Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu soc.religion.christian:21634
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!psuvax1!rutgers!igor.rutgers.edu!geneva.rutgers.edu!christian
From: kolassa@genesee.bst.rochester.edu (John Kolassa)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Definition of Christianity?
Message-ID: <May.16.01.57.06.1993.6710@geneva.rutgers.edu>
Date: 16 May 93 05:57:07 GMT
Sender: hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu
Organization: University of Rochester Biostatistics.
Lines: 29
Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu

In article <May.12.04.28.31.1993.9972@athos.rutgers.edu> clh writes:
>
>[Often we get into discussions about who is Christian.  Unfortunately
>there are a number of possible definitions.  Starting from the 
>broadest, commonly used definitions are:

>3) The next level is an attempt to give a broad doctrinal definition,
>which includes all of the major strands of Christianity, but excludes
>groups that are felt to be outside "historic Christianity."  This is
>of course a slippery enterprise, since Catholics could argue that
>Protestants are outside historic Christianity, etc.  But I think the
>most commonly accepted definition would be based on something like the
>Nicene Creed and the Formula of Chalcedon.

Are you sure you want to include Chalcedon here?  I presume that you 
mean the description of Jesus as fully human and fully devine.  Almost 
everyone would consider the majority of Copts and Armenians, and the 
Jacobites, as Christians, yet for 15 centuries it has been maintained 
that they disagree with the Formula of Chalcedon.  Those that wouldn't 
consider them Christians are most likely to object that these communities 
don't require a personal commitment to Jesus, which is only tangentially 
related to the Formula of Chalcedon.  
-- 
Thanks, John Kolassa, kolassa@bio1.bst.rochester.edu

[As I understand the recent discussion here, the Copts for all
practical purposes accept Chalcedon.  They talk about one nature
rather than two, but the issue seems to be one of terminology rather
than substance.  --clh]
