As for Gregory’s doctrine, once one introduces multiple persons who are God, without a mechanism for rationalizing this it is polytheism. The mechanism is what Gregory calls the distinction of hypostases or subsistencies. It is a combination that does not exist in the OT or in the OT + NT. Gregory had to get this part of the equation from the Greeks. Without it, he agrees that the imagination of plurality would be a reality.
St. Gregory is not “rationalizing” so as to prevent a charge against polytheism; rather, he is utilizing philosophical understanding precisely to preserve and illuminate the Mystery of Christ’s revelation of the Trinity. Such language, of course, could not be found among the Jews who preserved the knowledge of the One God. Once that One God became more fully known through Christ’s Incarnation, the language of the philosophers could be utilized to further knowledge of the Divine Persons. Again, from
Aeterni Patris:
Lastly, the duty of religiously defending the truths divinely delivered, and of resisting those who dare oppose them, pertains to philosophic pursuits. Wherefore, it is the glory of philosophy to be esteemed as the bulwark of faith and the strong defense of religion. As Clement of Alexandria testifies, the doctrine of the Savior is indeed perfect in itself and wanteth naught, since it is the power and wisdom of God. And the assistance of the Greek philosophy maketh not the truth more powerful; but, inasmuch as it weakens the contrary arguments of the sophists and repels the veiled attacks against the truth, it has been fitly called the hedge and fence of the vine.[22] For, as the enemies of the Catholic name, when about to attack religion, are in the habit of borrowing their weapons from the arguments of philosophers, so the defenders of sacred science draw many arguments from the store of philosophy which may serve to uphold revealed dogmas.
Gregory does not say that they take all of Greek teachings and remove the errors and keep what remains from Greek teachings. Certainly you would disagree with more than just the distinction of hypostases from the Greeks!.
I’m speaking generally about the use of philosophy by Christ’s Church, Dan, not the particulars of what is or isn’t acceptable.
He speaks of something that remains in his doctrine, not something that remains from the Greeks. This Greek distinction of hypostases.is hand-picked to counterbalance the parts of Jewish teaching they selected to form a doctrine that is not found taught in either the OT, the NT, the OT and NT combined, but only Jewish combined with Greek.
The Fathers didn’t “form a doctrine”, Dan; they merely employed philosophy – put it to its right use – in presenting the Mystery of the Incarnation revealed in and by Christ Himself.
What is ironic is that Gregory calls the Jews heretics unless Greek teachings are added. His view is that God gave the Jews a doctrine that was in error unless it was combined with something from Pagans.
Not at all; the Jews had the doctrine of the One God, which is true. The Jews, however, after Christ, while rightly holding to the belief of the One God, denied the divinity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit which was revealed to them in the Person of Jesus Christ (thus they are in heresy in not recognizing God in their midst). For St. Gregory philosophy is in aid of preserving the unity of the One God while proclaiming the Divinity of Christ and the Holy Spirit.
But God told them not to mix with Pagans. They were not to mix Pagan customs or Pagan teachings. And yet that it what Gregory does.
And why did God tell “them” not to mix with Pagans? So as not to be perverted to a worship of the false gods and embrace the immorality often associated with those gods. St. Paul, though, recognizes that the Greeks did have a natural wisdom given to them by God, which employed in the wrong way led to these debasements of that gift. That natural wisdom is from God and is therefore good; that wisdom has been redeemed in Christ through its employment by such as Gregory to put forward the “case for Christ”. Just as wood was used to create the horror of the Roman cross but became a symbol of the victory of Christ, so is the goodness of human wisdom – which was turned to error and sin – redeemed by Christ. :** “. . .and through him to reconcile all things for him, making peace by the blood of his cross (through him), whether those on earth or those in heaven. (Col. 1:20). **
In questioning the adoption by the Church of philosophy and anything seen as having pagan origins, one must then question the Jews themselves; e.g., their Feast of Tabernacles which coincided with a Canaanite festival celebrating the grape harvest. Just as the Hebrews made their own and conformed to the honor of the One True God what were previously pagan commemorations, it was (is) entirely appropriate for the Church to reclaim those things had been perverted and bring them back to their properly ordered use to the glory of God. This point is highlighted above by Leo XVII when he speaks of all the things of Egypt that Israel brought out in their exodus which would be put to its proper use in the worship of the one God.
In Ephesians 1:10 we read:
“. . .to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth,” (RSV). Here and elsewhere in Scripture we see that all of creation is to be gathered into submission to Christ - ALL of creation. The Church is the means by which this gathering-in is accomplished, redeeming and sanctifying in Christ that which has been corrupted - including time, places, things – and what is good of human thought through the ages.
All this you cannot understand, though, precisely because you do not know Christ, God and Man, Whose Incarnation gives humanity and all that pertains to it its true value and meaning.
According to Gregory without doing this, the Trinity is polytheism.
If you think that the distinction of hypostases is taught in the NT, then where is it and where did Gregory teach that the Greeks had a truth that was also taught in the NT?
The term isn’t used, but the distinction of Persons is (cf. e.g., John 1:1 ff.; Matt. 28:18; Matt. 12:31; 2 Cor. 13:13; Phil. 2:5-7; Col. 1:13-19). Why do you see a need that he teach about the truth of the Greeks vis-à-vis the NT specifically? His very use of reason in service of the Truth of Christ is testament enough.
