Here, the condemnation of their heretical (Nestorian) writings, the same writings defended in Chalcedon shows a CONTRADICTION. If you don't admit that, then you are in an extreme case of denial.
These writings were also condemned by St. Cyril in his letter to the Emperor. Do not tell me you didn't read those.
God bless you.
Xrictoc anecti!
You know I can't argue here, which is why you are quoting me and posting your comments.
I know that Theodoret of Cyrus was Orthodox - despite the condemnation of some of his earlier writings - because he made a full confession of his Orthodoxy, repented of the appearance of Nestorianism in some of his controversy with St. Cyril, and was accepted by the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon.
He was a holy and God-bearing Father of the Church who produced some valuable writings. That is why he is in fact known to the Orthodox Church as Blessed Theodoret of Cyrus.
Some of his early writing was dredged up and condemned at the Fifth Ecumenical Council as a concession to the Monophysites. I am not saying the written work in question was correct, but that was the reason behind dredging it up.
A letter allegedly written by Ibas of Edessa (he denied writing it) was likewise condemned, as were the person and writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia.
All three men were long dead by the time their writings were condemned and had no opportunity to answer for themselves.
I do not deny that the council was right in recognizing what appears to have been heresy in the "Three Chapters," but it is nonetheless true that their authors were not around to offer any sort of defense or explanation.
Theodoret and Ibas are both recognized by the Orthodox Church as Orthodox. They were not Nestorians.
__________________ Have no doubts: the devil is behind abortion and same-sex marriage.
A vote for any politician or political party that favors either or both is a vote for the devil.
And you know I can't argue in TAW, which is why I'm posting here.
I'm sorry Maximus, but you are the first EO I here that confess that Theodoret and Ibas are saints. For there are many EO I know that disagree, and St. Cyril himself disagree. Theodore of Mopsuestia's writings were also defended in Chalcedon and condemned in Constantinople. St. Cyril condemned Theodore before Chalcedon had to contradict it. These "three Chapters" are one of the MANY reasons why we as Oriental Orthodox do not accept your councils.
Chalcedon accepted these writings, and Constantinople rejected them.
As for debating, I wish that you debate. I do not want to act like manywho kicked me out and not share my views in the same thread.
May God bless you.
Xrictoc anecti!
PS Why didn't you share these views with me in PM then? Why did you wait till I got everyone's attention?
Last edited by minasoliman; 3rd May 2005 at 09:46 PM.
I know that Theodoret of Cyrus was Orthodox - despite the condemnation of some of his earlier writings - because he made a full confession of his Orthodoxy, repented of the appearance of Nestorianism in some of his controversy with St. Cyril, and was accepted by the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon.
And yet you seem to not believe me if I condemn Eutyches.
He was a holy and God-bearing Father of the Church who produced some valuable writings. That is why he is in fact known to the Orthodox Church as Blessed Theodoret of Cyrus.
And later on "impious."
Some of his early writing was dredged up and condemned at the Fifth Ecumenical Council as a concession to the Monophysites. I am not saying the written work in question was correct, but that was the reason behind dredging it up.
Did St. Athanasius concede to the Arians or St. Cyril to the Nestorians? Obviously not! Concession only proves a weakness, not consistency in Orthodox defense.
A letter allegedly written by Ibas of Edessa (he denied writing it) was likewise condemned, as were the person and writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia.
Proof? I understood that Ibas and Theodore defended themselves very well, and are venerated with Nestorius by the Assyrian Church as "Orthodox."
All three men were long dead by the time their writings were condemned and had no opportunity to answer for themselves.
Neither did Origen defend himself. Yet he was condemned while being alive by the Alexandrian Patriarch at his time. So did Theodore and Ibas were condemned while being alive by St. Cyril. They had a chance to defend themselves, but in return, they condemned the Pillar of Faith.
I do not deny that the council was right in recognizing what appears to have been heresy in the "Three Chapters," but it is nonetheless true that their authors were not around to offer any sort of defense or explanation.
Therefore, you in actuality, without realizing it, reject the 5th "Ecumenical" Council. The same Orthodox Church have filled the sentence by condemning the three men as impious. Did the Orthodox fathers somehow "misunderstood" them? You can't defend that! For misunderstanding to you implies that they were not lead by the Holy Spirit. Unless, you confess that these fathers did "misunderstand" while the Chalcedonian fathers "never" misunderstood. You seem to choose who misunderstood and who didn't among your fathers, which contradicts consistency in Orthodox defence. If you want, I can do the same and try to prove to you that St. Dioscorus never misunderstood the "Chalcedonian Nestorians," but I know in my heart that he did, yet remained Orthodox in faith, and suffered under Imperial persecutions as a Confessor.
Meanwhile, Chalcedon never condemned St. Dioscorus for heresy, and yet you reject him without researching the facts.
Xrictoc anecti!
Last edited by minasoliman; 3rd May 2005 at 10:11 PM.
Neither Theodoret nor Ibas are condemned or ever were condemned by the Orthodox Church. The Fifth Council condemned some of Theodoret's early writing but not his person. It condemned a letter allegedly written by Ibas of Edessa, but which Ibas himself denied writing.
The person of Theodore of Mopsuestia, as well as his writings, were condemned by the Fifth Council.
Origen was also condemned at the same council.
Please understand: in the cases of Theodoret and Ibas, writings were condemned, not persons. Theodoret of Cyrus is regarded by the Orthodox Church as Blessed Theodoret, a righteous man and Church Father. Ibas made an Orthodox confession at Chalcedon and produced no more suspect writings.
Theodore of Mopsuestia and Origen were themselves condemned as heretics.
The Council of Chalcedon did not endorse the "Three Chapters." At one point the papal legates made the comment that they had examined the alleged letter of Ibas and had found it Orthodox, but that was their own opinion and not that of the Council itself; it never made it into the Council's dogmatic decrees.
It is the dogmatic decrees of an ecumenical council that are infallible, not every offhand remark made by every participant. If, for example, a bishop says, "I like banana splits," that does not mean tomorrow's headline should read, "Orthodox council endorses banana splits!" It simply means one bishop likes banana splits.
Besides that, if one reads the proceedings at Chalcedon, he will find that the papal legates said they had examined the letter and found him (Ibas) Orthodox. What they said cannot even be construed as an endorsement of the letter. Even if what they said was an endorsement of that letter, it still, as I said above, was only an expression of private opinion and not a conciliar decree.
Dioscorus made heretical statements at the Council of Chalcedon. He was anathematized as a heretic in subsequent councils. I have researched this subject very thoroughly.
Your thread here has inspired me to post a thread in TAW on the history of the Monophysite controversy. I will probably do so as soon as I have sufficient time. I am a school teacher and am currently very busy.
__________________ Have no doubts: the devil is behind abortion and same-sex marriage.
A vote for any politician or political party that favors either or both is a vote for the devil.
Your thread here has inspired me to post a thread in TAW on the history of the Monophysite controversy. I will probably do so as soon as I have sufficient time.
I was wondering when you would start a thread on your EO board. I knew it was only a matter of time before you started one.
You seem to enjoy spreading mistruths.
I've never seen someone attack something that they are so similar to, the way you do. Doesn't really make that much sense. I guess some people like to criticize those they are closest to--they look to find fault in others to justify their own actions and shortcomings.
God Bless.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I was wondering when you would start a thread on your EO board. I knew it was only a matter of time before you started one.
You seem to enjoy spreading mistruths.
I've never seen someone attack something that they are so similar to, the way you do. Doesn't really make that much sense. I guess some people like to criticize those they are closest to--they look to find fault in others to justify their own actions and shortcomings.
God Bless.
Say what you will.
This is your forum, after all.
__________________ Have no doubts: the devil is behind abortion and same-sex marriage.
A vote for any politician or political party that favors either or both is a vote for the devil.
To the Eastern Orthodox who have posted in this thread I would say, please be careful to what you expose yourselves.
Be careful also to what you commit yourselves.
Maximus, thank you for your concern, and I mean that. I know that it is sincere. I take your warnings seriously and I have no problem coming to the same understanding you have. But frankly I am much more convinced that our Fathers of the council of Chalcedon misunderstood the Copts. What they condemned, they condemned rightly, but this does not seem to be what the OO were actually confessing, even if some heretics among them were indeed confessing heresies.
I have not "commited" myself to anything. I hope I have made it perfectly clear here (through past posts regarding this very topic) that I am willing and ready to believe otherwise... I used to be convinced of otherwise until I took a fair look at both sides... but I am of course by no means an expert and am willing to admit when I'm wrong.
I am at this time researching the subject, using Orthodox sources available on the net. Due to me, at the moment, living in Saudi Arabia I am not able to find 'real time' information.
Linear Mode
