Author Topic: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine  (Read 3654 times)

Offline DominusTecum

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 192 times
Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« on: January 27, 2017, 03:22:51 AM »
While widely held in high esteem by the Orthodox Churches in earlier times, since the absolute ascendance of Palamism Augustine's writings have increasingly become the object of a sustained assault which accuses him of mutilating the Church and the teachings of Christ. It is now frequently held that he is the source of all western "errors" concerning the filioque, original sin, purgatory and more, and ultimately the cause of the apostasy in the Church.

https://orthodoxwiki.org/Augustine_of_Hippo#Reception_of_Augustine_in_the_Orthodox_Church

Quote
Despite these acclamations, most of his works were not translated into Greek until circa 1360 by Demetrios Cydones and some Orthodox Christians identify errors in his theology—especially those in his Triadology which gave rise to the Filioque addition to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed—and regard him as being one of the major factors in the Great Schism between the Church in the East and in the West. Thus, there are those among the Orthodox who regard Augustine as a heretic, although there has never been any conciliar condemnation of either him or his writings.

More moderate views regard Augustine as (1) a theological writer who made too many mistakes to be included among the Church Fathers but still a saint, (2) a theological writer among many in the early Church (but not a saint), and (3) a theological writer with, perhaps, the title "Blessed" before his name. It should be noted, however, that the Orthodox Church has not traditionally ranked saints in terms of "blessed" or "saint" (i.e., suggesting that the latter has a greater degree of holiness than the former). Saint "rankings" are usually only differences in kind (e.g., monastics, married, bishops, martyrs, etc.), not in degree.

There are at least two books explicitly dealing with the issue of Augustine's place in Orthodoxy: The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church by Fr. Seraphim Rose (ISBN 0938635123), which is generally favorable toward Augustine, citing his importance as a saint in terms of his confessional and devotional writings rather than in his theology, and The Influence of Augustine of Hippo on the Orthodox Church by Dr. Fr. Michael Azkoul (ISBN 0889467331), which tends to see Augustine as the root of all Western Christendom's errors. (There is also a condensation of this book into a booklet titled Augustine of Hippo: An Orthodox Christian Perspective.) The former's cover (shown on right) includes a traditional Greek icon of Augustine, where he is labelled as "Ό Αγίος Αυγουστίνος"—"Saint Augustine."

Another view is expressed by Christos Yannaras, who descibed Augustine as "the fount of every distortion and alteration in the Church's truth in the West" (The Freedom of Morality, p. 151n.).

http://orthodoxcanada.org/Augustine%20%20an%20exploration.html

Quote
Augustine's heresies have been the source for the inauguration and consolidation of the separation of the heterodox from Orthodoxy. We have already shown how his Filioque heresy initiated the fall of the Western Church. The two other heresies which energized the momentum behind the West's migration from salvation as revealed by the Orthodox Church was their adoption of Augustine's doctrine of "Original Sin" and theory of "irresistible grace.

http://www.thyateira.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=594&Itemid=167

Quote
...the Augustinian doctrine of Original Sin is wholly un-Orthodox, and it led, I believe, to a whole series of heresies in the Latin Church, such as Predestination, Purgatory, Limbo and the Immaculate Conception.

http://www.voskrese.info/spl/Xaustin-hip.html

Quote
From the Orthodox point of view, St. Augustine's legacy is controversial. In the West, it would be impossible to overestimate the impact of his writings, starting in his own lifetime, and by the VI Century he was regarded as one of the greatest Latin Fathers, revered by Western saints whose Orthodoxy has never been questioned in the East. On the other hand, nearly all of those ideas which are most distinctively Augustinian -- in particular his views on the Trinity, on original sin, and on predestination -- have subsequently been rejected by the Orthodox Church, and are among the distinguishing points between Eastern and Western Christianity. Thus some Orthodox consider him not a saint, but an heresiarch.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2017, 03:37:33 AM by DominusTecum »
 
The following users thanked this post: Boccaccio

Offline John Lamb

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1902
  • Thanked: 2232 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #1 on: January 27, 2017, 04:59:56 AM »
I've come across this as well.

I don't think it's that surprising. St. Augustine was anti-Pelagian in his writing, and if I'm not mistaken the East never went up against Pelagianism, and their theology often has a semi-Pelagian tint to it.

Quote from: Fr. Adrian Fortescue
The question of Grace and Predestination is interesting as showing the different attitude of mind in the two Churches. Although Pelagius was condemned at Ephesus side by side with Nestorius, this question never took hold of Eastern minds as it did those of the Latins. Their theological discussions were  all Christological, ours Soteriological. St. Augustine, whose influence in the West has always been so great, remained almost unknown in the East, and their schools never produced any one like St. Augustine. [...] We may, perhaps, say that the Greek philosophical mind found the questions of Christology — of nature and person, unity and distinction — congenial, while the Latin mind, that had built up the legal system of the Empire, was naturally attracted to legal questions, such as those of predestination. In any case, the subtle system explained by St. Augustine in his de Bono perseverantiæ and de Prædestinatione sanctorum, the great field of discussion that he left to his Church, the endless controversy that has gone on amongst us ever since about the fine line between antecedent reprobation on the one hand and semi-Pelagianism on the other — all these things have never troubled Easterns at all. As always happens to people who have not gone far into the matter, they rather inclined to the opposite of St. Augustine's system, to loose and kindly principles which, if driven out of their vagueness, would become semi-Pelagian. St. John Chrysostom is an example of this. He did not intend to formally discuss the matter, he had never heard of Pelagianism, and was concerned to defend free will against Manichaeism. He does in many places maintain the need of grace for every good deed, but he also, inconsistently, in other places uses such expressions as " We must first choose what is right, and then God will do his part," expressions that would be inconceivable in Augustine. This want of definiteness about Grace and Predestination has always been a note of the Eastern Church. Long after the schism, in 1575, when the Tübingen Protestants sent an exposition of their belief to Jeremias II of Constantinople (1572-1579), the Patriarch in his answer to their Calvinism teaches pure semi-Pelagianism.

https://archive.org/stream/orthodoxeasternc00fortuoft#page/108/mode/2up/search/pelagian

They also seem to think that Adam's sin is not the cause of any guilt in us, but only of punishment. I had a discussion about this with Quare on this forum, because I think, with St. Augustine, that original sin involves a shared or corporate guilt on the part of all humanity, whereas he seemed to deny it. It's difficult to see what purification of soul, or washing away of sin, is taking place in infant baptism, if there is no stain of guilt contracted by original sin. I also agree with St. Augustine's idea of the mass damnata, that due to original sin mankind is a damned and damnable mass, unless God were to gratuitously bestow mercy.

I need to do a lot more reading, but I personally favour St. Augustine from what I've read. I think you have to be careful not to take a few of his statements out of context though, because it would be easy to fall into a Calvinist / Jansenist darkness & scrupulosity where you only think of the vileness of sin and God's righteous anger. I think St. Augustine's essential insight is the gratuitousness of grace, which when rightly understood, leads to a greater hope & love of God, not despair & excessive fear.

I don't know if I can take the Orthodox's objections all that seriously, which so often seem to be driven by polemical spite. Once you've decided to hate someone, you have to find justification for your hatred.

I don't necessarily find the Orthodox more impressive than say, the Evangelical Protestants, because they keep ancient things like Byzantine icons & Byzantine chant; what the Evangelicals keep is even more ancient and traditional than the Byzantine empire: the desire to spread the gospel. In fact, I could almost imagine myself having more respect for someone abandoning the Church for Evangelicalism rather than for Orthodoxy, for that reason; although leaving the Church is a tragedy either way.

Schism is an abominable crime and, let's not have any illusions, the Orthodox will be just as difficult to convert as the Protestants. And Traditionalists should avoid being seduced by the Orthodox merely because they have a lot of old stuff in their churches.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2017, 05:03:51 AM by John Lamb »
Dearly beloved, let us love one another: for charity is of God. And every one that loveth is born of God and knoweth God. (1 John 4:7)
 
The following users thanked this post: PerEvangelicaDicta

Offline aquinas138

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 985
  • Thanked: 933 times
  • Māran etraḥam 'lay!
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #2 on: January 27, 2017, 09:23:06 AM »
Despite the polemics, the service for St. Augustine of Hippo is still in the Menaion, at least among the Slavs, on July 15:

"O holy hierarch, father Augustine, even though the land of Hippo hath fallen silent, yet do we glorify thee as the uprooter of heresies, the confirmation of the Orthodox Faith, the great boast of monastics, the adornment of hierarchs, the lover of poverty, the elucidator of the Scriptures, and as our fervent intercessor. Pray thou that we be granted great mercy." (2nd Sticheron of Vespers)

As far as the lack of missionary impulse, that is somewhat overblown. Just because we don't know about Orthodox missions doesn't mean they don't exist. The Russian Orthodox had missionaries in Alaska, Western Canada, and the Pacific Northwest into the 20th century; they became cut off from the mainland Russian church during Communism, which is part of the origin of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. There are Orthodox missionaries in Africa and South America, both of which are meeting with some success. It should be remembered that since before the discovery of the New World until just a century ago, all the non-Russian Orthodox were under the heel of the Ottomans, and as soon as that was lifted, Communism swept in everywhere and in Russia as well. Orthodoxy has been in a "just survive and preserve the faith" mode for centuries; getting out of that is a slow process.

I end up sounding like an Orthodox apologist a lot, which is not exactly my intention, but it is amazing how intelligent people do not see how Catholic criticism of Orthodoxy is motivated by the same "polemical spite" we're so quick to accuse the Orthodox of. DominusTecum has a rather sneering contempt of the Christian East that comes through loud and clear; his recent thread on "Eastern warbling" would be just as offensive to Eastern Catholics as Orthodox. It's not more justifiable just because he happens to be a Trad. The pursuit of truth should not be about tribalism, and the fact that some Greek Orthodox fanatics deny the sanctity of Augustine because he was Western doesn't justify us writing off the traditions of Eastern Christianity just because they don't always cohere neatly with Tridentine Catholicism. Catholics can be and have been just as bad as the Orthodox in condemning the other side for not doing things "our way." We've been a bit better about it in the last couple of centuries, with some notable exceptions, but we don't have a perfect track record.

It's also interesting that Fr. Fortescue can suggest that St. John Chrysostom is basically a semi-Pelagian because he didn't deal with the Pelagians directly, but doesn't admit the possibility that St. Augustine's ideas may have become a bit extreme because of his engagement with them. The Church has certainly mitigated some of St. Augustine's ideas, e.g., the doctrine of Limbo. I happily and unreservedly named one of my sons after the great Doctor of Hippo, but at times he sounds a lot more like Calvin than most Catholics would like to admit. That doesn't make him a Calvinist heretic any more than St. John Chrysostom is a semi-Pelagian heretic. It just means that a perfect and comprehensive knowledge of the Divine is not possible for any of us, the great Doctors of the Church included.
O unashamed intercessor of Christians, ever loyal advocate before the Creator, do not disregard the prayerful voice of sinners but in your goodness hasten to assist us who trustfully cry out to you: Intercede always, O Mother of God, in behalf of those who honor you!
 
The following users thanked this post: Larry, Maximilian, Mrs. HK

Offline awkwardcustomer

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2993
  • Thanked: 1454 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #3 on: January 27, 2017, 09:39:12 AM »
When I became a Catholic over 20 years ago, I can distinctly remember thinking that the Doctrine of Original Sin was the only explanation for human behaviour that made any sense at all. And I still think this.

So the Orthodox don't believe in Original Sin or the Immaculate Conception.  What else don't they believe in? Is there something simple like one of the old CTS booklets that would lay out the differences?

I've never understood why a Catholic would convert to Orthodoxy or Protestantism.  If Catholicism isn't true then Christianity isn't true.  Far better then to become a Pagan or something, IMO.
And formerly the heretics were manifest; but now the Church is filled with heretics in disguise.  
St Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 15, para 9.

And what rough beast, it's hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
WB Yeats, 'The Second Coming'.
 

Offline Prayerful

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6772
  • Thanked: 3017 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #4 on: January 27, 2017, 10:20:40 AM »
Some people see the dreary and irreverant New Mass, and see also that nearby there's an Orthodox church with a beautiful liturgy. Protestantism seems often a mix of reaction to scandal with a liturgy which is either dignified (no communion in the hand etc) or mood lifting.

Christianity in View has a comparison of Orthodox, Protestants and 'Roman' Catholics, but its Protestant heresy means some things are not well represented.

The English Catholic Truth Society doesn't seem to have booklets which efficiently list the errors and defects of heretics and pagans like Buddhists, but perhaps if a person asked, there might be something in some of the booklets. At least there are better than the Irish CTS, now Veritas which has some of the meandering of Fr Timothy 'sodomy a sacrament' Radcliffe OP on prominent display, and has nothing whatsoever on the Mass of Ages barring aspects like the Baronius Challoner Douay-Rheims or Knox Bible.
Padre Pio: Pray, hope, and don't worry. Worry is useless. God is merciful and will hear your prayer.
 

Offline DominusTecum

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 192 times
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2017, 09:30:26 AM »
Despite the polemics, the service for St. Augustine of Hippo is still in the Menaion, at least among the Slavs, on July 15:

"O holy hierarch, father Augustine, even though the land of Hippo hath fallen silent, yet do we glorify thee as the uprooter of heresies, the confirmation of the Orthodox Faith, the great boast of monastics, the adornment of hierarchs, the lover of poverty, the elucidator of the Scriptures, and as our fervent intercessor. Pray thou that we be granted great mercy." (2nd Sticheron of Vespers)

The Slavic Churches (and the Romanian Church) are theologically intermediate between western and eastern Christianity. Catholic theologians (particularly Aquinas and Bellarmine) were accepted authorities in Russian seminaries until Peter the Great introduced his protestantising reforms.

Quote
As far as the lack of missionary impulse, that is somewhat overblown. Just because we don't know about Orthodox missions doesn't mean they don't exist. The Russian Orthodox had missionaries in Alaska, Western Canada, and the Pacific Northwest into the 20th century; they became cut off from the mainland Russian church during Communism, which is part of the origin of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. There are Orthodox missionaries in Africa and South America, both of which are meeting with some success. It should be remembered that since before the discovery of the New World until just a century ago, all the non-Russian Orthodox were under the heel of the Ottomans, and as soon as that was lifted, Communism swept in everywhere and in Russia as well. Orthodoxy has been in a "just survive and preserve the faith" mode for centuries; getting out of that is a slow process.

Negligible missionary efforts among native Americans notwithstanding, the Orthodox today seem to concern themselves primarily with culling lukewarm Catholics to swell their ranks. There is something profoundly abnormal about seeing a western European - whose entire history, culture and nationhood are intimately linked with the western Church - embrace a historically, culturally, nationally, and racially alien Orthodox Church as his own.

I don't see how significant missionary efforts are even possible within the Orthodox model. National Churches have never shown a great capacity to evangelize those outside of their ethnic and cultural milieu, and even when they do make some gains, those gains are quickly lost. The Catholic model has significant advantages in terms of actually facilitating the fulfillment of the Great Commission.

Quote
I end up sounding like an Orthodox apologist a lot, which is not exactly my intention, but it is amazing how intelligent people do not see how Catholic criticism of Orthodoxy is motivated by the same "polemical spite" we're so quick to accuse the Orthodox of. DominusTecum has a rather sneering contempt of the Christian East that comes through loud and clear; his recent thread on "Eastern warbling" would be just as offensive to Eastern Catholics as Orthodox. It's not more justifiable just because he happens to be a Trad. The pursuit of truth should not be about tribalism, and the fact that some Greek Orthodox fanatics deny the sanctity of Augustine because he was Western doesn't justify us writing off the traditions of Eastern Christianity just because they don't always cohere neatly with Tridentine Catholicism. Catholics can be and have been just as bad as the Orthodox in condemning the other side for not doing things "our way." We've been a bit better about it in the last couple of centuries, with some notable exceptions, but we don't have a perfect track record.

There is no equivalence between Catholic and Orthodox polemics. Historically the western Church has scarcely endeavored to address the theology of the east because there was little historical imperative to do so. Catholic Christendom concerned itself primarily with developing it's own theology, resisting Islam, evangelising Pagans and then dealing with the Protestant heresy and it's offshoots in liberalism and modernism. It didn't have the time or the inclination to address a sect that was either somewhat "Romanizing" any way in spite of denials of Papal authority (Russian Orthodoxy, Romanian Orthodoxy) or, further south and east, under the total dominion of the Mohammedans.

The Orthodox, on the other hand, have a long and colorful history of radical anti-Catholicism. In their struggle with the western Church, they uncritically adopted the arguments of the viciously anti-Catholic Protestant polemicists of the 16th century. The rehashed and repacked sophistries of the Calvinist pamphleteers still serve as the hidden foundation of Orthodox polemics. Nor do they fall short of the Calvinists in their seething hatred of the Catholic Church. I'm convinced that the Orthodox Churches would have effectively ceased to exist as unified bodies long ago were it not for their shared hatred of the western Church and the Papacy. It has become their daily bread, their sustenance. It is the means by which they have come to define themselves. It is the principal unwritten dogma of contemporary Orthodoxy.

Of course, on the ground-level, so to speak, the essential unity that once existed between the two Churches is more evident. Many western beliefs that modern Orthodox would brazenly label "heresy" were the profound convictions of some of their own Saints. Peter Mogila was as Catholic as he was Orthodox in theology. Same for Nicholas Kabasilas and Dimitri of Rostov. I've heard particular Orthodox deny the Sainthood of all the aforementioned because of their "Latinised" beliefs. Generally speaking, it seems the further back you go, the less hostile the Orthodox are to western spirituality. The extreme opposition to western spirituality common amongst contemporary Orthodox does not seem to have been shared by their forebears. It becomes particularly evident only in the 19th century with the burgeoning nationalist movements.

I'm not an unqualified admirer of the Tridentine Church. There were many spiritual currents or tendencies in the Tridentine Church, often complimentary but just as often contradictory. Some were good, e.g. the French School of Spirituality and it's Eucharistic mysticism, and some in hindsight were destructive, for example the laxity of certain Jesuitical thought on the one hand and the excessive rationalism and individualism of the Jansenists on the other. Orthodoxy is no different. There is much in the eastern traditions to admire, but it exists alongside dangerous spiritual trends and tendencies. Unfortunately Catholics, even traditionalist Catholics, are blind to the "development of doctrine" in the eastern Churches. They simply assume it is something that has happened in the west exclusively, while the reality is that the western Church simply admits that doctrine can develop while the Orthodox tend to disingenuously claim that doctrine remains fixed, as if Palamism were part of the original deposit of faith. While they will frequently attribute the decline of the western Church to undercurrents within post-Tridentine spirituality, they refuse to identify in Orthodox thought certain seeds that resulted in the apostasy of the Orthodox nations - one of which seeds was, in fact, the "delatinisation" movement of the 19th century. The quest to "purify" the Orthodox Churches of all western "taint" resulted in a Church "purified" of Christian belief itself, to exist from then on only as some kind of nationalistic-cultural-ethnic body. That was naturally rejected, since it was built on insufficient foundations, and the result was the profound intellectual corruption of Russian society which culminated in the Russian Revolution.

I don't think my personal preferences in liturgical music are analogous to the attacks made to the very heart of the Catholic faith by Orthodox apologists. Besides, my distaste for certain types of eastern chant doesn't extend to all forms of Orthodox liturgical music. I love Russian chant, for example.

Quote
It's also interesting that Fr. Fortescue can suggest that St. John Chrysostom is basically a semi-Pelagian because he didn't deal with the Pelagians directly, but doesn't admit the possibility that St. Augustine's ideas may have become a bit extreme because of his engagement with them. The Church has certainly mitigated some of St. Augustine's ideas, e.g., the doctrine of Limbo. I happily and unreservedly named one of my sons after the great Doctor of Hippo, but at times he sounds a lot more like Calvin than most Catholics would like to admit. That doesn't make him a Calvinist heretic any more than St. John Chrysostom is a semi-Pelagian heretic. It just means that a perfect and comprehensive knowledge of the Divine is not possible for any of us, the great Doctors of the Church included.

Calvinism is a mutilated form of Augustinianisn in the same way that Gnosticism is a mutilated form of Christianity. Augustine cannot be judged by the distortions of his ideas affected by heretics.  The problem is that many Orthodox, through their virulent disdain for Catholicism, are ultimately driven to assault the undiluted teachings of Augustine himself. But who can blame them? They've been inoculated against anything "western" by a millenia of state-sponsored propaganda. Handing a copy of Augustine's confessions to a radically anti-Catholic Orthodox is like throwing holy water on a vampire. Augustine is a Saint, but he's so Catholic, and the Catholics are heretics. It's a contradiction and it poses problems for those Orthodox who see the filioque, purgatory, original sin etc as rank heresies rather than differences in theological opinion.
 
The following users thanked this post: Wenceslav, Boccaccio

Offline DominusTecum

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 192 times
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2017, 09:50:28 AM »
It's difficult to see what purification of soul, or washing away of sin, is taking place in infant baptism, if there is no stain of guilt contracted by original sin.

That's precisely what the Orthodox deny.
 

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 7632
  • Thanked: 5721 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2017, 10:08:18 AM »
It's difficult to see what purification of soul, or washing away of sin, is taking place in infant baptism, if there is no stain of guilt contracted by original sin.

That's precisely what the Orthodox deny.
There really isn't any "stain of sin" present in any soul, even those with Mortal Sin. The loss of Sanctifying Grace by either the sin of Adam or our personal sin, means  that our souls lack something which by God's design they are supposed to have, namely,  Sanctifying Grace. The washing away of sin means that actual grace is infused into a soul and it becomes adorned with the virtues and the gifts.
It appeared to me that the discussion between John and Quare was about whether there was a "corporate guilt" that the whole human race shared because of Adam's sin or not. The Catholic Encyclopedia article favored this opinion while denying that this guilt was a "personal fault" in each man, which was John's view, Quare did not agree
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers
 

Offline St.Justin

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2538
  • Thanked: 1101 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2017, 04:43:30 PM »
Luther was a was an Augustinian Monk. St Augustine was the first to mention "by Faith alone". Wonder where Luther got that Idea from?.

I am a devotee of St Augustine. I only mention this to point out that, as someone pointed out above, that not everything everyone says is totally orthodox especially when taken out of context.
 

Offline DominusTecum

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 192 times
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #9 on: January 29, 2017, 05:49:49 AM »
Any Christian heresy that emerges in western Europe is likely to involve the ideas of prominent western Church fathers in some fashion. Luther's doctrine of forensic justification would have been alien to St. Augustine.
 

Offline Boccaccio

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • Author website
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2017, 04:24:17 PM »
I have heard these arguments from Orthodox apologists online a lot, and it seems a lot of them are American converts from Protestantism or the Church.

Another common Orthodox assertion is that Thomism is the cause of atheism. On the other hand, Orthodox Palamism asserts that God is energy and essence and that the "error" of St. Thomas is his understanding that God is one entity. I have a difficult time understanding these theological disputes but the Palamist assertion of God as a duality doesn't make much sense to me. Isn't He ONE God?
 

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 7632
  • Thanked: 5721 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2017, 05:54:02 PM »
I have heard these arguments from Orthodox apologists online a lot, and it seems a lot of them are American converts from Protestantism or the Church.

Another common Orthodox assertion is that Thomism is the cause of atheism. On the other hand, Orthodox Palamism asserts that God is energy and essence and that the "error" of St. Thomas is his understanding that God is one entity. I have a difficult time understanding these theological disputes but the Palamist assertion of God as a duality doesn't make much sense to me. Isn't He ONE God?
God being a pure spirit, is not composed. The "energies" of God are either part of God's essence or a creature; If they are part of God's essence then they cannot be different or separate from God; if they are a creature then they cannot be eternal.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers
 
The following users thanked this post: Boccaccio

Offline Greg

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Major
  • ****
  • Posts: 12262
  • Thanked: 7012 times
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2017, 06:27:27 PM »
I've never understood why a Catholic would convert to Orthodoxy or Protestantism.  If Catholicism isn't true then Christianity isn't true.  Far better then to become a Pagan or something, IMO.

Well, I can't speak for Protestantism because I have never tried it, but two big benefits of Orthodoxy which immediately spring to mind is that the women are much better looking, more feminine and just plain old nicer to talk to, on the whole; and the priests are almost never limp wristed faggots.

Liturgy is great and so is the chant.

You have to love a religion/culture where Cossacks beat feminists with whips.  That's just the bomb.  If I was 21 again, I would definite move to Russia and learn the lingo.  The place is fun and everyday is different.

They even arrested a woman for lighting her cigarette on a church candle this week.  That's what we need in the west a bit of old fashioned intolerance and an occasional ass-whuppin.

Not sure why anyone would want to become a pagan.  No upside.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2017, 06:33:05 PM by Greg »
 
The following users thanked this post: Elliott, Maximilian

Offline Boccaccio

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • Author website
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2017, 08:10:50 PM »
I have heard these arguments from Orthodox apologists online a lot, and it seems a lot of them are American converts from Protestantism or the Church.

Another common Orthodox assertion is that Thomism is the cause of atheism. On the other hand, Orthodox Palamism asserts that God is energy and essence and that the "error" of St. Thomas is his understanding that God is one entity. I have a difficult time understanding these theological disputes but the Palamist assertion of God as a duality doesn't make much sense to me. Isn't He ONE God?
God being a pure spirit, is not composed. The "energies" of God are either part of God's essence or a creature; If they are part of God's essence then they cannot be different or separate from God; if they are a creature then they cannot be eternal.

Thanks for the clarification. This is why I don't understand the Orthodox (or, rather, Palamist) interpretation. Why do they even create a division in the two?
 

Offline DominusTecum

  • Vizekorporal
  • **
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 192 times
Re: Eastern Orthodoxy's Radical Disdain for Saint Augustine
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2017, 08:33:23 PM »
....the priests are almost never limp wristed faggots.

Limp wristed? Maybe not. Faggots? Plenty. Some queers wear beards. There is a huge amount of homosexuality in the Orthodox hierarchy. Read up on Andrei Kuraev and what was going at the Kazan Theological Seminary, among others.