Problematic Issues of Christology in Dialogue with Non-Chalcedonian Churches. Notes on the Second Agreed Statement

Abstract

The publication provides a theological analysis of the «Second Agreed Statement of the Mixed Commission on Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches» (Chambesy, 1990). The preamble states the reasons that prompted to revisit this document, after which its analysis begins. Points of the Statement are indicated that are not controversial and can be considered acceptable. The following are the problematic points of the Statement. The groundlessness of the statement in it about the condemnation of the Kryptonestorianism by the Orthodox Church of St. Theodorite of Cyrus. Further, when considering the question of the natures of Christ, the indisputability of a number of the provisions expressed here is recognized, but the intentional silence about the number of the natures of Christ is emphasized. It is pointed out that the fundamental discrepancy in this issue between Orthodox and moderate Monophysites remains unresolved in the Statement due to the lack of necessary clarifications. It is noted that the expression «distinguishing two natures only in speculation» (τῇ θεωρίᾳ μόνῃ), accepted by both sides, does not solve the problem due to the different understanding of this expression by Orthodox and non-Chalcedonian.