|
|
|
2 members (theophan, 1 invisible),
93
guests, and
17
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,219
Posts415,297
Members5,881
| |
Most Online3,380 Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 499
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 499 |
Dear Friends, Last night Vision TV (Canada's Multi-faith network) was broadcasting a series called Heaven on Earth - Christianity. The speaker and host travelled around the globe visiting Cathedrals, Great Churches and the Architecture of that time period. While in Hagia Sophia the host said that there was a 5th century schism that still exists today.
Can someone elaborate on this ?
Brad
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268 |
Dear Brad:
The host could have been referring to the non-Chalcedonians, aka our present-day "Oriental Orthodox" brethren.
Their bishops did not attend or boycotted altogether the Council of Chalcedon.
The Eastern Orthodox still consider them in "schism" from the "Church!"
Amado
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Dear Friends,
The two families of Orthodox Churches today do acknowledge each other as being "Orthodox Christians" and their theologians have come to a Christological agreement.
The remaining problem for full unity to be achieved (actually for the Orthodox there is no "imperfect unity" you are either ONE or you are not) is the number of Councils to be accepted and also HOW to re-establish unity.
The HOW is less of a problem (they say they could withdraw the excommunications against each other's teachers and that would restore it), but the issue of which Councils to accept since the Oriental, Miaphysite Churches accept only the first three and probably consider the others after Chalcedon to be "all right" but not necessarily "Ecumenical Councils" since they addressed issues that did not affect the Oriental Churches (i.e. icons) and since their Churches weren't represented at them.
But the EO and OO have developed very close mutual ties.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 4,268 |
I don't know if we can consider that the Catholic Church has a "more advanced" ties with the Orientals than the Eastern Orthodox Churches do.
But we have 7 Oriental Churches now in communion with Rome:
From the Assyrian Church of the East:
(1) The Chaldean Catholic Church; and (2) The Syro-Malabar Catholic Church; From the Oriental Orthodox:
(3) The Armenian Catholic Church; (4) The Coptic Catholic Church; (5) The Ethiopian (and Eritrean) Catholic Church; (6) The Syrian Catholic Church; and (7) The Syro-Malankara Catholic Church.
Amado
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Dear Amado,
Ah, but your very own RC theologians, of pleasant remembrance, cease not to affirm at Catholic-Orthodox theological commission meetings that the "Union" way of achieving ecclesial togetherness in history is "bad" and "no longer to be considered viable as a model of church unity today."
The propagation of such Churches of the East in communion with (aka under the foot of) Rome cannot be considered a positive Western response to the enduring question of mutual ecclesiological estrangement requiring proficient and indepth prayer and rumination over past theological and historical issues relating to the continuing separation . . .
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|