Talk:Coptic Christianity - Definition and Overview

Put your text for the new page here. How do you differ from the Roman Catholic Church? The Greek Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholics both believe of the dual nature of Jesus the man. Is there any way that we, as Roman Catholics, can reconcile our differences too? In the present state of affairs (an impending war with Iraq, the "war on terrorism" and the persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt), it seems that we all, especially you, founded by Saint Mark, should join together in dialogue. We, as Christians, all acknowledge Saint Mark as the first Gospel writer and the closest person to have a connection with Jesus other than Saint Peter (or should I say through Saint Peter). I admire your strength of faith and your perserverence in the face of adversity because of the overwhelming majority of Muslim population of Egypt.

I think of us all...Roman Catholics, Coptic Christians, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Armenian Orthodox, etc. as followers of Christ(one family). In the face of adversity, we must stand as one, serve The Lord and STOP ARGUING AMONG OURSELVES.

American foreign aid goes all over the world, even though we have hungry people here. Christian mission aid goes all over the globe, even though we have Christians in need all over the globe, most of that goes to non-Christians.

We may have our theological differences, but we all believe that Jesus is the Son of God the Father, in one substance with Him and the Holy Spirirt. That He became man to suffer and die to redeem us from our sin. So what's the big deal? Let's join together, praise the Lord and put our differences behind us!

Not sure, but I think that Pope John Paul II has made some visits to the Coptic Orthodox Church; for all we know there could be ongoing dialogue there as well. I agree with the spirit of your sentiments; in the litany of the Orthodox Church in America at least, and probably others as well, we regularly pray for "healing of the schisms". It helps to remember that none of these schisms happened over night, but developed over a period of time. It will take time to heal them too; meanwhile we need to be patient while we pray.

That said, Wikipedia discussion pages should really be used to discuss ways the article could be improved. For instance, any information on the relationship between Roman Catholicism and Coptic Orthodoxy would be very appropriate to add here, including any papal visits, ongoing dialogues, etc. Let's try to focus on that sort of thing here. :-) Wesley 17:42 Dec 18, 2002 (UTC)

I have added the term "miaphysite", which has been used by Copts in correspondance with me. "Mia-" means "joined" and refers to the Oriental Orthodox doctrine regarding the Incarnation. They adhere to the formulation of St. Cyril rather strongly and recoil in horror at some Latin and Greek traditional formulations (Protestants belonging to the Latin tradition), considering them to be virtually Nestorian. The core was that the Oriental Orthodox use "nature" or "essence" to mean two things. Chalcedonians separate "ousia" (essences/natures) and "hypostases" (persons). Thus, we say that the Divine and human ousia are inextricably joined in the hypostasis of the Son, the Incarnate Logos. The Oriental Orthodox, on the other hand, use "ousia" to mean both "essences" and "person".

This is so written from a Coptic POV that the average English-speaking reader can barely decipher it. We get the point that just about everybody mentioned is a Saint. Normal usage is to "Athanasius" not always to "Saint Athanasius." "Pope" in English means the bishop of Rome. What is the Coptic word for "pope" as used here? When you mention "the Pope" and then "St. Cyril" few realize that it's the same person. Wetman 21:07, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)~

I agree that the article is in need of a rigorous editing, but your comments there about the pope(s) are more than likely to antagonize any Coptic editors watching this article. "Coptic Orthodox Patriarch" might be an alternative, but I don't think it's helpful to dogmatically state that the gentleman in Alexandria is not a pope. –Hajor 21:37, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Coptic Pope

The Coptic term for Pope is "papa"...it's actually a Greek word. It is a term of endearment for the Patriarch of Alexandria, not a title that confers any power above and beyond that of a normal bishop. The term was first used to address the Patriarchs of Alexandria, and was later "appropriated" by the Bishops of Rome. So calling the Patriarch of Alexandria "Pope" is correct.

Even if that is true (and I think it needs to be researched), the above prefatory statement needs to be included in the text, not all of us are as well-versed in the obscure historical origin of christian titles.

One the section on the Arab Invasion

The title

The term used in historical references is "The Arab invasion", adding the phrase of "..and occupation" is an over sentimental view which no longer stands, and should not be part of an article in an encyclopaedia.

Destruction of the Library

It is uncertain whether the burning of the library of Alexandria was due to riots that took place in the capital during or before the Arab invasion, or due to intentional acts. Even in the case of intentional acts, it is probable that early Christians who perceived the library as promoting pagan teachings, destroyed it among other pre-Christian sites. See Library_of_Alexandria#Destruction_of_the_Great_Library>

In all cases, this is not right article to relay the story of the library, and references to it should be removed.

On the origin of 'Copt'

The paragraph on the origin of the word 'Copt' is copied from the article having the same title. If needed, a simple sentence referring the reader to the aforementioned article should be placed, preferably, at the top of the article, as to indicate the explanation of the word in the title.

--Alif 17:17, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

From a careful reading of this article, I'd say that more than just this one section should be marked with {{controversial}}. -- llywrch 17:36, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Removed text

There is even evidence that third and fourth century Copts had missionaries to Northern Europe. One example is Saint Maurice of the Theban Legion who was drafted from Egypt to serve under the Roman flag and ended up teaching Christianity to inhabitants of the Swiss Alps, where a small town and a Monastery that contains his relics as well as some of his books and belongings are named after him. Two other saints from the Theban Legion are Saint Verena and Saint Victor. Coptic missionaries have been as far as Ireland where, long before Saint Patrick, seven Coptic monks evangelized and spread Christianity. Striking similarities are still observed between Coptic and Celtic cultures, especially in music and language.

There are a number of factual errors & unjustified assertions in the above passage: the Theban Legion is a religious legend & never existed; even if it had, their sole alleged act was to die en mass as martyrs; there is no evidence for direct cultural contact between Egypt & Ireland in this period, let alone that missionaries from Egypt ever visited Ireland. The effect of these claims is to erode the credibility of an important & undeniable fact: that Christian monasticism did originate in Egypt, which was one of several important contributions Egypt made to modern Christianity.

Just another example of what needs to be fixed in this article. Too much space is filled with fantastic & untrue claims that in the end only embarass, when there are numerous verifiable events & acts that would bring credit upon this religion -- & are passed over without even a word. -- llywrch 20:43, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)