Category:Coptic interpretations of the Fourth Ecumenical Council

From OrthodoxWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (oriental)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{oriental}}
 
This is a compilation of texts relevant to the [[Fourth Ecumenical Council]] page. [[User:Arbible]] writes:
 
This is a compilation of texts relevant to the [[Fourth Ecumenical Council]] page. [[User:Arbible]] writes:
  
::These are all public domain articles (the Coptic Synaxarium text is not copyrighted, neither are HH Pope Shenouda III writings, of which also only a short excerpt is presented (fair use), and/or are 1990s Coptic apologetic writings intended by their writers for wide dissemination by all means (at that time via mail lists and early Web sites). They have been lightly copyedited, e.g., correcting the names of Emperor Justinian and Proterius the Melchite Patriarch, and adding relevant external links. These Coptic apologetics also appeared in our freeware work, Encyclopedia of the First Millennium of Christianity 1998 - Second Edition. See also http://www.monachos.net/mb/messages/4225/ORIENT3-20256.doc (not sure if Orthodox Wiki should also keep a copy of this important historical document). It states (among other key declarations), "The (Chalcedonian) Orthodox agree that the Oriental Orthodox will continue to maintain their traditional cyrillian terminology of 'one nature of the incarnate Logos' (mia fusiV tou qeou logou sesarkwmenh), since they acknowledge the double consubstantiality of the Logos which Eutyches denied. The Orthodox also use this terminology. The Oriental Orthodox agree that the Orthodox are justified in their use of the two-natures formula, since they acknowledge that the distinction is ‘in thought alone (th qewria monh). Cyril interpreted correctly this use in his letter to John of Antioch and his letters to Acacius of Melitene (PG 77, 184-201). to Eulogius (PG 77. 224-228) and to Succensus (PG 77, 228-245)."
+
::These are all public domain articles (the Coptic Synaxarium text is not copyrighted, neither are HH Pope Shenouda III writings, of which also only a short excerpt is presented (fair use), and/or are 1990s Coptic apologetic writings intended by their writers for wide dissemination by all means (at that time via mail lists and early Web sites). They have been lightly copyedited, e.g., correcting the names of Emperor Justinian and Proterius the Melchite Patriarch, and adding relevant external links. These Coptic apologetics also appeared in our freeware work, Encyclopedia of the First Millennium of Christianity 1998 - Second Edition. See also http://www.monachos.net/mb/messages/4225/ORIENT3-20256.doc ([[Agreed Official Statements on Christology with the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches|Chambesy 1990 Orthodox-Oriental Orthodox Agreement]]). It states (among other key declarations), "The (Chalcedonian) Orthodox agree that the Oriental Orthodox will continue to maintain their traditional cyrillian terminology of 'one nature of the incarnate Logos', since they acknowledge the double consubstantiality of the Logos which Eutyches denied. The Orthodox also use this terminology. The Oriental Orthodox agree that the Orthodox are justified in their use of the two-natures formula, since they acknowledge that the distinction is ‘in thought alone'. Cyril interpreted correctly this use in his letter to John of Antioch and his letters to Acacius of Melitene (PG 77, 184-201). to Eulogius (PG 77. 224-228) and to Succensus (PG 77, 228-245)."
 +
 
 +
[[Category:Contributed Articles]]
 +
[[Category:Oriental Orthodox]]

Latest revision as of 15:23, November 7, 2006

Coptic Orthodox Cross
Note: This article or section represents an Oriental Orthodox (Non-Chalcedonian) perspective, which may differ from an Eastern Orthodox (Chalcedonian) understanding.

This is a compilation of texts relevant to the Fourth Ecumenical Council page. User:Arbible writes:

These are all public domain articles (the Coptic Synaxarium text is not copyrighted, neither are HH Pope Shenouda III writings, of which also only a short excerpt is presented (fair use), and/or are 1990s Coptic apologetic writings intended by their writers for wide dissemination by all means (at that time via mail lists and early Web sites). They have been lightly copyedited, e.g., correcting the names of Emperor Justinian and Proterius the Melchite Patriarch, and adding relevant external links. These Coptic apologetics also appeared in our freeware work, Encyclopedia of the First Millennium of Christianity 1998 - Second Edition. See also http://www.monachos.net/mb/messages/4225/ORIENT3-20256.doc (Chambesy 1990 Orthodox-Oriental Orthodox Agreement). It states (among other key declarations), "The (Chalcedonian) Orthodox agree that the Oriental Orthodox will continue to maintain their traditional cyrillian terminology of 'one nature of the incarnate Logos', since they acknowledge the double consubstantiality of the Logos which Eutyches denied. The Orthodox also use this terminology. The Oriental Orthodox agree that the Orthodox are justified in their use of the two-natures formula, since they acknowledge that the distinction is ‘in thought alone'. Cyril interpreted correctly this use in his letter to John of Antioch and his letters to Acacius of Melitene (PG 77, 184-201). to Eulogius (PG 77. 224-228) and to Succensus (PG 77, 228-245)."
Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox