So thankful for this. I've been practicing Tewahedo Ethiopian Orthodox for about a year nowChristened in November. I'm originally from very rural South Carolina. Having been either Methodist or Pentecostal all my life and with my wife being Ethiopian and kids being Christened after birth I was blessed to be drawn in. Good to be home. This is one think I've never understood as we have Serbian Russian and Greek friends who I consider just orthodox. Education is part of the journey. Thanks
@@sorrycant8844 Some when spoken really really fast. Some mezmurs are very fast during liturgy. Wife is from Ethiopia and I've been married for close to 20 years and spent time in Addis so I generally understand kidase. The church teach Amarigna to the kids and they learn from family.
@@rogue7894 whoaaa the fact that u can understand kidase is amazing considering it is in geez. extending a helping hand here but i dont know if u know him , but there is a deacon called deacon Henok Haile and he translates most of his teaching in English and they are pretty amazing. He has a Facebook group where he post this translated short teaching and i think they can do u good. so 20 years together and 1st year as an orthodox?
@@sorrycant8844 OMG. No I don't understand geez. LOL. Maybe I'm mistaken but when I refer to kidase I mean the part of the service when kesis brings the message after prayers and ceremony. I know very few people who speek Geez and they are priests. I've practiced for years but made it official (Christened) last year. Of course the kids were born into the faith. I will say this, the faith is always being challenged. It couldn't be any other way though. I will look Hanok up. Thanks
Currently in Catechism to be baptized in the Eastern Orthodox Church and I recently attended the liturgy at a Coptic Church. I was blown away by the experience and afterwards felt a strong connection with the priest and congregation. It makes me sad that I have to choose one or the other to be baptized and take communion. It feels like it should be the same Church.
@Markos pantopolos I am not enamored of the Tome of Leo and at the end of the day, it has been agreed that St. Cyril's Christology is Orthodox. I mean, I could say that I wouldn't want the exaggerated statements from Severus either, but we must work together to achieve unity.
@Markos pantopolos No, nothing he wrote was Heterodox, but it does make Eastern Orthodox nervous for reasons I've never understood. Strictly speaking, the Tome of Leo is Orthodox. Some of the language is problematic, but I don't think it's outright Nestorian. It is exaggerated. Leo is a Western Latin saint, and he simply didn't have that great of a frame of reference. It goes back to St. Cyril anyway. If both churches have agreed (and, we have) to accept St. Cyril's christology, it doesn't need to be quite so complicated! And, I didn't say St. Severus was heterodox, by the way. I said he was somewhat exaggerated in his tone.
Juan Rodriguez It’s true Severus the cursed gave lip service to the Orthodox doctrine but when he was asked about the energies of Christ he affirms only one. Severus is anathema
@@thelandofsmyth if you read him or also mar philoxenos they welcomed people who go back from the EO even without chrismation ...it is just them definded the faith and its purity ...keep in mind they went under chaledon persecution ...we can't blame them at all
@Juan Rodriguez it is not even that separation it is when you say the divine nature do something and the human nature do other ..this is creation of two hypostasis by leo (keep in mind he wasn't a theologian ) ...the miaphysite can say Jesus did that as a man and that as Divine since we are referring to Him our lord ...also we can say he tasted death by his human nature ..The nature is not a who or being ...it is the answer for How not who ✋
Eastern Orthodox Christian here, and just now looking into these videos. And so far, I’m interested in studying the Coptic Orthodox church. Not for conversion, but understanding.
@@FolkBoyify I can get into the matter of Pope Leo I and the controversies behind "papal primacy" and not "first amongst equals", the intermingling of Church and state;or the election of a heretic to the see of Constantinople(Nestorius) or the rivalry of Antioch and Alexandria until St.Severus, or how Pope Dioscorus (we haven't canonized him as a saint yet, he ought to be though in my eyes) was a direct disiple of St. Cyril so was completely Cyriallian in theology; or the jealousy of Rome because Pope Dioscorus was called upon to judge in a Christological matter involving Greek semantics that the Latin West had no real grasp of and yet the Tome of Leo was the "Magnum Opus" of Pope Leo in Chalcedon but is suspiciously Nestorian in language, which created the 1st rift amongst the Church and eventually the "Great Schism" where the East anathemas the West and vice versa (if you pay attention to the minutes of Chalcedon, we were not anathema neither did we anathema anyone). I can write a book about what I won't talk about, let alone the volumes I can write about what could be talked about, regardless, I will not sparr with you Dr. Poetry1, strife and division is of the evil one and my choice is my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who was completely God and completely man without mingling, division or confusion. This is what we have and will always profess, what more do we need to know than this, does knowing more than that make you closer to Christ or holliness?!DrPoetry1, if you believe in the message you sent then you know what you are talking about and it is right and true for you to say this. May the Lord, the Logos who descended from the Father to take on humanity in the flesh, open your eyes to the complete unity of His Bride the True Church.
I don't often cry. But the love of Christ between the separated brethren, and the sins and suspicious fear that keeps the body of Christ divided hurts my heart. Your testimony of being given a table in the midst of your [perceived] enemies, and how that softened your heart made me smile and shed tears of joy. The upside in all of this is how remarkable God has been in his faithfulness through the centuries, on both sides of the EO and the OO. I marvel at the exodus of protestants who are returning to the faith of the ancient fathers in the Church of the Apostle, and the love of His holy blessed Theotokos, has been encouraging. May God heal our wounded body for the Glory of His Name.
rentonious a martyr church still persecuted in Egypt for the sin to believe in Christ. Christ bless the Coptic Church from persecution. I contribute to the orphans of Coptic children.
As one who is currently worshipping at a Coptic Orthodox Church and not yet a member this lecture was very helpful. One thing is for sure, Jesus Prayer in Jn 17 will be answered.
Father, this was a great talk. You spoke off the cuff and made things so understandable. I pray our 2 families "sign the papers" and get on with being brothers!
Loved this talk. Very informative. I came from the Melkite Greek Catholic Church (Uniate) to full communion with the EO Church. The Oriental Churches are Orthodox. That is our view. We just need a few things to happen on both sides however to restore full communion. It really shouldn't take us this long, but there's always the crack pots (trouble makers) throwing wrenches into the works. I truly hope it is within the next decade though at least.
You have no idea what you are talking about my dear friend. With all due respect. Just like your ancestors threw the true faith that is Eastern Orthodoxy under the bus and for a bribe from the heretical neo platonic and neo pagan Rome they became 'Melkite' almost a millenia ago now you do the same. The only difference was that your ancestors did it for money and power and you do it as a result of ignorance and brainwashing by the masons who promote a one world false and heretic 'christianity' in their pursuit of 'unity'. Just as Saint Gregory Palamas Prophesied in his dialogue with the heretic Barlaam to ignore the decisions taken during the 6th Ecumenical Council and deny the Essence vs. Uncreated Energies distinction and to deny that God the Father is the Sole Monarch and Sole Cause of Divinity will lead to atheism. This is exactly what happened to the West. Rome is run by NWO globalist heretics who deny that Christ is the only Way, the only Truth and the only Life. Western Societies are totally hedonistic, atheist and so it is no wonder that the Papist Roman 'catholic' church wishes to incorporate and 'unite' as many insane 'churches' (it even posted a stamp and installed a statue of arch heretic Martin Luther in the Vatican for goodness sake!) to keep this charade going a few years longer as its churches stand empty and its clergy is exposed for what they basically are - morally corrupt and more often than not sexually perverted. Christ came to the world so that we know the Truth and the Truth will set us free. He did not Come so that you bend and change dogma to suit your desires in your ecumenical-maniac race to create a new false 'christianity' that accepts every heresy and depravity concocted in the past 1,950 years. Have you read the canons of the 7 ecumenical councils? Have you read the writings of Saint Athanasius, Saint Basil, Saint Cyril of Alexandria, The Cappadocian Fatrers, Saint John of Damascus, Saint Maximus the Confessor that you have the audacity to label those who know and follow the truth that is Christ to be a lunatic fringe? 1 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight. + + + (Isaiah 5)
A great non-polemic overview of the history surrounding Chalcedon. I enjoy talks by Fr Anthony Paul! Also thanks to Fr Paul for clearing up the confusions of the concept "Theosis" in comparing the EO and OO traditions. The shared Fathers and the post-Chalcedonian OO Fathers have theosis embedded in their spiritual writings.
Thanks for this Fr. Antony. I think this is important for people to listen, to get a sense without the worry of being polemical why we believe what we believe, that is what is "our side", while at the same time desiring unity based on Orthodoxy and not mere persons or politics.
Really enjoyed the talk Abouna AP! Well thought out and presented and really illustrated the root issues at play. The best we can do is pray for unity and as you say, threat the matter with humility and love.
Very will said Fr Paulos. I often watch and listen to Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox speakers. When it comes to the liturgy I find myself attracted to the Ethiopian Orthodox service probably since I grew up in Ethiopia. Friends I trust have told me that the EOC and Ethiopian Protestants work much more closely together than they did some 55 yrs ago when I left the country to attend high school.
Wow...God Bless you for explaining this...You make total sense and your analogies are wonderful and heartfelt with humility and understanding. Thank you so much!!
❤✝️❤ I have been enjoyed to listen this fascinated video . It is realy eye opening and informative lesson . Thank you fr paul .may the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you . From eitrean orthodox Tewahdo church 🇪🇷
Fr Gabriel Yassa Now that the Popes of Rome, dear Abouna, have declared that all religions worship the same god, and even have participated in the vile practices of these demonic religions; while singing a hymn to Lucifer in Latin on Holy Saturday in the Vatican; it is time to sever all ties to Rome altogether, lest you find your selves in total apostasy, as warned by the Apostles (2Thes. 2.). This current Popes has publicly declared that a personal relationship with Christ is dangerous and believing in the literature interpretation of Genesis ch. 1 is pagan. His very office is Antichrist, for we have one Head of the Ecclesia which is Ye'shua H'Mashiakh and know no other.
I'm an Eastern Orthodox christian and recently I started to find these videos. I found also a video about the Great Schism between the Orthodox and Catholic Church. It is sad how the devil was able to break Christ's Church.
I’m glad to hear that you said it was a lot of ego that cause Schism and excommunication, I was talking with a Eastern Orthodox Priest and told him it was pride but he said it was way more and said that the Roman Catholic’s believe Jesus differently than they do. I said no it’s the same by the way the speak it’s sounds the same to me. I’m Catholic by the way and is the Coptic Church in union with Rome? I believe I’m with you on your point that we all need set pride aside and go to the table and discuss theology and if we all teach the same then we need to be one again since the Church doesn’t have the pressure of politics bearing down on it now like it was in the early church.
@Straight White Male heretics yes, but still part of the Church on a broader level (in an Ecumenical way). We usually do not ordain a Catholic priest a second time for this reason as Oikonomia via reChrismation is usually sufficient.
Brian Mouse HH Pope Shenouda III (Coptic Orthodox Church) and Pope Paul (Church of Rome) signed a joint statement of faith in the 60’s to set the ground work for later generations to work with toward full communion. You can look it up.
Thank you so much! I enjoyed it every minute! It clarified so many things. I wish I could be part of the Ortodox church. Unfortunately although all of them are represented here in Jerusalem, I don't speak any of their languages (Greek, Armenian, Arabic, etc). However, I am eager to learn more about the history of the church (first 400 years) before every one took their own route.
Thank you father. There is no unity without love. Just as the persons of the Trinity are perfectly united in perfect love, so we pray that the church will likewise become one body in Christ.
as a Catholic I am impressed, regarding the councils calcedonia and others council of ancient Christianity. I pray for our brothers and sisters of protestant church come back to the Apostolic faith.
I grew up in the Syriac Orthodox Church and I left that synagogue of satan and am presently a Catachumen in the Eastern Orthodox Church in preparation for a second (and this time a fully Orthodox) Baptism in 2020. There is no such thing as 'apostolic faith' if this mystical 'faith' is to be shared by Churches that do not share the same dogma. Christ Established ONE Church which is His Body. A Body that is Wounded, Tortured, Bloodied and Spat upon but never broken (He Declared to Saint Peter that One Church will be Established and that the gates of hades will never defeat it. He spoke of One, nor many..) The only True Church which is the Eastern Orthodox Church that Accepts ONLY 7 Ecumenical Councils.
Robby Voseta I’m so saddened that you left our most holy church because not you chosen freely but deceived by the Satan. I hope you to re-examine the heresy of Nestorianism among the Byzantines and come back to the real church. I’m not angry with you. I hope you will live happy and lovely life. You have a chance. But I will fill my heart with furious hate towards the deceivers and satanists who injected you with the poison.
The believe that the holy spirit dictates the council is equal to papal dogmas of RCC ..the holy spirit guide the ecumenical councils when we want the holy spirit to guide us
Due to it's status as the capital of the Roman empire, and it being the location of the martyerdom of Sts. Peter and Paul, the Roman Church was agreed upon to be the "first among equals." This meant *jurisdictional* issues which could not be resolved by the local Patriarchate appealed its issue to Rome, and an all-inclusive final resolution would be agreed upon. This did not mean, however, the authority of the Roman bishop was supreme to the others. It was actually the Church of Alexandria that first named their head bishop as "Pope", which meant "father of fathers" as the Church grew so big many bishops under the bishop had to be ordained. Two schools of thought emerged in the early Church: Alexandria and Antioch. When Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople (who was a graduate of the School of Antioch) anathematized anyone who called the Virgin Mary 'Theotokos', the Council of Ephesus was held, of which Cyril of Alexandria was president. John I, Patriarch of Antioch, refused to attend when he found out the Council had began without him, and held his own rival meeting expressing his support for Nestorius. Emperor Theodosius II of Byzantia also expressed his support for Nestorius at Ephesus as he felt their school (Antioch) was being attacked as illegitimate. Emperor Theodosius II was told by an anchorite from Constantinople that there had been a message from God telling him that Cyril was correct, and that's when Ephesus was ratified as the legitimate council. So, the Church of Antioch was in schism. Later, Patriarch John was reconciled with Patriarch Cyril concerning the issue, and Antioch rejoined the Church. But this was done in a personal exchange between the two rather than in a formal council. So there were still people in Antioch who strongly disliked Cyril of Alexandria. When Nestorius was deposed, Alexandria elected the new Patriarch of Constantinople, so there was an obvious dominance of Alexandria in the early Church, which made many feel some type of way. Cyril dies in 444, and Pope Dioscorus assumes the throne of Alexandria. At this point, the Church of Constantinople was on the rise. A monk in Constantinople, Eutyches, invited a guest speaker to preach, who was a bishop. The bishop preached something that led Eutyches to accuse him of heresy, and the bishop appealed to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Flavian, insisting the Patriarch excommunicate Eutyches. In attempts to be the peacemaker, Patriarch Flavian holds a local council, and Eutyches is accused of monophysitism, and was unjustly excommunicated. Eutyches had connections to Emperor Theodosius II and thus another council was held, this time in Ephesus (the "Robber" Council), of which Patriarch Dioscorus was chosen to preside over. At this council, it was discussed whether Patriarch Flavian, or Eutyches, was correct. At this point, this was already a slap in the face for Pope Leo I, as Rome was understood as the "court of appeals" for the early Church, as discussed earlier. At the "robber" council, Eutyches confesses that when he meant "one nature", it was in reference to what Cyril of Alexandria said, and denounces monophysitism. The "robber" council concludes what Eutyches confesses is Orthodox, and lifts his excommunication, effectively deposing Flavian as Patriarch. Emperor Theodosius II sends guards to arrest Flavian, and they unfortunately kill him. Now there is a conflict in the Church.
Wow, as I listen, I am getting a reaffirmation of everything that I have learned up to now in my Theology class. 39:00 a typical NorthAmerican Turkey dinner disagreement.
He said on a couple of occasions, that they have the minutes, for this and that at these councils, aee these minutes available to the public, who has them and can they be accessed.
Greetings I am a Greek Orthodox Christian. Just to clarify, our church ‘s are in discussion ( as per my Bishop), however, since we are not in Full Communion, marriage would not be possible, remember, we , the about to be married couple, will receive Holly Communion during the Sacrament of Marriage, and that fact that our churches ( Greek Eastern Orthodox and Coptic Orthodox ) are not in full Communion ( which I hope a pray we will be very soon) can NOT get married, at least not the Greek Orthodox Church and risk not being good standing with the Eastern Orthodox Church. Very important that if a Greek Orthodox Christian listens to this amazing lecture, to PLEASE consult your Greek Orthodox Presbyter for his guidance and to avoid any conflict resulting in poor standing with the Eastern Orthodox Church before proceeding with any plans. According to our leaders of the Greek Orthodox ( Eastern Orthodox) Church, we have a long, long way to go as mentioned in the amazing, informative lecture from a Coptic point of view. I already am very familiar with the Eastern Orthodox-Greek perspective, whereby was not mentioned in this lecture- the influence of Charlemagne-the German/ Franc on the Orthodox world. That importance of Agia Sophia being the central church of the whole Roman Orthodox Church as what it was called the 1st thousand years of Christianity. Just a quick sample of the Eastern Orthodox point of view. Not to mention St Andrew, St John writings of the book of Revelation..all Greek within a Hellenic universe. The library of Alexandria was mentioned during the lecture, just to keep in mind that The library of Alexandria was created by Alexander the Great and continued and expanded after his death and destroyed by fanatic local religious leaders of the time at Alexandria. The present library your referring to is inferior replica, and idea borrowed yet again from Classical Hellenic period and for me , will never be as GREAT as the original. A little insulting come to think about it. Something to reflect and think about, that why the reunification of Byzantine rite - Greek and the Coptic Christian requires a lot of time yet attainable on both sides. There are an abundance of written documents in Eastern Orthodoxy that would be just as compelling to the details mentioned in this lecture on the history , differences and similarities, yet 1500 years of differences hard to forget. God bless and thank you for your understanding .
MR V. Did the Word of God die in the Flesh or not? Which nature died on the Cross? If it’s the human alone you and I are not saved! Get it!? Let’s not get distracted by other lessor differences. Let’s stick to what’s important: Salvation
‘The Incarnate Logos died’ Amen!!! The only way this can be possible is with the Formuli of St. Cyril/Ecumenical Council of Ephesus. This is clear in St. Cyril own refute of Dyophysitism in his letter to Emperor Theodosius during the onset of the Nestorian heresy. Moreover, St. Cyril repeated this same Formuli in reply to John of Antioch in which he said the natures can only be distinguished in “Theoria alone” and this is repeated in his subsequent 1st and 2nd letters to Succensus. St. Cyril is very consistent on this crucial point. I think you would agree? The Joint Commission Agreements repeat and affirm this essential criteria “in Theoria alone” which the Chalcedonians very suspiciously and unfortunately reject to this day. Importantly, the Joint Commission Agreement emphasize that St. Cyril is preeminent and paramount in the area of Christology. This means all Chalcedonian “councils” need to be interpreted only through the lens of St. Cyril/Ecumenical Council of Ephesus to be considered Orthodox. Have all Chalcedonians done this? It’s an important condition and criteria for Orthodoxy according to the Joint Commission itself. I think you would agree? Actually, once an ‘in Theoria’ caveat is applied there is in fact, no longer “two” so called “equally orthodox formuli) but only 1 Truly Orthodox Formuli which is Miaphysis… this means the other must be heretical. It’s a myth that 2 different formuli are the same. The only way for the ‘Incarnate logos to die” is by way of two natures uniting into ‘One Concrete Reality’ united hypostatically indivisibly and naturally.The natures being distinguished in “Theoria alone (conceptually” and even this, St. Cyril says may be contemplated too far as to divide the natures in the ‘One Son’.
It is sad that people let pride get in the way of eternal life. The Council of Chalcedon was led by nothing but the desires of the flesh, the desire for worldly and pride.
@@Luis-kn4pm “The activity of each form is what is proper to it in communion with the other: that is, the Word performs what belongs to the Word, and the flesh accomplishes what belongs to the flesh. One of these performs brilliant miracles; the other sustains acts of violence. “ Here’s the problem. Describing the activities of each nature in such way that blurs the mystery of the union of natures sets up a dichotomy similar to what Nestorius preached. Nestorius said the Virgin Mary is Christokos (The birthgiver of Christ) not Theotokos (the birthgiver of God) because God can’t be born. In other words, divinity can’t be born. In other words, according to Nestorius, the two natures of Christ must be maintained separate and divided. Nestorius insisted on this dichotomy ignoring the fact that in the Incarnation, the union of the natures prevails over dichotomous division. He goes on to list miracles belong to divinity and emotions belong to the flesh. He says, “So, if I may pass over many instances, it does not belong to the same nature to weep out of deep-felt pity for a dead friend, and to call him back to life again at the word of command, once the mound had been removed from the four-day-old grave;” Again, he is going on the assumption that when anyone says “same nature” or “one nature” it must mean one and only nature or one and only one hybrid nature. He fails to recognize that one can mean one nature in a different manner than he assumes. It’s almost as if he went on a mission saying the Son of man weeps for his friend and the Son of God raises him from a four-day-old grave. This is no different than Nestorius who said the Virgin gave birth to the man Jesus Christ, not God. By the way, as Leo moves down his list of miracles done by the divinity and events done by the flesh, he just has to slip an allusion to Rome’s supremacy when Peter called the man Jesus “the Christ, the Son of the Living God.” Leo writes, “He [Peter] thoroughly deserved to be declared “blessed” by the Lord. He derived the stability of both his goodness and his name from the original Rock,” This in itself is not the theme of Leo’s Tome but it illustrates Leo’s intentions of his Tome.
Does the Coptic church have rules regarding how a cross should be handled? i.e., is scratching one's head with the same hand that is holding the cross ok?
Dear Fr. Antony Paul You forgot two things If the differences only political, Why it says in Leo’s tome: “Apart from His divinity , He went up on the Cross. “ Means on the cross was only the humanity, not divinity which is essential for the salvation. Can you explain why Pope Dioscorus lost his teeth and beard, or who killed the 30,000 martyrs of Alexandria Thanks Samir fayek
Please show me where it says in the Tome "Apart from His divinity , He went up on the Cross". Either you're lying of you've been lied to, this is what the Tome actually teaches : "So again He showed the wound in His side, the marks of the nails, and all the signs of His quite recent suffering, saying, "See My hands and feet, that it is I. Handle Me and see that a spirit has not flesh and bones, as you see Me have ;" in order that the properties of His Divine and human nature might be acknowledged to remain still INSEPARABLE: and that we might know the WORD NOT TO BE DIFFERENT FROM THE FLESH, in such a sense as also to confess that the ONE SON OF GOD IS BOTH WORD AND FLESH." Like Fr Antony said, there was hostility from both sides, quit appealing to emotions.
This was a great video as an eastern Orthodox it really helped me see that there isn't that much that separates our christology. I was just wondering though how would someone explain to a Muslim about Jesus' suffering from a Mia-physite position?
Of course. So Miaphysitism of course is the belief that Jesus has 1 nature that is fully divine and fully human. This is not too different from us humans who have a body and a soul, yet we are still 1 nature as we have 1 will. We must also recognise these natures never mixed nor separated not even for the twinkle of the eye. Now that we have this definition. Why is it significant? That’s because God truly took our humanity on and United it with his divinity so that we may be saved. Jesus is the bridge to salvation. “Whoever believes in my shall not perish, but have eternal life”. Now how does this relate to suffering? On the Cross His Divinity did not part from His Humanity. However, in Its unification with His Human nature, the former had let the latter to suffer with no intervention whatsoever, thus making the redemptive act of suffering quite genuine. This state of play is expressed by the Lord Jesus Christ's words: "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" The words "and was buried" indicate that His Body had died. That death was the price of sinfulness of the whole world. In that death, His Human Soul left His Body, though His Divinity never separated from either His Soul nor His Body. The Soul , unified with Divinity, went to Hades and announced the Good Tidings to the dead, opened up the gates of Paradise, and let them in, together with the thief on the right side. The Body, united with Divinity, stayed in the tomb without becoming decomposed.
Could there be another Ecumenical Council to resolve this? I think too that the idea of first among equals in terms of presiding over disputes inevitably led to problems and schism. Perhaps instead the disputes could be handled by 5 bishops from 5 other orthodox traditions. If for instance an issue arises in Antioch, have representative bishops from, say Alexandria, Moscow, Constantinople, Jerusalem and Belgrade come to resolve the issue. I am currently a Roman Catholic but I have great interest in Orthodoxy and I think I will inevitably convert. I would love for the Oriental and Eastern faiths to reunite.
Forgive me, but the term "first among equals" didn't refer to Rome being the "court of appeals". It only meant that the Roman church's patriarch (the Roman Pope) had the privilege of speaking first at synods and councils. It's only Rome who thinks they were the court of appeals or still today think they have any special status above that. After Rome and the other patriarchates split, the term was given to the Patriarch of Constantinople and the privilege is similarly defined.
Wel said. I'm not even sure if the term 'first among equals' is legit or comes from the fathers? I believe Rome was EQUAL to the other Sees. Not sure if one can be FIRST & EQUAL at the same time!?
My understanding of the Christological difference between the Oriental Orthodox (OO) and Eastern Orthodox (EO) is this: OO believe that the incarnate Christ is 1 divine-human particular nature, and the divine and human properties are distinct from one another. EO believe that the incarnate Christ is 1 divine particular nature, and the divine and human general natures are distinct from one another. This difference is caused by two different philosophical presuppositions: OO presuppose a conceptual distinction between a particular nature and a general nature, due to the fact that a general nature is a conceptual grouping/compendium of particular natures. EO presuppose a real distinction between particular natures and general natures, while general natures only exist in particular natures EO nonetheless view them as being distinct in reality. Please let me know if I'm missing something.
The Doctrine of St. Cyril of Alexandria, and of the later Cappadocian Saints Saint Basil, Saint Greg and company are consistently OO position. "The eternally uncreated Son at the first moment of incarnation within the Theotokos, became Fully God, and Fully man. After the Union we do not speak of two natures, but One. He is Theanthropos. The God-man. From His incarnation, until his death, through His resurrection, and the ascension, this never changing. He is after the union of the two natures, one single composite nature. Fully God, as the Eternal Logos Begotten of the Father, and Fully human but without sin, from The blessed Mother of God.
Thank you so much. I am Chrismated Eastern Orthodox. Will there ever come a time that Rome will ever see us as part of the ONE,HOLY , CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC Church? Also, may I receive communion at a Coptic Church?
You may ask the priest in the Coptic church beforehand, to see if that is possible. It is also best to ask your Eastern Orthodox priest if he is ok to allow that. God bless
Why are you concerned whether Rome will see us as part of the one holy Catholic and Apostolic church? Eastern Orthodox see the Eastern Orthodox Church as the one holy Catholic and apostolic church and Rome has deviated from that.
I know he is speaking in a brief way but arius didn’t claim that Jesus was a man that became God, he claimed that the Lord was the first and most noble creature of God and that He wasn’t eternal. We piously defend the true divinity and eternality of the Lord
So basically you agree with Abouna Anthony who describes the Ancient Fathers who attended the defining ecumenical councils as thugs and low life politicians and he stresses 'both sides' regularly practiced deceit and uncalled for violence and unchristian tactics yet at the same time we are supposed to base our trust in eternal salvation on the fact that God the Holy Spirit Chose to Bestow Grace on these very 'politician thugs' who even got to decided on Biblical Canon etc... Gimme a break. This is NWO and anti-christ nonsense compliments of the copts who are infamous for their vivid and colorful imagination and their love of stretching truths and 1001 nights style exaggeration. The Truth is One and it is Christ and the Holy Spirit is that Spirit of Truth. In Chalcedon there was a heretic and corrupt gang lead by dioscorus and severus who for the sole purpose of excluding Byzantium from Egypt and the hold of the church on its vast wealth concocted the lies and heresies and split the Body of Christ. It is no different today. The Coptic Church is the second most affluent institution in Egypt. It owns agricultural lands that are as vast in territory as some of the smaller states in Africa and Latin America. It never pays taxes nor reveals its accounts to anybody. When the Arabs came to conquer Egypt they were amazed by the fact that a delegation of Copts welcomed them and even provided them with the best fighting men with the sole purpose of ridding Egypt from the Byzantines. Shenoudah III wrote a book on the subject of Theosis and he wrote against everything Saint Athanasius wrote in his book 'on the incarnation' yet at the same time the copts call Shenoudah III 'Athanasius of the 20th century' and 'the teacher of all generations'.You really can't make this up! 🤠🤠
Apostolic churches: 1. Roman (Western) Church - Latin liturgy 2. Greek (Eastern Orthodox) Church - Byzantine liturgy 3. Oriental Orthodox churches a. Coptic Church and descendant churches - Alexandrian liturgy b. Syriac Church of Antioch and descendant churches - West Syriac liturgy c. Armenian Church - Armenian liturgy 4. Church of the East and descendant churches - East Syriac (Persian) liturgy 5. Eastern Catholic churches - churches from 2/3/4 that have fully re-united with the Roman Church, but employ Eastern liturgies (Byzantine/Alexandrian/Armenian/West Syriac/East Syriac)
Excellent presentation could you recommend something to be read on the Chalcedon issues, from both sides. I do not accept Chalcedon probably because I do not understand it and I have found no one from our denomination who can. I find Nicea fine but without the filoque. You talked about mixed marriages but I assume that would exclude all RCs and Protestants who you see as heretics (at least as best I understand it). Our church will not marry all Protestants especially ones in the 1900s classical liberal tradition who often deny the existence of Jesus except as a story (UCC, some PCCanada and some Anabaptists...). If one can't affirm the Apostles creed without convoluted explanations or just plain lying then our church tends to back away.
William David Wallace I converted from the RC church to the Coptic Orthodox church. Not once was I ever referred to as a heretic, nor do I hear that language widely used as one would hear from the Eastern Orthodox. Copts do not consider any of the major denominations heretical, and in my humble opinion don't do enough to discourage their influence due to their open and friendly position with almost all Christians, i.e., non Arian, Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons.
Council of Chalcedon accepts that Jesus Christ has 2 natures: God-nature and Human-nature and they're seperated from each other. There were Churches who rejected this council and were called Miafysites and believe in a 1 God-Human nature, wich is the correct nature of Jesus Christ. The Chalcedonians called them Monophysites, but they had a different Christology than the Miafysites.
I am a ex-Eastern Orthodox and now a Oriental Orthodox catechumen. Father Anthony is sadly spouting ecumenism and has come to the wrong conclusion on Eastern Orthodox Christology. Eastern Orthodox Christology is not Orthodox. They don’t believe the same thing as Oriental Orthodox.
@@airri3875the Eastern “orthodox” dare to seperate Jesus’ natures into 2 and excuse it by saying IN 1 person. Funnily enough, Nestorius agreed with this terminology and said it was aligned with his Nestorian christology.
The fathers of our past follow the first sin of me and is what every man is born with and God is the leader not us not us to judge it is a sin and both are Orthodox lol
Thank you good lecture but isn’t evil that all Christian divisions happened because of all these councils debating the nature of Jesus Christ instead of focusing on his teachings and the unity of all Christians ? It all happened since the un fair debate between St. Athanasius and Arius !
It’s nice hearing the Oriental position, though there are a few things I disagree. One I would like to point out though, at 29:34 . The canons of the Second Ecumenical Council had already granted the Patriarch of Constantinople those honours. Canon 3:” Because it is new Rome, the bishop of Constantinople is to enjoy the privileges of honour after the bishop of Rome.”
Hi! I'm Eastern Orthodox. I'm sure there are many things that we need to work on together. The biggest problem I see in the future is the Armenian practice of unleavened bread in the Eucharist. This, to me, is a huge issue. That bread is the bread of unity, and how can we be United if we have different theology of the Eucharist? Comments appreciated.
Not a big issue. Orthodoxy is capable of embracing and accommodating different traditions so long as the Orthodox understanding of Faith is the same. The COC uses leavened bread because Christ carried the ‘sins of the world on the Cross’
Are you kidding me. The arguments for both types are plausible based on Holy Scripture. I myself am inclined to see the addition of yeast in keeping with expansion under the New Cov. But a cause for division?
I not a Protestant only I am not very happy with this pope. There no such thing as a liberal Catholic, the ancient Eastern Orthodox. Only is the apostolic teaching and laws of the councils. If the Roman church goes apostate and run for orthodoxi.
![MORTAL KOMBAT 1 - KOMBAT PACK 2 REVEAL TRAILER!! [REACTION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Mi2M58zEQVc/mqdefault.jpg)
So thankful for this. I've been practicing Tewahedo Ethiopian Orthodox for about a year nowChristened in November. I'm originally from very rural South Carolina. Having been either Methodist or Pentecostal all my life and with my wife being Ethiopian and kids being Christened after birth I was blessed to be drawn in. Good to be home. This is one think I've never understood as we have Serbian Russian and Greek friends who I consider just orthodox. Education is part of the journey. Thanks
Welcome to Tewahdo
welcome. any language barrier problems?
@@sorrycant8844 Some when spoken really really fast. Some mezmurs are very fast during liturgy. Wife is from Ethiopia and I've been married for close to 20 years and spent time in Addis so I generally understand kidase. The church teach Amarigna to the kids and they learn from family.
@@rogue7894 whoaaa the fact that u can understand kidase is amazing considering it is in geez.
extending a helping hand here but i dont know if u know him , but there is a deacon called deacon Henok Haile and he translates most of his teaching in English and they are pretty amazing. He has a Facebook group where he post this translated short teaching and i think they can do u good.
so 20 years together and 1st year as an orthodox?
@@sorrycant8844 OMG. No I don't understand geez. LOL. Maybe I'm mistaken but when I refer to kidase I mean the part of the service when kesis brings the message after prayers and ceremony. I know very few people who speek Geez and they are priests.
I've practiced for years but made it official (Christened) last year. Of course the kids were born into the faith. I will say this, the faith is always being challenged. It couldn't be any other way though. I will look Hanok up. Thanks
Ex-muslim here and follower of Christ now. 🙏🏼❤✝️
Welcome home, brother.
يسوع المسيح هو الله تعالى
Welcome home brother
I Care welcome brother ☦️
congratulations love. how are u holding up
Amen
Currently in Catechism to be baptized in the Eastern Orthodox Church and I recently attended the liturgy at a Coptic Church. I was blown away by the experience and afterwards felt a strong connection with the priest and congregation. It makes me sad that I have to choose one or the other to be baptized and take communion. It feels like it should be the same Church.
Christ Has Risen! ☦️❤️☦️
@@mirelaalina4050 indeed he's risen
I'm Eastern Orthodox and agree with every word you said here, Father! Pray that we can reunite!
@Markos pantopolos I am not enamored of the Tome of Leo and at the end of the day, it has been agreed that St. Cyril's Christology is Orthodox. I mean, I could say that I wouldn't want the exaggerated statements from Severus either, but we must work together to achieve unity.
@Markos pantopolos No, nothing he wrote was Heterodox, but it does make Eastern Orthodox nervous for reasons I've never understood. Strictly speaking, the Tome of Leo is Orthodox. Some of the language is problematic, but I don't think it's outright Nestorian. It is exaggerated. Leo is a Western Latin saint, and he simply didn't have that great of a frame of reference.
It goes back to St. Cyril anyway. If both churches have agreed (and, we have) to accept St. Cyril's christology, it doesn't need to be quite so complicated! And, I didn't say St. Severus was heterodox, by the way. I said he was somewhat exaggerated in his tone.
Juan Rodriguez It’s true Severus the cursed gave lip service to the Orthodox doctrine but when he was asked about the energies of Christ he affirms only one. Severus is anathema
@@thelandofsmyth if you read him or also mar philoxenos they welcomed people who go back from the EO even without chrismation ...it is just them definded the faith and its purity ...keep in mind they went under chaledon persecution ...we can't blame them at all
@Juan Rodriguez it is not even that separation it is when you say the divine nature do something and the human nature do other ..this is creation of two hypostasis by leo (keep in mind he wasn't a theologian ) ...the miaphysite can say Jesus did that as a man and that as Divine since we are referring to Him our lord ...also we can say he tasted death by his human nature ..The nature is not a who or being ...it is the answer for How not who ✋
This was very helpful. Thank you for your perspective.
Glad it was helpful! God bless you
So rare to see something in English from the oriental perspective on this. Thank you for this gem.
Eastern Orthodox Christian here, and just now looking into these videos. And so far, I’m interested in studying the Coptic Orthodox church. Not for conversion, but understanding.
You wouldn't need to convert b/c we're the same!
Christian Lotfy We are..not the same. ☦️
@@FolkBoyify I can get into the matter of Pope Leo I and the controversies behind "papal primacy" and not "first amongst equals", the intermingling of Church and state;or the election of a heretic to the see of Constantinople(Nestorius) or the rivalry of Antioch and Alexandria until St.Severus, or how Pope Dioscorus (we haven't canonized him as a saint yet, he ought to be though in my eyes) was a direct disiple of St. Cyril so was completely Cyriallian in theology; or the jealousy of Rome because Pope Dioscorus was called upon to judge in a Christological matter involving Greek semantics that the Latin West had no real grasp of and yet the Tome of Leo was the "Magnum Opus" of Pope Leo in Chalcedon but is suspiciously Nestorian in language, which created the 1st rift amongst the Church and eventually the "Great Schism" where the East anathemas the West and vice versa (if you pay attention to the minutes of Chalcedon, we were not anathema neither did we anathema anyone). I can write a book about what I won't talk about, let alone the volumes I can write about what could be talked about, regardless,
I will not sparr with you Dr. Poetry1, strife and division is of the evil one and my choice is my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who was completely God and completely man without mingling, division or confusion. This is what we have and will always profess, what more do we need to know than this, does knowing more than that make you closer to Christ or holliness?!DrPoetry1, if you believe in the message you sent then you know what you are talking about and it is right and true for you to say this. May the Lord, the Logos who descended from the Father to take on humanity in the flesh, open your eyes to the complete unity of His Bride the True Church.
We are not the same just because the OO have accurate terms ✋
@@joonie8103 🤚Agreed and we're to polite to emphasize that all the time. Blessings from SMSV in Toronto.
I don't often cry. But the love of Christ between the separated brethren, and the sins and suspicious fear that keeps the body of Christ divided hurts my heart. Your testimony of being given a table in the midst of your [perceived] enemies, and how that softened your heart made me smile and shed tears of joy. The upside in all of this is how remarkable God has been in his faithfulness through the centuries, on both sides of the EO and the OO. I marvel at the exodus of protestants who are returning to the faith of the ancient fathers in the Church of the Apostle, and the love of His holy blessed Theotokos, has been encouraging. May God heal our wounded body for the Glory of His Name.
God Bless Egypt & our Coptic Orthodox Church, which have sacrificed a lot for this belief. Well spoken Fr. Antony Paul.
Yes..hundreds of millions of African lives.
rentonious a martyr church still persecuted in Egypt for the sin to believe in Christ. Christ bless the Coptic Church from persecution. I contribute to the orphans of Coptic children.
This video is truly great. 👏 From an Eastern Orthodox Christian, thank you, Abouna Father!
Catholic here, very interesting talk father. I learned a lot.
As one who is currently worshipping at a Coptic Orthodox Church and not yet a member this lecture was very helpful. One thing is for sure, Jesus Prayer in Jn 17 will be answered.
Even though i was born in saudi Arabia and lived my whole life with no church with no christian community im more orthodox than iv never been amen🙏🏾
God bless you hawey❤
Father, this was a great talk. You spoke off the cuff and made things so understandable. I pray our 2 families "sign the papers" and get on with being brothers!
This guy is excellent, just the facts no fluff, the best I have seen in a long time.
Loved this talk. Very informative. I came from the Melkite Greek Catholic Church (Uniate) to full communion with the EO Church. The Oriental Churches are Orthodox. That is our view. We just need a few things to happen on both sides however to restore full communion. It really shouldn't take us this long, but there's always the crack pots (trouble makers) throwing wrenches into the works. I truly hope it is within the next decade though at least.
You have no idea what you are talking about my dear friend. With all due respect. Just like your ancestors threw the true faith that is Eastern Orthodoxy under the bus and for a bribe from the heretical neo platonic and neo pagan Rome they became 'Melkite' almost a millenia ago now you do the same. The only difference was that your ancestors did it for money and power and you do it as a result of ignorance and brainwashing by the masons who promote a one world false and heretic 'christianity' in their pursuit of 'unity'.
Just as Saint Gregory Palamas Prophesied in his dialogue with the heretic Barlaam to ignore the decisions taken during the 6th Ecumenical Council and deny the Essence vs. Uncreated Energies distinction and to deny that God the Father is the Sole Monarch and Sole Cause of Divinity will lead to atheism. This is exactly what happened to the West. Rome is run by NWO globalist heretics who deny that Christ is the only Way, the only Truth and the only Life. Western Societies are totally hedonistic, atheist and so it is no wonder that the Papist Roman 'catholic' church wishes to incorporate and 'unite' as many insane 'churches' (it even posted a stamp and installed a statue of arch heretic Martin Luther in the Vatican for goodness sake!) to keep this charade going a few years longer as its churches stand empty and its clergy is exposed for what they basically are - morally corrupt and more often than not sexually perverted.
Christ came to the world so that we know the Truth and the Truth will set us free. He did not Come so that you bend and change dogma to suit your desires in your ecumenical-maniac race to create a new false 'christianity' that accepts every heresy and depravity concocted in the past 1,950 years.
Have you read the canons of the 7 ecumenical councils? Have you read the writings of Saint Athanasius, Saint Basil, Saint Cyril of Alexandria, The Cappadocian Fatrers, Saint John of Damascus, Saint Maximus the Confessor that you have the audacity to label those who know and follow the truth that is Christ to be a lunatic fringe?
1 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
and clever in their own sight.
+ + + (Isaiah 5)
Robby Voseta 😂😂😂😂 my ancestors were mostly Irish so the Celtic Orthodox Church would’ve been my church.
Robby Voseta also I disagree with Palamas as he taught heresy. No human can be unoriginate. That is for God alone.🙄
Robby Voseta also the Melkite Church came into being in 1724 CE and Gregory Palamas is a Saint in that Church🤦🏻♂️
@@Katholikos78 St. Gregory Palamas is a heretic? What? Lol. Is this the power of “Byzantine” Catholicism?
A great non-polemic overview of the history surrounding Chalcedon. I enjoy talks by Fr Anthony Paul! Also thanks to Fr Paul for clearing up the confusions of the concept "Theosis" in comparing the EO and OO traditions. The shared Fathers and the post-Chalcedonian OO Fathers have theosis embedded in their spiritual writings.
Who are these oo fathers post chalcedon and their spirtual writings? plz let me know, thanks.
@@jon-1been wondering the same thing. Please let me know if you’ve found out.
Thanks for this Fr. Antony. I think this is important for people to listen, to get a sense without the worry of being polemical why we believe what we believe, that is what is "our side", while at the same time desiring unity based on Orthodoxy and not mere persons or politics.
Exceptional - I've been waiting for just such a discourse for a LONG time!
Really enjoyed the talk Abouna AP! Well thought out and presented and really illustrated the root issues at play. The best we can do is pray for unity and as you say, threat the matter with humility and love.
Very will said Fr Paulos. I often watch and listen to Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox speakers. When it comes to the liturgy I find myself attracted to the Ethiopian Orthodox service probably since I grew up in Ethiopia. Friends I trust have told me that the EOC and Ethiopian Protestants work much more closely together than they did some 55 yrs ago when I left the country to attend high school.
Wow...God Bless you for explaining this...You make total sense and your analogies are wonderful and heartfelt with humility and understanding. Thank you so much!!
Father, thank you! This is a fantastic treatment of a touchy subject
❤✝️❤ I have been enjoyed to listen this fascinated video . It is realy eye opening and informative lesson .
Thank you fr paul .may the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you .
From eitrean orthodox Tewahdo church 🇪🇷
thank you for explaining our history. you are very understanding and don't play into the divisive atmosphere. im grateful ❤
Outstanding presentation!
The most humble churches are the oriental orthodox churches. I mean how lovely they are ❤❤ they hold the real faith yet they have no pride 👏👏👏
Yes Outstanding...thank you Father
Fr Gabriel Yassa Now that the Popes of Rome, dear Abouna, have declared that all religions worship the same god, and even have participated in the vile practices of these demonic religions; while singing a hymn to Lucifer in Latin on Holy Saturday in the Vatican; it is time to sever all ties to Rome altogether, lest you find your selves in total apostasy, as warned by the Apostles (2Thes. 2.). This current Popes has publicly declared that a personal relationship with Christ is dangerous and believing in the literature interpretation of Genesis ch. 1 is pagan. His very office is Antichrist, for we have one Head of the Ecclesia which is Ye'shua H'Mashiakh and know no other.
I’m an 🇺🇸Calvinist and I LOVED this Teaching for too many reasons to type. I wish all 🇺🇸Christians had ☦️ doctrine..
Thanks for sharing!! Peace be with you!
Fr. Wade+
Lakeland, FL
#FriarWade
I'm an Eastern Orthodox christian and recently I started to find these videos. I found also a video about the Great Schism between the Orthodox and Catholic Church. It is sad how the devil was able to break Christ's Church.
Babd are you Coptic
I’m glad to hear that you said it was a lot of ego that cause Schism and excommunication, I was talking with a Eastern Orthodox Priest and told him it was pride but he said it was way more and said that the Roman Catholic’s believe Jesus differently than they do. I said no it’s the same by the way the speak it’s sounds the same to me. I’m Catholic by the way and is the Coptic Church in union with Rome? I believe I’m with you on your point that we all need set pride aside and go to the table and discuss theology and if we all teach the same then we need to be one again since the Church doesn’t have the pressure of politics bearing down on it now like it was in the early church.
No, the Coptic Orthodox Church is not in union with Rome. However, there is another group called the Coptic Catholic Church.
@Straight White Male heretics yes, but still part of the Church on a broader level (in an Ecumenical way). We usually do not ordain a Catholic priest a second time for this reason as Oikonomia via reChrismation is usually sufficient.
Brian Mouse HH Pope Shenouda III (Coptic Orthodox Church) and Pope Paul (Church of Rome) signed a joint statement of faith in the 60’s to set the ground work for later generations to work with toward full communion. You can look it up.
Thanks for sharing!
Great talk. Thanks!
I learned so much from this!
This needs more views please spread the Word. Peace from the East (as a westerner).
Amazing lecture Fr
Thank you so much! I enjoyed it every minute! It clarified so many things. I wish I could be part of the Ortodox church. Unfortunately although all of them are represented here in Jerusalem, I don't speak any of their languages (Greek, Armenian, Arabic, etc). However, I am eager to learn more about the history of the church (first 400 years) before every one took their own route.
Thank you father.
There is no unity without love. Just as the persons of the Trinity are perfectly united in perfect love, so we pray that the church will likewise become one body in Christ.
@Andrew Toma Unity must be in Truth and love. Unity in love without truth is a deception.
GOD BLESS YOU, Fr. Antony! I'm zealous for unity. May God heal and reunite His flock.
I need more. This was amazing
Very good lecture, thank you!
Thank you father! You made it clear.
as a Catholic I am impressed, regarding the councils calcedonia and others council of ancient Christianity. I pray for our brothers and sisters of protestant church come back to the Apostolic faith.
I grew up in the Syriac Orthodox Church and I left that synagogue of satan and am presently a Catachumen in the Eastern Orthodox Church in preparation for a second (and this time a fully Orthodox) Baptism in 2020.
There is no such thing as 'apostolic faith' if this mystical 'faith' is to be shared by Churches that do not share the same dogma. Christ Established ONE Church which is His Body. A Body that is Wounded, Tortured, Bloodied and Spat upon but never broken (He Declared to Saint Peter that One Church will be Established and that the gates of hades will never defeat it. He spoke of One, nor many..)
The only True Church which is the Eastern Orthodox Church that Accepts ONLY 7 Ecumenical Councils.
Robby Voseta I’m so saddened that you left our most holy church because not you chosen freely but deceived by the Satan. I hope you to re-examine the heresy of Nestorianism among the Byzantines and come back to the real church. I’m not angry with you. I hope you will live happy and lovely life. You have a chance. But I will fill my heart with furious hate towards the deceivers and satanists who injected you with the poison.
@@user-kq8od8ly5d We're not Nestorians, dude.
The believe that the holy spirit dictates the council is equal to papal dogmas of RCC ..the holy spirit guide the ecumenical councils when we want the holy spirit to guide us
@@robbyvoseta1374 Have you been baptised in Orthodox church ?
Awesome explaination especially the council of chalcedon
Due to it's status as the capital of the Roman empire, and it being the location of the martyerdom of Sts. Peter and Paul, the Roman Church was agreed upon to be the "first among equals." This meant *jurisdictional* issues which could not be resolved by the local Patriarchate appealed its issue to Rome, and an all-inclusive final resolution would be agreed upon. This did not mean, however, the authority of the Roman bishop was supreme to the others. It was actually the Church of Alexandria that first named their head bishop as "Pope", which meant "father of fathers" as the Church grew so big many bishops under the bishop had to be ordained.
Two schools of thought emerged in the early Church: Alexandria and Antioch. When Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople (who was a graduate of the School of Antioch) anathematized anyone who called the Virgin Mary 'Theotokos', the Council of Ephesus was held, of which Cyril of Alexandria was president. John I, Patriarch of Antioch, refused to attend when he found out the Council had began without him, and held his own rival meeting expressing his support for Nestorius. Emperor Theodosius II of Byzantia also expressed his support for Nestorius at Ephesus as he felt their school (Antioch) was being attacked as illegitimate. Emperor Theodosius II was told by an anchorite from Constantinople that there had been a message from God telling him that Cyril was correct, and that's when Ephesus was ratified as the legitimate council. So, the Church of Antioch was in schism. Later, Patriarch John was
reconciled with Patriarch Cyril concerning the issue, and Antioch rejoined the Church. But this was done in a personal exchange between the two rather than in a formal council. So there were still people in Antioch who strongly disliked Cyril of Alexandria.
When Nestorius was deposed, Alexandria elected the new Patriarch of Constantinople, so there was an obvious dominance of Alexandria in the early Church, which made many feel some type of way. Cyril dies in 444, and Pope Dioscorus assumes the throne of Alexandria. At this point, the Church of Constantinople was on the rise.
A monk in Constantinople, Eutyches, invited a guest speaker to preach, who was a bishop. The bishop preached something that led Eutyches to accuse him of heresy, and the bishop appealed to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Flavian, insisting the Patriarch excommunicate Eutyches. In attempts to be the peacemaker, Patriarch Flavian holds a local council, and Eutyches is accused of monophysitism, and was unjustly excommunicated. Eutyches had connections to Emperor Theodosius II and thus another council was held, this time in Ephesus (the "Robber" Council), of which Patriarch Dioscorus was chosen to preside over. At this council, it was discussed whether Patriarch Flavian, or Eutyches, was correct. At this point, this was already a slap in the face for Pope Leo I, as Rome was understood as the "court of appeals" for the early Church, as discussed earlier. At the "robber" council, Eutyches confesses that when he meant "one nature", it was in reference to what Cyril of Alexandria said, and denounces monophysitism. The "robber" council concludes what Eutyches confesses is Orthodox, and lifts his excommunication, effectively deposing Flavian as Patriarch. Emperor Theodosius II sends guards to arrest Flavian, and they unfortunately kill him.
Now there is a conflict in the Church.
John 8:12 sad the Holy church fight among themselves.
Very helpful. Thank you!
Thank you abouna, you are a very good teacher
Thank you Abona
I hope this man rises high in the Church!
Wow, as I listen, I am getting a reaffirmation of everything that I have learned up to now in my Theology class.
39:00 a typical NorthAmerican Turkey dinner disagreement.
Great job. abouna.
Beautiful
Where can I read about everything Fr. Antony is talking about? Is there a book i can find more information about or maybe a website?
God bless you + + + Amen ⛪⛪⛪
God bless
Great video thank you for all this great information. Any Coptic churches in Houston Tx
Thank u for this im Eastern Orthodox
Greetings from malankara orthodox 👋👋
Lord have Mercy! let us all unite in Christ!
Ready for Harvest also did an excellent video on this
How did the some of the church fathers resort to violence. That is sad to hear.
He said on a couple of occasions, that they have the minutes, for this and that at these councils, aee these minutes available to the public, who has them and can they be accessed.
Greetings
I am a Greek Orthodox Christian.
Just to clarify, our church ‘s are in discussion
( as per my Bishop), however, since we are not in Full Communion, marriage would not be possible, remember, we , the about to be married couple, will receive Holly Communion during the Sacrament of Marriage, and that fact that our churches ( Greek Eastern Orthodox and Coptic Orthodox ) are not in full Communion ( which I hope a pray we will be very soon) can NOT get married, at least not the Greek Orthodox Church and risk not being good standing with the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Very important that if a Greek Orthodox Christian listens to this amazing lecture, to PLEASE consult your Greek Orthodox Presbyter for his guidance and to avoid any conflict resulting in poor standing with the Eastern Orthodox Church before proceeding with any plans.
According to our leaders of the Greek Orthodox ( Eastern Orthodox) Church, we have a long, long way to go as mentioned in the amazing, informative lecture from a Coptic point of view. I already am very familiar with the Eastern Orthodox-Greek perspective, whereby was not mentioned in this lecture- the influence of Charlemagne-the German/ Franc on the Orthodox world.
That importance of Agia Sophia being the central church of the whole Roman Orthodox Church as what it was called the 1st thousand years of Christianity. Just a quick sample of the Eastern Orthodox point of view.
Not to mention St Andrew, St John writings of the book of Revelation..all Greek within a Hellenic universe.
The library of Alexandria was mentioned during the lecture, just to keep in mind that
The library of Alexandria was created by Alexander the Great and continued and expanded after his death and destroyed by fanatic local religious leaders of the time at Alexandria.
The present library your referring to is inferior replica, and idea borrowed yet again from Classical Hellenic period and for me , will never be as GREAT as the original.
A little insulting come to think about it.
Something to reflect and think about, that why the reunification of Byzantine rite - Greek and the Coptic Christian requires a lot of time yet attainable on both sides.
There are an abundance of written documents in Eastern Orthodoxy that would be just as compelling to the details mentioned in this lecture on the history , differences and similarities, yet 1500 years of differences hard to forget.
God bless and thank you for your understanding .
MR V. Did the Word of God die in the Flesh or not? Which nature died on the Cross? If it’s the human alone you and I are not saved! Get it!?
Let’s not get distracted by other lessor differences.
Let’s stick to what’s important: Salvation
@@truedivinelight938 The Incarnate Logos died. Neither Church believes that "one" nature died on the Cross.
‘The Incarnate Logos died’ Amen!!! The only way this can be possible is with the Formuli of St. Cyril/Ecumenical Council of Ephesus. This is clear in St. Cyril own refute of Dyophysitism in his letter to Emperor Theodosius during the onset of the Nestorian heresy.
Moreover, St. Cyril repeated this same Formuli in reply to John of Antioch in which he said the natures can only be distinguished in “Theoria alone” and this is repeated in his subsequent 1st and 2nd letters to Succensus. St. Cyril is very consistent on this crucial point. I think you would agree?
The Joint Commission Agreements repeat and affirm this essential criteria “in Theoria alone” which the Chalcedonians very suspiciously and unfortunately reject to this day.
Importantly, the Joint Commission Agreement emphasize that St. Cyril is preeminent and paramount in the area of Christology. This means all Chalcedonian “councils” need to be interpreted only through the lens of St. Cyril/Ecumenical Council of Ephesus to be considered Orthodox. Have all Chalcedonians done this? It’s an important condition and criteria for Orthodoxy according to the Joint Commission itself. I think you would agree?
Actually, once an ‘in Theoria’ caveat is applied there is in fact, no longer “two” so called “equally orthodox formuli) but only 1 Truly Orthodox Formuli which is Miaphysis… this means the other must be heretical. It’s a myth that 2 different formuli are the same.
The only way for the ‘Incarnate logos to die” is by way of two natures uniting into ‘One Concrete Reality’ united hypostatically indivisibly and naturally.The natures being distinguished in “Theoria alone (conceptually” and even this, St. Cyril says may be contemplated too far as to divide the natures in the ‘One Son’.
It is sad that people let pride get in the way of eternal life. The Council of Chalcedon was led by nothing but the desires of the flesh, the desire for worldly and pride.
Indeed. Have you read the ‘tome of Leo’ by any chance? It’s a document written by the heretical pope leo that all chalcedonians accept.
@@tjdronex1113 What's heretical about it?
@@Luis-kn4pm “The activity of each form is what is proper to it in communion with the other: that is, the Word performs what belongs to the Word, and the flesh accomplishes what belongs to the flesh. One of these performs brilliant miracles; the other sustains acts of violence. “
Here’s the problem. Describing the activities of each nature in such way that blurs the mystery of the union of natures sets up a dichotomy similar to what Nestorius preached. Nestorius said the Virgin Mary is Christokos (The birthgiver of Christ) not Theotokos (the birthgiver of God) because God can’t be born. In other words, divinity can’t be born. In other words, according to Nestorius, the two natures of Christ must be maintained separate and divided. Nestorius insisted on this dichotomy ignoring the fact that in the Incarnation, the union of the natures prevails over dichotomous division.
He goes on to list miracles belong to divinity and emotions belong to the flesh. He says, “So, if I may pass over many instances, it does not belong to the same nature to weep out of deep-felt pity for a dead friend, and to call him back to life again at the word of command, once the mound had been removed from the four-day-old grave;”
Again, he is going on the assumption that when anyone says “same nature” or “one nature” it must mean one and only nature or one and only one hybrid nature. He fails to recognize that one can mean one nature in a different manner than he assumes. It’s almost as if he went on a mission saying the Son of man weeps for his friend and the Son of God raises him from a four-day-old grave. This is no different than Nestorius who said the Virgin gave birth to the man Jesus Christ, not God.
By the way, as Leo moves down his list of miracles done by the divinity and events done by the flesh, he just has to slip an allusion to Rome’s supremacy when Peter called the man Jesus “the Christ, the Son of the Living God.” Leo writes, “He [Peter] thoroughly deserved to be declared “blessed” by the Lord. He derived the stability of both his goodness and his name from the original Rock,” This in itself is not the theme of Leo’s Tome but it illustrates Leo’s intentions of his Tome.
Father Antony, have you spent anytime at Saint Paul University?
Does the Coptic church have rules regarding how a cross should be handled? i.e., is scratching one's head with the same hand that is holding the cross ok?
+ I'm sorry if this offended and/or distracted you. Please pray for my repentance and to have a deeper reverence.
Dear Fr. Antony Paul
You forgot two things
If the differences only political,
Why it says in Leo’s tome:
“Apart from His divinity , He went up on the Cross. “
Means on the cross was only the humanity, not divinity which is essential for the salvation.
Can you explain why Pope Dioscorus lost his teeth and beard, or who killed the 30,000 martyrs of Alexandria
Thanks
Samir fayek
Please show me where it says in the Tome "Apart from His divinity , He went up on the Cross".
Either you're lying of you've been lied to, this is what the Tome actually teaches : "So again He showed the wound in His side, the marks of the nails, and all the signs of His quite recent suffering, saying, "See My hands and feet, that it is I. Handle Me and see that a spirit has not flesh and bones, as you see Me have ;" in order that the properties of His Divine and human nature might be acknowledged to remain still INSEPARABLE: and that we might know the WORD NOT TO BE DIFFERENT FROM THE FLESH, in such a sense as also to confess that the ONE SON OF GOD IS BOTH WORD AND FLESH."
Like Fr Antony said, there was hostility from both sides, quit appealing to emotions.
So do you think maybe, the oriental orthodox churches, and the eastern orthodox church could eventually become one orthodox faith?
Godwilling
Christ Has Risen! ☦️❤️ Orthodox is a way of being!
This was a great video as an eastern Orthodox it really helped me see that there isn't that much that separates our christology.
I was just wondering though how would someone explain to a Muslim about Jesus' suffering from a Mia-physite position?
Of course. So Miaphysitism of course is the belief that Jesus has 1 nature that is fully divine and fully human. This is not too different from us humans who have a body and a soul, yet we are still 1 nature as we have 1 will.
We must also recognise these natures never mixed nor separated not even for the twinkle of the eye. Now that we have this definition. Why is it significant? That’s because God truly took our humanity on and United it with his divinity so that we may be saved. Jesus is the bridge to salvation. “Whoever believes in my shall not perish, but have eternal life”.
Now how does this relate to suffering?
On the Cross His Divinity did not part from His Humanity. However, in Its unification with His Human nature, the former had let the latter to suffer with no intervention whatsoever, thus making the redemptive act of suffering quite genuine. This state of play is expressed by the Lord Jesus Christ's words: "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"
The words "and was buried" indicate that His Body had died. That death was the price of sinfulness of the whole world. In that death, His Human Soul left His Body, though His Divinity never separated from either His Soul nor His Body. The Soul , unified with Divinity, went to Hades and announced the Good Tidings to the dead, opened up the gates of Paradise, and let them in, together with the thief on the right side. The Body, united with Divinity, stayed in the tomb without becoming decomposed.
Could there be another Ecumenical Council to resolve this? I think too that the idea of first among equals in terms of presiding over disputes inevitably led to problems and schism. Perhaps instead the disputes could be handled by 5 bishops from 5 other orthodox traditions. If for instance an issue arises in Antioch, have representative bishops from, say Alexandria, Moscow, Constantinople, Jerusalem and Belgrade come to resolve the issue. I am currently a Roman Catholic but I have great interest in Orthodoxy and I think I will inevitably convert. I would love for the Oriental and Eastern faiths to reunite.
Forgive me, but the term "first among equals" didn't refer to Rome being the "court of appeals". It only meant that the Roman church's patriarch (the Roman Pope) had the privilege of speaking first at synods and councils. It's only Rome who thinks they were the court of appeals or still today think they have any special status above that. After Rome and the other patriarchates split, the term was given to the Patriarch of Constantinople and the privilege is similarly defined.
Wel said. I'm not even sure if the term 'first among equals' is legit or comes from the fathers? I believe Rome was EQUAL to the other Sees. Not sure if one can be FIRST & EQUAL at the same time!?
It is sad that people let pride get in the way of eternal life. Pope Leo resurrected the heresy of Nestorius.
My understanding of the Christological difference between the Oriental Orthodox (OO) and Eastern Orthodox (EO) is this:
OO believe that the incarnate Christ is 1 divine-human particular nature, and the divine and human properties are distinct from one another.
EO believe that the incarnate Christ is 1 divine particular nature, and the divine and human general natures are distinct from one another.
This difference is caused by two different philosophical presuppositions:
OO presuppose a conceptual distinction between a particular nature and a general nature, due to the fact that a general nature is a conceptual grouping/compendium of particular natures.
EO presuppose a real distinction between particular natures and general natures, while general natures only exist in particular natures EO nonetheless view them as being distinct in reality.
Please let me know if I'm missing something.
The Doctrine of St. Cyril of Alexandria, and of the later Cappadocian Saints Saint Basil, Saint Greg and company are consistently OO position. "The eternally uncreated Son at the first moment of incarnation within the Theotokos, became Fully God, and Fully man. After the Union we do not speak of two natures, but One.
He is Theanthropos. The God-man. From His incarnation, until his death, through His resurrection, and the ascension, this never changing. He is after the union of the two natures, one single composite nature.
Fully God, as the Eternal Logos Begotten of the Father, and Fully human but without sin, from The blessed Mother of God.
Thank you so much. I am Chrismated Eastern Orthodox. Will there ever come a time that Rome will ever see us as part of the ONE,HOLY , CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC Church? Also, may I receive communion at a Coptic Church?
You may ask the priest in the Coptic church beforehand, to see if that is possible. It is also best to ask your Eastern Orthodox priest if he is ok to allow that. God bless
Why are you concerned whether Rome will see us as part of the one holy Catholic and Apostolic church? Eastern Orthodox see the Eastern Orthodox Church as the one holy Catholic and apostolic church and Rome has deviated from that.
I know he is speaking in a brief way but arius didn’t claim that Jesus was a man that became God, he claimed that the Lord was the first and most noble creature of God and that He wasn’t eternal. We piously defend the true divinity and eternality of the Lord
Lovely talk and so well put. Theosis is not to become God but being divinized or made immortal.
So basically you agree with Abouna Anthony who describes the Ancient Fathers who attended the defining ecumenical councils as thugs and low life politicians and he stresses 'both sides' regularly practiced deceit and uncalled for violence and unchristian tactics yet at the same time we are supposed to base our trust in eternal salvation on the fact that God the Holy Spirit Chose to Bestow Grace on these very 'politician thugs' who even got to decided on Biblical Canon etc... Gimme a break. This is NWO and anti-christ nonsense compliments of the copts who are infamous for their vivid and colorful imagination and their love of stretching truths and 1001 nights style exaggeration.
The Truth is One and it is Christ and the Holy Spirit is that Spirit of Truth. In Chalcedon there was a heretic and corrupt gang lead by dioscorus and severus who for the sole purpose of excluding Byzantium from Egypt and the hold of the church on its vast wealth concocted the lies and heresies and split the Body of Christ. It is no different today. The Coptic Church is the second most affluent institution in Egypt. It owns agricultural lands that are as vast in territory as some of the smaller states in Africa and Latin America. It never pays taxes nor reveals its accounts to anybody.
When the Arabs came to conquer Egypt they were amazed by the fact that a delegation of Copts welcomed them and even provided them with the best fighting men with the sole purpose of ridding Egypt from the Byzantines. Shenoudah III wrote a book on the subject of Theosis and he wrote against everything Saint Athanasius wrote in his book 'on the incarnation' yet at the same time the copts call Shenoudah III 'Athanasius of the 20th century' and 'the teacher of all generations'.You really can't make this up! 🤠🤠
Coptic here, can’t wait to reunite God willing
Apostolic churches:
1. Roman (Western) Church - Latin liturgy
2. Greek (Eastern Orthodox) Church - Byzantine liturgy
3. Oriental Orthodox churches
a. Coptic Church and descendant churches - Alexandrian liturgy
b. Syriac Church of Antioch and descendant churches - West Syriac liturgy
c. Armenian Church - Armenian liturgy
4. Church of the East and descendant churches - East Syriac (Persian) liturgy
5. Eastern Catholic churches - churches from 2/3/4 that have fully re-united with the Roman Church, but employ Eastern liturgies (Byzantine/Alexandrian/Armenian/West Syriac/East Syriac)
You forgot about Ethiopian and Eritrean apostalic Churches
@@Wedi565 They are under Coptic Church.
@@DeaconYeabkal What a small world, I was watching your last video, Why did you delete it?
@@DeaconYeabkal You there?
@jininbaby3756 Add 6. Roman (western-Latin rite) Orthodoxy in the USA. There are dozens of Latin rite Parishes under Patriarch John X of Antioch.
can u please start an instagram page?
Look up the one true holy Catholic and Apostolic Church teachings or rites! It also talks about what’s called the Apostolic succession!
Excellent presentation could you recommend something to be read on the Chalcedon issues, from both sides. I do not accept Chalcedon probably because I do not understand it and I have found no one from our denomination who can. I find Nicea fine but without the filoque. You talked about mixed marriages but I assume that would exclude all RCs and Protestants who you see as heretics (at least as best I understand it). Our church will not marry all Protestants especially ones in the 1900s classical liberal tradition who often deny the existence of Jesus except as a story (UCC, some PCCanada and some Anabaptists...). If one can't affirm the Apostles creed without convoluted explanations or just plain lying then our church tends to back away.
William David Wallace I converted from the RC church to the Coptic Orthodox church. Not once was I ever referred to as a heretic, nor do I hear that language widely used as one would hear from the Eastern Orthodox. Copts do not consider any of the major denominations heretical, and in my humble opinion don't do enough to discourage their influence due to their open and friendly position with almost all Christians, i.e., non Arian, Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons.
Council of Chalcedon accepts that Jesus Christ has 2 natures: God-nature and Human-nature and they're seperated from each other. There were Churches who rejected this council and were called Miafysites and believe in a 1 God-Human nature, wich is the correct nature of Jesus Christ. The Chalcedonians called them Monophysites, but they had a different Christology than the Miafysites.
William David Wallace Read the Book ‘Chalcedon Re-Examined by V.C Samuel (Amazon) and The Unity of Christ by St. Cyril of Alexandria.
We don't play" the heretics" word game in the coptic church
There weren’t a few athonite monks against this but the the entire monastic community of Mt Athos.
What of the new schism?
If a Coptic Orthodox wanted to become an Eastern Orthodox would they require him or her to be baptized again?
@cogitari record depend on what ? I mean which EO church do so ?
Usually it would be christmated from what I’ve heard.
The real question is why would you want to become Eastern “Orthodox”?
Rome and Alexandria?
Basically lost in translation and after centuries of division we still have argument based on two peoples speaking different way of speaking Greek.
I think OCA members can commune with Oriental Orthodox Churches.
Heretical to do that.
This is a great explanation i thought Chaldonians were heretical. Pray for unity.
I am a ex-Eastern Orthodox and now a Oriental Orthodox catechumen. Father Anthony is sadly spouting ecumenism and has come to the wrong conclusion on Eastern Orthodox Christology. Eastern Orthodox Christology is not Orthodox. They don’t believe the same thing as Oriental Orthodox.
Disagree. What do you think the Eastern Orthodox believe?
Why you say this ?
@@airri3875the Eastern “orthodox” dare to seperate Jesus’ natures into 2 and excuse it by saying IN 1 person. Funnily enough, Nestorius agreed with this terminology and said it was aligned with his Nestorian christology.
The fathers of our past follow the first sin of me and is what every man is born with and God is the leader not us not us to judge it is a sin and both are Orthodox lol
Thank you good lecture but isn’t evil that all Christian divisions happened because of all these councils debating the nature of Jesus Christ instead of focusing on his teachings and the unity of all Christians ? It all happened since the un fair debate between St. Athanasius and Arius !
It’s nice hearing the Oriental position, though there are a few things I disagree.
One I would like to point out though, at 29:34 .
The canons of the Second Ecumenical Council had already granted the Patriarch of Constantinople those honours.
Canon 3:” Because it is new Rome, the bishop of Constantinople is to enjoy the privileges of honour after the bishop of Rome.”
The terms and eastern and western should be dropped and we should join together more . We are both orthodox and apostolic .
Hi! I'm Eastern Orthodox. I'm sure there are many things that we need to work on together.
The biggest problem I see in the future is the Armenian practice of unleavened bread in the Eucharist. This, to me, is a huge issue. That bread is the bread of unity, and how can we be United if we have different theology of the Eucharist?
Comments appreciated.
I should add I consider your Christology Orthodox.
Western Rite Orthodox also use unleavened bread.
The Armenians have always used unleavened bread. If it wasn't a problem at the beginning of the church, why should it be a problem now?
Not a big issue. Orthodoxy is capable of embracing and accommodating different traditions so long as the Orthodox understanding of Faith is the same. The COC uses leavened bread because Christ carried the ‘sins of the world on the Cross’
Are you kidding me. The arguments for both types are plausible based on Holy Scripture. I myself am inclined to see the addition of yeast in keeping with expansion under the New Cov. But a cause for division?
When it come to christ there is no hard line . There is truth or evil 35:14
16:30 Swollen up...
Woe to the generation that has replaced Orthodoxy with heterodoxy, and heterodoxy for Orthodoxy. God help all of true Faith.
There is holy spirit that tell the holy people what is true .
I not a Protestant only I am not very happy with this pope. There no such thing as a liberal Catholic, the ancient Eastern Orthodox. Only is the apostolic teaching and laws of the councils. If the Roman church goes apostate and run for orthodoxi.
eastern orthodox and oriential orthodox are one and same
I like coptic, eastern orthodox Greeks, Serbs, ah liberals kinda. Russian and ukrainia went they live and speak the faith.