OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 22, 2014, 09:40:12 PM *
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 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Themistius and the Agnoetae  (Read 5151 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« on: October 31, 2011, 08:30:23 AM »

I want to start a seperate thread dealing with this heresy particularly, as the other Christology thread is rather dealing with wider issues.

I am presently trying to produce a collection of texts dealing with Themistius and the Agnoetae. This will take a little while as I am having to translate many of the key texts, some passages have been translated by Grillmeier.

Here are a few notes that interested parties can add to and hopefully discuss.

Historical information

Themistius was a deacon from Alexandria who travelled to Constantinople, probably with St Theodosius, the exiled patriarch of Alexandria. His views were typically Severan, and he became controversial only when his opinion that Christ lacked knowledge of the last day, and of other matters, entered the public sphere.

Patriarch Anthimus of Constantinople wrote against his views, as did Patriarch Theodosius, Constantine of Laodicea, Pope Gregory the Great of Rome, the Chalcedonian Patriarch Eulogius of Alexandria, and many others up to and including the 6th EO Council.

The heresy of the Agnoetae spread into Palestinian Chalcedonian monastic circles and therefore drew criticism and condemnation from Chalcedonian figures as well as non-Chalcedonian. It would appear to have continued to be a Christological position held for some time by small groups and individuals, but being so universally condemned it would not appear to have survived in the non-Chalcedonian or Chalcedonian communions beyond the 7th century.

Themistius was clearly wishing to insist on the Severan teaching of the reality of the humanity of Christ, but the manner in which he expressed this drew censure which he seemed unwilling to accept.

Pope Gregory of Rome

It would seem that Pope Gregory of Rome was well aware of this heresy from contacts in Constantinople (Anatolius the Deacon wrote to him enquiring about it), and from Alexandria (where Patriarch Eulogius write to him and sent his own criticism of the position). Both Pope Gregory and Eulogius died in the early 7th century and therefore in 600 AD this was still a real issue, having been introduced as a controversy in about 535 AD.

Pope Gregory writes a very interesting letter to Eulogius where he says..

He mentions also another thing that may be understood of the same Son, namely that Almighty God sometimes speaks in a human manner, even as He says to Abraham, Now I know that thou fearest God (Genesis 22:12) It was not that God then came to know that He was feared, but that He then made Abraham know that he feared God.

...

The Almighty Son says that He does not know the day which He causes not to be known; not that He Himself does not know it, but that He does not allow it to be known. Whence also the Father alone is said to know it, because the Son Who is consubstantial with Him has His knowledge of what the angels are ignorant of from His divine nature, whereby He is above the angels. Whence also it may be more nicely understood thus; that the Only-begotten, being incarnate and made for us a perfect man, knew indeed in the nature of His humanity the day and hour of the judgment, but still it was not from the nature of His humanity that He knew it. What then He knew in it He knew not from it, because God, made man, knew the day and hour of the judgment through the power of His Deity.


This letter is entirely compatible with OO Christology, and it brings out the distinction between knowing according to the humanity and the divinity. The divinity knows all things by nature, while the humanity must acquire all knowledge. In the hypostatic and natural union the humanity receives all knowledge and wisdom by means of the union. Therefore, as Pope Gregory says that Christ, in his humanity, as in his divinity, knows the day and hour, but the distinction is in the source of knowing. It was from his divinity that he knew all things in his humanity.

His humanity retains that natural characteristic of needing to receive knowledge and not having knowledge by nature, but, and what Themistius failed to appreciate, the Word gives all knowledge to his own humanity, as is naturally required, so that his humanity shares the same divine knowledge according to his humanity.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #1 on: October 31, 2011, 10:51:38 AM »

Thank you. I find Pope St. Gregory's explanation most helpful.
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 31, 2011, 10:55:35 AM »

So do I. He is a Pope of Rome I have a lot of time for.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Severian
God save Egypt, Syria & Iraq
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Coptic/Egyptian Orthodoxy
Posts: 5,039


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Christians

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 31, 2011, 12:58:29 PM »

--Subscribed--
Logged

On hiatus from posting. Forgive me if my posts have lacked humility or tact. Note that some of my older posts -especially those prior to late 2012- may not reflect my current views. In the meantime, please pray for my sinful self as I am in a critical and unsure juncture in my life. Thank you.
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #4 on: November 02, 2011, 11:48:08 PM »

+++subscribed+++
Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 03, 2011, 05:29:03 AM »

Here is a criticism of Themistius from an EO perspective by Sophronius in his Synodical Letter. (I am not producing these materials in some sort of absolutist proof-texting manner, but to assist in building up a proper resource on the subject. There are a things I disagree with Sophronius about.)

Themistius, the father and begetter and most lawless sower of ignorance, who babbled that Christ, our true God, did not know the day of judgement, statements which he himself, driven mad by God, made in ignorance, not knowing what he uttered in his mistaken thinking. For if he did not know the force of his own words, he would not have given birth to the destructive ignorance and hotly defended the pollutiuon of ignorance, belching forth from his senseless brain the statement that, not in so far as he was God eternal but in so far as he had in truth become a human being, was Christ ignorant of the day of consummation and judgement, and making him a mere human being.

Sophronius is writing in about 634 AD. Almost 100 years after Themistius started teaching his view, but they were still current, it would seem, among some Chalcedonians in Palestine at that time.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.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: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 03, 2011, 08:19:41 AM »

Let me add the reference to that last quote.

Sophronius of Jerusalem and Seventh Century Heresy - The Synodical Letter and Other Documents.
Oxford Early Christian Texts
Pauline Allen
p. 143

(From the Synodal Letter of Sophronius)
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.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: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 03, 2011, 08:26:07 AM »

Another reference is from an Edikton issued by Justinian against the Agnoetai.

The only-begotten Son and Word of God, having become incarnate amd inhominate for our salvation, who is our Lord Jesus Christ, one of the Holy Trinity, willingly for our sakes accepted in the flesh sufferings and death. The holy soul of the Word possesed the entire knowledge of the Word whose soul it was, for the entire will of the divinity is in Christ, as Athanasius, who is with the saints, taught.

This is taken from a florilegium translated with comments by Sebastian Brock in

After Chalcedon - Studies in Theology and Church History
Edited by Laga, Munitiz and Van Rompay
Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta
p. 39
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 10,882


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


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 03, 2011, 11:35:09 AM »

Thank you Father for helping along with this and setting the records straight.

Hopefully, this work would also help vindicate St. Theodosius from accusations of Monothelitism rather than understand the context of his statements, which is becoming clearer and clearer to me.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2011, 11:36:39 AM by minasoliman » Logged

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

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 03, 2011, 11:47:31 AM »

Well I am certainly a miathelite (although I don't object to being called a monothelite or a monophysite). Most of the material I have studied seems to me to indicate that when most people speak of one will, one activity, one operation and one energy they are speaking in an entirely Orthodox manner. But I'd rather consider that in a different thread.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 03, 2011, 12:34:16 PM »



 Cheesy
Logged


I'm going to need this.
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #11 on: November 03, 2011, 02:22:32 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOqpXubBZhE
(thread soundtrack)
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 03, 2011, 04:35:40 PM »

This is another text. It is a translation I have made myself from the Latin of Van Roeys volume of Syriac texts. This is dated to after 535 AD when Anthimus became Patriarch or after 536 AD when he was kept safe in Constantinople by the Empress St Theodora.
 
Monophysite Texts of the Sixth Century
Van Roey and Allen
Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta
Peeters
p. 65

Anthimus of Constantinople

Address to Justinian


Saint Anthimus, from the treatise to the Emperor Justinian.

Therefore adhering to the prophetic word, we in no way attribute ignorance to the one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son, composite and indivisible. For to say that God the Word, inasmuch as he is God the Word, does not know the last day and hour is full of Arian, or rather Jewish, impiety. But to say he does not know it in his humanity is to make a division of the one Lord into two persons, two sons, two Christs, two natures and two hypostases, and separate the operations and proprieties of them, and of all things.

St Gregory Nazianzus also taught this in his second oration on the Son, saying: ‘Is it not known to all that it is known to him as God, but he says he is ignorant as man, if we separate the visible from the intelligible’. See how this wise teacher explains the word of the Gospel saying: ‘If we separate the visible from the intelligible’, and taught us that it is possible to attribute ignorance to him when we use a division in contemplation concerning the one composite Christ, and enquire regarding the substance of his animated flesh.

And after a little. For us, however, there is one hypostasis and one nature of the Word of God incarnate, just as there is without doubt, one will. And we know only one operation and one wisdom, and one knowledge for both. Therefore whoever says that he knew as God, but as a man, however, did not know, unsuitably divides the one indivisible Son into two natures, and two hypostases, as did the impious Theodoret. But we, by the grace of God, believe, as we have already said, the divine soul, rational and intelligent, consubstantial with our souls, had, by the union with God the Word, an existence with his body, consubstantial with our bodies, and from that union, it has gained all its operation and wisdom, and divine omniscience, so that there is one and the same knowledge of God the Word, and of the intellectual soul.

Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,440



« Reply #13 on: November 03, 2011, 05:26:11 PM »

The Almighty Son says that He does not know the day which He causes not to be known; not that He Himself does not know it, but that He does not allow it to be known. Whence also the Father alone is said to know it, because the Son Who is consubstantial with Him has His knowledge of what the angels are ignorant of from His divine nature, whereby He is above the angels. Whence also it may be more nicely understood thus; that the Only-begotten, being incarnate and made for us a perfect man, knew indeed in the nature of His humanity the day and hour of the judgment, but still it was not from the nature of His humanity that He knew it. What then He knew in it He knew not from it, because God, made man, knew the day and hour of the judgment through the power of His Deity.

Father,

I trust this is Grillmeier's work . . .

Would have been awesome if some who knew English did the translation.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,440



« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2011, 05:39:31 PM »

This letter is entirely compatible with OO Christology, and it brings out the distinction between knowing according to the humanity and the divinity. The divinity knows all things by nature, while the humanity must acquire all knowledge. In the hypostatic and natural union the humanity receives all knowledge and wisdom by means of the union. Therefore, as Pope Gregory says that Christ, in his humanity, as in his divinity, knows the day and hour, but the distinction is in the source of knowing. It was from his divinity that he knew all things in his humanity.

His humanity retains that natural characteristic of needing to receive knowledge and not having knowledge by nature, but, and what Themistius failed to appreciate, the Word gives all knowledge to his own humanity, as is naturally required, so that his humanity shares the same divine knowledge according to his humanity.

Now to the commentary of that obscurant translation.

I find the language here troubling. It is imprecise at best or wrong at worst.

And try to hang with me here. I didn't get into the other threads cause they were going sideways and the language being used already assuming too much and using a rather vague and what I would call a less than sophisticated hermeneutic. Let's keep the hermeneutic honest and grounded in tradition.

How does a nature know something? Let's keep the dichotomous divinity and humanity out of it.

How does a nature know anything?

Or you can couch the question in another manner, which likely to be much more productive, in virtue of what is something known?

Please don't quote mine. These are fundamental questions which can be discussed without recourse to Patristics or giving me a reading list, as this goes to theory and method, if you allow me to engage in that dichotomy for a moment.

I promise I won't give you a list of 30k pages to read regarding hermeneutics. Or quote one philosopher after another the Fathers relied on to conduct their work and the philosophers who followed who developed different and possibly more productive paths of understanding understanding.



Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 03, 2011, 05:42:07 PM »

The Letter by St Gregory of Rome came from the Nicene/Ante-Nicene Fathers series on CCEL.

There is a modern edition of his letters, but I don't have it in hard-copy and can't access it online.

I don't know if anyone has a modern edition of St Gregory's letters?

I agree it is rather a difficult translation!
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.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: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 03, 2011, 05:44:46 PM »

Orthonorm, I don't really want to go into all that here on this thread. Why not start another for the more philosophical aspects of this issue. I'll post elsewhere but here I want to stick to historic texts in the first instance.

What I want to do here is exactly and entirely produce and discuss the patristic material and the controversy with Themistius and his opinions.

I am presently translating some other works on the same subject which I will post here to further this historic and patristic study.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,440



« Reply #17 on: November 03, 2011, 05:56:22 PM »

Orthonorm, I don't really want to go into all that here on this thread. Why not start another for the more philosophical aspects of this issue. I'll post elsewhere but here I want to stick to historic texts in the first instance.

What I want to do here is exactly and entirely produce and discuss the patristic material and the controversy with Themistius and his opinions.

I am presently translating some other works on the same subject which I will post here to further this historic and patristic study.

Father, understood.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,440



« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2011, 05:58:22 PM »

The Letter by St Gregory of Rome came from the Nicene/Ante-Nicene Fathers series on CCEL.

There is a modern edition of his letters, but I don't have it in hard-copy and can't access it online.

I don't know if anyone has a modern edition of St Gregory's letters?

I agree it is rather a difficult translation!

I tell you I don't see how you read all those texts. The translations are absurd. And I read "difficult" stuff. It seems often the translators went out of their way to make English not English. It gives me headaches.

Your translation reads well.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #19 on: November 03, 2011, 06:18:31 PM »

Yes, there are a lot of 'difficult' translations, even from English speakers. Some of the commentary by St Cyril is only readable with great effort.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.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: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 04, 2011, 12:13:46 PM »

I want to post a passage from Maximus the Confessor who addresses the issue of knowledge in a non-controversial manner drawing very much on the earlier patristic understanding.

I've copied it from a volume by a Roman Catholic, Raymond Moloney, SJ, in his book - The Knowledge of Christ. He doesn't go too deep into the patristic material so I probably won't do more than scan it on Google Books, but the reference to Maximus the Confessor is from his..

Questions and Doubts: 66
Maximus the Confessor

If, then, among the holy prophets, things which were at a distance and beyond the scope of our power were recognized through the power of grace, how much more did the Son of God, and through him his humanity, know all things - not of the nature of that humanity, but through its union with the Word. Just as iron in the fire has all the properties of fire, since it both glows and burns, yet in its nature remains iron and not fire, so too the humanity of the Lord, in so far as it is united with the Word, knew all things, and displayed attributes proper to God. However, in so far as his humanity is considered as not united to the Word, it is said to be ignorant.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #21 on: November 04, 2011, 02:23:44 PM »

I want to post a passage from Maximus the Confessor who addresses the issue of knowledge in a non-controversial manner drawing very much on the earlier patristic understanding.

I've copied it from a volume by a Roman Catholic, Raymond Moloney, SJ, in his book - The Knowledge of Christ. He doesn't go too deep into the patristic material so I probably won't do more than scan it on Google Books, but the reference to Maximus the Confessor is from his..

Questions and Doubts: 66
Maximus the Confessor

If, then, among the holy prophets, things which were at a distance and beyond the scope of our power were recognized through the power of grace, how much more did the Son of God, and through him his humanity, know all things - not of the nature of that humanity, but through its union with the Word. Just as iron in the fire has all the properties of fire, since it both glows and burns, yet in its nature remains iron and not fire, so too the humanity of the Lord, in so far as it is united with the Word, knew all things, and displayed attributes proper to God. However, in so far as his humanity is considered as not united to the Word, it is said to be ignorant.


"...displayed attributes proper to God." Without changing what humanity is in essence, the Logos imparts to it the Divine energy (being-at-work)?
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 09, 2011, 06:16:37 PM »

I shall start posting some material from St Theodosius' Ad Theodoram. I am having to translate it from Latin so it will take me a little while. I'll post a chapter at a time. As far as I can see this document has not been available in English before (so it is sort of copyright since I might well want to publish it all in a small volume on this topic).

Ad Theodoram

In three ways Christ, our God, appropriated for himself our human passions animated with his body. Saint Theodosius, Pope of Alexandria, from the treatise to the Empress Theodora, concerning those asserting that Christ is ignorant of the last day.

Chapter 1


We say, therefore, the only-begotten Son and Word of God the Father, co-eternal and consubstantial, for us and for our salvation was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and of the holy Mother of God and ever virgin Mary, and became man perfectly, truly and without change, truly and without phantasy appropriating and assuming all the natural and blameless passions of his body, consubstantial with us and animated by a rational and intellectual soul – meaning hunger, thirst, sleep, fatigue, bodily perforations, pains, wounds, death, confusion, sorrow, anguish and whatever else are like these -  remained impassible in the passions as God and the Word, but sometimes he voluntarily allowed his flesh to suffer.

These he has appropriated to himself in the manner in which the soul of a man, common and similar to us, appropriates to itself its fleshly passions, while remaining entirely alien to them according to its own nature. Yet they are all assumed because of the union and by reason of the fellow-feeling, and considered as if they happened to itself. It is helpful to say this in a higher sense of Emmanuel.

For his divinity had no communion with the passions of his animated flesh, except according to the manner of appropriation by union, which the Only-begotten Son and Word of God, voluntarily assumed for us because of the goal of the economy of his love for mankind.

So there is one mode of appropriation as we have said. The Lord God, our Jesus Christ, has appropriated the natural and blameless passions of his animated flesh, truly and without phantasy, but this has happened by the will of God the Word.

« Last Edit: November 09, 2011, 06:17:06 PM by Father Peter » Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2011, 05:48:51 AM »

^^ oh that was beautiful!! And definitely a must publish Father!
« Last Edit: November 10, 2011, 05:52:27 AM by Hiwot » Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 10, 2011, 09:01:50 AM »

The Chronicle of Michael the Syrian also has a relevant reference.

In volume II of Chabot's French translation, p 248.

My own translation from the French is..

At that time the heresy of the Agnoetes arose, which means 'ignorant'. It appeared in Alexandria. They interpreted this maxim foolishly: 'Nobody knows the day nor the hour'. and they claimed that 'the Son does not know that day'. They deprived the Son of God of this knowledge which had been communicated by grace even to the prophets.

They gather evidence from the Scriptures to prove it.

Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.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: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 10, 2011, 09:09:24 AM »

Interestingly enough, Michael the Syrian also suggests that Constantinople 553 had condemned the Agnoetai. I have already posted an excerpt from an edict of Justinan against the Agnoetai.

Chabot volume II, p. 435

Michael the Syrian says..

The Synod also anathematised the heresy of the Agnoetai, who also admitted two wills and two operations.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
zekarja
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 745


O Holy Prophet Zechariah, intercede to God for us!


« Reply #26 on: November 10, 2011, 09:31:50 AM »

This is another text. It is a translation I have made myself from the Latin of Van Roeys volume of Syriac texts. This is dated to after 535 AD when Anthimus became Patriarch or after 536 AD when he was kept safe in Constantinople by the Empress St Theodora.
 
Monophysite Texts of the Sixth Century
Van Roey and Allen
Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta
Peeters
p. 65

Anthimus of Constantinople

Address to Justinian


Saint Anthimus, from the treatise to the Emperor Justinian.

Therefore adhering to the prophetic word, we in no way attribute ignorance to the one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son, composite and indivisible. For to say that God the Word, inasmuch as he is God the Word, does not know the last day and hour is full of Arian, or rather Jewish, impiety. But to say he does not know it in his humanity is to make a division of the one Lord into two persons, two sons, two Christs, two natures and two hypostases, and separate the operations and proprieties of them, and of all things.

St Gregory Nazianzus also taught this in his second oration on the Son, saying: ‘Is it not known to all that it is known to him as God, but he says he is ignorant as man, if we separate the visible from the intelligible’. See how this wise teacher explains the word of the Gospel saying: ‘If we separate the visible from the intelligible’, and taught us that it is possible to attribute ignorance to him when we use a division in contemplation concerning the one composite Christ, and enquire regarding the substance of his animated flesh.

And after a little. For us, however, there is one hypostasis and one nature of the Word of God incarnate, just as there is without doubt, one will. And we know only one operation and one wisdom, and one knowledge for both. Therefore whoever says that he knew as God, but as a man, however, did not know, unsuitably divides the one indivisible Son into two natures, and two hypostases, as did the impious Theodoret. But we, by the grace of God, believe, as we have already said, the divine soul, rational and intelligent, consubstantial with our souls, had, by the union with God the Word, an existence with his body, consubstantial with our bodies, and from that union, it has gained all its operation and wisdom, and divine omniscience, so that there is one and the same knowledge of God the Word, and of the intellectual soul.



Abouna, what does it mean "if we separate the visible from the intelligible"? I'm not understanding this statement.  Huh
Logged

Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #27 on: November 10, 2011, 09:57:02 AM »

St Gregory means that if we consider the visible human nature as it is on its own, then we understand that it is subject to ignorance as a natural condition. And when we consider the invisible divine nature as it is on its own, then we understand that all things are known to it.

But we quickly return to the understanding of the union of humanity and divinity in which all the divine knowledge is shared with the human nature so that there is no ignorance in Christ at all.

So in the incarnation we do not say that there is any ignorance in Christ, even though we do not say that the humanity is other than true humanity. But it is always humanity in union with divinity and never 'mere' humanity.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
zekarja
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 745


O Holy Prophet Zechariah, intercede to God for us!


« Reply #28 on: November 10, 2011, 10:10:08 AM »

St Gregory means that if we consider the visible human nature as it is on its own, then we understand that it is subject to ignorance as a natural condition. And when we consider the invisible divine nature as it is on its own, then we understand that all things are known to it.

But we quickly return to the understanding of the union of humanity and divinity in which all the divine knowledge is shared with the human nature so that there is no ignorance in Christ at all.

So in the incarnation we do not say that there is any ignorance in Christ, even though we do not say that the humanity is other than true humanity. But it is always humanity in union with divinity and never 'mere' humanity.

Thanks! This really help me understand. Smiley
Logged

zekarja
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 745


O Holy Prophet Zechariah, intercede to God for us!


« Reply #29 on: November 11, 2011, 09:52:49 AM »

And so He is said also to have increased in wisdom, not as receiving fresh supplies of wisdom,----for God is perceived by the understanding to be entirely perfect in all things, and altogether incapable of being destitute of any attribute suitable to the Godhead:----but because God the Word gradually manifested His wisdom proportionably to the age which the body had attained. - St Cyril of Alexandria
[Emphasis mine.]

It's hard for my friend (and me) to understand, if He did actually know day, how that is not lying.

Would we say that in Mark 13:32 [But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. ] Jesus hadn't manifested the wisdom of knowing the day yet?

Thanks! Smiley

P.S. I've read the quotes in this thread and St John Chrysostom and St Basil the Great on the matter. I know the patristic teaching on this. I just can't wrap my mind around it. Tongue

[EDIT] I found this to be little more helpful, but I still don't understand. Maybe I should chalk it up to being a mystery.
To a fair hearer there is no violence in this interpretation, because the word only is not added as it is in Matthew. Mark's sense, then, is as follows: of that day and of that hour knows no man, nor the angels of God; but even the Son would not have known if the Father had not known, for the knowledge naturally His was given by the Father. This is very decorous and becoming the divine nature to say of the Son, because He has, His knowledge and His being, beheld in all the wisdom and glory which become His Godhead, from Him with Whom He is consubstantial. - St Basil the Great
« Last Edit: November 11, 2011, 10:11:15 AM by zekarja » Logged

NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #30 on: November 11, 2011, 01:09:14 PM »

It's hard for my friend (and me) to understand, if He did actually know day, how that is not lying.
1. Choose not to accept the concept of antinomy in Orthodoxy
2. Apply bad logic to collapse the antinomies of Christ
3. Repeat

That should solve the problem. It's worked well for others on the board.  Grin

[EDIT] I found this to be little more helpful, but I still don't understand. Maybe I should chalk it up to being a mystery
If it were a mystery, why would these writers struggle to such a degree to pin it down and explain it?
« Last Edit: November 11, 2011, 01:16:29 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #31 on: November 11, 2011, 01:12:13 PM »

We say, therefore, the only-begotten Son and Word of God the Father, co-eternal and consubstantial, for us and for our salvation was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and of the holy Mother of God and ever virgin Mary, and became man perfectly, truly and without change, truly and without phantasy appropriating and assuming all the natural and blameless passions of his body, consubstantial with us and animated by a rational and intellectual soul – meaning hunger, thirst, sleep, fatigue, bodily perforations, pains, wounds, death, confusion, sorrow, anguish and whatever else are like these -  remained impassible in the passions as God and the Word, but sometimes he voluntarily allowed his flesh to suffer.
Which Theodosius is this?


These [passions] [Christ] has appropriated to himself in the manner in which the soul of a man, common and similar to us, appropriates to itself its fleshly passions, while remaining entirely alien to them according to its own nature.
Does this refer to the hellenistic understanding of the soul, or is he saying that Christ's soul was alien to passions according to its nature in a special case?
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 11, 2011, 01:15:22 PM »

St Theodosius of Alexandria.

The nature of Christ, the Incarnate Word, is his divine nature. He is divine by nature, and he has appropriated and assumed a human nature by an act of his will and love towards mankind.

St Theodosius is saying that the passions of the humanity of Christ are alien to his divine person and nature, but nevertheless he has made then his own, as the passions of the flesh belong to the soul of a man, even though a man's spirit does not experience hunger.
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #33 on: November 11, 2011, 01:17:20 PM »

the passions of the flesh belong to the soul of a man, even though a man's spirit does not experience hunger.
Does not a spirit become faint from hunger? Or are you saying that the soul experiences it via the hypostatic union of a human being but not of... the nature of a soul?
« Last Edit: November 11, 2011, 01:19:35 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
zekarja
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 745


O Holy Prophet Zechariah, intercede to God for us!


« Reply #34 on: November 11, 2011, 01:20:10 PM »

It's hard for my friend (and me) to understand, if He did actually know day, how that is not lying.
1. Choose not to accept the concept of antinomy in Orthodoxy
2. Apply bad logic to collapse the antinomies of Christ
3. Repeat

That should solve the problem. It's worked well for others on the board.  Grin

[EDIT] I found this to be little more helpful, but I still don't understand. Maybe I should chalk it up to being a mystery
If it were a mystery, why would these writers struggle to such a degree to pin it down and explain it?

I personally accept the Christ new the hour. How he knew the hour I don't know. St Basil helps a bit. Cheesy
Logged

NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #35 on: November 11, 2011, 01:21:07 PM »

St Theodosius of Alexandria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Theodosius_I_of_Alexandria

This one, Father?
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #36 on: November 11, 2011, 01:21:36 PM »

It's hard for my friend (and me) to understand, if He did actually know day, how that is not lying.
1. Choose not to accept the concept of antinomy in Orthodoxy
2. Apply bad logic to collapse the antinomies of Christ
3. Repeat

That should solve the problem. It's worked well for others on the board.  Grin

[EDIT] I found this to be little more helpful, but I still don't understand. Maybe I should chalk it up to being a mystery
If it were a mystery, why would these writers struggle to such a degree to pin it down and explain it?

I personally accept the Christ new the hour. How he knew the hour I don't know. St Basil helps a bit. Cheesy
Why can't he both know and not know the hour? It seems that both have to be true.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
zekarja
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 745


O Holy Prophet Zechariah, intercede to God for us!


« Reply #37 on: November 11, 2011, 01:23:36 PM »

It's hard for my friend (and me) to understand, if He did actually know day, how that is not lying.
1. Choose not to accept the concept of antinomy in Orthodoxy
2. Apply bad logic to collapse the antinomies of Christ
3. Repeat

That should solve the problem. It's worked well for others on the board.  Grin

[EDIT] I found this to be little more helpful, but I still don't understand. Maybe I should chalk it up to being a mystery
If it were a mystery, why would these writers struggle to such a degree to pin it down and explain it?

I personally accept the Christ new the hour. How he knew the hour I don't know. St Basil helps a bit. Cheesy
Why can't he both know and not know the hour? It seems that both have to be true.

Because that would divide the person of Christ in two: One who is human and ignorant and One who is divine and knew.
Logged

NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #38 on: November 11, 2011, 01:27:00 PM »

It's hard for my friend (and me) to understand, if He did actually know day, how that is not lying.
1. Choose not to accept the concept of antinomy in Orthodoxy
2. Apply bad logic to collapse the antinomies of Christ
3. Repeat

That should solve the problem. It's worked well for others on the board.  Grin

[EDIT] I found this to be little more helpful, but I still don't understand. Maybe I should chalk it up to being a mystery
If it were a mystery, why would these writers struggle to such a degree to pin it down and explain it?

I personally accept the Christ new the hour. How he knew the hour I don't know. St Basil helps a bit. Cheesy
Why can't he both know and not know the hour? It seems that both have to be true.

Because that would divide the person of Christ in two: One who is human and ignorant and One who is divine and knew.
Nonono, you don't understand.

I mean, what if you say that he both knew and did not know the hour, not in division (nestorianism) or because the divine nature became ignorant (monophysitism),

but that he simply both knew and did not know the hour in a logical paradox?
« Last Edit: November 11, 2011, 01:28:47 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
zekarja
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 745


O Holy Prophet Zechariah, intercede to God for us!


« Reply #39 on: November 11, 2011, 01:31:11 PM »

It's hard for my friend (and me) to understand, if He did actually know day, how that is not lying.
1. Choose not to accept the concept of antinomy in Orthodoxy
2. Apply bad logic to collapse the antinomies of Christ
3. Repeat

That should solve the problem. It's worked well for others on the board.  Grin

[EDIT] I found this to be little more helpful, but I still don't understand. Maybe I should chalk it up to being a mystery
If it were a mystery, why would these writers struggle to such a degree to pin it down and explain it?

I personally accept the Christ new the hour. How he knew the hour I don't know. St Basil helps a bit. Cheesy
Why can't he both know and not know the hour? It seems that both have to be true.

Because that would divide the person of Christ in two: One who is human and ignorant and One who is divine and knew.
Nonono, you don't understand.

I mean, what if you say that he both knew and not knew the hour, not in division (nestorianism) or because the divine nature became ignorant (monophysitism),

but that he simply both knew and did not know the hour in a logical paradox?

I believe that the One Person of the Word knew the hour. My question lies in the fact that He said the "neither the Son" even though He did.
Logged

NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #40 on: November 11, 2011, 01:38:56 PM »

I believe that the One Person of the Word knew the hour. My question lies in the fact that He said the "neither the Son" even though He did.
And I'm saying that you can say that he was telling the truth and not be a heretic.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
zekarja
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 745


O Holy Prophet Zechariah, intercede to God for us!


« Reply #41 on: November 11, 2011, 01:39:47 PM »

I believe that the One Person of the Word knew the hour. My question lies in the fact that He said the "neither the Son" even though He did.
And I'm saying that you can say that he was telling the truth and not be a heretic.

I'm not calling you a heretic. Tongue
Logged

NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #42 on: November 11, 2011, 01:42:01 PM »

I believe that the One Person of the Word knew the hour. My question lies in the fact that He said the "neither the Son" even though He did.
And I'm saying that you can say that he was telling the truth and not be a heretic.

I'm not calling you a heretic. Tongue
I know. And I agree that the Person of the Logos knows everything and that that person without change became man. But I think it's possible (or impossibly possible) for that same one person to have been simultaneously ignorant because of his divine condescension. Even though that makes no sense.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2011, 01:42:13 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,630



WWW
« Reply #43 on: November 11, 2011, 01:44:51 PM »

What you are saying is NOT what the Fathers say.

There are lots of mental games we can play wondering about this and that. But as Orthodox we begin and end our considerations with the instruction of the Fathers, and they say clearly that Christ had all knowledge and that he did know the hour.

Are you saying that you think the Fathers are wrong?
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,825


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #44 on: November 11, 2011, 01:48:07 PM »

What you are saying is NOT what the Fathers say.

There are lots of mental games we can play wondering about this and that. But as Orthodox we begin and end our considerations with the instruction of the Fathers, and they say clearly that Christ had all knowledge and that he did know the hour.

Are you saying that you think the Fathers are wrong?
No, I agree with the Fathers. I'm not denying that Christ had all knowledge and that he did know the hour.

I'm just affirming another truth alongside that truth.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2011, 01:48:21 PM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Tags: Agnoetae heresy 
Pages: 1 2 »  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 0.159 seconds with 72 queries.