The filioque, Church Mothers, and Augustine

  • Thread starter Thread starter reen12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

reen12

Guest
The filioque. Wouldn’t Godhead have just as well been ‘defended,’
if it had been stated that this is a mystery that God chose not to address?
“Defining” the order of procession in the Holy Trinity. Who proceeded from Whom? http://bestsmileys.com/nono/9.gif

Had there been Church Mothers, one of the ladies might have
said: “Don’t be ridiculous. That’s for God to know.”
“Tell the bunch that’s contesting the point to go get a life. Dinner in 1/2 an hour.”
“Don’t forget to wash your hands, before we dine. No, Henry, that’s not a religious ritual,
it’s hygiene.”

I’m all for a married clergy. When you’re out there - working to
support the family, worrying about heating costs, shoes for the kids,
and tax rates, one has no time to whip up ‘doctrines’ - thought of,
in a quiet afternoon, in the clerical study.
Conditions ripe - for tresspassing on the mystery of Godhead.
The Orthodox were appalled.

Augustine abandoned the woman he’d had a child by, ‘got religion,’
and became a bishop. He wouldn’t have been dabbling in theology,
had he married the woman - and took an active part in raising his son.
He was elevated to ‘Father of the Church’ - when he couldn’t take
the time or interest to raise his own son. He was worried about
his relationship with God, don’t you know. All other relationships on ‘hold,’
til he got this ‘sorted out.’ :harp:

Reminds me of the big-noise in the Enlightment period of the 17th century.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau - who was well known for his theories on raising children,
who had placed his own children in an orphanage, the better to have time to write
a work on how to raise a child. :coffeeread:

La plus ça change, la plus c’est la même chose.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

reen12
 
Considering illogic, and the fatherly career of Augustine,
puts me in mind of the ‘relational’ in life.

‘In the beginning…’.God told Adam and Eve, and later
Noah and his family and in-laws, to “go forth, multiply,
and fill the earth.”
“May your children be like oliveshoots, around your table.”
“May you live to see your children’s children.” Psalms

Consoling those who were not blessed with attentive,
loving and/or caring parents, the God of Israel is
heard to say:

“Even if your mother should forget you, I will never forget you,”
“See? I have written your name on the palm of My hand.”

The Hebrew Scriptures are full of familial reference and analogy.

Where does one learn the fundaments of relationship, but in the family?
Cold, harsh, demanding fathers do their children no favor. Why?
Because this is the image of paternal deity that the child, now grown,
may well take with him/her, all through life. One wonders what Augustine’s
son must have felt about the '“fatherhood of God.”

I do note that the Passover is commemorated in a familial setting,
“Why is this night different from all other nights?” the youngest child asks, at table.
Both father and mother have liturgical roles, as Queen Sabbath
begins, when 3 stars are visible in the night sky.
No rushing off to some secular event, the family gathers, each week,
not in some designate ‘sacred space.’ The family itself is sacred to God.

Once the familial - the relational - was set aside for the corporate,
somthing sacred was lost. For all the talk about the ‘domestic church,’
the liturgical role of the father was supplanted by a cleric, who would
now be addressed as “Father.” An attempt was made, by St. Paul,
to justify this critical relational change by referring to the corporate
as the 'body of Christ." Once again, the ‘theoretical’ replaces what
the God of Israel knew would strenghten the family, teach the heart
of a child that family and rememberance and God were all one -
in a gorgeous reflection of God, the family, and the natural rhythm
of life.

I note that Saul of Tarsus did not have the joy and the responsibilty
and the insight that comes, with fatherhood.
Once again, the ‘theoretical’ supplants the relational -
this theoretical ‘image’ of the corporate, being held up as the
will of God. A truly sad loss and mis-emphasis.

reen12
 
Although, as Orthodox, I defend the Apostolic Tradition of married clergy, but I have to point out that St. Augustine did not abandon his son or the mother. He brought both into the Church, and both took vows (although I think the son died before he could).
 
quote: Isa Almisry
Although, as Orthodox, I defend the Apostolic Tradition of married clergy, but I have to point out that St. Augustine did not abandon his son or the mother. He brought both into the Church, and both took vows (although I think the son died before he could).
Click to expand...
I rather doubt that this lady had a lot of choice, given the times.
Not giving an inch of ground on this one. Augustine had a child by her,
and he did not marry her and provide his son with a family life.
Too bad for you. Daddy’s gone into the clergy, mommy’s taken the veil,
and this is your best bet. Let’s make the best of a sorry situation.

This kind of stuff is seen for what it is, given the increased understanding of the critical importance of early relationships, and no account of how the mother and the son were brought into the Church can cushion a hurtful reality for the son. He wasn’t important enough to his father for his father to provide homelife and paternal care. Abandonment takes many forms.
“Fatherhood,’” at one remove.

I did the best that I could by them, thought this Father of the Church?
Did you, Augustine? I leave it to others to make their own assessment.

reen12
 
**Had there been Church Mothers, one of the ladies might have
said: “Don’t be ridiculous. That’s for God to know.”
“Tell the bunch that’s contesting the point to go get a life. Dinner in 1/2 an hour.”
“Don’t forget to wash your hands, before we dine. No, Henry, that’s not a religious ritual,
it’s hygiene.” **

**Actually, there are many books–at least Orthodox ones–about the Church Mothers.

St. Herman’s Press published a “Moder Materikon” series, and there are several by Holy Apostle’s Convent.**
 
quote: bpbasilphx
Actually, there are many books–at least Orthodox ones–about the Church Mothers.

St. Herman’s Press published a “Moder Materikon” series, and there are several by Holy Apostle’s Convent.
Click to expand...
Thank you for noting this, bpbasilphx. Can you help me
understand something? Isn’t a Gerontas an abbess?
[Materikon is a wonderful title. :)] In Orthodoxy,
is there a form of female startetz? Or is this appelation
given soley to a priest, because of his role as confessor,
as well as teacher of prayer life?

It took me ages, to really comprehend what the Orthodox
were saying, with regard to the filioque. I have warm regard
for the Orthodox, and what is, to me, their profound sense of
the sacred, and their acknowledgement of mystery as mystery.

I’m pleased to know about the Materikon, bpbasilphx. Thank you.

reen12
 
reen12 said:
quote: Isa Almisry

I rather doubt that this lady had a lot of choice, given the times.
Not giving an inch of ground on this one. Augustine had a child by her,
and he did not marry her and provide his son with a family life.
Too bad for you. Daddy’s gone into the clergy, mommy’s taken the veil,
and this is your best bet. Let’s make the best of a sorry situation.

This kind of stuff is seen for what it is, given the increased understanding of the critical importance of early relationships, and no account of how the mother and the son were brought into the Church can cushion a hurtful reality for the son. He wasn’t important enough to his father for his father to provide homelife and paternal care. Abandonment takes many forms.
“Fatherhood,’” at one remove.

I did the best that I could by them, thought this Father of the Church?
Did you, Augustine? I leave it to others to make their own assessment.

reen12
Click to expand...
Btw, Augustine had abandoned the concubine because he was betrothed, which, if you are insisting on the “obligations,” he would have to have married (a legally bindng contract) and taken the mistress as a mistress, for the boys sake. As for paternal care, it’s been a while since I’ve looked at the Confessions, but I don’t recall it being a case study of abandonment.
 
To me, the Church of Rome went the route of ‘head-trips,’
in terms theologic.

Aquinas ‘baptized’ Aristole, and imported the categories
of ancient Greek philosophy into the heart of Christanity -
making the theology of the Church of Rome seem more
like a legal deposition - rather than a beautiful reflection of our life with God.

This mindset [philosophy as theology…not servant thereof]
was the basis for speculation as to the existence of Limbo.

newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm

That cruel ‘non-official’ teaching, came of a mindset that
turned grace into a ‘commodity’ - a *legalistic *view of man’s
position, with reference to God, rejecting the ‘relational’ reality
that God Himself had provided to human beings.

This cold mindset, and the expression thereof, in the end -
split Christendom a second time - in the 16th century -
after the Orthodox had said ‘enough’ - to Rome’s arrogance,
in it having defined the ‘order’ of procession within the Holy Trinity -
thus tresspassing on Godhead, while demonstating the lack of
a profound respect for sacred mystery.

The beautiful images, of God’s realtionship with human beings -
which God Himself had given, in scripture - were set aside…

for a dessicated, ‘cold-intellect’ assessment - of that which
constitutes ‘love.’

As I indicated in Post 2, in this thread"

quote: reen12
Once the familial - the relational - was set aside for the corporate,
somthing sacred was lost. For all the talk about the ‘domestic church,’
the liturgical role of the father was supplanted by a cleric, who would
now be addressed as “Father.” An attempt was made, by St. Paul,
to justify this critical relational change by referring to the corporate
as the 'body of Christ." Once again, the ‘theoretical’ replaces what
the God of Israel knew would strenghten the family, teach the heart
of a child that family and rememberance and God were all one -
in a gorgeous reflection of God, the family, and the natural rhythm
of life.
Click to expand...
reen12
 
With referrence to the Church of Rome - and her appalling speculation - with regard to the eternal abode of an unbaptized infant…this issue, alone, provides all one needs to know -
in terms of the cold mindset of said ecclesial entity.
The fact that this could even be a subject of discussion,
boggles the heart.

“Suffer the little children to come unto Me.”

[A complete distortion of the image of God, was Limbo.]
This ‘unofficial’ teaching lasted… for 700 years. A good long run,
for an ‘unofficial’ position, which was still present, in the
Baltimore Catechism, in the 1950’s. A thing to be memorized -
was this unofficial teaching.

Note, carefully, Augustine’s contribution, in this regard,
and why I will not give an inch - with regard to an assessment
of the mindset and activities of this ecclesial worthy.
Actions - Augustine - speak volumes.

Failing to properly father his own child, Augustine,
a ‘Father’ of the Church, now has the arrogance - to express an opinion -
on the destination of those infants who died, unbaptized.
Thoughts of a real family man. :coffeeread:

I note this - as an additional instance of the thought process -
of this inaptly titled ‘Father’ of the Church. Augustine’s views
are referrenced in the following:

newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm

This ‘unofficial’ teaching was part of the Baltimore Catechism,
and the defininition of Limbo was mememorized, in the
1950’s.

See questions and answer, # 631, from this widely used catechetical series.

intratext.com/ixt/ENG0104/_P1X.HTM

Once again, we see a mindset reflective of the ‘theoretical,’ not the relational,
in terms of the Church’s ‘understanding’ of grace.
Yet I am not surprised by this. [Post # 2, in this thread.]

reen12
 
Many of the Orthodox would say the filioque is outright heresy. I wouldn’t necessarily go that far because it’s debatable, however, I personally recite the Creed sine filioque because it wasn’t what was originally promulgated by the Council of Nicea.
 
quote: Isa Almisry
Btw, Augustine had abandoned the concubine because he was betrothed, which, if you are insisting on the “obligations,” he would have to have married (a legally bindng contract) and taken the mistress as a mistress, for the boys sake. As for paternal care, it’s been a while since I’ve looked at the Confessions, but I don’t recall it being a case study of abandonment.
Click to expand...
What Augustine opined on and shared is of interest.
It was what he did not do - that is also of interest,
as well as his later ‘fatherly’ thoughts… on the fate of the
unbaptized infant.

quote: reen12
Not giving an inch of ground on this one. Augustine had a child by her,
and he did not marry her and provide his son with a family life.
Too bad for you. Daddy’s gone into the clergy, mommy’s taken the veil,
and this is your best bet. Let’s make the best of a sorry situation.

This kind of stuff is seen for what it is, given the increased understanding of the critical importance of early relationships, and no account of how the mother and the son were brought into the Church can cushion a hurtful reality for the son. He wasn’t important enough to his father for his father to provide homelife and paternal care. Abandonment takes many forms.
“Fatherhood,’” at one remove.

I did the best that I could by them, thought this Father of the Church?
Did you, Augustine? I leave it to others to make their own assessment.
Click to expand...
And when one adds, to this sorry reality, Augustine’s later
thoughts - on the fate of unbaptized infants - this endearing
assessment, on Augustine’s part, again…speaks volumes.

quote: reen12
Reminds me of the big-noise in the Enlightment period of the 17th century.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau - who was well known for his theories on raising children,
who had placed his own children in an orphanage, the better to have time to write
a work on how to raise a child.
Click to expand...
Now we have Augustine - offering his thought on the fate of the
unbaptized infant. A sure guide, was Augustine. :coffeeread:

reen12
 
Doctrines can be wrong. Very wrong. It doesn’t abrogate your Catholicity, or your sanctity.
 
Shall return to this thread later, to address,
more specifically, Augustine’s thoughts:

--------> on the eternal abode - and characteristics thereof -
meted out to a human infant…unlaved by saving waters.

And speaking of the ‘familial,’ housework calls.

Which puts me in mind of Church law - with regard to
the Lenten fast, only changed within recent memory.
Even as a kid, I thought this of interest.

There’s Mom, doing laundry [no automatic clothes dryer]
hanging out wash, and ironing [no ‘drip-dry’ in those days]
for a family of 5 -being told to fast - on most of the days of Lent -
while Father whoever, had a housekeeper to take care
of all of those strenuous chores that Mom did.
Even as a kid, I knew that there was something
off the wall, about this.

Another reason for a married clergy. I can just hear
the spouse of a cleric - getting in his face over these
fasting ‘rules.’ http://bestsmileys.com/fainting/1.gif

“Look, darling, I know you are extending effort,
sitting at your desk, writing Sunday’s homily.
I’m up to my clavicle, in laundry and hauling groceries.
I feel kind of light-headed, by 2 in the afternoon.
Get together with the boys and rewrite the laws
on fasting, for those taking care of laundry, dishes,
ironing, and attending to Henry, who has chicken pox.”

And I would have been *vastly *interested… in the
‘review’ of ‘theories’ - by clerical spouses - as to
the fate of an unbaptized infant -

“You think what?” Mrs.Augustine might well have said -
hearing of her spouse’s thoughts on the fate and abode of an infant,
lacking saving waters. A bit of balance might have obtained,
had Mrs.‘Father of the Church’ expressed her own views
on the subject. http://bestsmileys.com/nono/9.gif

reen12
 
reen12 said:
Shall return to this thread later, to address,
more specifically, Augustine’s thoughts:

--------> on the eternal abode - and characteristics thereof -
meted out to a human infant…unlaved by saving waters.

And speaking of the ‘familial,’ housework calls.

Which puts me in mind of Church law - with regard to
the Lenten fast, only changed within recent memory.
Even as a kid, I thought this of interest.

There’s Mom, doing laundry [no automatic clothes dryer]
hanging out wash, and ironing [no ‘drip-dry’ in those days]
for a family of 5 -being told to fast - on most of the days of Lent -
while Father whoever, had a housekeeper to take care
of all of those strenuous chores that Mom did.
Even as a kid, I knew that there was something
off the wall, about this.

Another reason for a married clergy. I can just hear
the spouse of a cleric - getting in his face over these
fasting ‘rules.’ http://bestsmileys.com/fainting/1.gif

“Look, darling, I know you are extending effort,
sitting at your desk, writing Sunday’s homily.
I’m up to my clavicle, in laundry and hauling groceries.
I feel kind of light-headed, by 2 in the afternoon.
Get together with the boys and rewrite the laws
on fasting, for those taking care of laundry, dishes,
ironing, and attending to Henry, who has chicken pox.”

And I would have been *vastly *interested… in the
‘review’ of ‘theories’ - by clerical spouses - as to
the fate of an unbaptized infant -

“You think what?” Mrs.Augustine might well have said -
hearing of her spouse’s thoughts on the fate and abode of an infant,
lacking saving waters. A bit of balance might have obtained,
had Mrs.‘Father of the Church’ expressed her own views
on the subject. http://bestsmileys.com/nono/9.gif

reen12
Click to expand...
I don’t see what married clergy have to do with fasting, as all the married clergy I know, their wives, and their children fast like the rest of us.
 
In a quest to delineate the vast abyss that exists, between ghastly ‘theories’ and the relational -
which relational reality God had established, through His word, given to man,
I turn to Augustine, once again, for a closer look at his thought - as it relates to a non-baptized infant, and his/her fate, having passed away in infancy.

newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm

Previous to the time of Augustine, speculation had it that such an unbaptized infant
would find him/herself in a place of natural happiness*…‘limbus infantium.*’ Limbo of infants.

Considering that the infant had not been ‘sealed’ - with the waters of Baptism -
said infant, having had no chance, in life, to express ‘Baptism of desire,’
was therefore consigned - for all eternity, never to see God in the face, [beatific vision]
or to live in His eternal presence - according to the thought
of many distinguished personages, of the Christian faith.

The point is not that this was never ‘official’ Church teaching.
[even though it appeared, as late as the 1950’s, in the
widely used catechetical series - a thing to be memorized.]

The point is - what kind of minds and hearts could have
even considered speculating on such a thing to begin with?

What of the parents, who were told that they would not live, eternally, with their child, in the presence of God.
How a mother’s or father’s heart could have withstood this crushing,
thorougly noxious - unoffical ‘teaching’ - I cannot imagine.

reen12
 
Augustine? What of his ‘view?’

Augustine held that such an infant would be subject to the ‘positive misery of the damned’ -
relenting, after a time, him then saying that this ‘punishment’ would be so mild that the infant would not choose non-existence, as ‘preferable’ to such a state.

You’re in luck, sweetheart. Not the full-flame effect of the damned.
No. You can’t be with Mommy and Daddy and God, but you’ll
adjust to all of this ‘natural happiness,’ in time.

Far from any given point of doctrine, one might do well to
consider the characteristics of mind and heart possessed by
this highly elevated prelate - in having - at one point - consigned these infants
to the ‘positive misery of the damned.’

The oft heard reply, is that this was opinion, only, and never the
official teaching of the Church. A very official ‘unoffical’ teaching,
one advanced… for 700 years.

How many hearts were broken, for the rest of a lifetime - because
this wretched ‘non-official’ teaching was taught? What kind of
hearts and minds were at work, to speculate on this horror to
begin with?

Augustine of Hippo - Father of the Church…and his ‘fatherly’ thoughts…
about the ‘positive misery of the damned,’ and this - as relates to
the fate of those infants who never could do a charitable deed, ‘meriting’ anything,
nor could they express ‘baptism of desire.’ They couldn’t even talk yet.

newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm

What kind of a mindset could create such a thing? - in the face of a God Who said:

“Let the little children come unto Me.”

These ecclesial worthies marred the face of Christ more than the Roman soldiers did.
They made Him unrecognizable, as the God Who *is *Mercy itself.

Once cast overboard, of Peter’s Barque, the beautiful relational
images - familial images - given to human beings by the Creator of all,
and this is possibly the prime example of what may be said and written,
by cold hearts - and by minds, untutored - by the experience of family life.

quote: reen12
Once the familial - the relational - was set aside for the corporate,
Click to expand...
somthing sacred was lost. For all the talk about the ‘domestic church,’
the liturgical role of the father was supplanted by a cleric, who would
now be addressed as “Father.” An attempt was made, by St. Paul,
to justify this critical relational change by referring to the corporate
as the 'body of Christ." Once again, the ‘theoretical’ replaces what
the God of Israel knew would strenghten the family, teach the heart
of a child that family and rememberance and God were all one -
in a gorgeous reflection of God, the family, and the natural rhythm
of life.

I note that Saul of Tarsus did not have the joy and the responsibilty
and the insight that comes, with fatherhood.
Once again, the ‘theoretical’ supplants the relational -
this theoretical ‘image’ of the corporate, being held up as the
will of God. A truly sad loss and mis-emphasis.

Augustine of Hippo, Father of the Church, exemplifies this reality.

reen12
 
quote: Isa Almisry
I don’t see what married clergy have to do with fasting, as all the married clergy I know, their wives, and their children fast like the rest of us.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the post itself will clarify.
It read, in part [referring to the 1950’s, not the 21st century]:

quote: reen12
Which puts me in mind of Church law - with regard to
the Lenten fast, only changed within recent memory.
Even as a kid, I thought this of interest.

There’s Mom, doing laundry [no automatic clothes dryer]
hanging out wash, and ironing [no ‘drip-dry’ in those days]
for a family of 5 -being told to fast - on most of the days of Lent -
while Father whoever, had a housekeeper to take care
of all of those strenuous chores that Mom did.
Even as a kid, I knew that there was something
off the wall, about this.
Click to expand...
reen12
 
reen12 said:
Augustine abandoned the woman he’d had a child by, ‘got religion,’
and became a bishop. He wouldn’t have been dabbling in theology,
had he married the woman - and took an active part in raising his son.
He was elevated to ‘Father of the Church’ - when he couldn’t take
the time or interest to raise his own son. He was worried about
his relationship with God, don’t you know. All other relationships on ‘hold,’
til he got this ‘sorted out.’ :harp:
Click to expand...
:confused:

From wikipedia:
Ambrose baptized Augustine, along with his son, Adeodatus, on Easter Vigil in 387 in Milan, and soon thereafter in 388 he returned to Africa. [7] On his way back to Africa his mother died, as did his son soon after, leaving him alone in the world without family.
Click to expand...
 
The material from wikipedia is of interest, Peter J.
I addressed the matter of Augustine and his ‘family,’
earlier in this thread.

Have an appt. this afternoon, and will offer thought on the
points raised, later in the day. Thank you for noting same.

I was thinking, last night, of the irony involved - in
Martin Luther having been an Augustinian monk,
when he delivered himself of the 95 theses.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Meant to be a scholarly exchange, it ended with
a second profound rift in the Christian Church -
after Orthodoxy had said ‘enough’ in 1054,
after Rome ‘defined’ the order of procession
in the Holy Trinity. filioque]

Conveying thought, on both Luther and Augustine,
recently, it did make for irony, I thought.

reen12
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top