Your Cart

Your cart is empty.

Oriental Orthodoxy and Chalcedon: The Churches That Never Agreed

Rev. C•D•F• Warrington, M.Div.
By Rev. C•D•F• Warrington, M.Div.

Ordained Minister, M.Div.

July 6, 2026

2 min read

chalcedonian creed
Ancient Eastern church interior with Oriental Orthodox golden icons and candles

When the Council of Chalcedon defined Christ as one person in two natures in 451, it resolved the great christological controversies of the fifth century — at least for most of the church. But a significant portion of Eastern Christianity refused to accept the definition, believing it had swung too far toward Nestorianism. These churches — known today as Oriental Orthodox — broke communion with the rest of Christendom and have remained separate for over fifteen centuries.

Who Are the Oriental Orthodox?

The Oriental Orthodox churches include the Coptic Orthodox Church of Egypt, the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Churches, the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Syriac Orthodox Church, and the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church of India. Together they represent tens of millions of Christians, many belonging to the oldest continuous Christian communities in the world. Egypt was Christian centuries before Europe; Ethiopia's church claims continuity from the Ethiopian eunuch's encounter with Philip in Acts 8.

Miaphysitism vs. Dyophysitism

Oriental Orthodox are miaphysites, not monophysites — a distinction they regard as crucial. Classical Monophysitism (Eutyches) held that Christ's humanity was absorbed into his divinity. Oriental Orthodox reject this. They follow Cyril of Alexandria's formula: Christ has one united nature (mia physis) that is both divine and human without mixture or confusion. Chalcedonian Christians speak of two natures in one person. Oriental Orthodox believe this language implies a Nestorian division between Christ's divine and human aspects.

A Schism of Misunderstanding?

Modern ecumenical dialogue has produced a remarkable conclusion: Oriental Orthodox and Chalcedonian churches may have been saying the same thing in different words. The 1989 Common Declaration affirmed that both traditions confess the full humanity and full divinity of Christ, reject both Eutychian monophysitism and Nestorian separation, and worship the same Lord. The schism of 451 may have been largely a tragic failure of translation and politics rather than genuine theological disagreement.

Full Reconciliation and Its Obstacles

Despite theological convergence documented in ecumenical dialogues, full communion between Oriental Orthodox and Chalcedonian churches has not been achieved. Practical and jurisdictional questions remain, and some Orthodox theologians insist the Chalcedonian formula cannot be negotiated away. The Chalcedonian definition, rather than ending christological controversy, created fractures that fifteen centuries have not fully healed — but modern dialogue offers genuine hope of eventual reconciliation.

Tags:chalcedonian creedchristologychurch history

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did Oriental Orthodox churches reject the Council of Chalcedon in 451?

The Oriental Orthodox churches—including the Coptic, Ethiopian, Armenian, Syriac, and Malankara churches—rejected the Council of Chalcedon primarily because they believed its formula of 'two natures' in Christ implied a Nestorian division of His person. These churches held to miaphysitism, teaching that Christ's divine and human natures were united in one nature after the Incarnation, without separation or confusion. Political and theological disputes intertwined, as Chalcedon's definition was perceived as an imposition by Constantinople on older eastern churches.

What is the difference between Chalcedonian and Oriental Orthodox Christology?

Chalcedonian Christianity teaches that Christ has two natures—fully divine and fully human—that coexist in one person without confusion, change, division, or separation, a definition from the 451 Council. Oriental Orthodoxy, by contrast, professes miaphysitism: that Christ's humanity and divinity were united into one nature in the Incarnation, insisting this is not the heresy of Eutyches (who taught confusion of natures). Modern ecumenical dialogue, particularly the 1990 and 1994 agreed statements, has suggested the difference may be more terminological than substantive.

Which churches are considered Oriental Orthodox?

The Oriental Orthodox communion comprises six main church families: the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, the Syriac Orthodox Church of Antioch, the Armenian Apostolic Church, and the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church of India. Together they represent approximately 60 million Christians worldwide. All rejected the Council of Chalcedon in 451 and have been in communion with each other for centuries.

Have Oriental Orthodox and Chalcedonian churches ever reached agreement on Christology?

Significant ecumenical progress occurred in the late twentieth century when Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox theologians issued agreed Christological statements in 1989 and 1990, acknowledging that both traditions confess the same faith in the one Lord Jesus Christ, though in different terminology. Similar dialogues between Oriental Orthodoxy and the Roman Catholic Church have also produced positive statements. However, full communion has not been established, and formal reunion awaits further theological and ecclesial resolution.

What does the Chalcedonian Definition actually say about Christ's nature?

The Chalcedonian Definition, issued at the Fourth Ecumenical Council in 451 AD, declares that Jesus Christ is 'perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man,' consisting of two natures 'without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.' These four negative adverbs (Greek: asynchytos, atreptos, adiairetos, achoristos) guard against both Nestorianism and Eutychianism. The definition became the standard Christological formula for Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and most Protestant churches.

← Back to all articles