Draft:Joint Commission Of The Theological Dialogue Between The Orthodox Church And The Oriental Orthodox Churches: Difference between revisions
Tag: citing a blog or free web host |
|||
| Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
Returning to Geneva, the third official dialogue was held on 28 September 1990. This was the occasion for the '''Second Agreed Statement'''<ref name="RaASoECaWL" />. This clarified and interpreted the first statement, with particular reference to pastoral matters, anathemas, and the acceptance (or lack thereof) of the last four ecumenical councils. |
Returning to Geneva, the third official dialogue was held on 28 September 1990. This was the occasion for the '''Second Agreed Statement'''<ref name="RaASoECaWL" />. This clarified and interpreted the first statement, with particular reference to pastoral matters, anathemas, and the acceptance (or lack thereof) of the last four ecumenical councils. |
||
The second statement also explicitly stated the validity of both the Oriental Orthodox terminology of the Incarnation ("one nature of the incarnate Logos") and the Eastern Orthodox terminology (two natures in Christ that are distinct "in thought alone"). Thus, no changes to the terminology used by either side were proposed, and the participants of the commission stated<ref name=" |
The second statement also explicitly stated the validity of both the Oriental Orthodox terminology of the Incarnation ("one nature of the incarnate Logos") and the Eastern Orthodox terminology (two natures in Christ that are distinct "in thought alone"). Thus, no changes to the terminology used by either side were proposed, and the participants of the commission stated<ref name="RaASoECaWL" /> |
||
{{Blockquote |
{{Blockquote |
||
|text= |
|text= |
||
we have now clearly understood that both families have always loyally maintained the same authentic Orthodox Christological faith, and the unbroken continuity of the apostolic tradition, though they have used Christological terms in different ways<ref name=" |
we have now clearly understood that both families have always loyally maintained the same authentic Orthodox Christological faith, and the unbroken continuity of the apostolic tradition, though they have used Christological terms in different ways<ref name="RaASoECaWL" /> |
||
}} |
}} |
||
| Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
{{Blockquote |
{{Blockquote |
||
|text= |
|text= |
||
Both families accept the first three Ecumenical Councils, which form our common heritage. In relation to the four later Councils of the Orthodox Church, the Orthodox state that for them the above points [i.e., the points made in the Second Agreed Statement] are the teachings also of the four later Councils of the Orthodox Church, while the Oriental Orthodox consider this statement of the Orthodox as their interpretation. With this understanding, the Oriental Orthodox respond to it positively.<ref name=" |
Both families accept the first three Ecumenical Councils, which form our common heritage. In relation to the four later Councils of the Orthodox Church, the Orthodox state that for them the above points [i.e., the points made in the Second Agreed Statement] are the teachings also of the four later Councils of the Orthodox Church, while the Oriental Orthodox consider this statement of the Orthodox as their interpretation. With this understanding, the Oriental Orthodox respond to it positively.<ref name="RaASoECaWL" /> |
||
}} |
}} |
||
Both sides agreed in principle that they "should" lift all anathemas against Councils and Fathers of the other side, but no concrete steps were taken in this regard: |
Both sides agreed in principle that they "should" lift all anathemas against Councils and Fathers of the other side, but no concrete steps were taken in this regard: |
||
{{Blockquote|text="The manner in which the anathemas are to be lifted should be decided by the Churches individually... we submit this Agreed Statement and Recommendations to our venerable Churches for their consideration and action"<ref name=" |
{{Blockquote|text="The manner in which the anathemas are to be lifted should be decided by the Churches individually... we submit this Agreed Statement and Recommendations to our venerable Churches for their consideration and action"<ref name="RaASoECaWL" />}} |
||
=== Geneva (1993) === |
=== Geneva (1993) === |
||
Revision as of 15:05, 29 July 2024
 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 3 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,491 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
Submission declined on 14 December 2022 by DoubleGrazing (talk).
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. |  |
Comment: Cites only primary sources, most (all?) of which appear to be close to the subject. DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
| Part of a series on the |
| Eastern Orthodox Church |
|---|
 |
| Overview |
| Part of a series on |
| Oriental Orthodoxy |
|---|
 |
| Oriental Orthodox churches |
 Christianity portal |
| Part of a series on |
| Christianity |
|---|
 |
The Joint Commission of the Theological Dialogue Between the Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Church are a series of ecumenical dialogues between the Eastern Orthodox churches and Oriental Orthodox Churches. The division between the churches can be traced to the years following the Council of Chalcedon (451) whose Christological teaching the Oriental Orthodox did not accept. Attempts to mend the schism "were abandoned in the mid-sixth century" and remained dormant until these meetings and dialogues in the mid- to late-20th century.[1]
The Joint Commission believes both Churches share the same Christological beliefs in substance, the differences being semantic in nature, and that the schism can be mended.
History
Council of Chalcedon
The Council of Chalcedon (convened in the city of Chalcedon, Bithynia; modern-day Kadıköy, Istanbul, Turkey), was the fourth ecumenical council of the Christian Church. It was convoked by the Roman emperor Marcian and took place from 8 October to 1 November 451. The principal purpose of the council was to re-assert the ecumenical Council of Ephesus' teachings of Christ's nature as simultaneously divine and human, opposing the teachings of Eutyches (of Christ as solely divine: Monophysitism) and Nestorius (of Christ being divine and human separately: Nestorianism).
The council adopted the confession of Dyophysitism: that Jesus Christ is one person of one substance and one hypostasis, with two distinct but inseparable natures. As well as opposing Monophysitism, this opposed Miaphysitism (divine and human but in one nature). Those who held to Miaphysitism accused the Dyophysites of embracing Nestorianism and broke off from the rest of the church to become what is now the Oriental Orthodox Churches.
Ecumenism
In the 20th century, the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches, "through the efforts of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches"[2], began entering into ecumenical dialogue to explore the potential of the schism being mended. This began with four unofficial meetings, followed by four official dialogues.[3]
Unofficial Meetings
![[icon]](/wiki/File:Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg){kind=small} | This section needs expansion with: details about each meeting. You can help by adding to it. (September 2022) |
Four unofficial meetings between clergy and theologians of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches took place.[2]
Aarhus (1964)
The first unofficial meeting took place 1964 in Aarhus, Denmark[4].
Bristol (1967)
The second unofficial meeting took place three years later in 1967, in Bristol, England[5].
Geneva (1970)
A further three years passed until the third unofficial meeting 1970, located in Geneva, Switzerland[6].
Addis Ababa (1971)
The last of the unofficial meetings was held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in 1971[6][7].
Official Dialogues
| This section needs expansion with: details about each dialogue. You can help by adding to it. (September 2022) |
The unofficial meetings led to a series of four official dialogues between the two Churches.
Geneva (1985)
The first official dialogue, taking place on 15 December 1985 in Geneva, Switzerland.
Culminating a joint Communique by Professor Dr. Chrysostomos Konstantinidis (Metropolitan of Myra, Ecumenical Patriarchate) and Bishop Bishoy (Coptic Orthodox Church)[8]:
"...For the next meetings, whose aim would be to rediscover our common grounds in Christology and ecclesiology, the following main theme and subsequent sub-themes were agreed upon: Towards a Common Christology
- Problems of terminology;
- Conciliar formulations;
- Historical factors;
- Interpretation of Christological dogmas today..."
Egypt (1989)
The second official dialogue was held on 24 June 1989, this time in in Wadi El-Natrun, Egypt. This was the occasion for the signing of the First Agreed Statement[8], at which participants affirmed the fundamental commonalities between the Dyophysite and Miaphysite positions.
Both sides found common ground in their rejection of the two extremes of the classical Christological debate, i.e., the strict Alexandrine[9], or Monophysite, position which holds that Christ has only a divine nature, as well as the strict Antiochene position which upholds a radical separation of Christ's divine and human natures[10]. The agreed theological statement therefore explicitly rejects both the Nestorian heresy ("We neither separate nor divide the human nature in Christ from His divine nature") and the Eutychian or Monophysite heresy ("nor do we think that [the human nature] was absorbed in [the divine nature] and thus [the former] ceased to exist"). In this middle ground, the statement asserted that
We neither separate nor divide the human nature in Christ from His divine nature, nor do we think that the former was absorbed in the latter and thus ceased to exist. The four adverbs used to qualify the mystery of the hypostatic union belong to our common tradition – without commingling (or confusion), without change, without separation and without division. Those among us who speak of two natures in Christ do not thereby deny their inseparable, indivisible union; those among us who speak of one united divine-human nature in Christ do not thereby deny the continuing dynamic presence in Christ of the divine and the human, without change, without confusion.[8]
The participants appear to have found this common ground by referring to the writings of Cyril of Alexandria, who is venerated by Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians alike[11]. Since Cyril used the formula "mia physis ton Theou Logon sesarkomene" (the one physis or hypostasis of God’s Word Incarnate), the agreed statement suggests that while monophysitism is beyond the pale of Nicene Christianity, miaphysitism is not.
Geneva (1990)
Returning to Geneva, the third official dialogue was held on 28 September 1990. This was the occasion for the Second Agreed Statement[8]. This clarified and interpreted the first statement, with particular reference to pastoral matters, anathemas, and the acceptance (or lack thereof) of the last four ecumenical councils.
The second statement also explicitly stated the validity of both the Oriental Orthodox terminology of the Incarnation ("one nature of the incarnate Logos") and the Eastern Orthodox terminology (two natures in Christ that are distinct "in thought alone"). Thus, no changes to the terminology used by either side were proposed, and the participants of the commission stated[8]
we have now clearly understood that both families have always loyally maintained the same authentic Orthodox Christological faith, and the unbroken continuity of the apostolic tradition, though they have used Christological terms in different ways[8]
While both sides agree that the underlying causes of the schism --- ostensibly Christological --- have been thus addressed, the commission did not come to a definitive agreement about the latter four ecumenical councils, which continued to be a stumbling block for the reconciliation of the two sides.
Both families accept the first three Ecumenical Councils, which form our common heritage. In relation to the four later Councils of the Orthodox Church, the Orthodox state that for them the above points [i.e., the points made in the Second Agreed Statement] are the teachings also of the four later Councils of the Orthodox Church, while the Oriental Orthodox consider this statement of the Orthodox as their interpretation. With this understanding, the Oriental Orthodox respond to it positively.[8]
Both sides agreed in principle that they "should" lift all anathemas against Councils and Fathers of the other side, but no concrete steps were taken in this regard:
"The manner in which the anathemas are to be lifted should be decided by the Churches individually... we submit this Agreed Statement and Recommendations to our venerable Churches for their consideration and action"[8]
Geneva (1993)
The last of the four official dialogues was held on 6 November 1993, returning again to Geneva.
Publishing Proposals for Lifting Anathemas.[12]
After 1993
The Joint Commission of the two families of Orthodoxy has not convened since 1993, with the churches being left to decide the next steps to be taken. For many years, little has happened,[3][13] but many sought concrete steps to reach full communion.[2]
On the 10-13 March 2005, the Inter-Orthodox Theological Committee for Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches was held in Chambésy, Geneva.[14] This meeting sought to acknowledge the progress that had been made, and the opportunities and challenges for the ecumenical work going forward.
The International Orthodox Theological Association (IOTA)[15] (registered in 2017 as a non-profit organization in Illinois, USA) aims to support pan-Orthodox unity and conciliarity, and maintain constructive relations with the leaders of all Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches. The organization has hosted international conferences since 2019[16], and facilitates group research projects.
Current Ecumenical Status
The following table lists the positions of the Autocephalous Orthodox Churches regarding the Joint Commission's statements and proposals. Autonomous Churches have been listed when their stances differ from their parent Autocephalous Church.
Eastern Orthodox ChurchesIn Agreement[17]
Participating[17]
Not Participating
In Opposition
|
Oriental Orthodox ChurchesIn Agreement[17]
Participating[17]
Not Participating
In Opposition(none) |
See Also
- Eastern Orthodoxy
- Ecumenism
- Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches
- Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue Between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church
- Oriental Orthodoxy
References
- ^ Russell, Norman (2021-01-02). "The Eastern Orthodox–Oriental Orthodox Dialogue hits stormy waters: two recent publications on the debate". International Journal for the Study of the Christian Church. 21 (1): 32–41. doi:10.1080/1474225X.2021.1919968. ISSN 1474-225X. S2CID 236593504.
- ^ a b c Attia, Maged (2001). The Coptic Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Movement (PDF) (1st ed.). Abasseya, Cairo, Egypt: Bishopric of Youth Affair. pp. 13–57.
- ^ a b Ioan, Ovidiu; Martzelos, George (2014). "Eastern Orthodox—Oriental Orthodox Dialogue. A Historical and Theological Survey". In Kalaitzidis, Pantelis (ed.). Orthodox Handbook on Ecumenism. Resources for Theological Education. Oxford: Regnum Books. pp. 508–535. JSTOR 10.1163/j.ctv2kqwzk1.15.
- ^ Romanides, John S.; Verghese, Paul; Nissotis, Nick A. (Winter 1964–1965). "Unofficial Consultation Between Theologians of Eastern Orthodox And Oriental Orthodox Churches - August 11-15, 1964 - Papers and Minutes" (PDF). The Greek Orthodox Theological Review. X (2).
- ^ Constantelos, Demetrios J.; Nissiotis, Nikos A.; Verghese, T. Paul, eds. (Fall 1968). "Papers and Discussions Between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Theologians - The Bristol Consultation - July 25-29 1967" (PDF). The Greek Orthodox Theological Review. XIII (2). Brookline, Massachusetts: Holy Cross School of Theology.
- ^ a b Nissiotis, Nikos; Verghese, Paul, eds. (Fall 1971). "Third and Fourth Unofficial Consultations Between Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox Theologians" (PDF). The Greek Orthodox Theological Review. XVI (1 and 2). Brookline, Massachusetts: Holy Cross School of Theology.
- ^ Macar, Andrei (2022). Paulau, Stanislau; Tamcke, Martin (eds.). Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity in a global context: entanglements and disconnections. Texts and studies in Eastern Christianity. Leiden ; Boston: Brill. pp. 172–180. ISBN 978-90-04-50525-4.
- ^ a b c d e f g h Gros, Jeffrey; FSC; Meyer, Harding; Rusch, William G. (2000). Growth in Agreement II. Reports and Agreed Statements of Ecumenical Conversations at World Level 1982-1998, ed. Jeffrey Gros, FSC, Harding Meyer, William G. Rusch, WCC and Michigan. World Council of Churches. pp. 190–199.
- ^ "Alexandrian theology". Retrieved 29 July 2024.
- ^ "Antiochene theology". Oxford Reference. Retrieved 26 April 2024.
- ^ Laverty, Rhys (10 January 2022). "Unity Across the Chalcedonian Divide?". Ad Fontes.
- ^ Joint Commission Of The Theological Dialogue Between The Orthodox Church And The Oriental Orthodox Churches (2013-12-14) [1993]. "Proposals for Lifting Anathemas". Orthodox Unity (Orthodox Joint Commission). Chambesy, Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved 2022-09-19.
- ^ Asproulis, Nikolaos; Kalaitzidis, Pantelis (2016). "Which Orthodoxy, Whose Heresy? An Eastern Orthodox Comment on the Breach between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches". In Chaillot, Christine (ed.). The Dialogue between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches (1st ed.). Volos: Volos Academy Publications. pp. 256–270. ISBN 978-618-81264-5-9.
- ^ Ionita, Viorel; Ovidiu, Ioan; Martzelos, George (2013). "71, 78, 79". In Kalaitzidis, Pantelis; FitzGerald, Thomas; Hovorun, Cyril; Pekridou, Aikaterini; Asproulis, Nikolaos; Liagre, Guy; Werner, Dietrich (eds.). Orthodox Handbook on Ecumenism: Resources for Theological Education (Preliminary ed.). St. Philip and St. James Church, Woodstock Road, Oxford OX2 6HR, UK: Regnum Books International. ISBN 978-1-506477-58-9.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link) - ^ Gavrilyuk, Paul L., ed. (2020). Pilgrims toward the Kingdom: The Beginning of the International Orthodox Theological Association. St. Paul, Minnesota: IOTA Publications. ISBN 978-1-7352951-1-4.
- ^ Saliashvili, Meagan (2023-01-13). "A historic meeting of Orthodox Christian scholars convenes to confront divisions and war". Religion News Service. Retrieved 2024-05-04.
- ^ a b c d Ladouceur, Paul (2016). "Orthodox Critiques of the Agreed Statements between the Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox Churches". St Vladimir's Theological Quarterly. 3 (60): 333–368 – via Academia.
- ^ "Serbian Patriarch and Patriarchs of Antioch Call for Pan-Orthodox Unity". Orthodox Times. 6 June 2019. Retrieved 5 April 2023.
- ^ "A Memorandum of the Sacred Community of Mount Athos: Concerning the Dialogue Between the Orthodox and Non-Chalcedonian Churches" (in Greek). Greece: The Sacred Community of Mount Athos: Holy Community of Mount Athos. 1996. Retrieved 4 May 2024.
contemporary conferences of theological experts and representatives of Christian denominations convened to resolve matters of doctrine and practice | ||
| The Anglican Church with the |  | |
| The Assyrian Church of the East with the | ||
| The Roman Catholic Church with the | ||
| The Eastern Orthodox Church with the | ||
| The Lutheran Church with the | ||
| The Oriental Orthodox Church with the | ||
| Multilateral | ||
| see also | ||
- in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
- reliable
- secondary
- independent of the subject
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.