Orthodox Christianity, Greek, Russian, Coptic etc.

[Tellyontellyon]

What are the different types of orthodox Christianity, and what are the differences between them?

 

[Lukaris]

There are basically 2 divisions of Orthodoxy stemming from a disagreement during a 5th century church council in the ancient Byzantine city of Chalcedon. My thought process is slowing down and no longer understand what the difference is. Amazingly, both churches seem to have the same basic beliefs. The non Chalcedon churches say the very matter on which they are supposed to be wrong is incorrect.


Information on the Council of Chalcedon from where the differences emerged.

Council of Chalcedon - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Later add on. When I mentioned that both Orthodox theologies are so close is exemplified in an Orthodox seminary about 50 miles from where I live in northeast Pennsylvania in the US. St. Tikhon’s Seminary is Chalcedon Orthodox but a few non Chalcedon Orthodox students attend it.

 

[HTacianas]

What are the different types of orthodox Christianity, and what are the differences between them?

As @Lukaris said above, the two primary differences are the Churches that accept the Council of Chalcedon and those who do not. It is a schism between them having to do with the precise nature of Christ. It's something of a high-level theological definition that an outsider would probably have no interest in. The two Churches either disagree on the nature of Christ or there is a linguistic difficulty in explaining the nature of Christ. Two Churches who differ are the Greek Church and the Coptic Church.

Beyond that, you mention the Russian Church, the Greek Church, etc. They are for the most part the Orthodox Church, however one is the Orthodox Church in Russia while the other is the Orthodox Church in Greece. The Greek and Russian Churches are in schism right now but not for any theological reason. They both hold the same beliefs, their disagreement is who has jurisdiction in Ukraine, to put it in simple terms.

In the United States it gets confusing sometimes primarily because of immigrants. A group of people immigrate here from Greece and the Greek Church sends a priest to establish a Church to tend to them. At the same time, a group of Ukrainians immigrate here and the Ukrainian Church also sends a priest along with them to establish a Church. You then have a Greek Orthodox Church in some location with a Ukrainian Orthodox Church directly across the street. They are both the same Church just from different countries.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I'm not Orthodox, but I'll do my best here. And my Orthodox friends can correct me where I'm wrong.

In Orthodoxy there is a concept known as autocephelousy. Unlike, for example, the Roman Catholic Church where there is an idea of a universal bishop, an earthly head of the whole Church on earth (which Orthodoxy totally rejects as wrong); Orthodoxy instead believes that all bishops are full equals. Certain bishops are afforded certain honors, based on historical respect toward the historic jurisdiction; these include the ancient patriarchates of the Church. In antiquity there were five notable seats which were of high esteem, these were: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. The bishops of these seats were known as patriarchs. This position of honor was not a position of de facto authority, these were positions of honor not authority; however because of that honor the bishops who held these seats were often given deference in some cases. Before the East-West split, for example, the bishop of Rome was highly honored and respected, because historically bishops of Rome were great defenders of Christian orthodoxy against heresy. But, again, it was never a greater position of authority; it was always a position of honor, of respect.

Since bishops are all equal, with no bishop having authority over the whole Church; but each bishop of his diocese and with certain dioceses being historically honored, as Orthodoxy existed in other places--such as spreading among the Slavic peoples for example--new autocephalous (self-ruling) churches were established. This led to, for example, a Patriarch of Moscow. And so there is a Russian Orthodox Church (the Orthodox Church in Russia) and a Greek Orthodox Church (the Orthodox Church in Greece). It is Russian because it is in Russia with a Russian patriarch; or Greek because it is in Greece with a Greek patriarch, etc. Not two different Churches, but one and the same Church in different geographical locations.

Not all Orthodox churches have been in continued communion, this is where the Chalcedon/non-Chalcedon split comes in. The Church in Egypt (the Coptic Orthodox Church) and the Church in Armenia (the Armenian Apostolic Church) are examples of non-Chalcedonian Orthodox Churches; while the Russian and Greek Orthodox are examples of Chalcedonian Orthodox Churches.

That said, in modern times, this old schism between the Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian Orthodox Churches is waning. Lots of dialogue has largely shown that the old schism was never really a theological disagreement, but a difference in semantics. And so the day is probably going to come when communion is restored.

But, in brief, there is only one Orthodox Church; but there are various autocephelous or self-ruling churches which are in communion together as that one Orthodox Church. Because the unity of the Church is in the common Orthodox faith, in the equal brotherhood of her bishops together. There is no "top dog" in the Orthodox Church, because the Church only has one Head, and that's Jesus Himself. Every bishop, and thus every parish, every diocese, every patriarchate is a temporal jurisdiction of Christ's one and only Church throughout the whole world.

-CryptoLutheran