If our differences are not dogmatic we can be One Church, if they are, then we must learn to co-exist in love.
Fully agree. A wise statement.
Historically; a politically motivated council of schism; a robbers council, robbing the See of Alexandria of its theological authority.
A statement that is not supported by evidence and again, exposes the lack of understanding of theology.
- The only authority when it comes to theology and christology is that of Christ, and the Apostles who received and delivered the Faith. Theology is not the current best approach. The authority of the Church and each individual is to confirm the faith and protect the faith against any changes, an authority that no other See exercised better than Alexandria. Period. Show us when and where and under which Papacy did Alexandria deviate from the Apostolic Faith or fell short of confirming it. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š
- What is dogmatically wrong with the holy council of Ephesus II, that anathemized Theodret, Ibas and ratified the anathema against Theodore, the Nestorian heretic, 104 years before Constantinople II did the same to CORRECT the exoneration of these heretics by the synod of Chalcedon ?
I hope an EO comes forward with a clear explanation of the contradiction between Chalcedon or Constantinople II, and how a council and its counter-council can be both led by the Holy Spirit and part of the EO heritage?
The holy council of Ephesus II was ratified by the fifth council of the Chalcedonian, for the decisions are one and the same. Chalcedon, that allowed Nestorians back to the church and sanctified their teachings, contradicts both.