Many people hear the words “Eastern Orthodox” and “Oriental Orthodox” and assume one of two things: either they are exactly the same, or they are completely different. Neither answer is careful enough. The truth is more pastoral, more historical, and more serious than that. Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians are not the same communion, but they are very close in faith, worship, and tradition.
This matters for catechumens because Orthodoxy is not only something we study from a distance. It is the life of the Church. We learn the faith by worshiping, praying, fasting, confessing our sins, receiving the sacraments, honoring the saints, and obeying the Church. So when we speak about the Oriental Orthodox Churches, we must speak with care. We should not flatten the differences, but we should also avoid careless labels. We are speaking about ancient Christian Churches with deep roots, real sacraments, historic suffering, and a serious confession of Christ.
Why This Question Matters
For many catechumens, this question comes up in a very practical way. They may meet a Coptic Orthodox Christian, an Ethiopian Orthodox Christian, an Armenian Christian, or someone from the Malankara Orthodox Church of India. They may attend a wedding, a funeral, or a parish event where Oriental Orthodox Christians are present. They may ask, “Are they Orthodox like us?” or “Can they receive Communion here?” or “If we believe so much of the same thing, why are we separated?”
These are good questions. They should not be answered with slogans. The Orthodox Church teaches us to hold truth and love together. Truth without love becomes harsh and proud. Love without truth becomes sentimental and confused. The right Orthodox approach is to tell the truth about the schism, honor the real closeness between the Churches, obey the bishop, and pray for full healing.
The question also matters because it touches the center of the Christian faith: Who is Jesus Christ? The separation between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians is not mainly about ethnic customs, vestments, music, food, or calendar differences. It is rooted in the way the Church spoke about Christ after the Council of Chalcedon in 451. That means this is not a side issue. It touches the mystery of the Incarnation.
Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Are Not the Same Communion
The first thing to say clearly is that Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians are not the same communion. This means they are not fully united at the chalice. Their bishops are not in full sacramental communion with one another in the normal, universal sense. An Eastern Orthodox Christian should not simply go to an Oriental Orthodox parish and receive Communion as though nothing has happened. Likewise, an Oriental Orthodox Christian should not assume he may receive Communion in an Eastern Orthodox parish without speaking to the priest.
Communion is not merely a sign of personal friendship. It is not only a statement that people like each other or agree on many things. Holy Communion is the visible expression of the full unity of the Church in the one faith, one bishop, one altar, and one Eucharistic life. This is why the Church is careful. The chalice is not a private devotional act. It is the sacrament of unity in the Body and Blood of Christ.
At the same time, saying “not the same communion” does not mean “not Christian” or “basically Protestant” or “outside any meaningful relationship to the Church.” Those would be careless ways to speak. The Oriental Orthodox Churches are ancient Christian Churches. They are close to the Eastern Orthodox Church in worship, sacramental life, monastic tradition, and confession of Christ. So the answer begins with a careful balance: not the same communion, but very close.
Who Are the Oriental Orthodox Churches?
The Oriental Orthodox Churches include the Coptic Orthodox Church, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Eritrean Orthodox Church, the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Syriac Orthodox Church, and the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church of India. These Churches are sometimes called “non-Chalcedonian” because they did not receive the Council of Chalcedon in the same way the Eastern Orthodox Church did.
The word “Oriental” here does not mean “Eastern Orthodox from a different part of the world.” It refers to a distinct family of ancient Churches. They have their own histories, liturgical languages, saints, bishops, monastic traditions, and local customs. The Coptic Church is rooted in Egypt and the ancient See of Alexandria. The Armenian Church has its own ancient Christian history and identity. The Syriac Church preserves a deep Semitic Christian tradition. The Ethiopian and Eritrean Churches have preserved Christianity in Africa with great devotion. The Malankara Orthodox Church carries the ancient Christian tradition of India, often connected with the memory of Saint Thomas the Apostle.
These Churches have suffered greatly throughout history. Many of their people have endured persecution, martyrdom, poverty, exile, and political pressure. In many places, Oriental Orthodox Christians have preserved the name of Christ under very difficult circumstances. That should make Eastern Orthodox Christians speak with reverence and humility, not arrogance.
The Oriental Orthodox Are Not Protestants
One common mistake is to treat Oriental Orthodox Christians as if they are simply another group outside Orthodoxy in the same way that modern Protestant groups are outside Orthodoxy. This is not accurate. Protestantism arose in the West in the sixteenth century, long after the ancient Church had already faced the major Christological controversies of the early centuries. The Oriental Orthodox Churches are much older than Protestantism.
They have bishops, priests, deacons, liturgical worship, sacraments, fasting seasons, monastic life, devotion to the saints, veneration of the Virgin Mary, and a deep sense of Holy Tradition. Their worship is not built around private interpretation of Scripture or modern religious individualism. Their Christian life is sacramental, liturgical, and traditional.
This does not erase the schism. It does not mean full communion already exists. But it does mean we should not speak lazily. A catechumen should learn to distinguish between different kinds of separation. The Church’s relationship to Oriental Orthodox Christians is not the same as her relationship to modern Protestant denominations.
The Separation After the Council of Chalcedon
The separation between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians happened after the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Chalcedon was the Fourth Ecumenical Council. Eastern Orthodox Christians receive it as an Ecumenical Council of the Church. The Oriental Orthodox Churches rejected it, especially because of its language about Christ being “in two natures.”
To understand this, we need to remember that the early Church was trying to speak faithfully about the mystery of Christ. The Church had already rejected Arianism, which denied that the Son is truly God. The Church had also rejected Nestorianism, which divided Christ in a way that seemed to speak of two subjects or two sons. The question was how to confess that the one Lord Jesus Christ is both truly divine and truly human.
Chalcedon confessed that Christ is one Person in two natures, divine and human, without confusion, change, division, or separation. This language was meant to protect both truths at once. Christ is truly God. Christ is truly man. His divinity is not swallowed up by His humanity. His humanity is not erased by His divinity. He is one Lord, one Son, one Christ.
The Oriental Orthodox rejected the wording of Chalcedon because they feared it could be understood in a Nestorian way, as though Christ were divided into two persons or two acting subjects. This does not mean they denied that Christ is human. It means they believed the Chalcedonian language was dangerous or misleading. Much of the division involved theology, but also language, empire, politics, mistrust, translation, and fear of heresy.
What Eastern Orthodox Christians Confess About Christ
Eastern Orthodox Christians accept Chalcedon and confess that Jesus Christ is one Person in two natures, fully God and fully man. This does not mean Christ is split into two persons. It does not mean His divinity and humanity are side by side in a mechanical way. It means that the one eternal Son of God truly became man without ceasing to be God.
This confession is at the heart of salvation. If Christ is not truly God, then He cannot save us. If Christ is not truly man, then our humanity is not healed. Saint Gregory the Theologian famously taught, “That which He has not assumed He has not healed.” In other words, if the Son of God did not truly take our human nature, then our human nature is not truly restored. But He did take it. He became what we are, without sin, so that we might be united to Him.
Holy Scripture teaches this clearly. Saint John says, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” in John 1:14. Saint Paul says that in Christ “the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” in Colossians 2:9. The Apostle also teaches that Christ took “the form of a servant” and was “born in the likeness of men” in Philippians 2:7. The one who is eternally God truly entered our human life, our suffering, our death, and our grave in order to raise us up.
This is why the Church guards the language of Chalcedon. Doctrine is not word games. Doctrine protects worship. Doctrine protects prayer. Doctrine protects salvation. When we say Christ is fully God and fully man, we are confessing the One who is born of the Virgin, baptized in the Jordan, crucified under Pontius Pilate, risen from the dead, ascended into heaven, and coming again in glory.
What Oriental Orthodox Christians Were Trying to Protect
Oriental Orthodox Christians rejected Chalcedon’s wording, but they did not reject the divinity or humanity of Christ. This point is very important. Many people wrongly assume that Oriental Orthodox Christians believe Christ is only divine or that His humanity was somehow swallowed up. That is not a fair description of their actual faith.
Oriental Orthodox theology often uses the language of Saint Cyril of Alexandria: “one incarnate nature of God the Word.” Saint Cyril used this language to defend the unity of Christ against Nestorius. He wanted to make clear that the one born of the Virgin Mary is not a separate human person joined to the Word. The child born of Mary is the eternal Son of God in the flesh. The one who suffers is the Lord of glory. The one who dies on the Cross is the same one who is eternally begotten of the Father before all ages.
Oriental Orthodox Christians often feared that saying “in two natures” after the union could divide Christ. Their concern was to protect the unity of the one Lord. They wanted to avoid speaking as though the divine Son and the man Jesus were two separate subjects. In that concern, they were leaning heavily on Saint Cyril.
Eastern Orthodox Christians also honor Saint Cyril. In fact, the Council of Chalcedon itself must be read through Saint Cyril, not against him. Chalcedon was not meant to undo Cyril’s teaching. It was meant to confess the same Christ with careful language that also protects the fullness of His humanity. This is why modern dialogue has shown that the two sides are often closer in faith than the old polemics suggested.
“Fully God, Fully Man” and “Son of God, Son of Mary”
A simple way to explain the difference is this: Eastern Orthodox Christians often say Christ is “fully God and fully man,” while Oriental Orthodox Christians often emphasize that He is “Son of God and Son of Mary.” This is not a perfect explanation of all the theology involved, but it is helpful for catechumens.
When Eastern Orthodox Christians say “fully God and fully man,” we are protecting the completeness of both realities. Christ is not partly divine and partly human. He is not a mixture that creates something neither truly divine nor truly human. He is one Person who possesses the fullness of divinity and the fullness of humanity.
When Oriental Orthodox Christians say “Son of God and Son of Mary,” they are protecting the unity of the one Christ. The one who is born from the Father before all ages is the same one who is born from the Virgin Mary in time. The eternal Son of God is not someone different from the child of Mary. There is one Christ, one Lord, one Son.
Both ways of speaking are trying to guard the same mystery: Christ is truly God, truly man, and one undivided Lord. The theological difference is often smaller than people assume. Still, the historical schism is real. We should not say, “It was all just a misunderstanding, so nothing matters.” But we also should not pretend that the Oriental Orthodox are simply denying basic Christian truth. The matter requires patience, honesty, and theological care.
Why Words Still Matter
Some people may ask, “If both sides are saying almost the same thing, why does any of this matter?” It matters because the words we use about Christ are connected to the way we worship Christ. The Church does not treat doctrine as an optional academic exercise. The way we confess Christ shapes the way we pray, preach, baptize, commune, repent, and die.
The early Church fought so hard over Christological language because salvation was at stake. If Christ is divided, then our salvation is divided. If His humanity is not real, then our humanity is not healed. If His divinity is denied, then He cannot unite us to God. If He is not one Person, then the Gospel itself becomes confused.
So yes, the theological difference may be smaller than many people assume. But that does not mean language does not matter. Orthodox Christians should be charitable, but not careless. We should be hopeful, but not vague. We should be eager for reconciliation, but not at the cost of truth.
The Schism Is Real, Even If the Distance Is Not Absolute
The historical schism between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians is real. It has lasted for many centuries. It affected bishops, parishes, monasteries, families, nations, saints, and the normal sacramental life of the Church. A wound that old cannot be healed by pretending it does not exist.
At the same time, the distance between the two families of Churches is not absolute. Serious theological dialogue has shown that the two sides often intended to confess the same Christ, even when they used different language and accused one another harshly. This is one reason why the pastoral relationship can sometimes be much warmer and closer than people expect.
For a catechumen, this is a good lesson in how the Church thinks. The Church is not driven by internet categories. She does not reduce every question to “same” or “different,” “inside” or “outside,” “valid” or “invalid” in a simplistic way. The Church thinks sacramentally, canonically, pastorally, and historically.
Why Intercommunion Is Not Automatic
Because the two Churches are not fully reunited, intercommunion is not automatic or casual. This means a person should not walk up to the chalice simply because he personally believes the two Churches are close. Holy Communion is never based only on personal opinion. It is received within the order of the Church.
For Eastern Orthodox Christians, receiving Communion presumes full unity in the Orthodox faith, life in the Church, preparation through prayer and fasting, confession, and obedience to the bishop and priest. The chalice is not a private moment separated from the Church’s visible unity. It is the sacrament of that unity.
This is why a priest may ask questions before communing someone he does not know. He is not being rude. He is guarding the chalice and caring for the person. Saint Paul warns in 1 Corinthians 11 about receiving the Body and Blood of the Lord unworthily. The priest has a responsibility to help people approach with fear of God, faith, and love.
The OCA and Pastoral Work Toward Healing
In the Orthodox Church in America, there has been serious work toward healing the schism between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians. This does not mean the OCA has declared full reunion by itself. It does not mean every question is solved. It does mean that the OCA has taken this relationship seriously and has worked pastorally and theologically to address real situations.
In some OCA contexts, Oriental Orthodox Christians may receive Communion in OCA parishes under certain pastoral conditions. This is especially true when there is no adequate Oriental Orthodox priest or parish available. Such situations are not treated as casual intercommunion. They are handled with pastoral economia under the blessing and guidance of the Church.
This is important for catechumens to understand. The Church’s pastoral practice is not always as simple as a chart. There are canons, but there is also economia. There is doctrine, but there is also pastoral care. There is the real wound of schism, but also a real recognition that the Oriental Orthodox are not strangers to the ancient Christian faith.
What Is “Soft Communion”?
Some have described the present relationship in certain pastoral settings as a kind of “soft communion.” This phrase is not meant to say that full formal communion has already been restored. It means there is a real pastoral recognition and closeness between the Churches, even though full canonical reunion has not yet happened.
“Soft communion” should be understood carefully. It is not a free-for-all. It does not mean every Oriental Orthodox Christian may receive in every Eastern Orthodox parish at any time without speaking to the priest. It also does not mean Eastern Orthodox Christians should casually commune in Oriental Orthodox parishes. It means that, in certain circumstances, bishops and priests may apply economia because the relationship is uniquely close.
This kind of pastoral recognition is different from pretending there is no schism. It is also different from treating Oriental Orthodox Christians as complete outsiders. It stands in the middle, acknowledging the wound while also acknowledging the deep shared faith and sacramental seriousness of the Oriental Orthodox Churches.
When No Oriental Orthodox Priest or Parish Is Available
If there is no adequate Oriental Orthodox priest or parish available, an Oriental Orthodox Christian may be allowed to receive Communion in an OCA parish with the blessing of the priest. This is a pastoral matter. It is not something the person decides alone. The priest must know who the person is, what Church they belong to, whether they are in good standing, and what the local bishop’s guidance allows.
This situation can happen in parts of the United States where an Oriental Orthodox Christian may live far from his own parish. A Coptic, Ethiopian, Syriac, Armenian, Eritrean, or Malankara Orthodox Christian may desire to remain close to the sacramental life of the Church, but have no realistic access to his own clergy. In such cases, the Eastern Orthodox priest may be able to offer pastoral care under the Church’s economia.
This does not erase the difference between the Churches. Rather, it shows the Church’s care for souls. The purpose of economia is salvation, not convenience. The Church does not want people cut off from the life of prayer, repentance, and Communion when a serious pastoral path is available.
When an Oriental Orthodox Parish Is Available Locally
If there is an Oriental Orthodox parish available locally, the situation may be handled differently. For example, if there is a Coptic Orthodox Church in the same city, and a Coptic Orthodox Christian wants to become a regular member of an OCA parish, the priest may require formal reception into the Eastern Orthodox Church.
This is not meant to insult the Coptic Church or deny the seriousness of Coptic Christianity. It is a recognition that regular parish membership is not the same as occasional pastoral care. If someone is going to live as a member of an Eastern Orthodox parish, receive confession there, commune there regularly, serve there, raise children there, and be under that priest’s pastoral care, then the relationship needs to be made canonically clear.
There is a difference between receiving a traveler, helping someone without access to clergy, and receiving a person into regular parish life. Catechumens should learn this distinction because it shows how seriously the Orthodox Church takes both pastoral care and canonical order.
Reception by the Reading of the Creed
In some cases, Copts received into the OCA may be received canonically by the reading of the Creed, rather than by baptism or chrismation. This is significant. It shows that the Church is not treating them as though they have no baptism, no sacramental life, or no real Christian confession.
The reading of the Creed is not a minor gesture. It is a confession of the Orthodox faith. The Creed is not simply a paragraph of religious words. It is the Church’s concise confession of the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, the Cross, the Resurrection, the Church, baptism, and the life of the world to come. To read and confess the Creed in this context is to stand before the Church and say, “This is the faith I receive and confess.”
This method of reception also reflects the pastoral closeness between the Churches. The Church receives people in different ways depending on where they are coming from, what they have received, and how the bishop directs the process. Reception by Creed, in such cases, is a careful and canonical way of healing a person’s relationship to the Eastern Orthodox Church without pretending he is coming from a tradition with no connection to ancient Christianity.
Visitors and the Recitation of the Creed
Visitors may also be handled pastorally. In some situations, Oriental Orthodox visitors may be expected to recite the Creed at some point in the Liturgy before receiving Communion. This may be done on an honor system when the priest has given guidance and the person is known to be acting honestly.
This practice reminds us that Communion and confession belong together. To receive the Body and Blood of Christ is not separated from confessing the faith of the Church. The Creed is the shared voice of the Church. It is not merely personal belief. It is the faith into which we are baptized and the faith by which we approach the chalice.
This also teaches catechumens something important: Orthodoxy is not casual. We do not treat the Liturgy as a place where everyone decides for himself what he believes and what he may receive. The priest is responsible for pastoral order, and the faithful are called to honesty and obedience.
Marriage and Pastoral Economia
Marriage situations involving Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians have also been handled with pastoral economia in some jurisdictions. These situations can be complicated because marriage is not only a private relationship between two people. In the Church, marriage is a sacrament and a life of shared faith, worship, repentance, and salvation.
There have been cases where Eastern Orthodox clergy are married to Coptic women, and those women were not always required to be received by chrismation or by the reading of the Creed. These situations are handled by bishops, not by internet debate. They depend on the jurisdiction, the bishop’s guidance, the actual persons involved, and the pastoral circumstances.
This is another reason catechumens should avoid making sweeping claims. One person may hear of one practice in one place and assume it applies everywhere. That is not how the Church works. The bishop has authority to guide the pastoral application of the canons in his diocese. The priest acts under that blessing.
For anyone in an Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox relationship, the practical advice is simple: speak to the priest early. Do not wait until wedding plans are already made. Do not assume everything will be simple, and do not assume everything is impossible. Bring the relationship into the light of the Church and receive guidance.
The Malankara Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox Seminaries
The Malankara Orthodox Church of India has also had a close relationship with Eastern Orthodox seminaries and pastoral practice. In some seminary contexts, Malankara Orthodox Christians have been treated with notable pastoral closeness. This reflects the broader reality that the relationship between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians is not cold or distant.
Many Oriental Orthodox clergy have studied at Saint Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary and Saint Tikhon’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, especially Saint Vladimir’s. This includes clergy who later served in important roles in their own Churches. Such education does not erase the schism, but it does show that there has been serious trust, conversation, and theological exchange.
This matters because it keeps us from imagining the Oriental Orthodox as strangers. Their clergy have often studied the Fathers, liturgy, Scripture, and theology alongside Eastern Orthodox clergy. There has been real friendship, shared learning, and mutual respect. These relationships are part of the groundwork for future healing.
What the Schism Is Not
The schism between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians is not the same as the Protestant Reformation. It is not a disagreement about rejecting bishops, sacraments, icons, monasticism, or Holy Tradition. It is also not the same as the later division between Rome and the Eastern Orthodox Church, though all schisms are wounds in the Body of Christ.
The goal is not to treat Oriental Orthodox Christians as Protestants, Roman Catholics, or outsiders in a simplistic way. Each division has its own history, theology, and pastoral reality. The Church does not need crude categories. She needs truth, patience, and discernment.
It is also not helpful to say, “They are basically the same, so nothing matters.” That may sound loving, but it is not truly Orthodox. Full communion requires full agreement, formal healing, and canonical restoration. We cannot solve a fifteen-hundred-year-old schism by acting as though it has already disappeared.
What the Schism Is
The schism is a real historical and ecclesial wound that came after the Council of Chalcedon. It involves different receptions of an Ecumenical Council, different theological language, centuries of separation, and the absence of full Eucharistic communion. That is serious.
But the schism also exists between Churches that share far more than many people realize. Both confess the Holy Trinity. Both confess the Incarnation. Both worship liturgically. Both honor the Virgin Mary. Both have bishops, priests, and deacons. Both fast. Both venerate saints. Both have monastic life. Both know martyrdom. Both preserve ancient Christian worship.
This is why the wound is so painful. It is not a division between people who have nothing in common. It is a division between ancient Christians who confess the same Lord, often with deeply similar faith, but who remain separated by history, councils, language, and canonical order.
The Proper Orthodox Approach
The proper Orthodox approach is love, humility, obedience to the bishop, and hope for full canonical reunion. Love means we speak respectfully about Oriental Orthodox Christians. Humility means we admit that many of these Christians have preserved the faith with courage and sacrifice. Obedience means we do not make private decisions about Communion or reception. Hope means we pray for the healing of the schism.
This approach protects us from two errors. The first error is harshness. Harshness speaks as though Oriental Orthodox Christians are simply heretics with no real connection to the ancient Church. That is not a careful or pastoral way to speak. The second error is false simplicity. False simplicity says the schism does not matter and everyone should just commune everywhere. That is not Orthodox either.
Truth and love belong together. The Church teaches us to love without confusion and to confess the faith without pride. This is especially important for catechumens, because catechumens are learning not only what Orthodoxy teaches, but how Orthodox Christians think, speak, and live.
What Catechumens Should Do
Catechumens should ask their priest before making assumptions about Communion, reception, marriage, or parish membership. This is not because catechumens are unable to learn history or theology. It is because the Orthodox life is lived in the Church, not alone. The priest is there to guide, correct, encourage, and help the catechumen learn how to obey Christ within the actual life of the parish.
If you are a catechumen and you have Oriental Orthodox family members or friends, speak about them with respect. Do not use your new knowledge of Orthodoxy as a weapon. Do not act as though you now understand everything about ancient Church history after reading a few online articles. Be humble. Learn. Ask. Pray.
If you are Oriental Orthodox and attending an Eastern Orthodox parish, speak with the priest directly. Explain your background, your baptism, your parish history, and your situation. Do not be embarrassed. These are exactly the kinds of questions priests are meant to help with.
If you are Eastern Orthodox and invited to an Oriental Orthodox wedding, funeral, baptism, or liturgy, ask your priest what is appropriate. You may attend with respect. You may pray. But do not receive Communion without guidance. The same principle applies whenever an Orthodox Christian visits a church outside his own communion.
How This Teaches Us to Live Orthodoxy
This topic is not only about history. It teaches us how to live as Orthodox Christians. Orthodoxy is not private opinion. It is not emotional preference. It is not internet research. It is life in the Church.
We learn to live under obedience. We learn to trust the Church more than our own first reaction. We learn that sacraments are not casual. We learn that doctrine matters because Christ matters. We learn that love must be truthful, and truth must be loving.
This also teaches us how to pray. We should pray for the healing of this ancient wound. We should pray for Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox bishops, priests, monks, nuns, theologians, and faithful who are working toward reconciliation. We should pray that reunion happens in truth, not confusion, and in love, not politics.
Most Commonly Asked Questions
Are Oriental Orthodox the same as Eastern Orthodox?
No. Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians are not the same communion. They are very close in faith, worship, and tradition, but the historical schism after the Council of Chalcedon in 451 has not yet been fully healed.
Do Oriental Orthodox Christians believe Christ is fully God and fully man?
Yes. Oriental Orthodox Christians do not deny the divinity or humanity of Christ. They often use the language of Saint Cyril of Alexandria, especially the phrase “one incarnate nature of God the Word,” to protect the unity of Christ.
Why did the Oriental Orthodox reject Chalcedon?
They rejected Chalcedon’s wording because they feared it could divide Christ in a Nestorian way. Eastern Orthodox Christians receive Chalcedon as protecting the truth that Christ is one Person in two natures, fully God and fully man. Much of the later dialogue has shown that both sides were often trying to defend the same mystery from different dangers.
Can Oriental Orthodox Christians receive Communion in an Eastern Orthodox parish?
Sometimes, but not automatically. In the OCA, there are pastoral situations where Oriental Orthodox Christians may receive Communion with the blessing of the priest and bishop, especially when no adequate Oriental Orthodox priest or parish is available. This must be handled by the Church, not by private assumption.
How are Coptic Orthodox Christians received into the OCA?
In some cases, Coptic Orthodox Christians may be received into the OCA by the reading of the Creed rather than by baptism or chrismation. This reflects the Church’s recognition of their ancient Christian faith and sacramental life, while still taking seriously the need for canonical reception into the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Are Oriental Orthodox Christians heretics?
It is better to avoid careless labels. The historical schism is real, and the Eastern Orthodox Church receives Chalcedon as an Ecumenical Council. At the same time, Oriental Orthodox Christians confess Christ as truly God and truly man, and the modern relationship between the Churches is much closer than many people assume.
What should I do next if I am confused about this?
Speak with your priest. Do not try to solve questions about Communion, marriage, reception, or parish membership by searching online or asking many different people until you find the answer you prefer. Bring the question to the Church with humility, and let the priest guide you in obedience to the bishop.
A Pastoral Word
The division between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Christians is an ancient wound in the Body of Christ. We should not exaggerate it, and we should not ignore it. We should speak truthfully, love generously, obey the Church, and pray for the day when this schism is healed fully, canonically, and in the truth of the Orthodox faith.
Until that day, we should treat Oriental Orthodox Christians with respect, not suspicion. We should honor their martyrs, their fasting, their reverence, and their ancient witness to Christ. We should also remain faithful to the Orthodox Church, her councils, her bishops, her sacraments, and her pastoral order.
If you’re working through this and need guidance, reach out to Fr. Stephen at frsteve@savannahorthodox.com AND Anthony at anthony@anthonyally.com. CC us both.
