Sorry I have not been on-line for a while so I missed this thread.
So the Latins dissobeyed the Papacy when they aid not to rebaptize any eastern christian?
Of course they did not ‘obey.’ To them Ethiopia and India were not ‘the East’ and for certain were not Christians; not even of the heretical sort. They were heathens—inferior backward peoples that needed colonization and the light of the Vatican and Europe. The Portuguese did not consider them equals of a different civilization. All policies that were applied to Byzantine Christianity had zero affect on Vatican efforts in non-European societies.
More than the rejection of the Chalcedonian formula, it could have been the rejection of the forced Latinization and intolerant attitude of the foreign power that invaded them?
Yes, of course the revolt (which produced many martyrs and saints for our Church [in particular many women martyrs and saints) had all the aspects of a revolt against foreign domination and attempted colonialism. In many ways, it was similar to the revolt by Indian Orthodox Christians against Portugal. But the theological underpinnings of the revolt should not be underestimated. Ethiopian and Coptic priests produced a voluminous amount of non-Chalcedonian apologetics during this period. It was a time when the Church was not ready to hear the fact that Christologies of the East and the West were very similar, if not identical, albeit if they stressed one or the other of nature of Christ.
This is the strangest thing I've ever read. From what I've studied, I have never found any of thiese theories to be part of Roman Catholicism or Chalcedonian Orthodoxy. It would not surprise me if they came from a modern Charismatic Catholic or Pentecostal Protestant, but from a Portuguese of the 1700's it's unbelievable.
No they definitely arrived with Portugal. That is not to say that they were the direct product of Portuguese theology but these heresies (as well as two others) were for sure a by-product of the confusion, anarchy and havoc brought by the Vatican.
Did the portuguese presence have any visible influence in Ethiopian Orthodoxy? did it have a liturgical influence?
Yes. Like all other attempts at non-Orthodox missionary activities it caused a reawakening and renaissance in the Church as she responded to defend herself. Years of isolation without competition by anyone except Islamic pranksters makes the clergy and the laityGÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Â¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ÂªwellGÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Â¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Âªsomewhat lazy and idle. Attempts like that of the Portuguese forces dynamism.
I read that in the North of Ethiopia, and in Eritrea, there is still a Uniate community, but from what I know they are more recent and are not related to the Portuguese intervention, and the new ones are not latinized and very close to Ethiopian Orthodoxy. How true is this?
There is a Uniate community and they disassociate with the past in strong terms. The division is unfortunately largely based on ethnic division. The north, for the most part, is ‘Orthodox in Communion with Rome’ and has kept the same liturgy with the exception of mentioning the Bishop of Rome. The south is very Latinized and confused.