OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 16, 2014, 12:45:01 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags CHAT Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: OO fathers on the wills of Christ  (Read 6401 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #45 on: September 13, 2011, 08:25:06 PM »

How were the condemned heresies defined? Mono in a Eutychian sense or mono/mia in a Cyrillian sense?

If the latter, then wouldn't that be a legitimate difference in Eastern and Oriental Orthodox theologies?
I will try to discuss these things with you tomorrow if I can find the time. But I have to dash right now.

Best wishes and God bless. Smiley
Severian! You still haven't discussed this with me.  Cry
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #46 on: September 13, 2011, 09:32:47 PM »

Sorry for the delayed response but I have had a lot of paperwork to do. Though I will probably be able to speak to you in more detail tomorrow. Smiley

Quote
I don't really get what that means. What is a "thing viewed in a different category, not in one proper to it"?
I think here he is arguing that wills cannot be categorized as a property of hypostasis.

Quote
By properties does he mean things proper to a hypostasis? Or, like, adjectives vs nouns?

Would it be Orthodox (from an Oriental POV) to say that Christ has the composite properties of being both invisible and visible or being created and uncreated?
I think what he means is that if we speak of one faculty of willing we would have to say that the same will is both created and uncreated, invisible and visible. As per the second part of your post, I am not 100% sure what you mean by this. If what you mean is that we believe he is visible according to the flesh while being invisible in his divinity, etc., then yes we do believe that.

Quote
Following that logic, couldn't you say that Christ's subsistence as the Theanthropos separates Him from the Father because the Father's hypostasis is not compound?
No, because the three hypostases of the Trinity are distinct in hypostasis but are united in one essence. Thus, the Father and Son would still be one God even though the Father's hypostasis is uncompound while the Son's hypostasis is compound, because they still share the same essence.

Quote
I wonder if St. Cyril ever wrote about Christ's will(s). Probably not if the controversy never came up until centuries after his repose.
Actually, over in the private fora someone cited a quote from St. Cyril where he seems to imply that there are two natural faculties of willing in Christ. If I can find it for you (probably tomorrow), I will.
Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #47 on: September 15, 2011, 05:19:15 PM »

Why are you agreeing with St. John's critique of miaenergism and miatheletism? I thought that the OO were miathelites/miaenergists.
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #48 on: September 15, 2011, 05:28:05 PM »

Why are you agreeing with St. John's critique of miaenergism and miatheletism? I thought that the OO were miathelites/miaenergists.
I am not agreeing with it, I am explaining it. In any case he isn't arguing against Miathelitism as the OO understand it (I.e. one volitional impulse and one willing subject), he is criticizing the belief that Christ has one faculty of willing. Both the OO and EO agree that there are two faculties of willing in Christ.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2011, 05:35:40 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #49 on: September 15, 2011, 05:34:41 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Why are you agreeing with St. John's critique of miaenergism and miatheletism? I thought that the OO were miathelites/miaenergists.
I am not agreeing with it, I am explaining it. In any case he isn't arguing against Miathelitism as the OO understand it (I.e. one volitional impulse and one acting subject), he is criticizing the belief that Christ has one faculty of willing. Both the OO and EO agree that there are two faculties of willing in Christ.

Two faculties of the One (mia, composite) Will though correct? What is the specifically EO take on this considering I understand them to profess two converging wills?



stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #50 on: September 15, 2011, 05:43:00 PM »

^Yes, two faculties of willing. Meaning two ways of willing, but one incarnate will. Christ is one willing subject with one object of willing (I.e. to follow the will of his Father) who expresses this one will in two real and distinct ways. I cannot say what the EO think of our theletic Christology, but between the agreed statements, St. Severus' dyothelite confession in his work "Contra Impium Grammaticum" (though his theletism is probably more consistent with our Christology), and amongst other things I don't find anything objectional to what the sixth council has to say about the "two natural wills" in Christ.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2011, 05:43:37 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #51 on: September 15, 2011, 05:53:23 PM »

What's the difference between Christ having two faculties of willing and having two wills?
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #52 on: September 15, 2011, 05:56:57 PM »

Also, is Christ's divine will part of the essence of the Most Holy Trinity or part of His hypostasis? If it's part of the divine essence common to all three hypostases, then I can see St. John's point about how Christ cannot have one composite will because the will is not His but also that of His Father and Holy Spirit.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2011, 05:57:20 PM by William » Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #53 on: September 15, 2011, 08:47:43 PM »

What's the difference between Christ having two faculties of willing and having two wills?
For the EO "two faculties of willing" and "two natural wills" seem to be synonymous. To the ear of an OO "two wills" can be interpreted as meaning that Christ has two "schizophrenic" objects of willing, so we speak of one will meaning one willing subject and one object of willing with two natural faculties by which the "one will" is expressed/willed. I have heard some OO theologians explain our theletism by saying that Christ has "one personal will with two natural wills". One personal will because Christ is one person and he has one object of willing, two natural wills because he has two faculties of willing. One faculty of willing stems from the divine nature and the other stems from the human nature.

Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #54 on: September 15, 2011, 08:50:44 PM »

Also, is Christ's divine will part of the essence of the Most Holy Trinity or part of His hypostasis? If it's part of the divine essence common to all three hypostases, then I can see St. John's point about how Christ cannot have one composite will because the will is not His but also that of His Father and Holy Spirit.
Perhaps Fr. Peter can correct me on this one if I am wrong, but I would think that the divine faculty willing in the All-Holy Trinity is a part of the one divine essence. Otherwise we would have to say that there are three divine faculties in the All-Holy Trinity! But of course the OO do not confess one composite faculty of willing, we confess two distinct faculties of willing.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2011, 08:52:10 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
CoptoGeek
of Alexandria, the Christ-loving City
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church
Posts: 1,299



« Reply #55 on: September 16, 2011, 10:46:41 AM »

I'm not very knowledgable on this but Fr. Kyrillos posted a link to a lecture by HG Anba Bishoy that touched on the subject in another thread. Perhaps it may be of interest to you. The topic of willing starts on p. 64 (the 9th page of the word doc)

brief excerpt:

Quote
Our church also does not accept this concept that the natural human will was dissolved.  The natural divine will, natural human will were united without confusion and without mixture.  To say ‘without confusion’, means that the natural human will of Jesus Christ was not eliminated because of the union.  Does this mean that Jesus Christ had two wills?  It is impossible to say that He had two wills, otherwise He is going to be considered two persons.  That’s why we should define what we mean by the word ‘will’.  The same problem concerning the natures emerges with ‘will’.  He has His natural divine will united to His natural human will, but the two natural wills continued to exist in the union, in complete harmony without contradiction.

What is the natural will and what is the personal will? 

The natural will is the desire; the personal will is the decision. 
You can say, ‘I want to drink, but I don’t want to drink’;  ‘I have a will to go, but I don’t will to go.’   What does this mean?  If you are fasting you say ‘I am willing to drink, but I shall not drink’?   It means that ‘I desire to drink but I decided not to drink’.  So, there is difference between the natural will and personal will.  The personal will works with the decision, while the natural will works with the desire.

As a human being Jesus Christ felt hunger and thirst while He was fasting on the mount. He naturally desired to drink or to eat, because His divinity did not eliminate the properties of His humanity; the energies and the natural will were not eliminated. Only tendency to sin was absolutely not in Him.  He never had a desire for sin - not to desire and resist;  no never.  He was absolutely holy and infallible.  However, all the other human desires were in Him.  One of these desires as any human being was that he does not like to die.  This normal desire was present in Him when He was approaching the cross.  But, obeying the Father, as a person He is the second Person of the Holy Trinity;  He is free, but He has input to His personal decision from His human desire and divine desire.  His divine desire is identical with the desire of the Father.  The three hypostaseis are three persons, three in their will, loving each other, but they have the same will and the same desire.  Three in number, but one in nature.  Naturally, whatever the Father desires, the Son desires, and the Holy Spirit desires. 

Are the natural wills identical?  No, because if they are identical this means that we are Eutychean and that there is confusion, since the natural desire of His humanity was absorbed in His divinity.  This is the heresy of Monotheletism.  If the two natural energies and natural wills are reduced to one natural will, this is the Eutychean heresy.  Saint Cyril of Alexandria said that the differences of the properties of the two natures were not destroyed because of the union. 


http://www.metroplit-bishoy.org/files/lectures/Lecture%204.doc
Logged

"Be oppressed, rather than the oppressor. Be gentle, rather than zealous. Lay hold of goodness, rather than justice." -St. Isaac of Nineveh

“I returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church with affection, finding in her our tormented and broken history“. -Salama Moussa
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #56 on: September 16, 2011, 02:01:26 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!
What's the difference between Christ having two faculties of willing and having two wills?

As it has just been explained with CoptoGeek's quote, we have a natural will and a faculty of will.  In our own humanity, we are physical-spiritual beings, which necessarily have two "wills" and yet do not. The spirit may desire one thing, and the flesh another, but we as individual persons maintain only a single will, even if multifaceted. We are not two persons, a spiritual and a physical united, rather we are of one nature, one person, yet clearly are differences between the will of the flesh and the will of the spirit as the Apostle Paul explains in Romans 7

Quote
"For we are aware that the law is spiritual, yet I am fleshly, having been disposed of under Sin. For what effecting I know not, for not what I will, this I am putting into practice, but what I am hating, this I am doing.  Now what I am not willing, this I am doing."

This is the faculties of willing, that we can desire things which we are not necessarily doing, just as Jesus Christ, as God, surely being Immortal desired not to die, and yet allowed His Person do experience death.
stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #57 on: September 16, 2011, 06:29:36 PM »

What's the difference between Christ having two faculties of willing and having two wills?
For the EO "two faculties of willing" and "two natural wills" seem to be synonymous. To the ear of an OO "two wills" can be interpreted as meaning that Christ has two "schizophrenic" objects of willing, so we speak of one will meaning one willing subject and one object of willing with two natural faculties by which the "one will" is expressed/willed. I have heard some OO theologians explain our theletism by saying that Christ has "one personal will with two natural wills". One personal will because Christ is one person and he has one object of willing, two natural wills because he has two faculties of willing. One faculty of willing stems from the divine nature and the other stems from the human nature.


Why do you OOs have to keep believing the exact same thing as the EO with different terminology? Come on! Throw me a bone, here! There's got to be at least one doctrinal difference!

 Wink
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #58 on: September 16, 2011, 06:35:40 PM »

Ok. So, how can the divine will in Christ possibly only be a "natural will" and not a "personal will"? It is a personal will for the Father and Holy Spirit, and the divine essence of the Logos did not change during the incarnation. So wouldn't Christ's divine faculty of willing/natural will be a personal will?
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #59 on: September 16, 2011, 08:03:35 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Ok. So, how can the divine will in Christ possibly only be a "natural will" and not a "personal will"? It is a personal will for the Father and Holy Spirit, and the divine essence of the Logos did not change during the incarnation. So wouldn't Christ's divine faculty of willing/natural will be a personal will?

It is a natural will because of the Union within the Incarnation.  While the Divine Essence of the Word did not change, it was unified with the human essence which has its own "natural" will, and so in the Union, Jesus Christ is One Person, of One (mia/composite) Nature and subsequently has only One Will.  Jesus Christ's unified, one will is at once both naturally Divine and yet human because of the unity of the Incarnation. Naturally [i.e. essentially, or by nature], Jesus Christ expressed the Divine Will, and yet due to the unique status of His Incarnation and His uniquely Divine-Human hypostasis, Jesus Christ has His Own Will, that is naturally a synergy of both Divine and Human wills.  In this concept, Jesus Christ represents the truest manifestation of the human prayer of "Father, let Thine Will be Done."

In being Divine, Jesus Christ manifests the Divine Will of God, and yet as a perfect human being, Jesus Christ also at the same time manifests the human will in synergy with the Divine.  This is a composition, as the theology of miaphysis suggests.

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #60 on: September 16, 2011, 11:33:28 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Ok. So, how can the divine will in Christ possibly only be a "natural will" and not a "personal will"? It is a personal will for the Father and Holy Spirit, and the divine essence of the Logos did not change during the incarnation. So wouldn't Christ's divine faculty of willing/natural will be a personal will?

It is a natural will because of the Union within the Incarnation.  While the Divine Essence of the Word did not change, it was unified with the human essence which has its own "natural" will, and so in the Union, Jesus Christ is One Person, of One (mia/composite) Nature and subsequently has only One Will.  Jesus Christ's unified, one will is at once both naturally Divine and yet human because of the unity of the Incarnation. Naturally [i.e. essentially, or by nature], Jesus Christ expressed the Divine Will, and yet due to the unique status of His Incarnation and His uniquely Divine-Human hypostasis, Jesus Christ has His Own Will, that is naturally a synergy of both Divine and Human wills.  In this concept, Jesus Christ represents the truest manifestation of the human prayer of "Father, let Thine Will be Done."

In being Divine, Jesus Christ manifests the Divine Will of God, and yet as a perfect human being, Jesus Christ also at the same time manifests the human will in synergy with the Divine.  This is a composition, as the theology of miaphysis suggests.

stay blessed,
habte selassie

That sounds like a spot on explanation to me! *Thumbs up*
« Last Edit: September 16, 2011, 11:37:33 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #61 on: September 16, 2011, 11:49:32 PM »

This post from Monachos.net was really helpful regarding St. Severus' teaching on the freely-willing soul of Christ:
Quote
Dear M.C. Steenberg,

+irini nem ehmot,

Nonetheless, I would wager that the concern he wishes to address is not that of a struggle in Christ, but that of real freedom in Christ: is Christ truly free, in the sense that the human will is a free will, to be disobedient?
Severos of Antioch addresses this issue by essentially concluding that it is because of the fact that Christ’s human will is trulyfree will that it is always in sync with the divine will.

True freedom of will, in the sense that Severos had in mind, is not freedom in the sense of mere volitional capacity, but rather in the sense of fully informed volition. When man opposes the will of God, we do so primarily because of the ignorance of our person which inhibits us from recognising true, absolute and objective goodness (which our spirits are naturally inclined towards) in order to consequently will and act in accordance to such goodness; we recognise as the good that which falsely appears good to us by virtue of our ignorance.

Christ, being none other than True, Absolute, and Objective Goodness Incarnate, could not have possibly suffered from the same problem, hence the impossibility of His human will freely acting contrary to the divine will. It seems contradictory for me to use variations of the terms “impossible” and “free” in application to the same subject, but essentially it is no contradiction, just a paradox.

Is there any Father or theologian of the EO Church that would share similar sentiments to this?

In IC XC
-Athanasius (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?2964-The-relationship-of-two-wills-in-Christ&p=36853&viewfull=1#post36853)
I think that Maximus of Constantinople argued very similarly to St. Severus in this regard, am I wrong?
Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #62 on: September 18, 2011, 07:03:47 PM »

Ok, thanks to HabteSelassie and Severian for their willingness to educate me.

I really need to study this stuff more in depth sometime. But finding the time is hard.
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #63 on: September 19, 2011, 01:21:20 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

I was reading the Gospels this morning, and came across the passage regarding the Leper on the roadside who asked Jesus for a healing saying, "Lord if you are willing, I can be cleansed."  Jesus replied, "I am willing, be cleansed."

Notice Jesus Christ didn't say, "My Divine Nature is willing, be cleansed" to perform this miracle in distinction from His natural human will stemming from Him being a God-Man standing and breathing and speaking those words to that Leper, rather in demonstrating the synergy of His Will He said in the singular first-person, "I am willing.."  In Oriental Orthodox the fathers teach that there is One composite Nature incarnate in One composite hypostasis, having One composite Will, both human and divine in all three regards.

By the way to William, the year I have spent here on the forum has been life changing in regards to the depth of my theological discussions and studies, I had studied many things before, but this place is a valuable outlet to have not only the discussions that are very rare in day to day encounters (even with priests, really who has the time?) but also speak with such a variety of brothers and sisters with great experience and understanding to share.  Its one of the things I love most about our forum and why I invest so much time here, to give back to folks as much as I can for all they give to me Smiley

stay blessed,
habte selassie

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #64 on: September 29, 2011, 03:28:09 PM »

What do St. Timothy Aelurus and the other great OO Fathers say about the will of Christ?
« Last Edit: September 29, 2011, 03:36:34 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,581



WWW
« Reply #65 on: September 29, 2011, 05:25:31 PM »

At that early time in the controversial period they used the term 'rational' to describe a 'thinking, acting, willing agent'. So when you see the insistence that the humanity of Christ is 'rational' it always means that it is a humanity with the integrity of the human faculty of will preserved. Of course it does not stand for an independently willing agent apart from the Divine willing of the Word.

Since the Cyrilline tradition insists on the necessity for one who is human to take up again the conflict with Satan, the enemy and deceiver of mankind, it is inconceivable that our anti-Chalcedonian tradition would remove this necessary aspect from the humanity of Christ. It is as man that God the Word shows Himself entirely obedient to the Will of the Father, not independently from His Divinity, but in perfect hypostatic union with His own humanity.

Father Peter
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org
Study the Orthodox Faith online with the London School of Orthodox Christian Studies
http://www.lsocs.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,959


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #66 on: October 03, 2011, 05:47:33 PM »

Since the Cyrilline tradition insists on the necessity for one who is human to take up again the conflict with Satan, the enemy and deceiver of mankind, it is inconceivable that our anti-Chalcedonian tradition would remove this necessary aspect from the humanity of Christ. It is as man that God the Word shows Himself entirely obedient to the Will of the Father, not independently from His Divinity, but in perfect hypostatic union with His own humanity.

Father Peter

Father,

I feel like Gandalf trying to pick up the Ring here, but I don't see a difference between EO and OO on this explanation.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,581



WWW
« Reply #67 on: October 04, 2011, 03:07:39 AM »

There isn't a difference.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org
Study the Orthodox Faith online with the London School of Orthodox Christian Studies
http://www.lsocs.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #68 on: October 17, 2011, 06:29:18 AM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Why are you agreeing with St. John's critique of miaenergism and miatheletism? I thought that the OO were miathelites/miaenergists.
I am not agreeing with it, I am explaining it. In any case he isn't arguing against Miathelitism as the OO understand it (I.e. one volitional impulse and one acting subject), he is criticizing the belief that Christ has one faculty of willing. Both the OO and EO agree that there are two faculties of willing in Christ.

Two faculties of the One (mia, composite) Will though correct? What is the specifically EO take on this considering I understand them to profess two converging wills?



stay blessed,
habte selassie

This is our take on it:
http://www.amazon.com/Disputation-Pyrrhus-Father-Maximus-Confessor/dp/1878997017 (The Disputation With Pyrrhus of Our Father Among the Saints Maximus the Confessor)



As well as this:
http://www.amazon.com/Free-Choice-Saint-Maximus-Confessor/dp/1878997025/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1318847257&sr=1-1 (Free Choice in Saint Maximus the Confessor)






Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,581



WWW
« Reply #69 on: October 17, 2011, 07:57:21 AM »

Can you distill those two volumes into an easy to appreciate paragraph?
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org
Study the Orthodox Faith online with the London School of Orthodox Christian Studies
http://www.lsocs.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #70 on: October 18, 2011, 08:27:34 PM »

Can you distill those two volumes into an easy to appreciate paragraph?

Father,

I read free choice in Saint Maximus the Confessor, and it quoted the other work a number of times, but before I give an answer, I would like to read The whole Disputation first, and not just quotes of it, as seen from the other book. I'm getting my copy from the Library and so I should have it soon.

But if you would like to see a snippet of free choice in Saint Maximus the Confessor you can. I quoted 4 pages of it back in January:

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/2011/01/more-about-western-confusion.html (from pages 207 to 211)

« Last Edit: October 18, 2011, 08:31:37 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
CoptoGeek
of Alexandria, the Christ-loving City
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church
Posts: 1,299



« Reply #71 on: October 19, 2011, 07:30:56 AM »


jnorm888, what an awesome website!
Logged

"Be oppressed, rather than the oppressor. Be gentle, rather than zealous. Lay hold of goodness, rather than justice." -St. Isaac of Nineveh

“I returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church with affection, finding in her our tormented and broken history“. -Salama Moussa
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #72 on: October 20, 2011, 09:12:11 AM »



Thank you!
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #73 on: October 24, 2011, 05:59:58 PM »

The Library wants me to pick up the book this Thursday, but I will be out of town that day and so I should have it by Friday.
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #74 on: October 24, 2011, 06:52:07 PM »

Also, is Christ's divine will part of the essence of the Most Holy Trinity or part of His hypostasis? If it's part of the divine essence common to all three hypostases, then I can see St. John's point about how Christ cannot have one composite will because the will is not His but also that of His Father and Holy Spirit.
The Divine will is part of the divine essence, or rather, the divine will is not a faculty of a divine person.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2011, 06:53:34 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #75 on: October 24, 2011, 08:23:35 PM »

Mina provided me these interesting quotes from St. Severus on another thread (from Fr. V.C. Samuel's book):


Quote
God the Word who brought us into being, through whom the Father made all things, when by his grace alone he willed to restore him who had fallen to the original order to give back to him who had fallen to the original order the grace of immortality, did not exercise force by using divine power.  On the contrary, in accordance with the word of justice, he made him who had fallen to fight again the battle. ... It was necessary for man to obtain the crown of victory over satan who had formerly deceived and defeated him.
p. 339


Quote
The Lord suffered the vehement feeling of hunger, which arouses the yearning for food.  Therefore, the voluntary passions permitted by the Word were not without any operation; but there was in him the stirring up of operations.  These were, however, subjected to the power of the invincible God.
p. 341


Quote
By his death our Saviour vanquished death.  It is clear, therefore, that if he did not die, death would not have been abolished.  The same is true of every one of the passions of the flesh.  If he did not fear, nature would not have been freed from fear.
p. 341

The second quote is particularly interesting. St. Severus says that the "voluntary passions" of the Word which were exercised by virtue of the Divine kenosis in the Incarnation were brought about by a "stirring of operations" intrinsic to the human will. Here, the human will, and the "voluntary passions" intrinsic hitherto, take initiative, yet at the same time, the human will is "subject to the power of the invincible God". Therefore, St. Severus cannot be accused of teaching that the human will was a mere "marionette" of the Divine will.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2011, 08:42:56 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #76 on: October 24, 2011, 08:41:20 PM »

Here's another interesting quote from St. Severus:

Quote
"But [Christ's soul] was not without intelligence and imperfect, according to the statement of the proverbs of Apollinaris, but was in fact intelligent, as indeed the very term 'boy' and the fact that he was named 'man' is enough to show this same thing: for a boy's soul is not without reason, but it is reasonable because it is human. However this very same thing is also clearly shown even by the sacred writings of the gospel; for it said of him, «Then he began to be distressed and grieved, and to say, 'My soul is sorrowful, even unto death'». But it is plain to everyone that distress and grief happen to a rational and intellectual soul. But, if they say that the Godhead of the Only one took the place of intellect, this is in truth a thing without intellect, for us to assign the passion of distress to the impassible nature of God."

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/severus_coll_3_letters.htm
Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #77 on: October 24, 2011, 08:43:04 PM »

Mina provided me these interesting quotes from St. Severus on another thread (from Fr. V.C. Samuel's book):


Quote
God the Word who brought us into being, through whom the Father made all things, when by his grace alone he willed to restore him who had fallen to the original order to give back to him who had fallen to the original order the grace of immortality, did not exercise force by using divine power.  On the contrary, in accordance with the word of justice, he made him who had fallen to fight again the battle. ... It was necessary for man to obtain the crown of victory over satan who had formerly deceived and defeated him.
p. 339


Quote
The Lord suffered the vehement feeling of hunger, which arouses the yearning for food.  Therefore, the voluntary passions permitted by the Word were not without any operation; but there was in him the stirring up of operations.  These were, however, subjected to the power of the invincible God.
p. 341


Quote
By his death our Saviour vanquished death.  It is clear, therefore, that if he did not die, death would not have been abolished.  The same is true of every one of the passions of the flesh.  If he did not fear, nature would not have been freed from fear.
p. 341

The second quote is particularly interesting. St. Severus says that the "voluntary passions" of the Word which were exercised by virtue of the Divine kenosis were brought about by a "stirring of operations" intrinsic to the human will. Here, the human will, and the "voluntary passions" intrinsic hitherto, take initiative, yet at the same time, the human will is "subject to the power of the invincible God". Therefore, St. Severus cannot be accused of teaching that the human will was a mere "marionette" of the Divine will.


Thanks for posting the quotes from the other thread. I would also like to quote one that you presented as well:

Quote
Quote from: Severian on July 25, 2011, 10:53:28 PM
I think that this passage from St Severus would refute any allegation that he was a "Monothelite":

"But [Christ's soul] was not without intelligence and imperfect, according to the statement of the proverbs of Apollinaris, but was in fact intelligent, as indeed the very term 'boy' and the fact that he was named 'man' is enough to show this same thing: for a boy's soul is not without reason, but it is reasonable because it is human. However this very same thing is also clearly shown even by the sacred writings of the gospel; for it said of him, «Then he began to be distressed and grieved, and to say, 'My soul is sorrowful, even unto death'». But it is plain to everyone that distress and grief happen to a rational and intellectual soul. But, if they say that the Godhead of the Only one took the place of intellect, this is in truth a thing without intellect, for us to assign the passion of distress to the impassible nature of God."
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Here St Severus attributes the anguish in the Garden of Gethsemane to the freely willing and rational soul of the Incarnate Word. The Monothelites, from my understanding, would posit the human will of Christ as a "marionette" of his divinity. That is, they would attribute the anguish of Christ to his divinity activating the human faculty of willing, unless of course I'm wrong.

You're not wrong. For that's exactly what Pyrrhus (from the quotes I read) was saying in his conversation with Saint Maximus.



Thanks for sharing, for now I know that you and I are extremely close in this area.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2011, 08:45:59 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #78 on: October 24, 2011, 08:46:40 PM »

@Jnorm888 Thank you for informing me of this. Smiley Do you think that St. Severus of Antioch was in agreement with Pyrrhus' doctrine based on the information I have provided? Curious...
« Last Edit: October 24, 2011, 08:48:11 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,959


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #79 on: October 24, 2011, 08:54:34 PM »

@Jnorm888 Thank you for informing me of this. Smiley Do you think that St. Severus of Antioch was in agreement with Pyrrhus' doctrine based on the information I have provided? Curious...

ISTM that Pyrrhus and the Monothelites are marrianettists, while Severus and St. Maximus are in agreement.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #80 on: October 24, 2011, 08:56:12 PM »

^This is indeed interesting because Maximus himself accused Saint Severus of being a "marrionettist", but the latter's works were almost completely destroyed during the former's life, so... who knows? Huh
« Last Edit: October 24, 2011, 09:00:51 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #81 on: October 24, 2011, 09:05:35 PM »

@Jnorm888 Thank you for informing me of this. Smiley Do you think that St. Severus of Antioch was in agreement with Pyrrhus' doctrine based on the information I have provided? Curious...

No, based on the quotes you provided, I would say they were not in agreement. The quotes you posted by the O.O. St. Severus were in agreement with the E.O. Saint Maximus.


Thus, you and I are mostly in agreement on this issue. (I agree with the quotes you posted, not only on this thread, but in the other one as well)
« Last Edit: October 24, 2011, 09:12:54 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,959


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #82 on: October 24, 2011, 09:11:12 PM »

^This is indeed interesting because Maximus himself accused Saint Severus of being a "marrionettist", but the latter's works were almost completely destroyed during the former's life, so... who knows? Huh

The works of Severus were destroyed? Just the Greek versions? I assume the Syriac versions survived. (Although, the rate of survivorship of patristic manuscripts is not so good. A lot of St. John Chrysostom was apparently lost, but it seems we have almost all of Blessed Theodoret's Biblical commentaries. However, being Antiochene, they're kind of terse, but still worth a read. No Christological problems in the Biblical commentaries that I know of.)
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #83 on: October 24, 2011, 09:19:00 PM »

@Jnorm888 Thank you then, that's interesting. Smiley

@Shanghaiski Yes, most of the Greek works of St. Severus were destroyed, though many of his works translated in Syriac survive.
Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #84 on: October 24, 2011, 09:24:03 PM »

^This is indeed interesting because Maximus himself accused Saint Severus of being a "marrionettist", but the latter's works were almost completely destroyed during the former's life, so... who knows? Huh

The works of Severus were destroyed? Just the Greek versions? I assume the Syriac versions survived. (Although, the rate of survivorship of patristic manuscripts is not so good. A lot of St. John Chrysostom was apparently lost, but it seems we have almost all of Blessed Theodoret's Biblical commentaries. However, being Antiochene, they're kind of terse, but still worth a read. No Christological problems in the Biblical commentaries that I know of.)
I just saw something on his abandonment of the term "Temple" for the human nature in the Commentaries.
The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrus: Antiochene Christology from the Council of Ephesus (431) to the Council of Chalcedon (451) By Paul B. Clayton
http://books.google.com/books?id=2m5Xnlarz8UC&pg=PA289&dq=Theodoret+Epistels&hl=en#v=snippet&q=suffered%20in%20the%20flesh&f=false

btw, the rate of survivorship of anything of ancient literature is not so good.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #85 on: October 24, 2011, 10:56:28 PM »

It seems he was flexible (or "inconsistent" some would say) on the question of the wills, but he is firm in monoenergism.
With respect, St. Severus affirmed the pseudo-Dionysian formula "new God-man energy" and even (Father?) Cyril Hovorun said he affirmed a human "component" in the energy of the Incarnate Word, so I do not think it is accurate to accuse him of monoenergism.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2011, 10:57:52 PM by Severian » Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,581



WWW
« Reply #86 on: October 25, 2011, 04:18:51 AM »

ialmisry, if you read all of Clayton's book, which is a good read, you will see that Clayton shows that while Theodoret moderated his language he never changed his Christology and remained a Theodorean all his life.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org
Study the Orthodox Faith online with the London School of Orthodox Christian Studies
http://www.lsocs.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,581



WWW
« Reply #87 on: October 25, 2011, 04:21:48 AM »

I think Hovorun fails to understand our Christology fully. He quotes things which I read naturally one way, and then he takes a different (and wrong) view.

If he, and others, (generally) always took 'one' to mean 'one by composition and union', rather than 'simply one', then they would be less confused. Hovorun's difficulty is that he has relied on Grillmeier to describe our Christology and Grillmeier is usually very wrong indeed. One academic in a paper I read recently said that Grillmeier had led an entire generation of theological students astray. I felt the same thing when I first read him 15+years ago.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org
Study the Orthodox Faith online with the London School of Orthodox Christian Studies
http://www.lsocs.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Severian
Glory be to the Most-Holy Trinity, both now and ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: I have it, but I don't live up to it
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 4,690


St. Severus of Antioch, Crown of the Syrians!

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #88 on: October 25, 2011, 02:47:52 PM »

Grillmeier says that St. Severus denied Christ's human will was active, but on what basis does he derive his argument from? I have not read too much from him, only a few excerpts from his books on Google.books.
Logged

I'm trying to avoid polemical posts until after Lent

Update, 4/9- Trying again...

Please pray for persecuted Christians in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Palestine & Kosovo


God bless Egypt & Syria, we share the same pain
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,581



WWW
« Reply #89 on: October 25, 2011, 02:51:39 PM »

Grillmeier is consistently wrong on our Christology, and even that of St Cyril.

He reads everything that speaks of 'one' with a certain perspective that is not true to our faith.

I always use him for his references, which are great, but I have never trusted his commentary.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org
Study the Orthodox Faith online with the London School of Orthodox Christian Studies
http://www.lsocs.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Tags: one will 
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   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 0.149 seconds with 72 queries.