|
Jon,
And again!
* Cult? No, that would be silly.
* Heretical? Depends on who you ask.
First, let?s understand ?heretical.? In common usage, it means something like, ?You bastard ??I?m gonna set you on fire!? In academic theological usage, on the other hand, it means something more like, ?Heavens, old chap ? can?t agree with you *there*!? In short, it means that the ?heretical? party is wrong about something rather important. Nothing personal, as they say.
So: Are ?Oriental Orthodox? ?? as those Christians who rejected the Council of Chalcedon in 451 now prefer to be called ??wrong about anything rather important, from an Eastern Orthodox perspective? Well, many now say that they rejected the council even though they did?t actually disagree with the Eastern Orthodox (who accepted it). It was a big misunderstanding, theologically speaking, and there were politics involved, and we all know better now.
In particular, the Oriental Orthodox claim that their position was not ?monotheist? ??which everyone agrees is heretical ??but ?mayst,?Uteich is compatible with the Eastern Orthodox, or ?dyophysite? position. (The question has to do with what it means for Christ to be both God and Man. I could say more, but that would take pages and isn?t necessary for the answer.)
Indeed, the miaphysite position does seem compatible with the Eastern Orthodox one; and it is the position that today?s Oriental Orthodox profess. However, there remains a question as to whether the Oriental Orthodox *who were at the council* professed this belief ? or whether, on the contrary, the Oriental Orthodox position has actually changed between then and now.
Moreover, the Eastern Orthodox have long considered themselves to be the ?Church of the Seven Councils? ??that is, the first seven Ecumenical (or, ?Church-wide?) councils. This is an oversimplification, but it is certainly the case that not only the Council of Chalcedon ? considered by the Eastern Orthodox to be the fourth of these councils ? but also the next three of them have been central to the Eastern Orthodox identity for over a thousand years. This is not some minor technical point, in other words.
So, as an Eastern Orthodox, I must ask myself: if we really believe the same things and always have ??if it was all a big misunderstanding ? why aren?t the Oriental Orthodox willing to accept all seven councils today? (Because Pope Shenouda, for example, has made it clear he?d rather not.) Do we *really* believe the same things? Or is this one of those typical, modern no-one?s-right-and-no-one?s-wrong exercises that try to talk around the truth so we can all feel warm and fuzzy?
I mean, it doesn?t offend me if someone disagrees with me, but I?d prefer that both of us come right out and be blunt about it ??because then you can have a real discussion. In this vein, it has to be noted that there are Oriental Orthodox writers who continue to maintain that the dyophysite position is incoherent. So it isn?t all hugs and kisses on *either* side.
Finally, some Eastern Orthodox theologians take the position that the Oriental Orthodox *did* believe the right things way back when ??so they weren?t heretics ??but that they made themselves *schismatics* by their attitude toward the Council. (A ?schismatic? is someone who separates from the Church for some lesser reason than a disagreement about the truth?? out of anger or pride or politics, for example.)
The fundamental basis for my objection to the idea that we are all one big Church is this: if what scripture says about the Church ??and what the Church has said from the start about itself ? is true, how can there have been a 1,500-year misunderstanding? Was the Holy Spirit asleep at the wheel? Anyone can make a mistake, but is it possible that *none* of the holy men and women over the centuries notice this ??and that it was finally ?figured out? by a bunch of 20th century academics?
I know we like to believe that we are *so* much smarter and wiser from people who lived a long time ago ??what with our iPhones and the UN and so on ??but I am not convinced. After all, how many of our academics today insist that there is no truth at all? This is an improvement? (And besides, in addition to our iPhones and the UN, we also have, for example, nuclear bombs and ??well, the UN.)
Anyhow ??just to be clear ? none of this says to me (or to any Orthodox theologian I have read) that just because a person is Oriental Orthodox, that means they?re going to Hell. That?d be nuts!
+
|
question to eastern orthodox christians:do you view oriental orthodoxy as a heretical
