chalcedon (451) both families agreed without<br />

reservation on rejecting <strong>the</strong> teaching <strong>of</strong> Eutyches as well as Nestorius, and<br />

thus <strong>the</strong> acceptance or non-acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Council</strong> <strong>of</strong> Chalcedon does not<br />

entail <strong>the</strong> acceptance <strong>of</strong> ei<strong>the</strong>r heresy.<br />

+ It was agreed that <strong>the</strong> significant role <strong>of</strong> political, sociological and<br />

cultural factors in creating tension between factions in <strong>the</strong> last fifteen<br />

centuries should be recognized and studied toge<strong>the</strong>r. They should not,<br />

however, continue to divide us.<br />

BRISTOL 1967<br />

The Agreed Statement from <strong>the</strong> second informal conversations in Bristol,<br />

England, firstly affirmed new areas <strong>of</strong> agreement and <strong>the</strong>n discussed <strong>the</strong><br />

questions that still remained to be studied and settled.<br />

— ONE —<br />

+ Based on <strong>the</strong> teachings <strong>of</strong> common fa<strong>the</strong>rs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> universal Church <strong>the</strong>y<br />

approached <strong>the</strong> Christological question from <strong>the</strong> perspective <strong>of</strong> salvation.<br />

2

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!