This post was originally published on this site
The dialogue between the Orthodox (Chalcedonian) and the Oriental Orthodox (non-Chalcedonian) churches began in its official capacity in 1989, and the official Joint Commission has continued to operate since then to address centuries-old divisions. Last November saw a landmark and groundbreaking, albeit unofficial an academic conference organized by the Huffington Ecumenical Institute at Holy Cross School of Theology, seeking to support the two families of churches in their ongoing efforts to affirm and act upon their theological agreements over the last decades.
At Holy Cross School of Theology, prominent hierarchs, scholars, and faithful from the Eastern and Oriental Churches gathered on November 5-6, 2025, for an international conference intended primarily as an opportunity for Eastern Orthodox to discuss response to the official dialogues, reception of our joint statements, and understanding of our historical divisions. But crucially, that reflection was done in the presence and with critical comments by members of the Oriental traditions: Coptic, Armenian, Syrian, Ethiopian, and Indian. Their participation ensured that the conversation was not one-sided, but instead reflected the voices and experiences of both church families.
After the close of this gathering, the following statement was drafted by the conference organizers in order to summarize its findings and propose recommendations to our churches, parishes, and theological schools about ways in which the two families could act upon what they had already agreed to officially in the Chambésy Statement of 1990, but also upon many additional insights that have arisen in the decades since then, especially on the local level, such as the United States.
REPORT AND CONCLUSIONS
From the Conference on Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Relations
“MOVING THE DIALOGUE FORWARD”
Holy Cross School of Theology
November 4–6, 2025
1. From November 4–6, 2025 the Huffington Ecumenical Institute at Holy Cross School of Theology hosted a conference on Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Relations. This meeting gathered leading hierarchs, theologians, and scholars before an in-person and online audience comprising over 150 participants.
2. This conference, the first of its kind in the United States, had significant impact. With no intention of interfering with or bypassing the formal processes of the Joint Commission of the Theological Dialogue between the two church families, it sought rather to be of help in the reception of these official dialogues. More specifically the primary intention was to help Eastern Orthodox coordinate amongst themselves, though in the presence and with the response of Oriental Orthodox participants.
3. To that end, most sessions featured two Eastern Orthodox speakers and an Oriental Orthodox respondent. There was ample conversation after each session, and an entire session was devoted to listening to the voices of younger members of both families, from the Orthodox Christian Fellowship and from students at Holy Cross School of Theology.
4. The clearest message that emerged from this gathering was the participants’ sense of urgency for the dialogue on the one hand to be revived in substance. The Agreed Statements must be advanced to the point that they are received within all the local churches. These statements must either bring us to the point of visible unity and sacramental communion, or the churches must speak authoritatively as to why this could not be possible. Otherwise, our continued division is a repudiation of our own official agreements from more than three decades ago.
5. Those present at this gathering were well aware that a potential restored unity between Eastern and Oriental Christians will require local adjustments and temporary arrangements in order to meet pastoral and liturgical considerations, and transcend psychological barriers built over centuries of separation and isolation. However, theological convergence was agreed more than thirty years ago by our discerning and qualified forebears. We owe it at once to their generation and to the present generation of our faithful to complete and consummate what they started and labored for over many years. A restored unity will be a test of humility as well as charity, but at the same time the proof of respect and honor for their commitment and conviction.
6. With all of our formal and informal dialogues, and on the heels of our own gathering in November 2025, we are also aware of the continued widespread ignorance of one another’s historical development and Christological thought. We further know that there are vocal opponents to our progress towards communion, from Mount Athos and within many sectors of Eastern Europe. In order to remedy persistent misconception and misinformation, and to build on our progress, our conference put forward the following as tangible and accessible recommendations. Some of these are simply more concrete iterations of pastoral recommendations made by the Joint Commission in the early 1990’s, while others are new.
7. That all theological colleges and seminaries provide informed education and course curricula, with inclusion and participation by representatives of one another’s communion, in the hope that this instruction would gradually influence and shape sermons and teaching in our respective parishes and communities.
8. That at the patriarchal and ecclesiastical level, mutual anathemas of saints in our respective communions should be lifted, on the basis of historical and theological findings of the past fifty years. The lifting of anathemas on each other’s saints would not require us to venerate previously anathematized persons as saints. But on the whole, it may be wiser and preferable to condemn theological positions (such as “Eutychianism” and “Nestorianism”), rather than individual names.
9. That on the local parish level, geographical proximity permitting, an exchange of visits on the occasion of one another’s patronal feasts, along with spiritual retreats, study days, and social events might be jointly organized for purposes of acquaintance and familiarity.
10. That on the practical level, the process of reception from one communion to the other should be standardized in the form of a confession of faith. Zealot voices on both sides should be highlighted, addressed, and/or censured in support of the overwhelming majority of faithful who endorse and need such reconciliation. In this regard, over the course of time, formal documents, especially in educational and academic contexts, should strictly avoid the old polemical and false terminology, such as “monophysite” (which refers now only to the heretical position denying Christ’s consubstantiality with us humans, a position held neither in Eastern nor Oriental churches).
11. Finally, on the level of sacramental union, the desired objective should be full communion. If our bilateral relations and agreed statements are considered with integrity and sincerity, we must confess that no other dialogue—whether that with the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion, or the Lutheran Federation—comes anywhere near as close as what has been achieved in recent times between our two family churches, whose separation dates much longer than an East-West or Protestant divide. On the way toward such full communion, it would be beneficial to establish intermediary steps, such as a broader—and more official—acceptance of communion among “inter-Orthodox” couples, as is already the practice in many parts of the world.
For the Conference Organizing Committee: EASTERN ORTHODOX ORIENTAL ORTHODOX Fr. John Chryssavgis, co-chair Archbishop Vicken Aykazian Huffington Ecumenical Institute at HCHC Armenian Apostolic Church Dr. Peter Bouteneff, co-chair World Council of Churches St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary Bishop Kyrillos Archbishop Alexander Golitzin Coptic Orthodox Diocese of Los Angeles Orthodox Church in America St. Athanasius and St. Cyril Theological School Rev. Dr. Nicolas Kazarian Bishop Daniel Findikyan Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America Gevorgyan Theological Seminary Rev. Dr. Philip Halikias St. Nersess Armenian Seminary Holy Cross School of Theology Atsede Elegba Rev. Dr. Gary Alexander Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church Holy Cross School of Theology Dr. George Kiraz Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute Dr. Andrew Youssef Trinity College, Toronto
The post ‘Moving the Dialogue Forward’: Conclusions from the conference on Eastern and Oriental Orthodox relations appeared first on Orthodox Observer.
