This is the name given to the local Churches that contested the dogmatic formulas of the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon.
Theological and linguistic differences led the Nestorians to reject the truths defined at the Council of Ephesus. In effect, they upheld the thesis of a double person, human and divine, in Christ, united by a moral bond. For the same reason, they rejected the title “Mother of God” given to the Virgin. Both doctrines were condemned at the Council of Ephesus. The churches that rejected this council are the so-called Assyrian Churches.
For its part, as an anti-Nestorian doctrine, the Monophysite thesis arose, rejecting the twofold nature of Christ, divine and human, in his one Person. Since this truth was defined at the Council of Chalcedon, the Monophysites rejected it. This group includes the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Coptic Church of Egypt, the Ethiopian Church, and the Syrian Jacobite Church.
Since, at different moments, faithful of these churches remained faithful to Rome or later returned to union with it, each of them has its Catholic counterpart. Thus there are Assyrian Catholics (Chaldeans), Armenian Catholics, Copts, Ethiopians, and Syrians (so called not merely because of their belonging to those places, but also because they preserved their own rite).
With all these separated churches, the Catholic Church has resumed fraternal relations, although in different ways. All these churches sent delegated observers to the Second Vatican Council, their patriarchs exchanged visits with the Pope, and — in the words of John Paul II — “with them the Bishop of Rome was able to speak as with brothers who, after a long time, joyfully meet again”.
The Pope says in the Encyclical Ut Unum Sint:
“The return of fraternal relations with the Ancient Churches of the East witnesses to the Christian faith in situations which are often hostile and tragic. This is a concrete sign of how we are united in Christ in spite of historical, political, social and cultural barriers. And precisely in relation to Christology, we have been able to join the Patriarchs of some of these Churches in declaring our common faith in Jesus Christ, true God and true man”.
And he notes:
1- The declaration signed by Paul VI with Shenouda III, Pope of Alexandria and Coptic Orthodox Patriarch, in 1973.
2- The common declaration signed by Paul VI with the Syrian Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, His Holiness Jacoub III, in 1971.
3- The ratification of these agreements, with consequences for the development of dialogue with Pope Shenouda and for pastoral cooperation with the Syrian Patriarch of Antioch, Mar Ignatius Zakka I Iwas, in 1979 and 1984 respectively.
4- The visit of the Patriarch of the Ethiopian Church, Abuna Paulos, to Rome on June 11, 1993: “we share the faith handed down from the Apostles, as also the same sacraments and the same ministry, rooted in the apostolic succession […]. Today, moreover, we can affirm that we have the one faith in Christ, even though for a long time this was a cause of division between us”.
5- The Christological Declaration with the Assyrian Patriarch of the East, His Holiness Mar Dinkha IV, in November 1994.
More recently, the Common Declaration of His Holiness John Paul II and His Holiness Karekin II, Catholicos of All Armenians, on September 27, 2001, deserves mention. So too does the decision to allow, in certain cases, the mutual reception of the sacraments between the faithful of the Assyrian Church and the Catholic Church.
The theological differences that produced the schism were Christological differences and, as can be seen, some of them have disappeared entirely, since they were differences of expression rather than of concept. This encourages us to think that the full union of these churches with Rome is not in the very distant future.
Source: El Teólogo responde
