I amazed that the entire bastion of the EO bows to the will of monks on Mt. Athos. Last I remember the hierarchy is set-up with the bishops at the top.
Their own Patriarch is trying to remove a good portion, with the help of the Greek Government, and they are defiant. Some have even levied anathemas against their own Patriarch. Gee--good situation.
So if you hold to your OO position, hold to it. Don't behave like your team has been insulted. Repudiate the position of the others by all means.
Firstly, the Church is like our mother. We can take insults on us, or on our own ignorance or short-commings, but when someone attacks or insults your mother, it is extremely offensive. Especially when their insults are based on lies.
In the meantime Godislove has posted a question about Our Lady of Lourdes. This too is relevant since 'things happen' outside the bastion of Orthodoxy. Myrrh weeping icons occur in the RCC as well as Orthodox ones.
There was absolutely NO apparition more amazing, more drammatic than Our Lady's appearance in Zeitun Egypt. Nothing compares.
Yet, if you tell any catholic about it, they have not heard about this event. Remarkable!! They clearly want to deny that St Mary is close to us.
I put the false label and characterization of Monophysitism on the CoC as being no different than the false accusations put forward in the accusations put forth against Our Lord: 'he cured on the sabbath', 'he said that he is the Son of God', 'he said that he can raise this temple up in three days'.
If it sounds like I'm sick and tired of the monophysite label business. I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
[quote author=ilovesaintmark link=topic=9222.msg114555#msg114555 date=1274304514] I put the false label and characterization of Monophysitism on the CoC as being no different than the false accusations put forward in the accusations put forth against Our Lord: 'he cured on the sabbath', 'he said that he is the Son of God', 'he said that he can raise this temple up in three days'.
If it sounds like I'm sick and tired of the monophysite label business. I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been. The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
Hi,
I just want to paraphrase you so to be sure that I've understood your point of view. Are you saying that the Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been??
Even when you go to Old Cairo, to the church of St. George (the round), they fly the flag of Greece at the top. They do not fly the Egyptian flag, which expounds at the fact that the nationalism and empire is more important than religious. Not to mention that, the Byzantine Alexandrian patriarchal jurisdiction should be looking to be indigenous to the population. It proves that their presence is a usurpers presence with an aim towards hellenization and not the true roots of Orthodoxy.
The Greek numbers in Egypt continue to dwindle--down to 5000. What was taken by the sword from us will return, not because the Copts were violent or took up the sword, but because we were steadfast to Our Master's call for patience and justice by peace. In plenty of areas in Egypt they are abandoning their churches, because there is not enough of a congregation.
Our Pope and Bishops are wonderful, I place their shoes on my head (as the Egyptian idiom goes). I agree with the blood boiling. It makes my blood curdle.
I will add: our priesthood is real and it is a beacon to what ministry is. I love our priests. They are good men with good hearts. They sacrifice and they care as good fathers. They are not trying to sell church lands for their profit, and they do not sell their souls to the Muslim rulers.
Does anyone remember Cyrus and the fall of Alexandria?
Explain to me how popes, bishops, and priests can ride with swords pointed in the air? And that is holy? Not to mention they actually killed with them.
Guys, some of what you say is bordering on the ridiculous. You are saying everything they just said about us. That their priests are this and that, and they talk about their miracles.
Let us not forget that we produced a lot of heretics as well- for instance Arian, Origen...The Pope before Pope Cyril (Kyrillos) VI was by many accounts, bad, and practicing simony.
Further, in the diaspora, I am equally intrigued how removed our churches are from the land of immigration. In the diaspora in Sydney, there are many fractions that continue to be very hostile and negative towards other ethnicities. There is huge resistance to making English the main language in the churches. There was even a brawl in church between Sudanese and Egyptians. People don't want the "Sudanese to take over the clergy"! Tell me where is the Christianity and Orthodoxy here? You are only offended by the Greek flag, because you love Egypt. I get the feeling that many people who take offence wouldn't care less if the Egyptian flag was raised in churches such as Sudan, Ethiopia or Australia. The same nationalisitc pride and imperialism, reigns in our Alexandrian church. You clearly showed that you believe Christianity owes everything to Alexandria? How about our own family of Churches, such as Ethiopia? Assyrian? etc. Do you even know their contributions? Basic Christian Orthodoxy must always be attributed to the Apostles. If we say it is from Egypt, than by definition it can't be orthodox, because it is not then the faith once and for all delivered by the Apostles.
Hey guys i found a link to this letter by HH Pope Theodoros II concerning the OO believe in the nature of Christ. PRIDE is a big factor in this situation as you will read in the letter.Please share your thoughts. And please read appendix 2 by HE Panteliemon http://www.theholysynod.copticpope.org/appendix1.htm PPFM
I hope that we will restrain ourselves from all forms of pride and cultural arrogance so that we are not guilty of that which we accuse others of.
The list of achievements of the Coptic Orthodox Church which has been listed seems gravely deficient to me I am sorry to say, and seems to be rather prideful. We are not solely the Orthodox Church, but we are one local manifestation of a universal reality. Any attitude which diminishes our unity with all other local Orthodox Churches in the unity of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ is error.
If we are Coptic before we are Orthodox then we are not Orthodox at all. And if we are Orthodox before we are Coptic then we are in a unity of faith with our Armenian, Eritrean, Ethiopian, Indian, Syrian, and British and French and American brethren.
If we are to reject a purported Byzantine Imperialism, then we should surely not seek to erect a Coptic Empire. I can find no trace of St Cyril or St Athanasius or St Severus or any of the saints speaking about the Church of Alexandria in such a way. When St Severus, a Syrian, was in Egypt he was received as the head of the Church. A large proportion of the Desert Fathers were not Egyptian. As far as I can see none of the Fathers spoke about their ethnicity in a prideful way.
We should be glad to be associated with such an ancient Christian community, but from a heavenly point of view there is no such thing as the Coptic Orthodox Church and the Syrian Orthodox Church and the Armenian Orthodox Church. There is only the Church of Christ, and if we separate ourselves either in heart and mind, or in practice, from other members of this one Church for such a prideful thing as which local community we belong to, or even worse, which ethnicity we belong to, then we are wounding the Church of Christ and all of our pride in one particular community will not save us.
To be at the Orthodox Festival and worship as a British person, who is almost entirely of English blood for hundreds of years back in my family, with bishops, priests and laity from Armenian, Syrian, Egypt, India, Ethiopia and Eritrea is a profoundly moving experience. Everything that is of the Armenian Christian community belongs to me, likewise that of Syria, India, Ethiopia and Eritrea, and everything I have belongs to them. Anything else is a failure to recognise the true Church of Christ.
As for the view of others about us? I am no longer sure it matters. There are a great many EO who know us and love us, we should not wilfully offend them. Last night I was at an ecumenical reception held by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. He preached at the short Anglican evening prayer service we attended, and then we gathered in the medieval hall at Lambeth Palace. I met various people I know there, but I am not good at mingling. I was there with Abba Seraphim, and saw Father Antonious from St Mark's. The Syrian Archbishop was also present. There were also many Eastern Orthodox, including Archbishop Gregrorios and Metropolitan Kallistos. I had a good conversation with several Eastern Orthodox priests, including one from the ROCOR church. There was genuine fellowship there, as far as folk felt comfortable. It wasn't a one world church or anything like that. I would not want to offend those Eastern Orthodox who had taken the time to attend an ecumenical event and pray with us and with others. It may well be that many there think we are monophysites, but they were not offensive to me if they did think that. I think that the Anglican Church has many errors but it was not an occasion to raise those either.
It seems better to me to assume that the vast majority of those who might call us monophysites do not actually know what we believe, but believe that they do know what we believe. There are a relatively small but very noisy group who intend to be offensive, I am not sure they will ever be convinced of anything.
So how do we help those who misunderstand what we believe. It must surely be by producing high quality educational materials in English and in other languages - why not Russian and Greek - so that people can learn what we believe. if most people get their knowledge of our faith from books that are no written by Orthodox people then that is our fault surely. If the Coptic Church is indeed the source of all Christianity - as we are asked to believe - then why has the Church generally failed to produce such materials in good quality English and with a professional appearance? Why have we not produced such information and invited every Christian pastor and priest in the UK to receive a free copy? Why are we not offering a free copy to every Protestant and Catholic seminary student? Why are we not offering to do lectures in every seminary to explain our own faith.
Indeed why are so many of our own faithful theologically illiterate and unable to explain what we believe in relation to other Christian communities and other religions?
Being negative and complaining about others attitudes and views achieves nothing - zero! It is only be being positive and finding positive ways of explaining what we believe that we overcome entrenched views. Views which are often not deliberate. But if I was taught at seminary or college that the Oriental Orthodox were monophysites then I would believe it.
But there is one project I have had on my mind for a long time. I would like to produce a website that listed in some form all the websites and books which misrepresented our Church and Faith, with some relatively easy way for people to email the publishers and request that references be corrected, or at least to let editors know that some terms are considered pejorative and not accurate.
But let's be positive. I don't really mind what I am called. But I would like others to know the substance of my faith. That requires work on my/our part to allow others to be better informed.
It seems unusual to choose the OO church over the EO. I read the prejudice before I was acquainted with the facts and it wasn't until the monastery I was baptised in went into schism that I attended a Coptic liturgy.
So, I would like to ask you Father Peter what was the story of your journey to Orthodoxy and why you didn't join the more prominent churches like the Greek etc?
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=9222.msg114569#msg114569 date=1274348640] I hope that we will restrain ourselves from all forms of pride and cultural arrogance so that we are not guilty of that which we accuse others of.
I really don't think that culture has anything to do with it.......? And who mentioned anything about building a "Coptic Empire"?? I don't think the goal of this discussion was to encourage people to be culturally arrogant, but rather just share opinions and facts. [quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=9222.msg114569#msg114569 date=1274348640] A large proportion of the Desert Fathers were not Egyptian.
What exactly are you implying with this statement? What does it matter if they where Egyptian or Greek or Chinese for that matter? Who mentioned anything about ethnicity??? Since when does ethnicity determine a persons level of spirituality?? Just purely out of curiosity, could you please give me some examples as i am interested to know. Forgive me Father, but i sense a high level of criticism from your posts, and from reading your previous posts on other topics, i have noticed that i am not the only one who has noticed this.... :-\ :-\ I hope i am wrong and that i am just misinterpreting what you want to say.. PPFM
Have you read all of this thread? Or are you just commenting on the last post. There has been a great deal of talk about empire in this thread and culture and how the Coptic church culture is the origin of Christianity.
I am not sure what you are asking when you seem unhappy that I am critical of this view? I am indeed highly critical of a view which elevates the Coptic Church above other Orthodox Churches. There is no place in the Orthodox Faith for such an attitude.
In this very thread someone has posted that the Coptic Orthodox Church gave the world Christianity. This is not true. The Coptic Orthodox Church has played an important role in the history of Christianity, but it is one role among many. Others have recently said that the Coptic Church is responsible for the episcopate, for the Bible, the Creed etc etc. This is not true.
It is elevating Copts above all other Christians, and is pride.
I am not quite sure what you mean by saying you have sense 'a high level of criticism' in my posts? Why is it wrong that I should be critical? I am not sure why you hope you are wrong? Please be clearer in your comment.
I do agree with you that ethnicity does not determine the level of a person's or culture's spirituality. Therefore I am unsure why you then seem to disagree with me when I criticise those who say that the Coptic Church is more important than any other Christian community.
It seems unusual to choose the OO church over the EO. I read the prejudice before I was acquainted with the facts and it wasn't until the monastery I was baptised in went into schism that I attended a Coptic liturgy.
So, I would like to ask you Father Peter what was the story of your journey to Orthodoxy and why you didn't join the more prominent churches like the Greek etc?
Dear Aidan,
It is true that many Anglicans might have a better awareness of Eastern Orthodoxy than Oriental Orthodoxy, but for the vast majority of Evangelicals and non-Christians I would say that there is little knowledge of either. I first discovered Orthodoxy when I was studying at an Evangelical Bible College. This was an exposure solely to a limited range of Eastern Orthodox sources. I read The Orthodox Church by Bishop Kallistos, I heard the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom in English on audio tape from Ennismore Gardens, and I read the Way of the Pilgrim. Later I began to read the Philokalia and the Lives of Desert Fathers, then I discovered some of the Apostolic Fathers.
Yet I had no met any Orthodox, and for a while a vague interest in Orthodox spirituality and doctrine was held in common with amn interest in Catholic spirituality, and a participation in some Anglican monastic communities - the Society of St Francis, with whom I went on several retreats.
I will miss out most of the life history, but at some point I was ready to move on and contacted the Moscow Patriarchate and the Greek Archdiocese. The contacts were friendly but not helpful. It was suggested I become an Anglican by those who responded since 'Anglicanism is the Orthodox Church for British people'. I did not think that was the case even then.
I had also contacted Abba Seraphim, just as a matter of random interest. And he invited me to meet with him and Father Michael, who became my parish priest, over dinner. I attended with my own father and we have a good conversation in which Abba Seraphim made himself available to help us learn, without putting us under any pressure. His small Church had come from the Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate in the previous century, but had been left isolated and was not in communion with either the major Eastern or Oriental Orthodox communions. I spent some years visiting Abba Seraphim and learning from him, but I did not want to join a community which was isolated, since it was already a great step to become Orthodox. Yet something was happening.
At the same time, some American Antiochian priests came over and started holding some meetings, mostly with disaffected Anglicans who were unhappy about the introduction of women priests in the Anglican Church. I attended a weekend conference with them, but was not sure that this was the way forward. From a personal point of view it seemed too much an Anglican process that I didn't really fit into.
In 1993 Abba Seraphim was invited to visit His Holiness, which he did, and a process began which ended in 1994, at Pentecost, with the union of this small British Church with the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate. A week later I was received into the British Orthodox Church, as it seemed clear to me that this was the way God wanted me to follow. I had been reading about the Coptic Orthodox Church in the preceding months and it did not seem to me that the Oriental Orthodox Churches held to the heresy they were accused of. Since I was not committed to becoming Eastern Orthodox I was also not committed to basing my opinion on the point of view held by the Eastern Orthodox towards the Oriental Orthodox.
Since 1994 I have become ever more grateful that I have been joined with the Oriental Orthodox communion, and after 16 years of study I am even more convinced that the Oriental Orthodox Churches are entirely Orthodox both now, and 1500 years ago.
I have several catechumens in my own small community in Kent. Well, two have now become members of the Church. They have come from a high Church Anglican background, are well aware of Eastern Orthodoxy but have chosen Oriental Orthodoxy. The other is from a non-Christian background, also made contact with Eastern Orthodox in the UK but has chosen Oriental Orthodoxy. Another, who became a reader before passing away a few years ago, had been a Catholic, was well aware of Eastern Orthodox and also chose to become Oriental Orthodox very deliberately. A local friend who is married to a Catholic and also well aware of Eastern Orthodoxy, has become Syrian Orthodox as a deliberate choice.
It may well be that among Anglicans there is still a greater knowledge of Eastern Orthodoxy, but I think that is changing quite quickly. My own spiritual father is often invited to speak at the Evangelical Bible College I attended many years ago. And His Grace Bishop Angaleos has presented several teaching days for Anglican clergy of several dioceses. That rather strange Anglican priest who has travelled the world finding odd religious experiences actually presented a good edition of his programme when he visited Egypt and stayed in the desert for a month. Likewise I recently say a good programme on art which looked at Coptic iconography in a very positive manner. Certainly I was neutral when I began seeking Orthodoxy, and contacted anyone who seemed likely to be able to help. I think the majority of people who come to seek Orthodoxy will be like that. The distinction between Eastern and Oriental Orthodox is as apparently meaningless to many enquirers as that between various Baptist or Methodist groups appears to be to a non-Christian wanting to find faith in Christ in that context.
Had I not been encouraged to become an Anglican, and then found the Antiochian process to be dominated by Anglicans trying to cope with women priests, I might well have become an Eastern Orthodox. But there was nothing in my initial searching that would have made that a definite outcome. I just wanted to find Orthodoxy at the beginning - and still do.
The issue i was trying to address was not your criticism of the subject being discussed but rather your criticism toward certain people because their view or opinion does not coincide with yours. I suppose my biggest worry is that you might assume that all Coptic Orthodox people are arrogant and believe that we should build a "Coptic Empire" when this is definitely not the case. I really don't think that your "criticizing" of people with that view is effective but rather i believe you should point them in the right direction with fatherly love and blessing and not criticisms. I don't mean any disrespect i hope your not upset with me father for any reason, and i would like to ask for forgivness if i have in anyway upset you. PPFM
I try not to be critical on this forum, and there are many posts I do not answer, but pride is always dangerous. I followed the link you posted to the blog and saw there that even the people contributing to the blog comments seemed to be dealing with local tensions between ethnicities. It is deadly.
In the West we must be engaged in building relations with our brothers and sisters in the other local Orthodox Churches because it is imperative that we bear witness together to the ONE Orthodox Church to which we belong.
I was careful not to point to any particular person in this thread. Indeed since I only know the real identities of about 3 people here it is impossible for me to point to particular persons. I have certainly never thought that the majority of Copts are arrogant, and it is easy to become proud of our community, but when pride in the Church becomes a means of dividing us from other Orthodox Christians, even within our own community, then I think it is necessary to say that it is an error.
I will try to restrain my posts in future so that I do not appear to criticise people. I do not wish to criticise people but those ideas which are not Orthodox.
Above all things we should all never be proud but of only one sign, and it is the one thing that unites us all: that is the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is the spiritual union in Christ, it has little to do with who's from where or language, even though our history and strength of faith speak for themselves.
Galatians 6:14 May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
i agree john_s2000, our great Saviour Jesus Christ is the one foundation on which our faith is built. i also liked father peter's posts, and was glad to get an update of all these meetings he went to. father peter, thank you for sharing and please send me a p.m. next time u know where bishop kallistos is going to be, i really want to hear him talk (and may even be brave enough to say hello!) as you say, it is important to be humble as well as theological accurate and to be ready to accept the other orthodox churches. as another person posting said, there may also be mistakes in the oriental orthodox history as well. we (EO and OO) do, however, have an agreed statement on the natures of Christ from 1990 and this is something we can always refer to.
however i understand why people love the coptic church so much they are a bit defensive. most of our clergy are so awesome and kind it comes natural to want to protect them against false accusations. there is a risk with any great community that it can become, or seem, exclusive. Christianity was never supposed to be like that.
aidan, i had always intended to pop into a greek orthodox church one day (i had no idea there were other orthodox churches in the uk, having not lived close to any), but didn't live near enough to one to actually do that. also it was only after i started attending the coptic church (recommended by a friend) i realised there were 2 families of orthodox churches. by then i had already found my spiritual home and the answers to my theological questions. i have, so far, attended 2 eastern orthodox churches, where i was specially welcomed by the priests after the service. one czech priest in a russian orthodox church was delighted to meet a copt and told me in his broken english (my czech was limited to 'good day') that he had read books by pope shenouda. he kept saying 'very good, very good' and we certainly had spiritual fellowship, if not Holy Communion.
may our great and mighty God lead us in prayer and intercession on behalf of His church that we may 'shine like stars in the universe' and that the world will know we are His disciples when we love one another.
Thanks Abouna! I really thank you for the contribution you have made concerning this subject, and the very wise counsel in how to approach those of other churches.
I was reading a translation of an article by a senior Russian Orthodox priest yesterday. I had already read a critical paper he had presented to our Holy Synod a couple of years ago, which I had thought I might respond to (with rather too much frustration in my heart) and might still respond to in the future if the Lord wills.
He had been involved in some of the discussion between the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox.
Here is part of what he says..
You can say that there is no truly serious scientific academic theology among the Copts today. At least, I am not aware of any significant Coptic theological dogmatist, patrologist or church historian. For example, if you look at the texts that were presented by participants during the Coptic Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Eastern Church, then, in my view, the theological level of these texts is not very high. Although, apparently, these texts were prepared by the leading theologians today the Coptic Church.
This strikes me as a rather concerning description of an outsiders view of our Church. They do not think that we are competent at theology at all. This seems to me to be a major part of the reason why we are still called monophysites (although names no longer trouble me). I know that Dr Youhanna Youssef has been producing serious academic papers, but most of the other sources of scholarly information which I have accessed have been from non-Orthodox but sympathetic sources. (I am aware those clergy who are well versed in patristics. Fr Athanasius Iskander and Fr Kyrillos Ibrahim are but two, and there are other younger men with whom I have been in contact for many/some years).
I hope that more and more Orthodox will see that the Church has a great need of those who are very well read in theology and patristics, not least so that those outside of the Church are not given cause to make comments such as that which I have quoted above. It would be a great service to the Church and is necessary both for the well being of the Church and for our mission in the world.
I wonder if St. Athanasius and St. Cyril and John Damascus would have passed the test?
I think the priest is right in a way, though, but I hardly see it as a major deficiency. I mean, the Apostles and many of our greatest church fathers would not pass todays standard of academic rigor? And real spirituality and theology can only be found in experience and faith, rather than research and painstaking collaboration of patristics. But I hope we do get a tower like Origen, save the fall.
I am afraid I do think it is rather a deficiency. There should surely be many members in every generation who are committed to serious study of theology? What was the Cathechetical School of Alexandria if not just such an institution. It was once said that the Church of Alexandria was filled with people who were deeply interested in theology and always engaged in theological conversations and debates.
I have been Coptic Orthodox since 1994 but in all that time I have found very few serious and detailed books on theology or church history in English written by Copts. I have a great interest in St Timothy of Alexandria, a very important figure indeed, but I have never read anything written about him by any Copts and I have had to rely on the serious efforts of Catholics and Protestants to learn what I have done.
Likewise St Shenoute, the most important figure in Coptic literary history, yet his literary corpus is being made available by non-Copts, and he is being studied and written about by non-Copts, and as far as I can see there are no Copts studying or writing about him.
The writings of St Dioscorus are only available through the efforts of non-Copts, and there seem to be no extended works about St Cyril of Alexandria by any Copts.
I am sure that St Athanasius and St Cyril would pass the test of having a rigourous theological knowledge and an extensive knowledge of the Fathers, but it is not clear that many of us do. This is not meant as a personal criticism of anyone, but I do believe it is the greatest threat the Coptic Church faces. If the faithful do not have a rich and extensive knowledge and appreciation of our theology then there is nothing to prevent them either living a Christian life relying on error, or even worse, wandering off to a heterodox group because 'we all believe the same'.
It seems to me that we should not make a dichotomy between faith and study, serious study is as much a part of our spiritual ascesis as prayer and fasting. There is a vast amount of energy expended in preserving the Coptic tradition of hymnology, and the Coptic language itself. A great deal of study and serious research is conducted. Why should the same not be applied to the actual substance of our Faith? Why should we not be able to reply in detail to detailed questions about our Faith? The Russian Orthodox priest from whom I quoted presented a very detailed criticism of our Faith, if we cannot easily reply to it in similar detail then we should not be surprised that others continue to think we have an erroneous theology. There are many folk here on this forum who are engaged in very detailed and technical studies towards gaining various secular qualifications and spend hours and hours each day in such studies. This is commendable. But it seems to me that we should expend some energy on learning the substance of our faith and becoming familiar with our own Fathers and history in a serious and systematic manner.
[quote author=Godislove260 link=topic=9222.msg114533#msg114533 date=1274280123] One of the issues for the EO is that if early church fathers considered us heretics and if they now reconsider that point of view, then they would be betraying their church fathers... this is one interesting point I read once on this subject! We didn't change anything since Chalcedon, so why should the EO change their point of view about us today?? But the problem is, they don't take into consideration that mistakes have been made in the past, that the opinions of their church fathers weren't necessarily based on religious disagreement but political animosity...
Another thing: this is not relevant to this discussion but I didn't want to open a new thread so as to not draw any attention to this: there is a new movie coming out soon called 'Agora', from what I read about it, the movie talks about 4th Century Alexandria, and it depicts the early christians as barbaric hateful people who enjoy the public burning of people who oppose their doctrine, I also heard it talks about St. Cyril as a cruel, greedy-for-power church leader who doesn't tolerate any opposition, the movie claims to be a true story and I also read it says the early christians were responsible for the burning of the famous Library of Alexandria, as it was full of heretic ancient philosophy... Now, I know that from the beginning of Christianity in Egypt there were the native Egyptian christians (copts) and the Byzantine occupiers (eastern roman empire with byzantium/ constantinopel as its capital) who later on became christian and in many cases opposed and fought the Coptic church, however, I wonder, are there any parts of our history that we are never told about because they are just too shamful?? Maybe this particular story in this specific movie isn't true, but is it possible that our church has in the past fallen into similar malpractices such as the ones the Catholic church was guilty of?? I mean corrupt leaders, crimes commited in the name of christianity etc. ???(I admit that I don't know a lot about early Coptic history (of course the Egyptian educaton system is one of the instances to blame here and I am very hesitant to read such books written by Copts because of the fear for historical inaccuracy and the lack of an objective mindset... ) so if anyone know about any good books...
I would greatly appreciate it if someone answered my question.. (it's the part in bold)
also, I would like to thank Fr. Peter for his brilliant answer, it is true that some seem to be guilty of the exact same thing they accuse others of...
Fr. Peter, about the deficiency of academic, theological books and studies by Copts, I agree with you, it is shameful really how little most Copts know about their church, but we must keep in mind the birthplace of many Copts is a country where about 40% are analphabets and where good education is a luxury many can't afford... maybe that is one of the reasons... (also see the underlined part of my former post)
and I agree with Clay, true religion is about living with God, and experiencing Him and His love, but true understanding of that religion is equally important, in order for us to love God, we must know Him, know Him the orthodox way, meaning the correct, patristic, apostolic tradition that was delivered to us by the people who met Him and received from Him His message to mankind and were told to spread it to all nations..
Comments
Let us not forget the person of Nestorius.
Athanasius, at 18 yrs old, was able to teach the world. Last Sunday was his feast day, God's Blessings be upon us through his prayers and pleadings.
Their own Patriarch is trying to remove a good portion, with the help of the Greek Government, and they are defiant. Some have
even levied anathemas against their own Patriarch. Gee--good situation.
So if you hold to your OO position, hold to it. Don't behave like your team has been insulted. Repudiate the position of the others by all means.
Firstly, the Church is like our mother. We can take insults on us, or on our own ignorance or short-commings, but when someone attacks or insults your mother, it is extremely offensive. Especially when their insults are based on lies. There was absolutely NO apparition more amazing, more drammatic than Our Lady's appearance in Zeitun Egypt. Nothing compares.
Yet, if you tell any catholic about it, they have not heard about this event. Remarkable!!
They clearly want to deny that St Mary is close to us.
in the accusations put forth against Our Lord: 'he cured on the sabbath', 'he said that he is the Son of God', 'he said that he can raise this temple up in three days'.
Trumped charges, false accusations, railroad arguments.
If it sounds like I'm sick and tired of the monophysite label business. I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
Because of their pettiness, the empire fell, the Arab-Islamic tide took over the Middle East, Africa, and almost all of Europe.
I put the false label and characterization of Monophysitism on the CoC as being no different than the false accusations put forward
in the accusations put forth against Our Lord: 'he cured on the sabbath', 'he said that he is the Son of God', 'he said that he can raise this temple up in three days'.
Trumped charges, false accusations, railroad arguments.
If it sounds like I'm sick and tired of the monophysite label business. I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
The Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been.
Hi,
I just want to paraphrase you so to be sure that I've understood your point of view. Are you saying that the Coptic Orthodox Church is not monophysite and never has been??
Can you confirm?
BTW, I'm not crazy, just eccentric.
Yes dear.
What happened man? You seem really not yourself today??
That's why I said I feel bad for our Coptic Bishops dealing with this issue. Their blood must be boiling over this. God be with them.
Ultimately, Saint Mary's apparition, and continuous apparitions should help them know that they are "special"!!! Yes, me too. Its so ridiculous that its funny even. Even His holiness says (with some sarcasm): "WHICH NATURE ARE WE ACCUSED OF DENYING?"??
lol.. relax mr. IloveStMark - I can tell you ONE thing that I know is a certainty:
Our Baptism is real.
Our Eucharist IS the REAL Body of Christ and Blood of Christ.
Confession is definately real.
I know, because I know what it is like to be deprived of them.
The Greek numbers in Egypt continue to dwindle--down to 5000. What was taken by the sword from us will return, not because the Copts were violent or took up the sword, but because we were steadfast to Our Master's call for patience and justice by peace. In plenty of areas in Egypt they are abandoning their churches, because there is not enough of a congregation.
Does anyone remember Cyrus and the fall of Alexandria?
Let us not forget that we produced a lot of heretics as well- for instance Arian, Origen...The Pope before Pope Cyril (Kyrillos) VI was by many accounts, bad, and practicing simony.
Further, in the diaspora, I am equally intrigued how removed our churches are from the land of immigration. In the diaspora in Sydney, there are many fractions that continue to be very hostile and negative towards other ethnicities. There is huge resistance to making English the main language in the churches. There was even a brawl in church between Sudanese and Egyptians. People don't want the "Sudanese to take over the clergy"! Tell me where is the Christianity and Orthodoxy here? You are only offended by the Greek flag, because you love Egypt. I get the feeling that many people who take offence wouldn't care less if the Egyptian flag was raised in churches such as Sudan, Ethiopia or Australia. The same nationalisitc pride and imperialism, reigns in our Alexandrian church. You clearly showed that you believe Christianity owes everything to Alexandria? How about our own family of Churches, such as Ethiopia? Assyrian? etc. Do you even know their contributions? Basic Christian Orthodoxy must always be attributed to the Apostles. If we say it is from Egypt, than by definition it can't be orthodox, because it is not then the faith once and for all delivered by the Apostles.
http://www.theholysynod.copticpope.org/appendix1.htm
PPFM
The list of achievements of the Coptic Orthodox Church which has been listed seems gravely deficient to me I am sorry to say, and seems to be rather prideful. We are not solely the Orthodox Church, but we are one local manifestation of a universal reality. Any attitude which diminishes our unity with all other local Orthodox Churches in the unity of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ is error.
If we are Coptic before we are Orthodox then we are not Orthodox at all. And if we are Orthodox before we are Coptic then we are in a unity of faith with our Armenian, Eritrean, Ethiopian, Indian, Syrian, and British and French and American brethren.
If we are to reject a purported Byzantine Imperialism, then we should surely not seek to erect a Coptic Empire. I can find no trace of St Cyril or St Athanasius or St Severus or any of the saints speaking about the Church of Alexandria in such a way. When St Severus, a Syrian, was in Egypt he was received as the head of the Church. A large proportion of the Desert Fathers were not Egyptian. As far as I can see none of the Fathers spoke about their ethnicity in a prideful way.
We should be glad to be associated with such an ancient Christian community, but from a heavenly point of view there is no such thing as the Coptic Orthodox Church and the Syrian Orthodox Church and the Armenian Orthodox Church. There is only the Church of Christ, and if we separate ourselves either in heart and mind, or in practice, from other members of this one Church for such a prideful thing as which local community we belong to, or even worse, which ethnicity we belong to, then we are wounding the Church of Christ and all of our pride in one particular community will not save us.
To be at the Orthodox Festival and worship as a British person, who is almost entirely of English blood for hundreds of years back in my family, with bishops, priests and laity from Armenian, Syrian, Egypt, India, Ethiopia and Eritrea is a profoundly moving experience. Everything that is of the Armenian Christian community belongs to me, likewise that of Syria, India, Ethiopia and Eritrea, and everything I have belongs to them. Anything else is a failure to recognise the true Church of Christ.
As for the view of others about us? I am no longer sure it matters. There are a great many EO who know us and love us, we should not wilfully offend them. Last night I was at an ecumenical reception held by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. He preached at the short Anglican evening prayer service we attended, and then we gathered in the medieval hall at Lambeth Palace. I met various people I know there, but I am not good at mingling. I was there with Abba Seraphim, and saw Father Antonious from St Mark's. The Syrian Archbishop was also present. There were also many Eastern Orthodox, including Archbishop Gregrorios and Metropolitan Kallistos. I had a good conversation with several Eastern Orthodox priests, including one from the ROCOR church. There was genuine fellowship there, as far as folk felt comfortable. It wasn't a one world church or anything like that. I would not want to offend those Eastern Orthodox who had taken the time to attend an ecumenical event and pray with us and with others. It may well be that many there think we are monophysites, but they were not offensive to me if they did think that. I think that the Anglican Church has many errors but it was not an occasion to raise those either.
It seems better to me to assume that the vast majority of those who might call us monophysites do not actually know what we believe, but believe that they do know what we believe. There are a relatively small but very noisy group who intend to be offensive, I am not sure they will ever be convinced of anything.
So how do we help those who misunderstand what we believe. It must surely be by producing high quality educational materials in English and in other languages - why not Russian and Greek - so that people can learn what we believe. if most people get their knowledge of our faith from books that are no written by Orthodox people then that is our fault surely. If the Coptic Church is indeed the source of all Christianity - as we are asked to believe - then why has the Church generally failed to produce such materials in good quality English and with a professional appearance? Why have we not produced such information and invited every Christian pastor and priest in the UK to receive a free copy? Why are we not offering a free copy to every Protestant and Catholic seminary student? Why are we not offering to do lectures in every seminary to explain our own faith.
Indeed why are so many of our own faithful theologically illiterate and unable to explain what we believe in relation to other Christian communities and other religions?
Being negative and complaining about others attitudes and views achieves nothing - zero! It is only be being positive and finding positive ways of explaining what we believe that we overcome entrenched views. Views which are often not deliberate. But if I was taught at seminary or college that the Oriental Orthodox were monophysites then I would believe it.
But there is one project I have had on my mind for a long time. I would like to produce a website that listed in some form all the websites and books which misrepresented our Church and Faith, with some relatively easy way for people to email the publishers and request that references be corrected, or at least to let editors know that some terms are considered pejorative and not accurate.
But let's be positive. I don't really mind what I am called. But I would like others to know the substance of my faith. That requires work on my/our part to allow others to be better informed.
Father Peter
It seems unusual to choose the OO church over the EO. I read the prejudice before I was acquainted with the facts and it wasn't until the monastery I was baptised in went into schism that I attended a Coptic liturgy.
So, I would like to ask you Father Peter what was the story of your journey to Orthodoxy and why you didn't join the more prominent churches like the Greek etc?
If its written somewhere else please direct me.
In Christ
I hope that we will restrain ourselves from all forms of pride and cultural arrogance so that we are not guilty of that which we accuse others of.
I really don't think that culture has anything to do with it.......?
And who mentioned anything about building a "Coptic Empire"?? I don't think the goal of this discussion was to encourage people to be culturally arrogant, but rather just share opinions and facts.
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=9222.msg114569#msg114569 date=1274348640]
A large proportion of the Desert Fathers were not Egyptian.
What exactly are you implying with this statement? What does it matter if they where Egyptian or Greek or Chinese for that matter? Who mentioned anything about ethnicity??? Since when does ethnicity determine a persons level of spirituality??
Just purely out of curiosity, could you please give me some examples as i am interested to know.
Forgive me Father, but i sense a high level of criticism from your posts, and from reading your previous posts on other topics, i have noticed that i am not the only one who has noticed this.... :-\ :-\
I hope i am wrong and that i am just misinterpreting what you want to say..
PPFM
Have you read all of this thread? Or are you just commenting on the last post. There has been a great deal of talk about empire in this thread and culture and how the Coptic church culture is the origin of Christianity.
I am not sure what you are asking when you seem unhappy that I am critical of this view? I am indeed highly critical of a view which elevates the Coptic Church above other Orthodox Churches. There is no place in the Orthodox Faith for such an attitude.
In this very thread someone has posted that the Coptic Orthodox Church gave the world Christianity. This is not true. The Coptic Orthodox Church has played an important role in the history of Christianity, but it is one role among many. Others have recently said that the Coptic Church is responsible for the episcopate, for the Bible, the Creed etc etc. This is not true.
It is elevating Copts above all other Christians, and is pride.
I am not quite sure what you mean by saying you have sense 'a high level of criticism' in my posts? Why is it wrong that I should be critical? I am not sure why you hope you are wrong? Please be clearer in your comment.
I do agree with you that ethnicity does not determine the level of a person's or culture's spirituality. Therefore I am unsure why you then seem to disagree with me when I criticise those who say that the Coptic Church is more important than any other Christian community.
Father Peter
It is true that many Anglicans might have a better awareness of Eastern Orthodoxy than Oriental Orthodoxy, but for the vast majority of Evangelicals and non-Christians I would say that there is little knowledge of either. I first discovered Orthodoxy when I was studying at an Evangelical Bible College. This was an exposure solely to a limited range of Eastern Orthodox sources. I read The Orthodox Church by Bishop Kallistos, I heard the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom in English on audio tape from Ennismore Gardens, and I read the Way of the Pilgrim. Later I began to read the Philokalia and the Lives of Desert Fathers, then I discovered some of the Apostolic Fathers.
Yet I had no met any Orthodox, and for a while a vague interest in Orthodox spirituality and doctrine was held in common with amn interest in Catholic spirituality, and a participation in some Anglican monastic communities - the Society of St Francis, with whom I went on several retreats.
I will miss out most of the life history, but at some point I was ready to move on and contacted the Moscow Patriarchate and the Greek Archdiocese. The contacts were friendly but not helpful. It was suggested I become an Anglican by those who responded since 'Anglicanism is the Orthodox Church for British people'. I did not think that was the case even then.
I had also contacted Abba Seraphim, just as a matter of random interest. And he invited me to meet with him and Father Michael, who became my parish priest, over dinner. I attended with my own father and we have a good conversation in which Abba Seraphim made himself available to help us learn, without putting us under any pressure. His small Church had come from the Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate in the previous century, but had been left isolated and was not in communion with either the major Eastern or Oriental Orthodox communions. I spent some years visiting Abba Seraphim and learning from him, but I did not want to join a community which was isolated, since it was already a great step to become Orthodox. Yet something was happening.
At the same time, some American Antiochian priests came over and started holding some meetings, mostly with disaffected Anglicans who were unhappy about the introduction of women priests in the Anglican Church. I attended a weekend conference with them, but was not sure that this was the way forward. From a personal point of view it seemed too much an Anglican process that I didn't really fit into.
In 1993 Abba Seraphim was invited to visit His Holiness, which he did, and a process began which ended in 1994, at Pentecost, with the union of this small British Church with the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate. A week later I was received into the British Orthodox Church, as it seemed clear to me that this was the way God wanted me to follow. I had been reading about the Coptic Orthodox Church in the preceding months and it did not seem to me that the Oriental Orthodox Churches held to the heresy they were accused of. Since I was not committed to becoming Eastern Orthodox I was also not committed to basing my opinion on the point of view held by the Eastern Orthodox towards the Oriental Orthodox.
Since 1994 I have become ever more grateful that I have been joined with the Oriental Orthodox communion, and after 16 years of study I am even more convinced that the Oriental Orthodox Churches are entirely Orthodox both now, and 1500 years ago.
I have several catechumens in my own small community in Kent. Well, two have now become members of the Church. They have come from a high Church Anglican background, are well aware of Eastern Orthodoxy but have chosen Oriental Orthodoxy. The other is from a non-Christian background, also made contact with Eastern Orthodox in the UK but has chosen Oriental Orthodoxy. Another, who became a reader before passing away a few years ago, had been a Catholic, was well aware of Eastern Orthodox and also chose to become Oriental Orthodox very deliberately. A local friend who is married to a Catholic and also well aware of Eastern Orthodoxy, has become Syrian Orthodox as a deliberate choice.
It may well be that among Anglicans there is still a greater knowledge of Eastern Orthodoxy, but I think that is changing quite quickly. My own spiritual father is often invited to speak at the Evangelical Bible College I attended many years ago. And His Grace Bishop Angaleos has presented several teaching days for Anglican clergy of several dioceses. That rather strange Anglican priest who has travelled the world finding odd religious experiences actually presented a good edition of his programme when he visited Egypt and stayed in the desert for a month. Likewise I recently say a good programme on art which looked at Coptic iconography in a very positive manner. Certainly I was neutral when I began seeking Orthodoxy, and contacted anyone who seemed likely to be able to help. I think the majority of people who come to seek Orthodoxy will be like that. The distinction between Eastern and Oriental Orthodox is as apparently meaningless to many enquirers as that between various Baptist or Methodist groups appears to be to a non-Christian wanting to find faith in Christ in that context.
Had I not been encouraged to become an Anglican, and then found the Antiochian process to be dominated by Anglicans trying to cope with women priests, I might well have become an Eastern Orthodox. But there was nothing in my initial searching that would have made that a definite outcome. I just wanted to find Orthodoxy at the beginning - and still do.
Father Peter
I don't mean any disrespect i hope your not upset with me father for any reason, and i would like to ask for forgivness if i have in anyway upset you.
PPFM
I try not to be critical on this forum, and there are many posts I do not answer, but pride is always dangerous. I followed the link you posted to the blog and saw there that even the people contributing to the blog comments seemed to be dealing with local tensions between ethnicities. It is deadly.
In the West we must be engaged in building relations with our brothers and sisters in the other local Orthodox Churches because it is imperative that we bear witness together to the ONE Orthodox Church to which we belong.
I was careful not to point to any particular person in this thread. Indeed since I only know the real identities of about 3 people here it is impossible for me to point to particular persons. I have certainly never thought that the majority of Copts are arrogant, and it is easy to become proud of our community, but when pride in the Church becomes a means of dividing us from other Orthodox Christians, even within our own community, then I think it is necessary to say that it is an error.
I will try to restrain my posts in future so that I do not appear to criticise people. I do not wish to criticise people but those ideas which are not Orthodox.
Pray for my weakness
Father Peter
Above all things we should all never be proud but of only one sign, and it is the one thing that unites us all: that is the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is the spiritual union in Christ, it has little to do with who's from where or language, even though our history and strength of faith speak for themselves.
Galatians 6:14
May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
Rejoice...
GBU
i also liked father peter's posts, and was glad to get an update of all these meetings he went to. father peter, thank you for sharing and please send me a p.m. next time u know where bishop kallistos is going to be, i really want to hear him talk (and may even be brave enough to say hello!) as you say, it is important to be humble as well as theological accurate and to be ready to accept the other orthodox churches. as another person posting said, there may also be mistakes in the oriental orthodox history as well. we (EO and OO) do, however, have an agreed statement on the natures of Christ from 1990 and this is something we can always refer to.
however i understand why people love the coptic church so much they are a bit defensive. most of our clergy are so awesome and kind it comes natural to want to protect them against false accusations. there is a risk with any great community that it can become, or seem, exclusive. Christianity was never supposed to be like that.
aidan, i had always intended to pop into a greek orthodox church one day (i had no idea there were other orthodox churches in the uk, having not lived close to any), but didn't live near enough to one to actually do that. also it was only after i started attending the coptic church (recommended by a friend) i realised there were 2 families of orthodox churches. by then i had already found my spiritual home and the answers to my theological questions. i have, so far, attended 2 eastern orthodox churches, where i was specially welcomed by the priests after the service. one czech priest in a russian orthodox church was delighted to meet a copt and told me in his broken english (my czech was limited to 'good day') that he had read books by pope shenouda. he kept saying 'very good, very good' and we certainly had spiritual fellowship, if not Holy Communion.
may our great and mighty God lead us in prayer and intercession on behalf of His church that we may 'shine like stars in the universe' and that the world will know we are His disciples when we love one another.
He had been involved in some of the discussion between the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox.
Here is part of what he says..
You can say that there is no truly serious scientific academic theology among the Copts today. At least, I am not aware of any significant Coptic theological dogmatist, patrologist or church historian. For example, if you look at the texts that were presented by participants during the Coptic Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Eastern Church, then, in my view, the theological level of these texts is not very high. Although, apparently, these texts were prepared by the leading theologians today the Coptic Church.
This strikes me as a rather concerning description of an outsiders view of our Church. They do not think that we are competent at theology at all. This seems to me to be a major part of the reason why we are still called monophysites (although names no longer trouble me). I know that Dr Youhanna Youssef has been producing serious academic papers, but most of the other sources of scholarly information which I have accessed have been from non-Orthodox but sympathetic sources. (I am aware those clergy who are well versed in patristics. Fr Athanasius Iskander and Fr Kyrillos Ibrahim are but two, and there are other younger men with whom I have been in contact for many/some years).
I hope that more and more Orthodox will see that the Church has a great need of those who are very well read in theology and patristics, not least so that those outside of the Church are not given cause to make comments such as that which I have quoted above. It would be a great service to the Church and is necessary both for the well being of the Church and for our mission in the world.
Father Peter
I think the priest is right in a way, though, but I hardly see it as a major deficiency. I mean, the Apostles and many of our greatest church fathers would not pass todays standard of academic rigor? And real spirituality and theology can only be found in experience and faith, rather than research and painstaking collaboration of patristics. But I hope we do get a tower like Origen, save the fall.
I have been Coptic Orthodox since 1994 but in all that time I have found very few serious and detailed books on theology or church history in English written by Copts. I have a great interest in St Timothy of Alexandria, a very important figure indeed, but I have never read anything written about him by any Copts and I have had to rely on the serious efforts of Catholics and Protestants to learn what I have done.
Likewise St Shenoute, the most important figure in Coptic literary history, yet his literary corpus is being made available by non-Copts, and he is being studied and written about by non-Copts, and as far as I can see there are no Copts studying or writing about him.
The writings of St Dioscorus are only available through the efforts of non-Copts, and there seem to be no extended works about St Cyril of Alexandria by any Copts.
I am sure that St Athanasius and St Cyril would pass the test of having a rigourous theological knowledge and an extensive knowledge of the Fathers, but it is not clear that many of us do. This is not meant as a personal criticism of anyone, but I do believe it is the greatest threat the Coptic Church faces. If the faithful do not have a rich and extensive knowledge and appreciation of our theology then there is nothing to prevent them either living a Christian life relying on error, or even worse, wandering off to a heterodox group because 'we all believe the same'.
It seems to me that we should not make a dichotomy between faith and study, serious study is as much a part of our spiritual ascesis as prayer and fasting. There is a vast amount of energy expended in preserving the Coptic tradition of hymnology, and the Coptic language itself. A great deal of study and serious research is conducted. Why should the same not be applied to the actual substance of our Faith? Why should we not be able to reply in detail to detailed questions about our Faith? The Russian Orthodox priest from whom I quoted presented a very detailed criticism of our Faith, if we cannot easily reply to it in similar detail then we should not be surprised that others continue to think we have an erroneous theology. There are many folk here on this forum who are engaged in very detailed and technical studies towards gaining various secular qualifications and spend hours and hours each day in such studies. This is commendable. But it seems to me that we should expend some energy on learning the substance of our faith and becoming familiar with our own Fathers and history in a serious and systematic manner.
Father Peter
One of the issues for the EO is that if early church fathers considered us heretics and if they now reconsider that point of view, then they would be betraying their church fathers... this is one interesting point I read once on this subject!
We didn't change anything since Chalcedon, so why should the EO change their point of view about us today??
But the problem is, they don't take into consideration that mistakes have been made in the past, that the opinions of their church fathers weren't necessarily based on religious disagreement but political animosity...
Another thing: this is not relevant to this discussion but I didn't want to open a new thread so as to not draw any attention to this:
there is a new movie coming out soon called 'Agora', from what I read about it, the movie talks about 4th Century Alexandria, and it depicts the early christians as barbaric hateful people who enjoy the public burning of people who oppose their doctrine, I also heard it talks about St. Cyril as a cruel, greedy-for-power church leader who doesn't tolerate any opposition, the movie claims to be a true story
and I also read it says the early christians were responsible for the burning of the famous Library of Alexandria, as it was full of heretic ancient philosophy... Now, I know that from the beginning of Christianity in Egypt there were the native Egyptian christians (copts) and the Byzantine occupiers (eastern roman empire with byzantium/ constantinopel as its capital) who later on became christian and in many cases opposed and fought the Coptic church, however, I wonder, are there any parts of our history that we are never told about because they are just too shamful?? Maybe this particular story in this specific movie isn't true, but is it possible that our church has in the past fallen into similar malpractices such as the ones the Catholic church was guilty of?? I mean corrupt leaders, crimes commited in the name of christianity etc. ??? (I admit that I don't know a lot about early Coptic history (of course the Egyptian educaton system is one of the instances to blame here and I am very hesitant to read such books written by Copts because of the fear for historical inaccuracy and the lack of an objective mindset... ) so if anyone know about any good books...
I would greatly appreciate it if someone answered my question.. (it's the part in bold)
also, I would like to thank Fr. Peter for his brilliant answer, it is true that some seem to be guilty of the exact same thing they accuse others of...
Fr. Peter, about the deficiency of academic, theological books and studies by Copts, I agree with you, it is shameful really how little most Copts know about their church, but we must keep in mind the birthplace of many Copts is a country where about 40% are analphabets and where good education is a luxury many can't afford... maybe that is one of the reasons... (also see the underlined part of my former post)
and I agree with Clay, true religion is about living with God, and experiencing Him and His love, but true understanding of that religion is equally important, in order for us to love God, we must know Him, know Him the orthodox way, meaning the correct, patristic, apostolic tradition that was delivered to us by the people who met Him and received from Him His message to mankind and were told to spread it to all nations..