In article <May.10.05.08.01.1993.3602@athos.rutgers.edu> db7n+@andrew.cmu.edu (D. Andrew Byler) writes: >Nabil Ayoub writes: > >>As a final note, the Oriental Orthodox and Eastren Orthodox did sign a >>common statement of Christology, in which the heresey of >Monophysitism >>was condemned. So the Coptic Orthodox Church does not believe in >>Monophysitism. > >Sorry! > >What does the Coptic Church believe about the will and energy of Christ? > Were there one or were there two (i.e. Human and Divine) wills and >energies in Him. > >Also, what is the objection ot the Copts with the Pope of Rome (i.e. why >is there a Coptic Catholic Church)?  Do you reject the supreme >jurisdiction of the 263rd sucessor of St. Peter (who blessed St. John >Mark, Bishop of Alexandria was translator for) and his predecessors?  Or >his infallibility?  Or what other things perhaps?  For your first set of questions (regarding the energy and will of Christ) I quote to you the relevant part of the Statement signed by both Eastern (Chalcedonian) and Oriental (non-Chalcedonian) Orthodox scholars a few years ago (Both families = both Orthodox churches) :  1. Both  families  agreed in  condemning  the Eutychian heresy. Both  families confess that the Logos, the Second Person  of the Holy  Trinity, only begotten of the Father before the ages  and consubstantial with  Him, was incarnate and was born from the Virgin Mary Theotokos; fully consubstantial with us, perfect man with soul, body and mind  ($  \nu o  \upsilon \zeta $); He  was crucified, died, was  buried and rose  from the dead on  the third day, ascended   to the Heavenly Father, where He sits on the right hand of the Father as  Lord of all creation. At  Pentecost, by the coming of  the  Holy Spirit He  manifested the Church as His Body. We look forward to His coming again in the fullness of His glory, according to the Scriptures.  2. Both  families condemn the  Nestorian heresy and the crypto-Nestorianism of Theodoret of  Cyrus. They agree that it  is not sufficient merely  to say that Christ is consubstantial both with His Father  and with us, by  nature God and by nature man; it is necessary to affirm also that the Logos, Who is by nature God,  became by  nature   man, by His  incarnation  in the fullness  of  time.  3. Both families agree  that the Hypostasis of the  Logos became  composite by uniting to His divine uncreated nature with its natural will and energy, which He has  in common with  the Father and  the Holy Spirit, created human nature, which He assumed  at the Incarnation  and made  His own, with its natural will and energy.  4. Both families agree  that the natures  with their proper energies and wills    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ are united hypostatically and  naturally   without confusion, without  change, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ without  division and without separation,  and that they are distinguished  in ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ thought alone. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^  5. Both families agree that He who wills and acts is always the one Hypostasis of the Logos Incarnate.  [...]  I guess that adresses your question adequately.  As for your second set of questions, I am afraid they are irrelevant to the discussion (at least from my point of view) of Monophysitism. I do not see how they relate to the topic we are discussing (other than to start an endless Orthodox-RC debate which I do not plan to engage into). As a brief answer to your questions, the position of the Coptic Orthodox Church  regarding the Roman pontiff, his jurisdiction, his infalability, etc. is exactly the same as all the other Orthodox churches.  Peace,  Nabil