OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 31, 2014, 12:41:10 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Eastern Orthodox doctrine of Enhypostasia  (Read 2550 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« on: December 10, 2006, 03:55:44 AM »

In relation to Christology, what is the Eastern Orthodox doctrine of enhypostasia? And what are the subsantial differences between enhypostasia and anhypostasia?                                                                                                                                           
« Last Edit: December 10, 2006, 04:05:45 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2006, 10:07:01 AM »

In relation to Christology, what is the Eastern Orthodox doctrine of enhypostasia?
It relates to the Human Nature of Christ as being En="in", "Hypostasis= "person"
There are several ways to understand it. The Human Nature of Christ being "enhypostatic" means that It is in-personal rather than impersonal. In other words, the Logos became a Man rather than simply "assumed Manhood", i.e. the Pre-eternal Logos enhypostasised a complete Human Nature. "Anhypostatic" means "without hypostasis"; and another way of looking at this and contrasting enhypostasia with anhypostasia  is that the Pre-existing Hypostasis of the Logos assumed for Himself a perfect and complete Human Nature which has no independent hypostasis of it's own (i.e is anhypostatic), but rather, the self-conscious "I" of Christ's human Nature exists only within the Divine Hypostasis (i.e. is enhypostatic). The self-conscious "I" of Christ's Human Nature is the One Hypostasis of the Theanthropos. Christ is One Hypostasis, not two, and the natural self-consciousness of Christ's Human Nature also experienced Christ's Self as One Hypostasis, not two.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2006, 10:57:21 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2006, 04:27:17 PM »

In the end, both enhypostasia and anhypostasia seem to be legitimately Orthodox.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2006, 04:28:58 PM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2006, 05:12:05 PM »

In the end, both enhypostasia and anhypostasia seem to be legitimately Orthodox.
Huh
"Legitimately Orthodox" in what sense? You speak of them as though they are doctrines in themselves rather than terms used to describe a doctrine. What you have just said makes about as much sense as saying that "Both the cardinal numbers one and three are Orthodox" on the "basis" that these numbers are used to describe the Trinity. But to say "God is three Natures in one hypostasis" is certainly not Orthodox.
It's not the words themselves which are "Orthodox" but rather, how they are used.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 11, 2006, 01:22:15 AM »

Apparently, Oriental Orthodoxy would lean toward anhypostasia while Eastern Orthodox would lean toward enhypostasia. Since I do not make judgment calls against either church's Christology, I'd consider both to be equally Orthodox in their respective understandings.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2006, 09:21:10 AM »

Apparently, Oriental Orthodoxy would lean toward anhypostasia while Eastern Orthodox would lean toward enhypostasia.
As I explained, "enhypostasia" and "anhypostasis" are not "doctrines" in themselves. You cannot "lean towards" one or the other. The issue is how you use these words.

Since I do not make judgment calls against either church's Christology, I'd consider both to be equally Orthodox in their respective understandings.
You seem to have missed an entire point. They cannot be "Orthodox" any more than the colour blue can be "Orthodox". "Enhypostasic" and "anhypostasic" are simply adjectives. They are not doctrines in themselves. To make any sense (look who I'm talking to about "making sense"!) you have to tell us what it is that you consider enhypostatic or anhypostatic.
And why should anyone care that you "consider both to be equally Orthodox in their respective understandings" when you don't even know what the terms mean or how they are used? What possible weight could your opinion carry when you don't even know what you're talking about? That would be like listening to a blind man's comparison of the shape of two clouds!
« Last Edit: December 11, 2006, 09:32:49 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,037


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2006, 11:29:19 PM »

Apparently, Oriental Orthodoxy would lean toward anhypostasia while Eastern Orthodox would lean toward enhypostasia.

Ummm...I believe it's the other way around.  St. Severus expounded what people may call "enhypostasia" while EO's tend to lean towards "anhypostasia," although research shows that Leontius of Byzantium really described "enhypostasia."

Either way, like George said, they only describe doctrines, and when one gets to the meat of the matter, I've always seen them as quite the same.

Fr. V.C. Samuel goes into some depth about it when comparing between St. John of Damascus and St. Severus of Antioch (notice how both seem to originate from Syria  Smiley ).

God bless.

Mina
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2006, 04:15:52 AM »

Ummm...I believe it's the other way around.  St. Severus expounded what people may call "enhypostasia" while EO's tend to lean towards "anhypostasia," although research shows that Leontius of Byzantium really described "enhypostasia."

Either way, it's all the same to me.  Cool

Fr. V.C. Samuel goes into some depth about it when comparing between St. John of Damascus and St. Severus of Antioch (notice how both seem to originate from Syria  Smiley ).

I finished reading that book, but perhaps I need to still work on my technical terms. I'm also going to read Christology After Chalcedon.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,037


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2006, 11:44:53 AM »

Either way, it's all the same to me.  Cool

It's all Greek to me  Wink
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.056 seconds with 37 queries.