Author Topic: Miaphysite vs monphysite  (Read 4601 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline scamandrius

  • Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,419
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek in exile
Miaphysite vs monphysite
« on: September 25, 2009, 04:28:20 PM »
Is there a difference between the terms monophysite and miaphysite?  Both "mia" and "mono" mean one or alone in Greek.  Sometimes I have seen the terms used interchangeably but some will say that there is a fine line of difference.  So, which is it?
I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene

Offline Pilgrim

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 304
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #1 on: September 25, 2009, 04:36:24 PM »
Monophysites were heretics who followed Eutychean christology. Miaphysites follow the christology of St. Severus, and are now the non-Chalcedonian Orthodox Churches.

I think the difference in the tern is simply to seperate these two.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2009, 04:37:26 PM by Pilgrim »
Heavenly King, Comforter, Spirit of Truth help us to walk the way of Life, which is Christ Jesus.

St. Cyril, St. Leo, and St. Severus pray that the Church may be united and one, Eastern and Oriental.St. Issac the Syrian, pray that Assyria would return to the Holy Church. St. Gregory, pray for Rom

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,728
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #2 on: September 25, 2009, 08:57:23 PM »
Monophysites were heretics who followed Eutychean christology. Miaphysites follow the christology of St. Severus, and are now the non-Chalcedonian Orthodox Churches.

I think the difference in the tern is simply to seperate these two.
Is it really that simplistic?  Let's wait and see what those of our OO brothers and sisters who are much better versed in their own history have to say before jumping to such simplistic conclusions as the above.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Salpy

  • Section Moderator
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,068
  • New Martyrs of Libya pray for us!
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #3 on: September 25, 2009, 10:01:33 PM »
It's been discussed here before, but I think there is a difference in meaning between mia and mono.  I've been told that mono is one in the sense of a numerical one, whereas mia is one in the sense of a united, or composite, one.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,649
  • Praying for the Christians in Iraq
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #4 on: September 26, 2009, 03:18:19 PM »
It's been discussed here before, but I think there is a difference in meaning between mia and mono.  I've been told that mono is one in the sense of a numerical one, whereas mia is one in the sense of a united, or composite, one.
Sounds like either could possibly be problematic.
You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.

Offline _Seraphim_

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 657
  • May Orthodoxy become our orthopraxis
    • OrthodoxMysteries
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #5 on: September 26, 2009, 03:37:58 PM »
Is there a difference between the terms monophysite and miaphysite?  Both "mia" and "mono" mean one or alone in Greek.  Sometimes I have seen the terms used interchangeably but some will say that there is a fine line of difference.  So, which is it?


I've never heard of "monphysite,"  ;) ;D,  but here's a very basic article about miaphysite/monophysite:


http://orthodoxwiki.org/Miaphysitism

Quote

...the Churches of the Oriental Orthodox Communion, while sometimes called monophysite, vehemently reject that label.

Over recent decades, leaders of the various branches of the Church have spoken about the differences between their respective christologies as not being as extreme as was traditionally held.

Much has been said about the difficulties in understanding the Greek technical terms used in these controversies.

The main words are ousia (οὐσία, 'essence'), physis (φύσις, 'nature'), hypostasis (ὑπόστασις, 'concrete reality/person') and prosopon (πρόσωπον, 'mask/person'). Even in Greek, their meanings can overlap somewhat. These difficulties became even more exaggerated when these technical terms were translated into other languages. In Syriac, physis was translated as kyānâ and hypostasis was qnômâ. The shades of meaning are even more blurred between these words, and they could not be used in such a philosophical way as their Greek counterparts. Hence, some have suggested that miaphysitism came about due to a grounding of language in the fact that someone's person and nature are a verisimilitude.

(Note: This article or section represents an Oriental Orthodox (Non-Chalcedonian) perspective, which may differ from an Eastern Orthodox (Chalcedonian) understanding.)



« Last Edit: September 26, 2009, 03:46:39 PM by _Seraphim_ »
"Disputes merely about words must not be suffered to divide those who think alike."
-St. Athanasius (†444)

Pray for Orthodox Unity

"Behold the light of our Agreed Statement on Christology"
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state04.html

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,728
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #6 on: September 26, 2009, 05:17:38 PM »
It's been discussed here before, but I think there is a difference in meaning between mia and mono.  I've been told that mono is one in the sense of a numerical one, whereas mia is one in the sense of a united, or composite, one.
Sounds like either could possibly be problematic.
From whose perspective?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,201
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #7 on: September 26, 2009, 06:35:32 PM »
"Monophysite" is a word used by those of the Chalcedonian tradition who attacked anyone that rejected Chalcedon.  Implied by the word was either a confusion of natures or a docetic/semidocetic Christ or an Apollinarian form of Christ, all of which are condemned by the OO fathers and the Church.

The word "Miaphysite" was taken from St. Cyril's famous phrase "Mia Physis tou Theo Logos Sesarkomene," and thus this has been adopted by our OO fathers along with its theological implications (theosis for one is a strong implication).  This word "Miaphysite" was adopted in answer to the attacks made against the OO as "Monophysites" to highlight the truth behind OO beliefs as well as allude to the common father St. Cyril as the source of OO beliefs.
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,649
  • Praying for the Christians in Iraq
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2009, 01:41:33 PM »
It's been discussed here before, but I think there is a difference in meaning between mia and mono.  I've been told that mono is one in the sense of a numerical one, whereas mia is one in the sense of a united, or composite, one.
Sounds like either could possibly be problematic.
From whose perspective?
A Chalcedonian one.
You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.

Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 20,183
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2009, 03:48:11 PM »
"Monophysite" is a word used by those of the Chalcedonian tradition who attacked anyone that rejected Chalcedon.  Implied by the word was either a confusion of natures or a docetic/semidocetic Christ or an Apollinarian form of Christ, all of which are condemned by the OO fathers and the Church.

IIRC, "monophysite" was a term coined well before Chalcedon.

The word "Miaphysite" was taken from St. Cyril's famous phrase "Mia Physis tou Theo Logos Sesarkomene," and thus this has been adopted by our OO fathers along with its theological implications (theosis for one is a strong implication).  This word "Miaphysite" was adopted in answer to the attacks made against the OO as "Monophysites" to highlight the truth behind OO beliefs as well as allude to the common father St. Cyril as the source of OO beliefs.

In modern Greek "mono" has more of an exclusive sense (like "only one"), versus "mia" which is merely a feminine form of "one" (enas, mia, ena).
"O Cross of Christ, all-holy, thrice-blessed, and life-giving, instrument of the mystical rites of Zion, the holy Altar for the service of our Great Archpriest, the blessing - the weapon - the strength of priests, our pride, our consolation, the light in our hearts, our mind, and our steps"
Met. Meletios of Nikopolis & Preveza, from his ordination.

Offline John Larocque

  • Catholic
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 530
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2009, 04:32:03 PM »
I remember a couple of years ago an explanation of something along these lines. Those who had an issue with Jesus' divinity found themselves in the Arian camp. Those who had an issue with Jesus' humanity tended to go to one of two extremes. The Nestorians treated Jesus divinity as having little to do with his humanity and vice versa, so you'd have a strange expression like, "Jesus the man died on the cross, but not the Jesus the divine." The monophysites swallowed up his divinity so that it was fused into a singular (mostly) divine nature. Again, at the expense of the humanity of Jesus. Even now, occasionally on the bulletin boards, "Chalcedonian" Christians will see expressions like "the humanity of Jesus" or "Jesus the Man" and think that it was some sort of intrinsic denial of his divine nature or Arianism in disguise. Why was the humanity of Jesus - or rather - that Jesus could be simultaneously truly human and truly divine - so problematic?

Cyrillian Miaphysitism seems like a milder form of monophysitism, and I read that some have tried to make it compatible with Chalcedonian expressions. Forgive me for saying this, but it seems similar to the semantics involved in making Western and Eastern approachs to the Trinity to unambiguously mean the same things, without in any sense departing from the Western terminologies. So from Latin/Greek semantics it's Syrian/Greek semantics. I suppose if you can get both confessions to assert the same thing (though semantically worded differently) you'd have unity, right?
« Last Edit: September 28, 2009, 04:36:00 PM by John Larocque »

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,201
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2009, 05:55:35 PM »
"Monophysite" is a word used by those of the Chalcedonian tradition who attacked anyone that rejected Chalcedon.  Implied by the word was either a confusion of natures or a docetic/semidocetic Christ or an Apollinarian form of Christ, all of which are condemned by the OO fathers and the Church.

IIRC, "monophysite" was a term coined well before Chalcedon.

I was only defining it within the context of the Chalcedonian debate, but you're right.

Quote
The word "Miaphysite" was taken from St. Cyril's famous phrase "Mia Physis tou Theo Logos Sesarkomene," and thus this has been adopted by our OO fathers along with its theological implications (theosis for one is a strong implication).  This word "Miaphysite" was adopted in answer to the attacks made against the OO as "Monophysites" to highlight the truth behind OO beliefs as well as allude to the common father St. Cyril as the source of OO beliefs.

In modern Greek "mono" has more of an exclusive sense (like "only one"), versus "mia" which is merely a feminine form of "one" (enas, mia, ena).

Is physis thus a feminine word?  Or is ancient Greek usage different from modern Greek in the word "mia"?
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,318
Re: Miaphysite vs monphysite
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2009, 08:53:50 PM »
"Monophysite" is a word used by those of the Chalcedonian tradition who attacked anyone that rejected Chalcedon.  Implied by the word was either a confusion of natures or a docetic/semidocetic Christ or an Apollinarian form of Christ, all of which are condemned by the OO fathers and the Church.

IIRC, "monophysite" was a term coined well before Chalcedon.

I was only defining it within the context of the Chalcedonian debate, but you're right.

Quote
The word "Miaphysite" was taken from St. Cyril's famous phrase "Mia Physis tou Theo Logos Sesarkomene," and thus this has been adopted by our OO fathers along with its theological implications (theosis for one is a strong implication).  This word "Miaphysite" was adopted in answer to the attacks made against the OO as "Monophysites" to highlight the truth behind OO beliefs as well as allude to the common father St. Cyril as the source of OO beliefs.

In modern Greek "mono" has more of an exclusive sense (like "only one"), versus "mia" which is merely a feminine form of "one" (enas, mia, ena).

Is physis thus a feminine word?  Or is ancient Greek usage different from modern Greek in the word "mia"?

I had a Maronite priest explain to me once about how the Maronites and other Syriac Christians were accused of being monothelites. He said they expressed their belief as being "one will doubly." Do OO express this same sort of idea as miaphysites?

In Christ,
Andrew
"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos