|
|
Post by teresahrc on Apr 24, 2009 20:59:18 GMT -5
I don't really mean this to be a debate, I just wanted to learn more about St. Augustine and find out why the Catholic Church loves him so much, why the Orthodox think he a Saint but also a heretic and what Protestants (or unafilliated Christians--like watchman  ) think about him. So far, I found this from the Orthodox perspective. This is actually a really good website. You gotta love Calabrians. www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8153
Augustine himself had not been personally attacked by the Hesychasts of the fourteenth century but Augustinian theology was condemned in the person of Barlaam, who caused the controversy. This resulted in the ultimate condemnation of western Augustinianism as presented to the East by the Calabrian monk, Barlaam, in the Councils of the fourteenth century.
Palamas, the Orthodox protagonist, wrote numerous treatises against the filioque and the basic theological philosophical presuppositions of Latin theology. Saint Gregory Palamas followed the Cappadocian theological presuppositions and maintained that God's essence is totally transcendent and supported the evidence of personal participation in the uncreated energies. That is, he opposed the identity of the essence with the attributes in God. It was the conflict of the theology of revelation based on Augustine, which came from the West through Barlaam, that was reacted against. Revelation for Palamas is directly experienced in the divine energies and is opposed to the conceptualization of revelation. The Augustinian view of revelation by created symbols and illumined vision is rejected. For Augustine, the vision of God is an intellectual experience. This is not acceptable to Palamas. The Palamite emphasis was that creatures, including humans and angles, cannot know or comprehend God's essence.[11]
In the person of Barlaam, the East rejected Augustinian theology. The East perceived that Augustine accepts the neo-Platonic presupposition that the saint is able to have vision of the divine essence as the archetype of all beings. Barlaam contended under the influence of neo-Platonism that through ekstasis, the reason going out of the body when it functions in a pure way, one has a vision of the divine archetype. Palamas calls this the Greek pagan error and maintained that man attains theosis through participation in the divine energies.[12]
Later, for political reasons, the Byzantine emperors sought union with Rome to save the empire. The Emperor, the Patriarch and a delegation came to Ferrara in 1438 to participate at a council with the pope and bring about union between the Greeks and the Latins.
In the debate between the Greeks and the Latins, numerous times the authority of Augustine came up. The adamant Greek Orthodox theologian, Mark Eugenikos, used the work of Augustine to support his views. In regard to the errors of Augustine, he tried to place him in the best possible light, following the example of Saint Photios. He makes reference to Saint Gregory of Nyssa who agreed with the Origenist doctrines. He says "it would be better to give them over to silence, and not at all compel us, for the sake of our own defence, to bring them out into the open."[13] |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 25, 2009 9:25:08 GMT -5
We do not think he is heretic!  We believe he a Saint and we honor him among the Holy Fathers of the Church. This doesn't mean he was infallible in his teaching (none of the Fathers were). The Roman Catholic Church honor him more and we honor him less only because he taught things, that to us, contradicts Scriptures and Tradition (i.e., his corrupt view on Original Sin, the Filioque, etc). Many of his teachings were Orthodox, but there just those little things that he wrote that we do not accept as authentic Orthodox teaching. Many of his teachings shaped on what would be know as Western Christian Theology. His view on Original Sin (i.e., that we inherent guilt, etc) gradually got accepted by the Roman Church and almost entirely by the Protestant Churches, some to even a more radical position (the Calvinist for instance). The Protestant Reformers favored Blessed Augustine because they found support for there "grace and free will" theology. For more information: www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8153There are at least two books explicitly dealing with the issue of Saint Augustine's place in Orthodoxy: The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church by Fr. Seraphim Rose, which is generally favorable toward Blessed 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, which tends to see Augustine as the root of all Western Christendom's errors. You may find different reaction towards Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church, but no one can denied that he a Saint and Holy Father of the Church. By the way, we Orthodox usually entitled him as "Blessed Augustine". In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Apr 25, 2009 11:04:52 GMT -5
Then how does the Orthodox Church decide what makes someone a heretic? According to Orthodox doctrine, he had many heretical views. Is there a certain number of heretical views that are allowed before someone crosses the line?
What about Origen?
peace
teresa
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 25, 2009 12:04:14 GMT -5
Then how does the Orthodox Church decide what makes someone a heretic? According to Orthodox doctrine, he had many heretical views. Is there a certain number of heretical views that are allowed before someone crosses the line? What about Origen? peace teresa Many Fathers held to personal beliefs not shared by the whole Church. Some are heresies and some are allowed to believe by the Church but it is not a established doctrine (or dogma) by the Church. For example, Saint Gregory of Nyssa believe that everyone will be saved at the end of the world (Universalism). No Orthodox can believe in this teaching because it contradicts the consensus patrium teaching that not everyone be saved, but many will be condemn. His teaching was not accepted by the entire Church, but no one denied he is a Saint and Holy Father of the Church, not even the Catholic Church. Have you ever heard a Catholic calling Gregory of Nyssa a Saint and a heretic? ;D The Church decide if someone is a heretic. Origen was not declared a heretic in his lifetime, but only later in the Fifth Holy Ecumenical Council. Blessed Augustine believed many things that was not shared by the entire Church, but the Church didn't deemed him a heretic. For us, a heretic is a person who creates controversy, dissension, and division concerning doctrine and belief within the Orthodox Christian church (Arius for instance). Blessed Augustine never had much impact on the Orthodox world. His name never went under "suspicion" as Origen. Some of his theologies shaped on what will be later called "Western Theology" but his views was never accepted in the East nor did it had a great impact on us. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Apr 25, 2009 12:58:58 GMT -5
OK, thanks for clearing that up.
But how does the average Orthodox (or Catholic) person reading the writings of Origen or St. Augustine etc. know how to decipher them?
Does the Orthodox Church have a Cathechism, or some kind of "official" list of dogmas, doctrine etc?
peace
teresa
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 25, 2009 21:19:08 GMT -5
OK, thanks for clearing that up. But how does the average Orthodox (or Catholic) person reading the writings of Origen or St. Augustine etc. know how to decipher them? You welcome. Now, what do you mean? You mean how does the average Orthodox (or Catholic) person reading there writings know what's authentic Apostolic teaching and what's not? Well two things I must mention: 1) The Orthodox Church does not forbid anyone to read any heretic works, but priests and Spiritual Fathers often advises one to always read writings written by heretics under there guidance to prevent confusion. This is especially true to recently admitted members. 2) If one is well grounded in the Orthodox Faith, I doubt he or she will be confused. He or she will quickly recognize what's authentic Orthodox teachings and whats not. Is that what you are asking? Does the Orthodox Church have a Cathechism, or some kind of "official" list of dogmas, doctrine etc? As far as a Catechism, there is not a "universal" Catechism (but we do have them), but there are a couple that has been stand out as being the best "Catechism" (the third one is use an official textbook in Orthodox Theology Schools). These will give you a solid understanding of the Eastern Orthodox Church: 1) www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Church-Ne....6011867& sr=8-1 2) www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Way-Kalli....d_bxgy_b_text_b3) www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Dogmatic-.... 6012013&sr=1-2 I will also suggest that you talk to a Orthodox Priest, as they are more capable in answering any of your questions regarding Orthodoxy. On a side note, The Church has the creed, liturgy, scriptures, the teachings of the councils (defining the Trinity, Incarnation, etc), and its icons. These are the catechism. The problem with having a book that is a called "Orthodox Catechism" (a official book) containing all dogmatic teachings of the Church is that nobody really agrees fully on what constitutes dogma. If something's not Christological or related to the nature of the Trinity, or a few other topics that are of utmost importance, we don't really make dogmatic statements about it. So there are lots of other things out there that would be considered doctrine, but not dogma, and even lesser doctrines that has lots of debate surrounding it, take the toll houses for example. We don't dogmatize until forced to. We admit that the faith is a mystery, and therefore expressable in a huge variety of ways. This is not to say that we do not have a overall Orthodox doctrines and practices that it shared by all Orthodox Churches, but they are some theological opinions in the Orthodox Church that will not make one a heretic or whatnot if one believes them. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on Apr 27, 2009 23:05:09 GMT -5
From what I have found, he fathered many of the Catholic doctrines such as the perpetual virginity and sinlessness of Mary, as well as purgatory. He also taught there was no salvation outside of baptism into the Catholic church, and that this present age was the Millennium. He also taught the heretical doctrine now known as Calvinism. The foundation of calvinism is unconditional election (otherwise known as predestination), limited atonement, and the perseverance of the saints (otherwise known as eternal security or OSAS). These protestant teachings were made famous by John Calvin, but was fathered by Augustine.
P.S. Calvinism is one of the worse, most perverse teachings to ever be popularized by any form of ''christianity''. If it is true that Augustine taught this, then everything else he taught should be under serious scrutiny.
|
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Apr 28, 2009 10:51:56 GMT -5
I'm confused, my post from yesterday is gone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 30, 2009 11:56:52 GMT -5
Many Fathers held to personal beliefs not shared by the whole Church. Some are heresies and some are allowed to believe by the Church but it is not a established doctrine (or dogma) by the Church. True, that's why we need The Church. The Church is greater than any single man because she is guided by The Holy Spirit where men can by guided by themselves or by Satan and still think that they are under the guidance of The Holy Spirit. Yes, The Fathers were not infallible and it was up to The Church to decide "what" was allowable for Christians to accept as doctrine. And, The Fathers themselves accepted this.  |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on Apr 30, 2009 12:51:06 GMT -5
Welcome back Cepha |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 30, 2009 12:53:12 GMT -5
Welcome back Cepha Thanks W. Been working a lot lately. Managed to squeeze in some posts. But you guys have been on fire here! LOL! |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 1, 2009 9:07:25 GMT -5
Many Fathers held to personal beliefs not shared by the whole Church. Some are heresies and some are allowed to believe by the Church but it is not a established doctrine (or dogma) by the Church. True, that's why we need The Church. The Church is greater than any single man because she is guided by The Holy Spirit where men can by guided by themselves or by Satan and still think that they are under the guidance of The Holy Spirit. Yes, The Fathers were not infallible and it was up to The Church to decide "what" was allowable for Christians to accept as doctrine. And, The Fathers themselves accepted this. Exactly Cepha. ;D We Orthodox look for the consensus teachings of the Fathers. When the Fathers agree, this is what we follow. When the Fathers disagree, the Church decided which way to go or leave it as pious opinions in which each believer can choose. Welcome Cepha! You need to be here more often. We missed you! In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 1, 2009 9:45:14 GMT -5
Exactly Cepha. ;D We Orthodox look for the consensus teachings of the Fathers. When the Fathers agree, this is what we follow. When the Fathers disagree, the Church decided which way to go or leave it as pious opinions in which each believer can choose. Welcome Cepha! You need to be here more often. We missed you! In IC.XC, Ramon Thank you Ramon. ;D I'll try. That's why Catholics (both of The Roman Rite and The Orthodox) aren't confused or disbanded with our faith. We have 2,000 years of work that was already done on our behalf. We don't have to keep searching for new truths or try to explain away truths we don't agree with. We have the luxury of being in the house built upon the foundation of The Apostles. |
|
|
|
Post by doxology on Jul 8, 2009 22:55:05 GMT -5
From what I have found, he fathered many of the Catholic doctrines such as the perpetual virginity and sinlessness of Mary, as well as purgatory. He also taught there was no salvation outside of baptism into the Catholic church, and that this present age was the Millennium. He also taught the heretical doctrine now known as Calvinism. The foundation of calvinism is unconditional election (otherwise known as predestination), limited atonement, and the perseverance of the saints (otherwise known as eternal security or OSAS). These protestant teachings were made famous by John Calvin, but was fathered by Augustine. P.S. Calvinism is one of the worse, most perverse teachings to ever be popularized by any form of ''christianity''. If it is true that Augustine taught this, then everything else he taught should be under serious scrutiny. Augustine believed in the perpetual virginity, but did not found the concept, Augustine did not believe in the sinlessness of Mary ... infact many eminent church men such as St. Bernard of Clairvaux and Thomas Aquinas have disagreed with the concept of the immaculate conception, and if a theologian of st. Augustines stature had endorsed such a view the concept would have probably become popular and doctrine much sooner then it did, eventually becoming doctrine in 1854. St. Augustine believed in purgatory, but again did not find the concept. St. Augustine believed in the necessity of water baptism for salvation, st. Augustine was the founder of Amillenialism. St. Augustine believed some things similar to what the Calvinists believed, but unlike the Calvinists st. Augustine always believed salvation was a process, that we are made holy by grace, and by being made holy by grace we are justified. ... Calvinists are Augustinian in their soteriology, but their Augustinianism has been distorted by protestantism. Pax |
|
) think about him. 
