St. George Enjoyer ✝️

Note: Fr Anthony Reuber is an Eastern Orthodox priest, forgot to clarify

Th 2000/2001 pastoral agreement begins by citing the 1989/1990 Joint Agreed Statements: “we have now clearly understood that both families have always loyally maintained the same authentic Orthodox Christological faith, and the unbroken continuity of the apostolic tradition”

HG Bishop Kyrillos of the Coptic Orthodox Church (in a 2025 conference) states the agreement between the Coptic Orthodox Church and the Greek Patriarchate of Alexandria in 2000/2001 (attached below) has recently been tried to be implemented outside Egypt where the bishops agree.

@JibrailGaboro @Snaelincognito @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Yes I’ll take it back, it was an EO bishop who said that not OO, my apologies

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @Snaelincognito @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Interesting, I'd like to see where it's mentioned that there is theologically 100% agreement on all those said topics above that do not complicate any unity.

Orientalist modernists constantly try to blur the lines and confuse Catholics by reducing serious theological divisions to mere “shared liturgy” or ethnicity. Gullible Catholics fall for such post-conciliar notions without knowing the history of this Church that carries a history of instability and switching sides as per convenience. Let alone the absurd claim peddled online by some Modern-ist Catholic influencers, that Nestorius wasn’t a Nestorian. So let the Old Church of the East itself answer. In an official 1961 introduction to its own Breviary, the Patriarch of the undivided Nestorian Church of the East, Mar Eshai Shimun from California (who was later assassinated by a fanatic Nestorian) wrote: “The Chaldeans added and planted in it the cursed customs and thoughts of the Romans, namely ‘God was born of Mary, and suffered, and died.’ Indeed, they confess that he was immortal from the beginning but became mortal in the latter times.” He continues: the Chaldeans “confess in the transubstantiation of bread and wine… to the flesh and blood of God the Word. Indeed, they confess that the Nature of God the Word became flesh to a man hypostatically/substantially.” Instead, Mar Eshai insisted: “God the Word took for himself a perfect man from the Virgin Mary, and made him his Temple, and dwelt in him." That is not “independent sophisticated Christology” as Aramaic Wire and his likes wants you to think. That is textbook Nestorianism!

@JibrailGaboro @Snaelincognito @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Because the statements dealt primarily with theology, so yes

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @Snaelincognito @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed You admitted there are "ecclesial issues" still yet to be "solved" yet it's incompetence that other theological topics (which converge with Christology) were not?

@miaphysite3 @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed I’m aware………………..

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed The incompetent here is only you, tbh. These statements were drafted on the basis of the papers submitted by the representatives such as HE Anba Bishoy.

@JibrailGaboro @Snaelincognito @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Guess they didn’t do their due diligence, very very incompetent!

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @Snaelincognito @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Just ignoring Palamism (which Anba Bishoy specifically cited as an obstacle), original sin, atonement, and many, many other issues that weren't addressed. We are further away from unity than at any other point in history.

@miaphysite3 @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Maybe they should’ve checked these conditions before claiming they’ve had the same Christological faith for 1500 years, very incompetent….

It is put in many papers, lol. But your point is one of the criticisms I have of the statements. They are far from sufficient. But one such condition is the condemnation of Theodoret (whom they called blessed at N.2) and Anba Bishoy talks about this. Another condition was that the union is *at the level of nature* and not just person (Fr. Shenouda Ishaq in his book, commissioned by HH Pope Shenouda, talks about the EOs' reluctance on this point and says it is one of the issues stopping the agreements from going forward). So, yes, there are conditions and the reluctance to adhere to them is among the problems stopping the statements' progress.

@Snaelincognito @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Well there was effect actually, even if it was small Regardless the Christological issue was already agreed upon, now it’s mostly ecclesial issues Ah yes, another condition that wasn’t in the statements

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed There was no effect. It was an attempt at moving towards eventual possible unification. The intercommunion in the middle East is conditional because that is the reality of Christians over there. Scattered minorities who have to attend the churches of each other

@miaphysite3 @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Oh yes I love this argument. It's the argument where these bishops actually put a precondition in their minds, but didn't bother putting it in any of the statements? I wonder if that would hold up in the court of law?

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed That isn't what the representatives such as HE Anba Bishoy say. So, you can have that in your Lala land, ig.

@miaphysite3 @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed There is no condition, we agreed that that’s how they’ve interpreted it for 1500 years in the statements

Because it is a conditional agreement on the basis that they have to adhere to the agreed-upon statements for the interpretation of their history/councils. HH himself criticises their Christology in his works. So, he was well aware of it. The issue here is that you are not being able to distinguish between charity and incompetence. Having a dialogue and granting them not to be embarrassed (out of charity and condescension) is not saying their actual history has always been this. Obviously, no group is going to come to the table if you can't condescend to them in charity. I am sure you can benefit a lot from St. Severus’s treatment of charity and condescension on this exact topic in relation to the 433 reunion where St. Cyril, in charity, accepted the Antiochenes upon conditionals even though they were Nestorians prior to the agreement and returned to their vomit after St. Cyril. Many such cases have happened in history.

@Snaelincognito @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Not mad at all actually, the conversation is simply about whether they are still in effect

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @miaphysite3 @10Kidus @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Ok this convo has carried on long enough. The reality of the matter is we are not in communion. The Synod achieved little if anything. You seem to be mad about that, but why beat a dead horse? If the Henotikon failed, little can succeed

@miaphysite3 @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Explain how it doesn’t follow and then we’ll get into the the Fathers of our Church

I know, and I am saying, granting that (even though it doesn't follow) your position basically entails your entire theologians from Severus, Theodosius, Bar Salibi, John of Tella, Philoxenus, Peter of Callinicus, John of Dara, Cyriacus, etc, basically all theologians after Chalcedon, are incompetent who couldn't comprehend what they were rejecting even when the Chalcedonians explained it to them, even when they read the Chalcedonian treatises with Chalcedonian definitions and stuff. Basically, yours entails that your entire history is that of incompetence and falsity.

@miaphysite3 @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Just so you know, my position isn’t that HH Pope Shenouda is incompetent, but that’s what’s entailed in your position 🤷‍♂️

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Even if that was to be the case (it isn't), it is much better than yours (1500 years of consensus to the bin and incompetent fathers/theologians all the way throughout history until the 1960s where you get your “competent” “top” theologians to say it is semantics).

@miaphysite3 @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed The logical end of your reasoning is saying that HH Pope Shenouda was theologically incompetent for more than a decade

@10Kidus @StGeorgeEnjoyer @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed It is the logical end of his reasoning.

@Garimian @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed So why can your side rebuke clergy who support my position, but I can’t spell out the logical end of your position? Stop with the double standard

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed Hey bro. Stop it, this is too much. You can have your own sympathetic side and you are in no position to rebuke bishop on their statement toward non-Orthodox churches. They are on that position with responsibilty of protecting their flocks from heresy.

@10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed I do appreciate that brother, if we can dm that would be better

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed I don’t want you to just concede for the sake of it. I want you to understand because I care. So again let’s go through it together. Why do you believe the EOs have the same Christology as us? Tell me how their Christology is compatible with ours.

@10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed x.com/stgeorgeenjoye…

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed That’s contingent on the all that i already mentioned. They used their lack of depth as a pretext to make that statement as a pretense.

@10Kidus @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed So they refused to get into the details, and we still signed and our synods approved? Once again very incompetent brother. And I mean this respectfully, I don’t like saying we are incompetent, but this is what this position entails

@StGeorgeEnjoyer @Snaelincognito @JibrailGaboro @DavidtheSyriac @zayyatheblessed The reason the agreements were signed was precisely because the EOs refused to actually go into the details of how they interpret miaphysis. Can you tell me how you think their Christology works? Let’s play the roles of the EO and OO sides so you understand the disconnect better.