For Chaldeans and Syro-Malabar

[mardukm]

This is a deeply theological question.

I don’t know if you guys are aware of the talks between the ACOE and the OOC(particularly with the Coptic Orthodox) regarding Christology, especially in the 1990’s. It goes without saying you guys are aware of the talks between the ACOE and the CC.

I was wondering. Would you classify yourselves as diophysite or miaphysite? I’m not sure, since I am not fully versed in the nuances of your doctrinal expressions.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my question.

Blessings

 

[Thomas48]

This is a deeply theological question.

I don’t know if you guys are aware of the talks between the ACOE and the OOC(particularly with the Coptic Orthodox) regarding Christology, especially in the 1990’s. It goes without saying you guys are aware of the talks between the ACOE and the CC.

I was wondering. Would you classify yourselves as diophysite or miaphysite? I’m not sure, since I am not fully versed in the nuances of your doctrinal expressions.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my question.

Blessings

The Syro Malabar Church would be diophysite, the nature of our doctrine has always turned more towards Rome (perhaps do to the period of Latinization). But to my understanding, even in the earlier centuries only the Churches of West Syriac Rite (Oriental Orthodox) have expressed miaphysitism.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Thomas34,

I’m sorry I was not clear. I understand that the Chaldeans and Syro-Malabars are diophysite. I’m referring specifically to Church of the East theology. What I’m really asking can be put this way: if you were not in union with Rome, would your theology be considered (or closer to) diophysitism or miaphysitism? I don’t know any ACOE here in these forums. I know there are Chaldeans and Syro-Malabars on CAF who are very well-versed in ACOE theology, and defend it ably.

Blessings

 

[ronyodish]

Marduk,

Peace!

The Christology of the ACoE is diophysite, but slightly different from the diophysitism of the Byznantines, Latins, and Maronites. In Assyrian Aramaic theology and terminology:

Kyana - General Nature
Qnuma - Individuated Nature
Parsoopa - Person

Thus, in regards to Christ or Msheekha, they confess as follows:

Two Kyane - Two General Natures – Divinity (God), and Humanity (Man).
Two Qnume - Two Individuated Natures - Of the Son, and of the human body and soul which the Son assumed at the moment of the Incarnation.
One Parsoopa - One Person - the Lord Jesus Christ.

God bless,

Rony

 

[Peter_J]

Would you classify yourselves as diophysite or miaphysite?

Granted I’ve never been Chaldean, Syro-Malabar, or ACoE, but this question seems to me a little bit of a nonsequitor. Why would an ACoE be miaphysite?