|
Forums26
Topics35,393
Posts416,749
Members5,993
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
God's energies (energeiai) and powers (dynameis) are revealed in His works (i.e., in creation), but one must be careful not to confuse God's energies (energeiai) and powers (dynameis) with created effects. And if the energies and powers are truly distinct, and not merely because of the way humans know, then you have destroyed the Simplicity which we know from the Creed is an absolute. "I believe in One God..."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
The East holds that God's energies (energeiai) are real (i.e., they are enhypostatic), because they exist within the person's of the Trinity. So, according to the East, in God there is essence and energies and Simplicity is destroyed. But that's not Basil's position but it may be that of the neo-Palamites. God's Simplicity is the key. When it appears that there are real distinctions in God (like essence and energies) this is because of our manner of speaking not because these distinctions really exist in God. As to quotes, I simply point out that Aquinas is doing nothing other than Basil. He falls in the same tradition of the Fathers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
If you mean by hypostatic properties, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, I have no objection. I profess, One God, Three Divine Persons. Nothing more, nothing less. If you mean properties in the way that a man has certain properties such that he has parts (essential though they may be), I repeat, God is One. Hence all that we say of Him regarding his Power, Goodness, Truth, Love refer to his Essence which is One. It is only in our manner of knowing and speaking that these things appear to be many and different.
A consequence of neo-Palalism which you espouse is that there is an inherent contradiction between faith and reason. Nonetheless, In the beginning was the Word (Logos).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8 |
In Question 13 Aquinas considers the various names of God: QUESTION 13: THE NAMES OF GOD
(In Twelve Articles)
After the consideration of those things which belong to the divine knowledge, we now proceed to the consideration of the divine names. For everything is named by us according to our knowledge of it. Under this head, there are twelve points for inquiry:
(1) Whether God can be named by us?
(2) Whether any names applied to God are predicated of Him substantially?
(3) Whether any names applied to God are said of Him literally, or are all to be taken metaphorically?
(4) Whether any names applied to God are synonymous?
(5) Whether some names are applied to God and to creatures univocally or equivocally?
(6) Whether, supposing they are applied analogically, they are applied first to God or to creatures?
(7) Whether any names are applicable to God from time?
(8) Whether this name God is a name of nature, or of the operation?
(9) Whether this name God is a communicable name?
(10) Whether it is taken univocally or equivocally as signifying God, by nature, by participation, and by opinion?
(11) Whether this name, Who is, is the supremely appropriate name of God?
(12) Whether affirmative propositions can be formed about God? The procedure followed by Basil is only made clearer by Aquinas. He follows in the same tradition of the Fathers. St. Gregory of Nyssa in his Seventh Homily on Ecclesiastes holds that the diastemic gap between the created and the uncreated is unbridgeable from man's side, and that true knowledge of God (i.e., knowledge that is salvific) can only come through divine revelation. Thus, the natural attempts by man to reach God cannot succeed, for such natural efforts can only find an imperfect reflection of His glory within creation, but that is not enough to save man, because to be saved he needs a real participation in God, a participation that can divinize him. This type of participation can only come about through grace, i.e., a real sharing in the divine nature through the uncreated energies, which unilaterally transgress the diastemic boundary between the uncreated Creator and His creation. (See also, St. Gregory of Nyssa's Commentaries on the Canticle of Canticles).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8 |
If you mean by hypostatic properties, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, I have no objection. I profess, One God, Three Divine Persons. Nothing more, nothing less. If you mean properties in the way that a man has certain properties such that he has parts (essential though they may be), I repeat, God is One. Hence all that we say of Him regarding his Power, Goodness, Truth, Love refer to his Essence which is One. It is only in our manner of knowing and speaking that these things appear to be many and different. I confess Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, consubstantial, of one Will and One Energy, who enters into His creation at the incarnation and Who permeates the world with His energies, for in fact the world exists within God's energies. A consequence of neo-Palalism which you espouse is that there is an inherent contradiction between faith and reason. Nonetheless, In the beginning was the Word (Logos). I reject Neo-palamism, because there is no such thing as Palamism in the first place, while I also reject Thomism, and Neo-Scholasticism, et al., for I embrace the Orthodox faith, which alone is true and holy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8 |
The East holds that God's energies (energeiai) are real (i.e., they are enhypostatic), because they exist within the person's of the Trinity. So, according to the East, in God there is essence and energies and Simplicity is destroyed. But that's not Basil's position but it may be that of the neo-Palamites. God's Simplicity is the key. When it appears that there are real distinctions in God (like essence and energies) this is because of our manner of speaking not because these distinctions really exist in God. Simplicity would only be destroyed if I accepted your dialectical reasoning, but I reject it, because theology is transcends the limits of the human mind. As to quotes, I simply point out that Aquinas is doing nothing other than Basil. He falls in the same tradition of the Fathers. On this issue we will have to disagree. Aquinas is doing philosophy, not theology; while St. Basil is doing theology and is not trying to workout a human philosophical system.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8 |
God's energies (energeiai) and powers (dynameis) are revealed in His works (i.e., in creation), but one must be careful not to confuse God's energies (energeiai) and powers (dynameis) with created effects. And if the energies and powers are truly distinct, and not merely because of the way humans know, then you have destroyed the Simplicity which we know from the Creed is an absolute. "I believe in One God..." No doubt that is what you believe, but I hold that the multiplicity of the divine energies is no more destructive of God's unity than is the Trinity of persons. Perhaps you do not believe that the persons of the Trinity are real, but I accept that they are real and not merely epinoetic constructs of my mind.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
St. Gregory of Nyssa in his Seventh Homily on Ecclesiastes holds that the diastemic gap between the created and the uncreated is unbridgeable from man's side, and that true knowledge of God (i.e., knowledge that is salvific) can only come through divine revelation. Thus, the natural attempts by man to reach God cannot succeed, for such natural efforts can only find an imperfect reflection of His glory within creation, but that is not enough to save man, because to be saved he needs a real participation in God, a participation that can divinize him. This type of participation can only come about through grace, i.e., a real sharing in the divine nature through the uncreated energies, which unilaterally transgress the diastemic boundary between the uncreated Creator and His creation. I never said that the natural knowledge of God is salvific. Neither does Aquinas. Both he and Gregory of Nyssa and St. Paul, however, see that God's existence can be seen through the things that are made. For salvation, revelation and the incarnation are absolutely necessary. Thank Goodness (refering to the essence of course!) I am not required to believe in the Divine Energies! But from my viewpoint, speaking as a man of course, I don't need to believe in the Energies (operations). To quote a former Abp. of Canterbury when he was asked whether he believed in infant baptism, I respond: Believe in it? Hell, I've seen it!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8 |
Thank Goodness (refering to the essence of course!) I am not required to believe in the Divine Energies! But from my viewpoint, speaking as a man of course, I don't need to believe in the Energies (operations). To quote a former Abp. of Canterbury when he was asked whether he believed in infant baptism, I respond: Believe in it? Hell, I've seen it! Huh? What has this to do with anything? That there is a hell I have no doubt, but I do not believe in hell; instead, I believe only in the Holy Trinity. As I said before: I believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one in essence and undivided, and this one God shares His uncreated life and glory with me through His energies, which – as long as I remain faithful to the end – bring about my deification ( theosis).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
Believe in the energies (operations, i.e. works)? I don't need to believe in them, I've seen them!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8 |
Believe in the energies (operations, i.e. works)? I don't need to believe in them, I've seen them! The energies (energeiai) are not the works (ergon); instead, the works (ergon) are caused by the energies (energeiai). The energies (energeiai) are the enactments of the divine powers (dynameis) by the three divine persons, and so they (i.e., the energies) are God as He is made manifest.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
Simplicity would only be destroyed if I accepted your dialectical reasoning, but I reject it, because theology is transcends the limits of the human mind. But human words are the only kinds which we have to do theology---to reflect upon the Word by whom we are saved.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8 |
Simplicity would only be destroyed if I accepted your dialectical reasoning, but I reject it, because theology is transcends the limits of the human mind. But human words are the only kinds which we have to do theology---to reflect upon the Word by whom we are saved. Theology in the proper sense of the term is experiential, and so it is not reducible to human words (cf. Dr. Scot Douglass' book, Theology of the Gap). That being said, the decrees (horoi) of the Councils are meant only to establish parameters within which we can speak, and as a consequence one must not look upon them (i.e., the decrees) as "definitions," because God is beyond any type of human definition.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 936 |
Yes, Yes but as St. John Chrysostom says in the Homilies on St. Matthew's Gospel: It were indeed meet for us not at all to require the aid of the written Word, but to exhibit a life so pure, that the grace of the Spirit should be instead of books to our souls, and that as these are inscribed with ink, even so should our hearts be with the Spirit. But, since we have utterly put away from us this grace, come, let us at any rate embrace the second best course.
For that the former was better, God has made manifest, both by His words, and by His doings.
...But since in process of time they made shipwreck, some with regard to doctrines, others as to life and manners, there was again need that they should be put in remembrance by the written word....Reflect then how great an evil it is for us, who ought to live so purely as not even to need written words, but to yield up our hearts, as books, to the Spirit; now that we have lost that honor, and are come to have need of these, to fail again in duly employing even this second remedy. For if it be a blame to stand in need of written words, and not to have brought down on ourselves the grace of the Spirit; consider how heavy the charge of not choosing to profit even after this assistance, but rather treating what is written with neglect, as if it were cast forth without purpose, and at random, and so bringing down upon ourselves our punishment with increase.
But that no such effect may ensue, let us give strict heed unto the things that are written... Have a blessed afternoon. Let us pray for one another.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854 Likes: 8 |
The Fathers were always reticent to speak about divine things, for they knew that human language was the creation of man, and not the creation of the Creator of man. Nevertheless, as St. Hilary pointed out: ". . . the errors of heretics and blasphemers force us to deal with unlawful matters, to scale perilous heights, to speak unutterable words, to trespass on forbidden ground. Faith ought in silence to fulfill the commandments, worshipping the Father, reverencing with Him the Son, abounding in the Holy Spirit, but we must strain the poor resources of our language to express thoughts too great for words. The error of others compels us to err in daring to embody in human terms truths which ought to be hidden in the silent veneration of the heart." Have a blessed afternoon. Let us pray for one another. God bless you too, and may God always watch over you.
|
|
|
|
|
