OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 31, 2014, 06:05:33 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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Indulgences, Temporal Punishment, Purgatory, etc  (Read 175316 times) Average Rating: 5
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1620 on: April 28, 2010, 11:47:01 PM »

Christ speaks much about eternal punishment and fire in the gospels.
That is how I read it to be also.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1621 on: April 29, 2010, 01:24:28 AM »

This is what St John of the ladder has to say about this heresy.:

41. Step 5

'Let all of us, and especially the fallen, beware lest we sicken in heart from the disease of the atheist Origen. For this foul disease, by using God's love for man as an excuse, is readily accepted by pleasure-lovers.
Christ is Risen!

There are Church Fathers on both sides of the question.

I doubt if Saint John of the Ladder, if he encountered Saint Isaac the Syrian, would have railed at him as a pleasure-lover who had a foul disease.

Saint Isaac  was teaching 100 years later than Saint John.  Clearly, despite Saint John's hard words from Sinai,  the idea of Universal Salvation was still alive and kicking and accepted by the holiest men and teachers of the Church.

It's great that your name of "DeathtotheWorld" probably comes from something Saint Isaac said:

 “The world is the general name for all the passions. When we wish to call the passions by a common name,
we call them the world. But when we wish to distinguish them by their special names, we call them the passions.
The passions are the following: love of riches, desire for possessions, bodily pleasure from which comes
sexual passion, love of honour which gives rise to envy, lust for power, arrogance and pride of position, the
craving to adorn oneself with luxurious clothes and vain ornaments, the itch for human glory which is a source
of rancour and resentment, and physical fear. Where these passions cease to be active, there the world is dead;
for though living in the flesh, they did not live for the flesh. See for which of these passions you are alive.
Then you will know how far you are alive to the world, and how far you are dead to it.”

Here is a short article on "Universal Salvation and Saint Isaac the Syrian"
http://en.hilarion.orthodoxia.org/6_6_10

NB:  my views on universal salvation are summed up in the quote below from Saint Maximos the Confessor
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 01:27:19 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
DeathToTheWorld
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 154



« Reply #1622 on: April 29, 2010, 01:39:40 AM »

This is what St John of the ladder has to say about this heresy.:

41. Step 5

'Let all of us, and especially the fallen, beware lest we sicken in heart from the disease of the atheist Origen. For this foul disease, by using God's love for man as an excuse, is readily accepted by pleasure-lovers.
Christ is Risen!

There are Church Fathers on both sides of the question.

I doubt if Saint John of the Ladder, if he encountered Saint Isaac the Syrian, would have railed at him as a pleasure-lover who had a foul disease.

Saint Isaac  was teaching 100 years later than Saint John.  Clearly, despite Saint John's hard words from Sinai,  the idea of Universal Salvation was still alive and kicking and accepted by the holiest men and teachers of the Church.

It's great that your name of "DeathtotheWorld" probably comes from something Saint Isaac said:

 “The world is the general name for all the passions. When we wish to call the passions by a common name,
we call them the world. But when we wish to distinguish them by their special names, we call them the passions.
The passions are the following: love of riches, desire for possessions, bodily pleasure from which comes
sexual passion, love of honour which gives rise to envy, lust for power, arrogance and pride of position, the
craving to adorn oneself with luxurious clothes and vain ornaments, the itch for human glory which is a source
of rancour and resentment, and physical fear. Where these passions cease to be active, there the world is dead;
for though living in the flesh, they did not live for the flesh. See for which of these passions you are alive.
Then you will know how far you are alive to the world, and how far you are dead to it.”

Here is a short article on "Universal Salvation and Saint Isaac the Syrian"
http://en.hilarion.orthodoxia.org/6_6_10

NB:  my views on universal salvation are summed up in the quote below from Saint Maximos the Confessor


I can only name 3 Fathers who are said to have believed in Universal salvation, St Issac, St Gregory of Nyssa, and St Maximos - but I could not get any proof that St Maximus really believed it.


There is a person on Monachos.net who does not even think that St Issac the Syria wrote that book Vol II, where it talks about Universal Salvation.

He said that it does not even look like his writings, and that the Nestorians used to stick the Honorable name of St Isaac on their works, only to give their heretical doctrines some kind of respectable reputation.

Look here:http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?2031

Just so you can look at other people's opinions.




'There is nothing he hates and fears so much as to be known, (the Devil) because then he cannot do evil as he wishes.' - St Dorotheos
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 01:53:48 AM by DeathToTheWorld » Logged

100. Like a bee one should extract from each of the virtues what is most profitable. In this way, by taking a small amount from all of them, one builds up from the practice of the virtues a great honeycomb overflowing with the soul-delighting honey of wisdom.

St Gregory of Sinai
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1623 on: April 29, 2010, 02:04:35 AM »


I can only name 3 Fathers who are said to have believed in Universal salvation, St Issac, St Gregory of Nyssa, and St Maximos - but I could not get any proof that St Maximus really believed it.

Apokatastasis still exercises its fascination on Eastern Christians, although it is not an approved belief.   In the first centuries it seems to have been widespread among Christians.  Saint Augustine tells us that it was a widely held early Christian belief.

"Some, nay, very many" (nonnulli, quam plurimi), pity with human feeling, the everlasting punishment of the damned, and do not believe that it is so."

~St Augustine. Enchiridion, chapter 112.

That Catholic site I referenced earlier has a list of about 12-15 Church Fathers who supported universal salvation...... I don't know how reliable it is though.


And an interesting quote from Saint Martin of Tours which backs up Saint Augustine's statement that in the early Church there was a belief in the possibility of universal salvation, even including for the devil.

“If thou, thyself, wretched being, wouldst but desist from attacking mankind, and even, at this period, when the day of judgment is at hand, wouldst only repent of your deeds, I, with a true confidence in the Lord, would promise you the mercy of Christ.

Chapter XXII.

Martin preaches Repentance even to the Devil.

Now, the devil, while he tried to impose upon the holy man by a thousand injurious arts, often thrust himself upon him in a visible form, but in very various shapes. For sometimes he presented himself to his view changed into the person of Jupiter, often into that of Mercury and Minerva. Often, too, were heard words of reproach, in which the crowd of demons assailed Martin with scurrilous expressions. But knowing that all were false and groundless, he was not affected by the charges brought against him. Moreover, some of the brethren bore witness that they had heard a demon reproaching Martin in abusive terms, and asking why he had taken back, on their subsequent repentance, certain of the brethren who had, some time previously, lost their baptism by falling into various errors. The demon set forth the crimes of each of them; but they added that Martin, resisting the devil firmly, answered him, that by-past sins are cleansed away by the leading of a better life, and that through the mercy of God, those are to be absolved from their sins who have given up their evil ways. The devil saying in opposition to this that such guilty men as those referred to did not come within the pale of pardon, and that no mercy was extended by the Lord to those who had once fallen away, Martin is said to have cried out in words to the following effect: “If thou, thyself, wretched being, wouldst but desist from attacking mankind, and even, at this period, when the day of judgment is at hand, wouldst only repent of your deeds, I, with a true confidence in the Lord, would promise you the mercy of Christ.” O what a holy boldness with respect to the loving-kindness of the Lord, in which, although he could not assert authority, he nevertheless showed the feelings dwelling within him! And since our discourse has here sprung up concerning the devil and his devices, it does not seem away from the point, although the matter does not bear immediately upon Martin, to relate what took place; both because the virtues of Martin do, to some extent, appear in the transaction, and the incident, which was worthy of a miracle, will properly be put on record, with the view of furnishing a caution, should anything of a similar character subsequently occur.

Source :: Sulpitius Severus "On the Life of St. Martin" Chapter XXI
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1624 on: April 29, 2010, 02:15:48 AM »


There is a person on Monachos.net who does not even think that St Issac the Syria wrote that book Vol II, where it talks about Universal Salvation.


Sebastian Brock is the foremost scholar on the writings of Saint Isaac and he accepts it as genuine.

Here is his scholarly record at the university of Oxford
http://www.orinst.ox.ac.uk/staff/ec/sbrock.html

Logged
DeathToTheWorld
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 154



« Reply #1625 on: April 29, 2010, 02:20:51 AM »


I can only name 3 Fathers who are said to have believed in Universal salvation, St Issac, St Gregory of Nyssa, and St Maximos - but I could not get any proof that St Maximus really believed it.

Apokatastasis still exercises its fascination on Eastern Christians, although it is not an approved belief.   In the first centuries it seems to have been widespread among Christians.  Saint Augustine tells us that it was a widely held early Christian belief.

"Some, nay, very many" (nonnulli, quam plurimi), pity with human feeling, the everlasting punishment of the damned, and do not believe that it is so."

~St Augustine. Enchiridion, chapter 112.

That Catholic site I referenced earlier has a list of about 12-15 Church Fathers who supported universal salvation...... I don't know how reliable it is though.


And an interesting quote from Saint Martin of Tours which backs up Saint Augustine's statement that in the early Church there was a belief in the possibility of universal salvation, even including for the devil.

“If thou, thyself, wretched being, wouldst but desist from attacking mankind, and even, at this period, when the day of judgment is at hand, wouldst only repent of your deeds, I, with a true confidence in the Lord, would promise you the mercy of Christ.

Chapter XXII.

Martin preaches Repentance even to the Devil.

Now, the devil, while he tried to impose upon the holy man by a thousand injurious arts, often thrust himself upon him in a visible form, but in very various shapes. For sometimes he presented himself to his view changed into the person of Jupiter, often into that of Mercury and Minerva. Often, too, were heard words of reproach, in which the crowd of demons assailed Martin with scurrilous expressions. But knowing that all were false and groundless, he was not affected by the charges brought against him. Moreover, some of the brethren bore witness that they had heard a demon reproaching Martin in abusive terms, and asking why he had taken back, on their subsequent repentance, certain of the brethren who had, some time previously, lost their baptism by falling into various errors. The demon set forth the crimes of each of them; but they added that Martin, resisting the devil firmly, answered him, that by-past sins are cleansed away by the leading of a better life, and that through the mercy of God, those are to be absolved from their sins who have given up their evil ways. The devil saying in opposition to this that such guilty men as those referred to did not come within the pale of pardon, and that no mercy was extended by the Lord to those who had once fallen away, Martin is said to have cried out in words to the following effect: “If thou, thyself, wretched being, wouldst but desist from attacking mankind, and even, at this period, when the day of judgment is at hand, wouldst only repent of your deeds, I, with a true confidence in the Lord, would promise you the mercy of Christ.” O what a holy boldness with respect to the loving-kindness of the Lord, in which, although he could not assert authority, he nevertheless showed the feelings dwelling within him! And since our discourse has here sprung up concerning the devil and his devices, it does not seem away from the point, although the matter does not bear immediately upon Martin, to relate what took place; both because the virtues of Martin do, to some extent, appear in the transaction, and the incident, which was worthy of a miracle, will properly be put on record, with the view of furnishing a caution, should anything of a similar character subsequently occur.

Source :: Sulpitius Severus "On the Life of St. Martin" Chapter XXI



But we know that St Augustine is not a saint in Orthodoxy, and St Martin? what is he known for doing?


If we start telling everybody that, 'Everyone will be saved at the end' then how many people will want to become Orthodox? How many people will there still be who are dead in their sins?
How many Orthodox do you think there will be, who will rather spend the unseen, temporary torment in Gehenna - which they cannot see, over a earthly torment, say torture and martyrdom?

Don't you know that there were martyrs who wimped out and would rather renounce Christ, than to suffer Martyrdom?

How many people do you think will end up saying, 'Oh, I'm so scared of the AntiChrist, so I will just get the mark of the beast... I would rather be in torment which I cannot see, than in torment that I can see, It doesnt matter anyways.'  'Lets worship Satan, he was such a beautiful angel anyways, God will make him just as glorious as he was in the end.'

When Jesus Christ tells us very plainly:

Revelation 14:11
And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
 
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 02:24:07 AM by DeathToTheWorld » Logged

100. Like a bee one should extract from each of the virtues what is most profitable. In this way, by taking a small amount from all of them, one builds up from the practice of the virtues a great honeycomb overflowing with the soul-delighting honey of wisdom.

St Gregory of Sinai
DeathToTheWorld
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 154



« Reply #1626 on: April 29, 2010, 02:22:46 AM »

Accidental Post
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 02:23:11 AM by DeathToTheWorld » Logged

100. Like a bee one should extract from each of the virtues what is most profitable. In this way, by taking a small amount from all of them, one builds up from the practice of the virtues a great honeycomb overflowing with the soul-delighting honey of wisdom.

St Gregory of Sinai
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1627 on: April 29, 2010, 02:23:02 AM »

Christ is Risen!

Thanks very much for this link.  There is a lot of meaty stuff there to study.  Overall though the impression from a first rapid reading is that the text is accepted as genuine Isaac.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1628 on: April 29, 2010, 02:26:13 AM »

But we know that St Augustine is not a saint in Orthodoxy.

OK, a statement such as that speaks quite a lot about your mindset.  It is also, by the way, plain wrong. I am really surprised though that it falls from the lips of someone who appears to be a follower of Father Seraphim Rose.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 02:30:08 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,371



« Reply #1629 on: April 29, 2010, 02:30:16 AM »

Quote
But we know that St Augustine is not a saint in Orthodoxy,

Oh rly?
Logged

LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,252


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #1630 on: April 29, 2010, 02:53:26 AM »

His feast day is June 15, and in some Orthodox calendars, August 28. That's all the proof I need.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 02:54:07 AM by LBK » Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #1631 on: April 29, 2010, 03:02:53 AM »

August 28 is the falling asleep of the Holy Virgin...for serbs...i never heard of St. Agustine being preached in a serbian church.....unless i wasn't paying attention or something... Huh
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
DeathToTheWorld
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 154



« Reply #1632 on: April 29, 2010, 03:07:08 AM »

But we know that St Augustine is not a saint in Orthodoxy.

OK, a statement such as that speaks quite a lot about your mindset.  It is also, by the way, plain wrong. I am really surprised though that it falls from the lips of someone who appears to be a follower of Father Seraphim Rose.

Ah, my mom talked about him that way.

I thought that the reason we call him 'Blessed' Augustine is because his doctrine was in error. Wasn't it Original Sin? It says in wikipedia that we call him such.

I'm mistaken.

I have not really read much of Fr Seraphim, only listened to him. He's almost like a modern-day prophet.








« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 03:08:35 AM by DeathToTheWorld » Logged

100. Like a bee one should extract from each of the virtues what is most profitable. In this way, by taking a small amount from all of them, one builds up from the practice of the virtues a great honeycomb overflowing with the soul-delighting honey of wisdom.

St Gregory of Sinai
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1633 on: April 29, 2010, 03:11:01 AM »

But we know that St Augustine is not a saint in Orthodoxy.

OK, a statement such as that speaks quite a lot about your mindset.  It is also, by the way, plain wrong. I am really surprised though that it falls from the lips of someone who appears to be a follower of Father Seraphim Rose.

Ah, my mom talked about him that way.

I thought that the reason we call him 'Blessed' Augustine is because his doctrine was in error. Wasn't it Original Sin? It says in wikipedia that we call him such.

I'm mistaken.

I have not really read much of Fr Seraphim, only listened to him. He's almost like a modern-day prophet.









An Orthodox priest one time told me that "Blessed"  Augustine was not a saint in the Orthodox Church. so it appears that there may be a difference of opinion on this. Of course, in the Roman Catholic Church, yes, St. Augustine is a saint.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1634 on: April 29, 2010, 03:41:09 AM »

August 28 is the falling asleep of the Holy Virgin...for serbs...i never heard of St. Agustine being preached in a serbian church.....unless i wasn't paying attention or something... Huh

Saint Augustine's feastday is 15 July.  See the Russian Calendar  http://days.pravoslavie.ru/Life/life1316.htm  He died on 28 August 430.

Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,252


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #1635 on: April 29, 2010, 03:57:01 AM »

An Orthodox priest one time told me that "Blessed"  Augustine was not a saint in the Orthodox Church. so it appears that there may be a difference of opinion on this. Of course, in the Roman Catholic Church, yes, St. Augustine is a saint.

My dear stanley, that priest is wrong. If Blessed Augustine is in the Menaion, and has a commemoration date in every church calendar I've ever come across (Slavic, Greek, whatever), then that settles it. Opinion counts for nothing in this case. In the most comprehensive calendar I have, Augustine's name is twelfth out of about thirty named saints for that day.

stashko, the reason you would not have heard Blessed Augustine commemorated with a service in your church is because June 15 is the feast of St Lazar the Great Prince. So, in Serbian churches, it would be St Lazar's service which is sung on that day. But, if you were to listen to the names of the saints of the day being read out by the priest at the dismissal of the Liturgy that day, I bet Augustine would be there in the priest's calendar.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1636 on: April 29, 2010, 04:08:16 AM »

An Orthodox priest one time told me that "Blessed"  Augustine was not a saint in the Orthodox Church. so it appears that there may be a difference of opinion on this. 

The priest would seem to have a different opinion to the Fathers at the Fifth Ecumenical Council.

"We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith."
Fifth Ecumenical Council, 553 AD
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1637 on: April 29, 2010, 04:18:25 AM »

stashko, the reason you would not have heard Blessed Augustine commemorated with a service in your church is because June 15 is the feast of St Lazar the Great Prince. So, in Serbian churches, it would be St Lazar's service which is sung on that day. But, if you were to listen to the names of the saints of the day being read out by the priest at the dismissal of the Liturgy that day, I bet Augustine would be there in the priest's calendar.

Yes, I checked the Calendar published by the Serbian Diocese for Australia and New Zealand and both Augustine and his mother Monica are given on 15th June, in fact they are are ahead of Saint Lazar in the listing. (Of course that means nothing since Calendars nearly always list Saints in the order of their year of death.)
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1638 on: April 29, 2010, 04:34:08 AM »

My dear stanley, that priest is wrong. If Blessed Augustine is in the Menaion, and has a commemoration date in every church calendar I've ever come across (Slavic, Greek, whatever), then that settles it. Opinion counts for nothing in this case. In the most comprehensive calendar I have, Augustine's name is twelfth out of about thirty named saints for that day.
OK.
Thanks for that helpful clarification.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1639 on: April 29, 2010, 04:37:36 AM »

An Orthodox priest one time told me that "Blessed"  Augustine was not a saint in the Orthodox Church. so it appears that there may be a difference of opinion on this. 

The priest would seem to have a different opinion to the Fathers at the Fifth Ecumenical Council.

"We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith."
Fifth Ecumenical Council, 553 AD
Dear Father Ambrose:
Well, wait. The priest said Augustine was blessed and revered, but not elevated to the sainthood. As I read this quote, it says Augustine was a holy Father, but I don't see the word saint used?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1640 on: April 29, 2010, 04:56:10 AM »

An Orthodox priest one time told me that "Blessed"  Augustine was not a saint in the Orthodox Church. so it appears that there may be a difference of opinion on this.  

The priest would seem to have a different opinion to the Fathers at the Fifth Ecumenical Council.

"We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith."
Fifth Ecumenical Council, 553 AD
Dear Father Ambrose:
Well, wait. The priest said Augustine was blessed and revered, but not elevated to the sainthood. As I read this quote, it says Augustine was a holy Father, but I don't see the word saint used?

It gives a list of 12 "holy Fathers" and there is the name of Augustine in the midst of them  I don't know of holy Fathers who are not Saints but maybe I am wrong.

Below is a modern French Orthodox icon, plus one more
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 05:03:46 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1641 on: April 29, 2010, 05:46:21 AM »

An Orthodox priest one time told me that "Blessed"  Augustine was not a saint in the Orthodox Church. so it appears that there may be a difference of opinion on this. 

The priest would seem to have a different opinion to the Fathers at the Fifth Ecumenical Council.

"We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith."
Fifth Ecumenical Council, 553 AD
Dear Father Ambrose:
Well, wait. The priest said Augustine was blessed and revered, but not elevated to the sainthood. As I read this quote, it says Augustine was a holy Father, but I don't see the word saint used?
Christ is Risen!

"Saint Augustine in the Greek Orthodox Tradition"
Rev. Dr. George C. Papademetriou

http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8153

Conclusion

In reviewing the Greek Orthodox literature we see that the Greek Orthodox theologians are very critical of Augustine and his errors. Nowhere, however, did we find evidence in the patristic writings for the claim that his name should be eliminated from the list of the saints. Beginning with Photios, generally, the Greek Orthodox perceive Augustine as a saint whose doctrines have been deformed or distorted by the West and that as a human being he erred on certain teachings. As Greek Orthodox we reverence the person of Saint Augustine.
Logged
Mickey
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Orthodoxy
Posts: 1,309



« Reply #1642 on: April 29, 2010, 09:04:02 AM »

The priest said Augustine was blessed and revered, but not elevated to the sainthood.

He is mistaken.  We must remember that when Holy Orthodoxy refers to someone as "Blessed"--we are venerating him/her as a saint.  It is not like Roman Catholics who use the title of "Blessed" as a stepping stone to sainthood.
Logged
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1643 on: April 29, 2010, 04:21:07 PM »

I have likewise heard that he was not added to the Church calendar until the 19th century. Obviously, there is some mystery here.

The fact that he is/was considered a saint or father is not proof that his theology is correct. The OrthodoxWiki (I have no idea how reliable this is) says that the majority of Blessed Augustine’s works were not translated into Greek until the 1300’s by Demetrios Cydones. So, the Greek-speaking fathers probably had a very poor picture of what he believed. Likewise, Augustine did not know Greek.

The key thing is, Augustine did not base anything he wrote on the Fathers who preceded him. He was not familiar with the Fathers, and he did not build off of them. Having read from some of his works, it is apparent that he changed his theological system repeatedly during his lifetime.

Blessed Augustine’s works may have gotten mangled by the Protestant reformers, but that does not alter the fact that he is *not* a reliable expositor of Church doctrine.

Here are some quotes form him, which someone in an old thread cited:
Quote
God the Father is He from Whom the Word is born and from Whom the Holy Spirit principally proceeds. I have used the word principally, so that it may be understood that the Spirit proceeds from the Son also. [On the Trinity, 15:16:29] The Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Father into the Son and then proceed from the Son for our sanctification; but He proceeds from Both at the same time, although the Father has given this to the Son, that just as the Holy Spirit proceeds from Himself, so He also proceeds from the Son. [On the Trinity, 15:27]

They are punished not only on account of the sins which they add by the indulgence of their own will, but on account of the original sin, even if, as in the case of infants, they had added nothing to that original sin. ... Even if there were in men nothing but original sin, it would be sufficient for their condemnation. [On the Soul and Its Origin, Bk IV, Ch 20]

Augustine does not read like any of the other Fathers. He reads like someone trying to put puzzle pieces together, constructing an elaborate and airtight philosophical system. I have no problem honoring this man, even as a saint, but when it comes to Orthodox doctrine, I believe he should be left out of the picture.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 04:23:53 PM by Rufus » Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1644 on: April 29, 2010, 04:43:22 PM »

An Orthodox priest one time told me that "Blessed"  Augustine was not a saint in the Orthodox Church. so it appears that there may be a difference of opinion on this. 

The priest would seem to have a different opinion to the Fathers at the Fifth Ecumenical Council.

"We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith."
Fifth Ecumenical Council, 553 AD
Dear Father Ambrose:
Well, wait. The priest said Augustine was blessed and revered, but not elevated to the sainthood. As I read this quote, it says Augustine was a holy Father, but I don't see the word saint used?
Christ is Risen!

"Saint Augustine in the Greek Orthodox Tradition"
Rev. Dr. George C. Papademetriou

http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8153

Conclusion

In reviewing the Greek Orthodox literature we see that the Greek Orthodox theologians are very critical of Augustine and his errors. Nowhere, however, did we find evidence in the patristic writings for the claim that his name should be eliminated from the list of the saints. Beginning with Photios, generally, the Greek Orthodox perceive Augustine as a saint whose doctrines have been deformed or distorted by the West and that as a human being he erred on certain teachings. As Greek Orthodox we reverence the person of Saint Augustine.
OK. thanks for this information.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1645 on: April 29, 2010, 04:45:51 PM »

I have likewise heard that he was not added to the Church calendar until the 19th century. Obviously, there is some mystery here.

The fact that he is/was considered a saint or father is not proof that his theology is correct. The OrthodoxWiki (I have no idea how reliable this is) says that the majority of Blessed Augustine’s works were not translated into Greek until the 1300’s by Demetrios Cydones. So, the Greek-speaking fathers probably had a very poor picture of what he believed. Likewise, Augustine did not know Greek.

The key thing is, Augustine did not base anything he wrote on the Fathers who preceded him. He was not familiar with the Fathers, and he did not build off of them. Having read from some of his works, it is apparent that he changed his theological system repeatedly during his lifetime.

Blessed Augustine’s works may have gotten mangled by the Protestant reformers, but that does not alter the fact that he is *not* a reliable expositor of Church doctrine.

Here are some quotes form him, which someone in an old thread cited:
Quote
God the Father is He from Whom the Word is born and from Whom the Holy Spirit principally proceeds. I have used the word principally, so that it may be understood that the Spirit proceeds from the Son also. [On the Trinity, 15:16:29] The Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Father into the Son and then proceed from the Son for our sanctification; but He proceeds from Both at the same time, although the Father has given this to the Son, that just as the Holy Spirit proceeds from Himself, so He also proceeds from the Son. [On the Trinity, 15:27]

They are punished not only on account of the sins which they add by the indulgence of their own will, but on account of the original sin, even if, as in the case of infants, they had added nothing to that original sin. ... Even if there were in men nothing but original sin, it would be sufficient for their condemnation. [On the Soul and Its Origin, Bk IV, Ch 20]

Augustine does not read like any of the other Fathers. He reads like someone trying to put puzzle pieces together, constructing an elaborate and airtight philosophical system. I have no problem honoring this man, even as a saint, but when it comes to Orthodox doctrine, I believe he should be left out of the picture.

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,502



« Reply #1646 on: April 29, 2010, 05:58:15 PM »

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?

Here's an interesting quote about St. Edward the Martyr and Filioque from the late Metropolitan Philaret of New York, the former president of ROCOR's Synod:

It has been stated that St. Edward cannot be considered a saint because the Filioque clause had already been inserted into the Symbol of Faith in England by his time. To take such a position is contrary to the stated opinions of the very Fathers of the Church who refuted the Filioque, namely the Ven. Maximus the Confessor and the holy hierarch Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Furthermore, justice would demand that many other saints who professed, unwittingly, the same addition to the Creed, also be removed from our lists of saints, e.g., Sts. Vyacheslav (Wenceslaus) and Ludmilla of Czechia, St. Martin the Confessor, Pope of Rome, etc. Both the Synod and the Council have examined the Filioque question carefully in regard to the case of St. Edward, and, in view of the stated opinions of the Fathers of the Church, have found it not to be an impediment at the time of St. Edward to a Chirstian achieving sanctity.

Apparently for ROCOR's Synod the Filioque wasn't an unsuperable obstacle for holiness.



« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 06:02:38 PM by Alpo » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1647 on: April 29, 2010, 05:58:40 PM »

I have likewise heard that he was not added to the Church calendar until the 19th century. Obviously, there is some mystery here.

The fact that he is/was considered a saint or father is not proof that his theology is correct. The OrthodoxWiki (I have no idea how reliable this is) says that the majority of Blessed Augustine’s works were not translated into Greek until the 1300’s by Demetrios Cydones. So, the Greek-speaking fathers probably had a very poor picture of what he believed. Likewise, Augustine did not know Greek.

The key thing is, Augustine did not base anything he wrote on the Fathers who preceded him. He was not familiar with the Fathers, and he did not build off of them. Having read from some of his works, it is apparent that he changed his theological system repeatedly during his lifetime.

Blessed Augustine’s works may have gotten mangled by the Protestant reformers, but that does not alter the fact that he is *not* a reliable expositor of Church doctrine.

Here are some quotes form him, which someone in an old thread cited:
Quote
God the Father is He from Whom the Word is born and from Whom the Holy Spirit principally proceeds. I have used the word principally, so that it may be understood that the Spirit proceeds from the Son also. [On the Trinity, 15:16:29] The Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Father into the Son and then proceed from the Son for our sanctification; but He proceeds from Both at the same time, although the Father has given this to the Son, that just as the Holy Spirit proceeds from Himself, so He also proceeds from the Son. [On the Trinity, 15:27]

They are punished not only on account of the sins which they add by the indulgence of their own will, but on account of the original sin, even if, as in the case of infants, they had added nothing to that original sin. ... Even if there were in men nothing but original sin, it would be sufficient for their condemnation. [On the Soul and Its Origin, Bk IV, Ch 20]

Augustine does not read like any of the other Fathers. He reads like someone trying to put puzzle pieces together, constructing an elaborate and airtight philosophical system. I have no problem honoring this man, even as a saint, but when it comes to Orthodox doctrine, I believe he should be left out of the picture.

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?

All the facts have long ago dropped out of my brain but it has been said that the Augustinian filioque is NOT the modern Roman Catholic flioque but something acceptably Orthodox in interpretation.  Was this discussed at the Dublin Meeting on the Filioque?
Logged
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1648 on: April 29, 2010, 11:16:48 PM »

Quote
St. Maximus the Confessor, Ad Domnum Marinum Cypri presbyterum (Letter to the priest Marinus of Cyprus), PG 91, 134D-136C.

With regard to the first matter, they (the Romans) have produced the unanimous documentary evidence of the Latin fathers, and also of Cyril of Alexandria, from the sacred commentary he composed on the gospel of St. John. On the basis of these texts, they have shown that they have not made the Son the cause of the Spirit — they know in fact that the Father is the only cause of the Son and the Spirit, the one by begetting and the other by procession; but [they use this expression] in order to manifest the Spirit’s coming-forth (προϊέναι) through him and, in this way, to make clear the unity and identity of the essence.

προϊέναι was the word Saint Cyril of Alexandria used when he wrote that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

As for whether St. Augustine’s understanding of the Trinity was Orthodox or not, I will refer those who have the time and are interested to book 15, chapter 17 of De Trinitate.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/130115.htm

Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1649 on: April 30, 2010, 12:16:18 AM »

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?

Here's an interesting quote about St. Edward the Martyr and Filioque from the late Metropolitan Philaret of New York, the former president of ROCOR's Synod:

It has been stated that St. Edward cannot be considered a saint because the Filioque clause had already been inserted into the Symbol of Faith in England by his time. To take such a position is contrary to the stated opinions of the very Fathers of the Church who refuted the Filioque, namely the Ven. Maximus the Confessor and the holy hierarch Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Furthermore, justice would demand that many other saints who professed, unwittingly, the same addition to the Creed, also be removed from our lists of saints, e.g., Sts. Vyacheslav (Wenceslaus) and Ludmilla of Czechia, St. Martin the Confessor, Pope of Rome, etc. Both the Synod and the Council have examined the Filioque question carefully in regard to the case of St. Edward, and, in view of the stated opinions of the Fathers of the Church, have found it not to be an impediment at the time of St. Edward to a Chirstian achieving sanctity.

Apparently for ROCOR's Synod the Filioque wasn't an unsuperable obstacle for holiness.




So a heretic can be a saint according to the Orthodox teaching?
Logged
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1650 on: April 30, 2010, 01:33:51 PM »

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?

Here's an interesting quote about St. Edward the Martyr and Filioque from the late Metropolitan Philaret of New York, the former president of ROCOR's Synod:

It has been stated that St. Edward cannot be considered a saint because the Filioque clause had already been inserted into the Symbol of Faith in England by his time. To take such a position is contrary to the stated opinions of the very Fathers of the Church who refuted the Filioque, namely the Ven. Maximus the Confessor and the holy hierarch Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Furthermore, justice would demand that many other saints who professed, unwittingly, the same addition to the Creed, also be removed from our lists of saints, e.g., Sts. Vyacheslav (Wenceslaus) and Ludmilla of Czechia, St. Martin the Confessor, Pope of Rome, etc. Both the Synod and the Council have examined the Filioque question carefully in regard to the case of St. Edward, and, in view of the stated opinions of the Fathers of the Church, have found it not to be an impediment at the time of St. Edward to a Chirstian achieving sanctity.

Apparently for ROCOR's Synod the Filioque wasn't an unsuperable obstacle for holiness.
So a heretic can be a saint according to the Orthodox teaching?

Augustine never opposed the Church's teaching, even if his idea of it was a little sketchy. Error and heresy are two different things.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1651 on: April 30, 2010, 03:29:04 PM »

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?

Here's an interesting quote about St. Edward the Martyr and Filioque from the late Metropolitan Philaret of New York, the former president of ROCOR's Synod:

It has been stated that St. Edward cannot be considered a saint because the Filioque clause had already been inserted into the Symbol of Faith in England by his time. To take such a position is contrary to the stated opinions of the very Fathers of the Church who refuted the Filioque, namely the Ven. Maximus the Confessor and the holy hierarch Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Furthermore, justice would demand that many other saints who professed, unwittingly, the same addition to the Creed, also be removed from our lists of saints, e.g., Sts. Vyacheslav (Wenceslaus) and Ludmilla of Czechia, St. Martin the Confessor, Pope of Rome, etc. Both the Synod and the Council have examined the Filioque question carefully in regard to the case of St. Edward, and, in view of the stated opinions of the Fathers of the Church, have found it not to be an impediment at the time of St. Edward to a Chirstian achieving sanctity.

Apparently for ROCOR's Synod the Filioque wasn't an unsuperable obstacle for holiness.
So a heretic can be a saint according to the Orthodox teaching?

Augustine never opposed the Church's teaching, even if his idea of it was a little sketchy. Error and heresy are two different things.
His words as you have quoted them seem to be pretty clear. And there are others with similar opinions who are regarded as saints.
Logged
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #1652 on: April 30, 2010, 04:23:47 PM »

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?

Here's an interesting quote about St. Edward the Martyr and Filioque from the late Metropolitan Philaret of New York, the former president of ROCOR's Synod:

It has been stated that St. Edward cannot be considered a saint because the Filioque clause had already been inserted into the Symbol of Faith in England by his time. To take such a position is contrary to the stated opinions of the very Fathers of the Church who refuted the Filioque, namely the Ven. Maximus the Confessor and the holy hierarch Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Furthermore, justice would demand that many other saints who professed, unwittingly, the same addition to the Creed, also be removed from our lists of saints, e.g., Sts. Vyacheslav (Wenceslaus) and Ludmilla of Czechia, St. Martin the Confessor, Pope of Rome, etc. Both the Synod and the Council have examined the Filioque question carefully in regard to the case of St. Edward, and, in view of the stated opinions of the Fathers of the Church, have found it not to be an impediment at the time of St. Edward to a Chirstian achieving sanctity.

Apparently for ROCOR's Synod the Filioque wasn't an unsuperable obstacle for holiness.
So a heretic can be a saint according to the Orthodox teaching?

Augustine never opposed the Church's teaching, even if his idea of it was a little sketchy. Error and heresy are two different things.
His words as you have quoted them seem to be pretty clear. And there are others with similar opinions who are regarded as saints.

Even though St. Augustine believed some things that were erroneous, he never set out to oppose or change Church doctrine, like Arius and others traditionally considered heretics did. Having correct beliefs is not what makes a person a saint. Many of the desert fathers believed one thing or another that ran contrary to the understanding of the Church Catholic. That does not make them heretics or non-saints.

In any event, it is God, not the Church calendar, who has the final word on who is a saint.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1653 on: April 30, 2010, 04:52:04 PM »

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?

Here's an interesting quote about St. Edward the Martyr and Filioque from the late Metropolitan Philaret of New York, the former president of ROCOR's Synod:

It has been stated that St. Edward cannot be considered a saint because the Filioque clause had already been inserted into the Symbol of Faith in England by his time. To take such a position is contrary to the stated opinions of the very Fathers of the Church who refuted the Filioque, namely the Ven. Maximus the Confessor and the holy hierarch Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Furthermore, justice would demand that many other saints who professed, unwittingly, the same addition to the Creed, also be removed from our lists of saints, e.g., Sts. Vyacheslav (Wenceslaus) and Ludmilla of Czechia, St. Martin the Confessor, Pope of Rome, etc. Both the Synod and the Council have examined the Filioque question carefully in regard to the case of St. Edward, and, in view of the stated opinions of the Fathers of the Church, have found it not to be an impediment at the time of St. Edward to a Chirstian achieving sanctity.

Apparently for ROCOR's Synod the Filioque wasn't an unsuperable obstacle for holiness.
So a heretic can be a saint according to the Orthodox teaching?

Augustine never opposed the Church's teaching, even if his idea of it was a little sketchy. Error and heresy are two different things.
His words as you have quoted them seem to be pretty clear. And there are others with similar opinions who are regarded as saints.

Even though St. Augustine believed some things that were erroneous, he never set out to oppose or change Church doctrine, like Arius and others traditionally considered heretics did. Having correct beliefs is not what makes a person a saint. Many of the desert fathers believed one thing or another that ran contrary to the understanding of the Church Catholic. That does not make them heretics or non-saints.

In any event, it is God, not the Church calendar, who has the final word on who is a saint.
So the bottom line is that you can hold heretical beliefs and still be a Saint according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church?
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #1654 on: April 30, 2010, 05:02:14 PM »

Interesting that St. Augustine says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. Now, can a heretic be a saint, according to the Orthodox understanding ?

Here's an interesting quote about St. Edward the Martyr and Filioque from the late Metropolitan Philaret of New York, the former president of ROCOR's Synod:

It has been stated that St. Edward cannot be considered a saint because the Filioque clause had already been inserted into the Symbol of Faith in England by his time. To take such a position is contrary to the stated opinions of the very Fathers of the Church who refuted the Filioque, namely the Ven. Maximus the Confessor and the holy hierarch Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople. Furthermore, justice would demand that many other saints who professed, unwittingly, the same addition to the Creed, also be removed from our lists of saints, e.g., Sts. Vyacheslav (Wenceslaus) and Ludmilla of Czechia, St. Martin the Confessor, Pope of Rome, etc. Both the Synod and the Council have examined the Filioque question carefully in regard to the case of St. Edward, and, in view of the stated opinions of the Fathers of the Church, have found it not to be an impediment at the time of St. Edward to a Chirstian achieving sanctity.

Apparently for ROCOR's Synod the Filioque wasn't an unsuperable obstacle for holiness.
So a heretic can be a saint according to the Orthodox teaching?

Augustine never opposed the Church's teaching, even if his idea of it was a little sketchy. Error and heresy are two different things.
His words as you have quoted them seem to be pretty clear. And there are others with similar opinions who are regarded as saints.

Even though St. Augustine believed some things that were erroneous, he never set out to oppose or change Church doctrine, like Arius and others traditionally considered heretics did. Having correct beliefs is not what makes a person a saint. Many of the desert fathers believed one thing or another that ran contrary to the understanding of the Church Catholic. That does not make them heretics or non-saints.

In any event, it is God, not the Church calendar, who has the final word on who is a saint.
So the bottom line is that you can hold heretical beliefs and still be a Saint according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church?

Stanley...

What are you doing?Huh  It is not pleasant when the Orthodox twist things to suit.  Why would you indulge in it?  What truth does it serve?

Orthodoxy sanctifies men and women who, if you asked them would tell you they are sinners, and they do not sanctify formal heretics.

Mary
Logged

Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,371



« Reply #1655 on: April 30, 2010, 05:13:10 PM »

Quote
So the bottom line is that you can hold heretical beliefs and still be a Saint according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church?

That's a tricky question. I think the answer is yes and no. There is no one clear cut answer. St. Photius, for example, clearly thought the filioque wrong, but he defended Augustine and others, even (he says) if they made the error he was condemning...

Quote
Read through Ambrose or Augustine or whatever Father you may choose: which of them wished to affirm anything contrary to the Master's word? If it is I, then I insult your Fathers. But if you say it whilst I deny it, then you insult them, and I condemn you of insolence towards the Fathers. But, you retort, they have written so, and the words the Spirit proceeds from the Son are to be found in their writings. What of it? If those fathers, having been instructed, did not alter or change their opinion, if after just rebukes they were not persuaded — again, this is another slander against your Fathers — then you who teach your word [Filioque] as a dogma introduce your own stubbornness of opinion into the teachings of those men. Although in other things they are the equals of the best [Fathers], what does this have to do with you? If they slipped and fell into error, therefore, by some negligence or oversight — for such is the human condition — when they were corrected, they neither contradicted nor were they obstinately disobedient. For they were not, even in the slightest degree, participants in those things in which you abound. Though they were admirable by reason of many other qualities that manifest virtue and piety, they professed your teaching either through ignorance or negligence. But if they in no way shared the benefit of your advantages [of being corrected], why do your introduce their human fault as a mandate for your blasphemous belief? By your mandate, you attest that men who never imposed anything of this type are obvious transgressors, and so you demand a penalty for the worst blasphemy under the pretence of benevolence and affection. The results of your contentions are not good. Observe the excessive impiety and perversity of this frivolous knowledge! They claim the Master to be their advocate, but are discovered to be liars. They call upon the disciples to be their advocates, but are likewise discovered to be slanderers. They fled for refuge to the Fathers, but are found to cast down their great honour with blasphemy.

Although they call them Fathers — indeed, they do — they do not attribute to them the honour of being Fathers, but seek to discover how they may become patricides. They do not tremble at the voice of the divinely inspired Paul, whom they turn against the Fathers with great wickedness. For he who had received the authority to bind and to loose — and that authority reaches to the very Kingdom of Heaven itself and is both fearful and mighty — exclaims with a great, mighty and brilliant voice, But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you other than what we preached to you, let him be anathema. [Galatians 1:8] He who is so great a man, Paul, the never-silent trumpet of the Church, surrenders to anathema anyone who dares to receive or introduce any foreign doctrine to the Gospel, and he subjects to great curses not only others who would dare this, but also says it about himself; if he were seen to be obstinate, he urged equal judgement. He sets no limit on this fearful word of judgement but searches the heavens themselves. And if he finds there an angel with dominion upon the earth who evangelises anything contrary to the Gospel preaching, he suggests equal bonds, delivering him over to the devil.

And you, who bring forth the Fathers to violate the dogmas of the Master, to violate the preaching of which the disciples were heralds, to violate all the Ecumenical Synods, to violate the godly doctrine preached throughout the whole world, do you neither shudder nor tremble nor cower at the threat [of anathema]? You make them your Fathers without living their life in yourselves. Not even the incorporeal nature of the angels, nor the fact that as pure minds they stand before the Master in devotion, allows occasion for appeal, because they are reduced to equality with earthly things [in being subject to the pronounced anathema]. You call Ambrose, Augustine and other good men your Fathers — alas, such ruinous honour! — but does opposing them to the Master's teaching make any more tolerable the condemnation for yourselves or on these men? For you neither assign a good reward to your Fathers nor repay your forebears properly for their nurture. The anathema will not pass through you onto those blessed men, because neither your sophisms nor disobediences nor impieties will be found with them. You bear the anathema on your own shoulders because you presume they partake in your impiety. With distinguished deeds, however, and with their whole voice they cry against the anathema which you would bring on them.

But I do not admit that what you assert was so plainly taught by those blessed men. Even so, if any among them has fallen into something unseemly — for they were all men and human, and no one composed of dust and ephemeral nature can avoid some trace of defilement — I would then imitate the sons of Noah and cover my father's shame with silence and gratitude instead of a garment. I would not have followed Ham as you do. Indeed, you follow him with even more shamelessness and impudence than he himself, because you publish abroad the shame of those whom you call your Fathers. Ham is cursed, not because he uncovered his father, but because he failed to cover him. You, however, both uncover your Fathers and brag about your audacity. Ham exposes the secret to his brothers; you tell yours not to one or two brothers, but in your rash and reckless abandon, proclaim the shame of your Fathers to the whole world, as if it were your theatre. You behave lewdly towards the shame of their nakedness and seek other revellers with whom to make more conspicuous festival, rejoicing when you expose their nakedness to the light!

Augustine and Jerome said the Spirit proceeds from the Son. Now why is it that having said this in faith, in a time great with sayings, that their treatises did not work your evil? Because it is you who presume that they, and not just yourself, were intent upon this insufferable godlessness. And it is because of the fact that in those times, these sayings were not a impediment to anyone. You, however, abound in the resourcefulness of the enemy.

Admittedly, those things were said (by Augustine and Jerome). But perhaps they spoke out of necessity in attacking [pagan] Greek madness, or whilst refuting heresy, or through some condescension to the weakness of their listeners, or due to the necessity of any one of the many things presented by daily life. If, by chance, such a statement escaped their lips because of one or more of the above reasons, then why do you still dismiss their testimony, and take as a necessary dogma what they did not mean as a dogma? Do you not realise that you bring irreparable destruction upon yourselves by enlisting those men in your rebellious contention? - St. Photius, Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, 68-72

Did this Father or that Father have incorrect--even heretical--beliefs about the Trinity, or salvation, or the end times, before these issues were more clearly discussed and defined? Perhaps.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2010, 05:15:28 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #1656 on: April 30, 2010, 05:18:10 PM »

One of the clearest teachings on the Catholic understanding of filioque that I have ever seen, other than my own of course  Kiss, has recently been offered by an Orthodox layman.  He understands the theology and the history.  I would be happy to direct your collective attention to it under another topic heading but not here.

Mary

« Last Edit: April 30, 2010, 05:21:26 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1657 on: April 30, 2010, 05:48:01 PM »


Stanley...

What are you doing?Huh  It is not pleasant when the Orthodox twist things to suit.  Why would you indulge in it?  What truth does it serve?

Orthodoxy sanctifies men and women who, if you asked them would tell you they are sinners, and they do not sanctify formal heretics.

Mary
Here is the thing - St. Augustine and other saints as well, held the belief that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. According to Orthodox teaching, as I read it to be, this is said to be heresy. Of course, Catholics do not believe such as long as the filioques phrase is properly interpreted.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #1658 on: April 30, 2010, 05:50:44 PM »

Quote
So the bottom line is that you can hold heretical beliefs and still be a Saint according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church?

That's a tricky question. I think the answer is yes and no. ...
Yes and no?
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #1659 on: April 30, 2010, 06:00:10 PM »


Stanley...

What are you doing?Huh  It is not pleasant when the Orthodox twist things to suit.  Why would you indulge in it?  What truth does it serve?

Orthodoxy sanctifies men and women who, if you asked them would tell you they are sinners, and they do not sanctify formal heretics.

Mary
Here is the thing - St. Augustine and other saints as well, held the belief that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. According to Orthodox teaching, as I read it to be, this is said to be heresy. Of course, Catholics do not believe such as long as the filioques phrase is properly interpreted.

Well here is the OTHER thing  Smiley

Formal heresy is a teaching that is used by formal heretic to try to divide the Church.  To explicitly promote a teaching that is not part of revealed truth, and more than promoting that teaching to convince members of the Church to abandon the truth and replace their belief with the heterodox teaching.  If you don't have all of those elements operating then all you have is heterodoxy and error...and that is not enough to have one outside the Church.

That is what formal heresy does.  It puts the believer or the heretical evangelist outside of the Body of Christ.

The Filioque as it has been formally understood by the Catholic Church for centuries is not heresy.  It has never been heresy.

I don't care what the Orthodox have accused us of.  They've been, on this score, quite in error about us.

The real annoyance is that we adjusted the Creed to make the teaching more clear without asking permission.  So I guess it is fair that we all are punished unto the umpteenth generation...eh? Cool

M.

Logged

Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,371



« Reply #1660 on: April 30, 2010, 06:01:03 PM »

Quote
So the bottom line is that you can hold heretical beliefs and still be a Saint according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church?

That's a tricky question. I think the answer is yes and no. ...
Yes and no?

Sure. Questions about doctrinal exactness could be raised about St. Isaac the Syrian, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Ireneaus, and others as well.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2010, 06:02:21 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #1661 on: April 30, 2010, 06:04:30 PM »

Quote
So the bottom line is that you can hold heretical beliefs and still be a Saint according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church?

That's a tricky question. I think the answer is yes and no. ...
Yes and no?

Sure. Questions about doctrinal exactness could be raised about St. Isaac the Syrian, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Ireneaus, and others as well.

Do those two pretty -in- pink living dolls belong to you?
Logged

Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,371



« Reply #1662 on: April 30, 2010, 06:06:16 PM »

Do those two pretty -in- pink living dolls belong to you?

Yes Smiley My daughters Athanasia (about 5) and Sahara (about 3 1/2).
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #1663 on: April 30, 2010, 06:11:30 PM »

Do those two pretty -in- pink living dolls belong to you?

Yes Smiley My daughters Athanasia (about 5) and Sahara (about 3 1/2).

I have a son and daughter [grown] and five grandsons belonging to my very brave daughter...So you can imagine that I surround myself with young women who have baby girls  Smiley.   I do have two lovely nieces just a wee bit older than your two, so I get my fill of their sweetness and humor and fun now and then,  but not quite often enough.

Please pray for my son.  He struggles in life and refuses to turn to God.

Mary
Logged

Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,371



« Reply #1664 on: April 30, 2010, 06:24:57 PM »

May I have your son's first name? I'll add him to my prayers. I've struggled with faith as well over the last few years.
Logged

Tags: indulgences purgatory Hell forgiveness after death toll houses apokatastasis 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 »   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 0.196 seconds with 72 queries.