www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West A Study of the Radical Divide Between Catholicism & E Orthodoxy

But, when you're asking about a specific work like the Summa, you're dealing with a work composed in a context different, if not sometime antithetical to, the Orthodox mindset which existed in the West prior to the schism, and also in the East at the time Aquinas wrote. So, you will not just find teachings out of step, but constructs and understandings. Not only are the answers wrong, but also the questions. Now, I'm not trying to rip on non-Orthodox works, or scholasticism in particular. But this is just what we're dealing with in the West in general from 1100 on--thesis, antithesis, back and forth and getting nowhere, creating problems intentionally, and then solving them by creating new problems. It's nuts. It represents humanism--at first with Aquinas it is human reason to understand and expound upon Divine revelation, and then it is human reason glorified to be on par with divine revelation, until eventually it becomes human reason surpassing divine revelation. While you won't find an ecumenical council dogmatizing on this, the aspect and understanding of divine revelation over and confounding human reasoning is key in Orthodoxy. So, the value of works like the summa becomes quite peripheral.

Few Catholics realize that Eastern Orthodoxy, especially as represented by Palamite theology, represents a systematic and comprehensive attack upon Catholic doctrine. Catholic and Orthodox theology are not only in opposition to one another in their understanding of God (theology), but also in the various disciplines of philosophy – in Cosmology, Psychology, Epistemology, Metaphysics, Theodicy, and Ethics. They posit radically different views of God, of man, and of the relationship between God and His creation. Finally, and very crucially, they embrace radically different views of the final destiny of man. In this respect they both employ the concept of "deification", but possess very different understandings of what this term signifies.

Over the past 2,000 years there have been many heresies, schisms, and systems of thought comprehensively opposed to Catholicism. But none has carried the potential threat for corruption of all of Catholic dogma which Eastern Orthodoxy represents. Because of the validity of its sacramental system, the validity of its episcopate and priesthood, and because of the seemingly incurable blindness of Catholics to its extensive doctrinal aberrations, Eastern Orthodoxy is able to make incursions into the life of the Catholic Church which are not possible to other systems. Union with Eastern Orthodoxy is the premier goal of Catholic ecumenism. The achievement of such union without full conversion of the Eastern Orthodox would therefore amount to a massive ingestion of error into the interior of Christ's Mystical Body.

There is no question in my mind but that Palamism, derived from the theology of Gregory Palamas, and endorsed by a series of Eastern Councils in the 14th century, is the dominant system of thought in Eastern Orthodoxy, and has been for centuries. Therefore, while not denying that there have always existed counter-currents, I will feel free to consider the terms Palamism and Eastern Orthodox theology and mysticism as interchangeable.

In similar fashion, I equate Catholic philosophy and theology with the teaching of St. Thomas. From the standpoint of many contemporary Catholics this equation may seem to be unwarranted. Since Vatican II, Thomism has suffered severely. It has been virtually excluded from the training of priests in most seminaries. However, this is to be seen as an historical aberration, which must change if the Church is to be restored to its glory. The following passages are given as evidence of the degree to which Thomistic philosophy and theology are to be identified with official Catholic teaching. In his encyclical Studiorum Ducem, Pope Pius XI writes:

We so heartily approve the magnificent tribute of praise bestowed upon this most divine genius that We consider that Thomas should be called not only the Angelic, but also the Common or Universal Doctor of the Church; for the Church has adopted his philosophy for her own."

In the late nineteenth and first half of the twentieth century (especially after the issuing of the encyclical Aeterni Patris by Pope Leo XIII in 1879), Roman Catholic thought was dominated by neo-Scholastic forms of thought. This, in reaction against "modernist" theology, insisted on a rigid adherence to the thought, methods and principles of the thirteenth-century thinker Thomas Aquinas. This dominance became particularly pronounced in the early twentieth century, as exemplified by the issuing of the Anti-Modernist Oath by Pope Pius X in 1910, and the publication in 1914 of 24 allegedly Thomist propositions which had to be taught in all colleges as fundamental elements of theology.

The roots of a questioning of the dominance of neo-Scholasticism may be traced to work done from the 1920s onwards. Some French Jesuit studies made in exile at Ore Place, Hastings in 1906-26 might be seen as forerunners of the nouvelle théologie.[1] However, the nouvelle théologie movement itself is generally associated with the period between c 1935 and 1960.[2] The movement in its early stages (i.e. the 1930s and early 1940s) is also particularly associated with the French language – a contrast with the Latin used in seminary teaching at the time.[3]

Theologians who are nowadays identified as early forerunners of the nouvelle théologie sought a return of Catholic theology to (what they perceived was) its original purity of thought and expression. To accomplish this, they advocated a "return to the sources" of the Christian faith: namely, scripture and the writings of the Church Fathers. This methodological move is known by its French name, ressourcement ("return to the sources"). Along with this, the movement adopted a systemic openness to dialogue with the contemporary world on issues of theology. They developed also a renewed interest in biblical exegesis, typology, art, literature and mysticism.

Without the work of St. Thomas I am sure that the Roman Church would not have found health during the tumult of the Protestant revolt.

But none has carried the potential threat for corruption of all of Catholic dogma which Eastern Orthodoxy represents. Because of the validity of its sacramental system, the validity of its episcopate and priesthood, and because of the seemingly incurable blindness of Catholics to its extensive doctrinal aberrations, Eastern Orthodoxy is able to make incursions into the life of the Catholic Church which are not possible to other systems. Union with Eastern Orthodoxy is the premier goal of Catholic ecumenism. The achievement of such union without full conversion of the Eastern Orthodox would therefore amount to a massive ingestion of error into the interior of Christ's Mystical Body.

What utter rubbish.

What utter rubbish.

“Thomas wrote under the inspiration of the supernatural spirit which animated his life and that his writings, which contain the principles of, and the laws governing, all sacred studies, must be said to possess a universal character.” (Studiorum Ducem)

Here is Richard Larsons study of "the Radical Divide" :

The Book of Sentences had its precursor in the glosses (an explanation or interpretation of a text, such as, e.g. the Corpus Iuris Civilis or biblical) by the masters who lectured using Saint Jerome's Latin translation of the Bible (the Vulgate). A gloss might concern syntax or grammar, or it might be on some difficult point of doctrine. These glosses, however, were not continuous, rather being placed between the lines or in the margins of the biblical text itself.

Some theologians are of opinion that traces of such a scientific treatment are to be found in the writings of Theophilus of Antioch Clement of Alexandria S Cyril of Jerusalem Lac tantius and others but in truth the first writer in whom anything of scientific arrangement or completeness of method is to be found is S John of Damascus in the eighth century And it may be said that his work De Orthodoxa Fide is both the first and the last to be found in the Oriental Church so stationary and unr effective it would seem has the Oriental mind become since its separation from the centre of spiritual and intellectual activity the Chair of S Peter Since S John of Damascus I hardly know what the Greek Church has produced except a few meagre Catenas of the Fathers upon certain books of Holy Scripture the works of Theophylact a body of miserable Erastian canon law a few still more meagre catechetical works and many virulent and schismatical attacks upon the Primacy of the Holy See.

... the discovery of Aristotle by the West caused an intellectual revolution that led theologians to try to reconcile Christian theology with Aristotle.

The difference is that the East considered Aristotle an authority on science and philosophy and never felt a need to reconcile Aristotle with Christianity.