RC response to St. Augustine's 3 pointers

  • Thread starter Thread starter tablecorner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Points one and three seem to be more or less the same. The article is arguing that the “particularity” of the Holy Ghost was settled at Nicaea (the Second Ecumenical Council) and that there is nothing further to be said in the matter.

In fact practically nothing was said about the Holy Ghost at Nicaea; a fuller treatment of His nature had to wait 60 years for the Council of Constantinople (Third Ecumenical Council). That is precisely an example of why it is never possible to say that there is no further possible elaboration of doctrine. All that can be said is that it is not possible to contradict previously established doctrine; however the addition of filioque does not contradict the original formula.

I confess to being mystified by the middle point of the article. Augustine used a number of analogies of the Trinity but these are only analogies. He did equate the Holy Ghost to love, but I don’t recall that he described Him as “energy”. Unfortunately the article doesn’t mention which passage of Augustine is referred to.
 
Maximian said:
The article is arguing that the “particularity” of the Holy Ghost was settled at Nicaea (the Second Ecumenical Council)
Click to expand...
😱 No. Nicea I is the First Ecumenical Council, which defined the Divinity of Christ:


Constantinople I is the Second Ecumenical Council. It defined the Divinity of the Holy Spirit.

The Creed which we profess at every Liturgy (and in the Latin Church, on Sundays & Holy Days) is properly called the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.
 
N.B. They only call him “Blessed” not “Our Holy Father among the Saints Augustine of Hippo”.
 
tablecorner said:
these pointers from the Russian Orthodox Church regarding St. Augustine.
Click to expand...
The arguments in that article have been (very strongly) articulated elsewhere by Orthodox theologians in the 20th century, notably Fr John Romanides, Christos Yannaras and Metropolitan John Zizioulas. In fact, many of the article’s sentences seem to be a copy and paste (word for word) of a paper presented by Romanides at an Anglican-Orthodox conference in the 1970s on the filioque.

In any case, Romanides had a very negative view of Augustine, and essentially understood him as the archetype and origin of all Western Christian (whether Catholic or Protestant) heresies. Some of his contemporaries, such as Yannaras, have attenuated their criticism of Augustine, but Romanides’ views are still very influential, especially amongst traditionalist Orthodox.

It’s difficult to present concise answers to your questions as much of the article touches upon some rather specific theological and philosophical teachings of Eastern Christianity (which is beyond the scope of this thread). If you want a more balanced Eastern view of Augustine, I would recommend reading Demacopoulos’ and Papapnikolaou’s Orthodox Readings of Augustine.
 
This is a pattern i see in the EO, referring to Augustine and Jerome as Blessed. I find it odd,biased and somewhat degrading.
 
Thank you so very much again, would you think that all these negative views towards St.Augustine could be better mitigated if the more of the EO had read Orthodox Readings of Augustine?
 
The linked article is not factual. That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son was the common teaching of the latin fathers before, during, and after Augustine. The common teaching of the greek fathers was that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, not from the Father alone, but through the Son.
 
Blessed is just one of many titles (passion bearer, great martyr, equal to the apostles, saint, etc) that is applied to saints, and isn’t meant to be derogatory at all.
Only some Orthodox who have an ax to grind against St. Augustine, and being uneducated in Orthodox teaching, might mistakenly think “blessed” is some second rate title. And I pity those who think as such of St. Augustine.

St. Xenia is one of Russia’s most beloved saints, but she is also commonly known as “blessed Xenia.”

Also, most likely he has title of “Blessed” Augustine because that is how the Fifth Ecumenical Council addresses him.
Especially since it is manifest that our Fathers, and especially the blessed Augustine, who was in very truth illustrious in the Divine Scriptures…
The Decretal Letter of Pope Vigilius in Confirmation of the Fifth Synod
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
tablecorner said:
if the more of the EO had read Orthodox Readings of Augustine ?
Click to expand...
I think so, yes. It’s an excellent book and does well to balanace Augustine’s reputation with more nuanced perspectives that are less polemical. I will also note that it’s very suitable reading for Latin Catholics as it sketches out Augustine’s relation to various facets of EO theology with which we are generally unfamiliar.
 
Last edited:
Ah. That’s what I thought you did but wasn’t sure. Thank you for the clarification.
 
Thank you Kmon23 this helped cure one of the big splinters in my mind.
 
Could you refer me to some these Greek fathers? i would like to check it out.
 
It wasn’t until neo-Palamism took hold as the dominant school in some of the EO Churches in the last couple hundred years that Augustine has been a problem. As a reaction to what they consider to have been a “Western Captivity” of EO theology, the Neo-Palamites tend to be generally very anti-Western and anti-Latin, especially with regards to St. Augustine. This is especially evident in their evolution on original sin, but he has also become a newer target in the longer standing Filioque debate.
 
Last edited:
thank you, there is a big chapter dedicated to him in the book on Iconography by Ouspensky.
 
Yeah. This is one of those factors that led me to not consider EO as an option. The modern EO belief that the late-medieval and Renaissance theology of the EO was in “Western captivity” that needed to be liberated is quite similar to the Lutheran belief of the Gospel in medieval times being “obscured” by good works. Better to stay as a Catholic than to risk mortal sin by schism, heresy, or apostasy.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top