Topic: Greatest Theologian in your opinion?

[JamesR]

Worst: Arius or Thomas Aquinas, do I even need to mention why?

Yeah

I'm curious as well.

He tried to reduce God into a lousy deistic entity that could be entirely interpreted by the mere human mind even though God is much bigger than that and there are many things about him we will never be able to understand with our minds. Thomas Aquinas did not worship God but worshipped a philosophical idol of God inside of his mind.

Quite the judgmental young man we are.  Thomas Aquinas quit writing his treatise after seeing the uncreated light.

Whether or not he saw the uncreated light is unconfirmed. However, I guess I was being too judgmental.

[KBN1]

Worst: Arius or Thomas Aquinas, do I even need to mention why?

Yeah

I'm curious as well.

He tried to reduce God into a lousy deistic entity that could be entirely interpreted by the mere human mind even though God is much bigger than that and there are many things about him we will never be able to understand with our minds. Thomas Aquinas did not worship God but worshipped a philosophical idol of God inside of his mind.

Have you read his Summa Theologica?  It is an honest question so please don't read anything into it.  I haven't tackled the Summa.  Maybe I will.

A side question to those of you who know a bit about Thomas Aquinas:  Where should a guy start who isn't ready to take on 3000+ pages?

[JamesR]

Have you read his Summa Theologica?  It is an honest question so please don't read anything into it.  I haven't tackled the Summa.  Maybe I will.

Yes and no. I read one of those selected-writings from the Summa Theologica books. I think penguin was the publisher. It was back when I was a Protestant going through this apologetics craze. I guess I was being too judgmental, but, it seems like from what I read, Thomas Aquinas was more of a philosopher than an actual theologian.

[theo philosopher]

Worst: Arius or Thomas Aquinas, do I even need to mention why?

Yeah

I'm curious as well.

He tried to reduce God into a lousy deistic entity that could be entirely interpreted by the mere human mind even though God is much bigger than that and there are many things about him we will never be able to understand with our minds. Thomas Aquinas did not worship God but worshipped a philosophical idol of God inside of his mind.

Have you read his Summa Theologica?  It is an honest question so please don't read anything into it.  I haven't tackled the Summa.  Maybe I will.

A side question to those of you who know a bit about Thomas Aquinas:  Where should a guy start who isn't ready to take on 3000+ pages?

Kreeft's "Summa of the Summa," or Kreeft's "An Even Shorter Summa of the Summa."

[KBN1]

Worst: Arius or Thomas Aquinas, do I even need to mention why?

Yeah

I'm curious as well.

He tried to reduce God into a lousy deistic entity that could be entirely interpreted by the mere human mind even though God is much bigger than that and there are many things about him we will never be able to understand with our minds. Thomas Aquinas did not worship God but worshipped a philosophical idol of God inside of his mind.

Have you read his Summa Theologica?  It is an honest question so please don't read anything into it.  I haven't tackled the Summa.  Maybe I will.

A side question to those of you who know a bit about Thomas Aquinas:  Where should a guy start who isn't ready to take on 3000+ pages?

Kreeft's "Summa of the Summa," or Kreeft's "An Even Shorter Summa of the Summa."

Thank you.  539 pages seems managable.

[Shiny]

Vladimir Lossky

[Shiny]

Quick question how Orthodox is Summa Theologica, even though its written by a Roman Catholic?

[Papist]

Worst: Arius or Thomas Aquinas, do I even need to mention why?

Yeah

I'm curious as well.

He tried to reduce God into a lousy deistic entity that could be entirely interpreted by the mere human mind even though God is much bigger than that and there are many things about him we will never be able to understand with our minds. Thomas Aquinas did not worship God but worshipped a philosophical idol of God inside of his mind.

"For by it's immensity, the divine substance surpasses every form that our intellect reaches. Thus we are unable to apprehend it by knowing what it is. Yet we are able to have some knowledge of it by knowing what it is not." - St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa conta gentiles, book 1, chapter 14

[Melodist]

If the person you believe is the great theologian is not on the list. Just post their name.

This is how we got our feast day for the three hierarchs.

[JamesRottnek]

Once again, I say St. Isaac of Nineveh.

[Kerdy]

I don't know enough to provide a clear answer, but does there have to be a greatest?  Couldn't it just be most personally influential?  So far, for me, its Fr. Alexander Schmemman (spelling?).

Proper title added.

[Severian]

Most overrated infallible theologian: St. Athanasius

It's almost true, though. Has this great Saint ever taught something that was rejected by the Church?

[Asteriktos]

Most overrated infallible theologian: St. Athanasius

It's almost true, though. Has this great Saint ever taught something that was rejected by the Church?

He rejected Esther from his biblical canon

[Severian]

Most overrated infallible theologian: St. Athanasius

It's almost true, though. Has this great Saint ever taught something that was rejected by the Church?

He rejected Esther from his biblical canon

That's true. Did he ever teach any doctrinal errors, however?

[Alpo]

Most overrated infallible theologian: St. Athanasius

It's almost true, though. Has this great Saint ever taught something that was rejected by the Church?

He rejected Esther from his biblical canon

That's true. Did he ever teach any theological errors, however?

Erring on biblical canon is not a theological error? 

[Severian]

Most overrated infallible theologian: St. Athanasius

It's almost true, though. Has this great Saint ever taught something that was rejected by the Church?

He rejected Esther from his biblical canon

That's true. Did he ever teach any theological errors, however?

Erring on biblical canon is not a theological error? 

Perhaps doctrinal would have been a better word to use. In any case, there are variances in Biblical canons even within the OO Communions and (AFAIK) EO Communions. The book of Enoch is canonical in the Ethiopian Church, but not in the Coptic Church. The Coptic canon is closer to that of RC's, whereas the Armenian canon is more like the Byzantine one.

[minasoliman]

Most overrated infallible theologian: St. Athanasius

It's almost true, though. Has this great Saint ever taught something that was rejected by the Church?

He rejected Esther from his biblical canon

That's true. Did he ever teach any theological errors, however?

Erring on biblical canon is not a theological error? 

No, that's not a theological error.

[Asteriktos]

I agree that specific scriptural canons are theologoumena when considered across the entirety of Christianity (and even within Orthodoxies), albeit a very important one that can't be ignored. But I wasn't asked to give a theological or doctrinal or dogmatic or [insert another term] mistake. The question was: "Has this great Saint ever taught something that was rejected by the Church?"  And the answer is yes, his scriptural canon was rejected by all Christian churches that I know of. 

[Severian]

^Haha, good point! Did he ever teach a doctrinal, dogmatic, or theological error, however?

[Asteriktos]

^Haha, good point! Did he ever teach a doctrinal, dogmatic, or theological error, however.

It's been a while since I read most of his writings (on CCEL), but I don't recall reading/hearing about any such error

[Shiny]

How reliable is stuff like CCEL?

[Asteriktos]

How reliable is stuff like CCEL?

Well, it's a Protestant site with Protestant source material (notes, introductions, etc.), but it's better than nothing. The past few years I've used newadvent's Church Fathers section just because it's easier to navigate and link to, but they don't have nearly as many notes or indexes. Unless you mean the translations, then I'm not sure. I have run into things that I wasn't sure about, like the phrase "semi-orthodox" in an oration of St. Gregory the Theologian.

[Shiny]

I ask that question because I wonder if Protestant theology would somehow distort the original text or the translation philosophy is to be more in line with Protestantism.

Nontheless I too think it's a very good site with alot of information.

[minasoliman]

I agree that specific scriptural canons are theologoumena when considered across the entirety of Christianity (and even within Orthodoxies), albeit a very important one that can't be ignored. But I wasn't asked to give a theological or doctrinal or dogmatic or [insert another term] mistake. The question was: "Has this great Saint ever taught something that was rejected by the Church?"  And the answer is yes, his scriptural canon was rejected by all Christian churches that I know of. 

Actually if anything, Esther wasn't rejected completely, but was considered pious reading, recommended by the Fathers for those "wishing to be instructed in the word of godliness".

[Shiny]

If I can add nothing to this discussion of St. Athansius' it would be I've had a few atheists confess that his On the Incarnation made them rethink about Christianity. It also made an impression on me when I was inquring into Orthodoxy and made me fall in love with the saint.

[Severian]

In which letter was it that he set forth the Biblical canon (excluding Esther)?

EDIT: Thank you Asteriktos.

[Asteriktos]

Letter 39 (from 367)