That's It I"m Becoming Eastern Catholic

[misereremi]

[quote name='mortify' post='1632219' date='Aug 20 2008, 03:56 AM']We are in far more need of securing our rite than the East is.[/quote]
true.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1632207' date='Aug 19 2008, 07:47 PM']I personally don't understand it's removal. We should all be reciting the same Creed as it reflects our oneness in Faith.[/quote]
The Eastern Churches (both Catholic and Orthodox) recite the Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed as it was originally written (i.e., without the [i]filioque[/i]), because our theology makes a real distinction between the Spirit's procession ([i]ekporeusis[/i]) of origin as person, which is from the Father alone, and His progression ([i]proienai[/i]) or manifestation ([i]phanerosis[/i]) as energy, which is from the Father through the Son.

[mortify]

Peace be with you Apotheoun,

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1633179' date='Aug 20 2008, 08:02 PM']The Eastern Churches (both Catholic and Orthodox) recite the Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed as it was originally written (i.e., without the [i]filioque[/i]), because our theology makes a real distinction between the Spirit's procession ([i]ekporeusis[/i]) of origin as person, which is from the Father alone, and His progression ([i]proienai[/i]) or manifestation ([i]phanerosis[/i]) as energy, which is from the Father through the Son.[/quote]

The distinction between God's essence and energies is a post-schism Greek development revolving around the Hesychast controversy. It's foreign to the West and those not influenced by the Greeks. The West condemned the concept in 1148 at the Synod of Rheims.

It seems incomplete to say there are relations between Father and Son, Father and Spirit, but not Spirit and Son. It fractures the essence of God. God is one in essence and there is no absolute distinction between any of the Three Persons, only Their relation to each Other can distinguish Them. The only way we can distinguish the "Spirit of Christ" from the Son of God, is to recognize a relative opposition between the two, and by this I mean the procession of the Spirit from Christ.


But God knows best.

[Selah]

[quote]Lebanese girls are very attractive[/quote]

Oh, you think so (I'm Lebanese, lol)

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1633230' date='Aug 20 2008, 08:43 PM']The distinction between God's essence and energies is a post-schism Greek development revolving around the Hesychast controversy. It's foreign to the West and those not influenced by the Greeks. The West condemned the concept in 1148 at the Synod of Rheims.[/quote]
The essence / energy distinction is made by the Cappadocians, by Clement of Alexandria, by Cyril of Alexandria, by St. Maximos the Confessor, by St. John Damascene, and many others; so it is hardly a "post-schism" development. In fact, anyone who has read the Eastern Fathers knows that the triadological and christological dogmas require this ineffable distinction.

Edited August 21, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1633230' date='Aug 20 2008, 08:43 PM']It seems incomplete to say there are relations between Father and Son, Father and Spirit, but not Spirit and Son. It fractures the essence of God. God is one in essence and there is no absolute distinction between any of the Three Persons, only Their relation to each Other can distinguish Them. The only way we can distinguish the "Spirit of Christ" from the Son of God, is to recognize a relative opposition between the two, and by this I mean the procession of the Spirit from Christ.[/quote]
The persons of the Trinity are not reducible to their relations, nor can it be said that there are "relations of opposition" within the Godhead, because God is beyond any form of opposition. God is adiastemic (i.e., beyond any kind of "intervals" or "oppositions"). Pagan philosophy must not be confused with Christian theology.

[mortify]

[quote name='Selah' post='1633234' date='Aug 20 2008, 10:51 PM']Oh, you think so (I'm Lebanese, lol)[/quote]

Ah, Lebnania? mash'allah mash'allah

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1633230' date='Aug 20 2008, 08:43 PM']The only way we can distinguish the "Spirit of Christ" from the Son of God, is to recognize a relative opposition between the two, and by this I mean the procession of the Spirit from Christ.[/quote]
This statement is false, for as St. John Damascene said, ". . . we do [b]not[/b] speak of the Spirit as from the Son: but yet we call Him the Spirit of the Son." That the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Son does not mean that He takes His origin from the Son. There is only one cause, one principle of origin within the Godhead, and that is the person of the Father.

Finally, as I have already said, there is absolutely no opposition in God, not between the persons of the Trinity, nor between the persons and the divine essence. Thus, there is no place in Christian theology for the metaphysics of Aristotle.

Edited August 21, 2008 by Apotheoun

[mortify]

Peace be with you Apotheoun,

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1633248' date='Aug 20 2008, 11:07 PM']The essence / energy distinction is made by the Cappadocians, by Clement of Alexandria, by Cyril of Alexandria, by St. Maximos the Confessor, by St. John Damascene, and many others; so it is hardly a "post-schism" development. In fact, anyone who has read the Eastern Fathers knows that the triadological and christological dogmas require this ineffable distinction.[/quote]

There is no real distinction between God's Essence and attributes because God is what He has. Scripture notes this when it says "God is Love." Certain Eastern Fathers such as the Cappadocians emphasized the distinction between God's essence and attributes because the heretic Eunomius claimed an immediate cognition of God even in this world. Our finite minds are incapable of comprehending God, so we know Him solely through a multiplicity of concepts revealed through His attributes.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1633274' date='Aug 20 2008, 09:31 PM']Peace be with you Apotheoun,



There is no real distinction between God's Essence and attributes because God is what He has. Scripture notes this when it says "God is Love." Certain Eastern Fathers such as the Cappadocians emphasized the distinction between God's essence and attributes because the heretic Eunomius claimed an immediate cognition of God even in this world. Our finite minds are incapable of comprehending God, so we know Him solely through a multiplicity of concepts revealed through His attributes.[/quote]
There is a real distinction, without a separation, between God's essence and His energies, and your position is not supported by the Eastern Fathers, because it is a pagan notion adopted from the metaphysics of Aristotle.

Below is a quotation from one of St. Gregory of Nyssa's writings that touches on this topic:


The Divine Nature, whatever It may be in Itself, surpasses every mental concept. For It is altogether inaccessible to reasoning and conjecture, nor has there been found any human faculty capable of perceiving the incomprehensible; for we cannot devise a means of understanding inconceivable things. Therefore, the great Apostle calls His ways unsearchable, meaning by this that the way that leads to knowledge of the Divine Essence is inaccessible to thought. That is to say, none of those who have passed through life before us has made known to the intelligence so much as a trace by which might be known what is above knowledge.

Since such is He whose nature is above every nature, the Invisible and Incomprehensible is seen and apprehended in another manner. Many are the modes of such perception. For it is possible to see Him who has made all things in wisdom by way of inference through the wisdom that appears in the universe. It is the same as with human works of art where, in a way, the mind can perceive the maker of the product that is before it, because he has left on his work the stamp of his art. [i]In this, however, is seen not the nature of the artist, but only his artistic skill which he has left impressed on his handiwork.[/i] Thus also, when we look at the order of creation, we form in our mind an image [i][b]not of the essence[/b], but of the wisdom of Him who has made all things wisely[/i]. And if we consider the cause of our life, that He came to create man not from necessity, but from the free decision of his goodness, we say that we have contemplated God by this way, [i]that we have apprehended his goodness – [b]so again, not his essence[/b], but his goodness[/i]. It is the same with all other things that raised the mind to transcendent goodness, all these we can term apprehensions of God, since each one of these sublime meditations places God within our sight. For power, purity, constancy, freedom from contrariety – all these engrave on the soul the impress of the divine and transcendent mind. Hence it is clear through what has just been said that the Lord speaks the truth when he promises that God will be seen by those who have a pure heart; nor does Paul deceive when he asserts in his letters that no one has seen God, nor can he see him. [i]For he is invisible by nature, [b]but becomes visible in his energies[/b], for he may be contemplated in the things that are referred to him.[/i]

[St. Gregory of Nyssa, [u]Sixth Sermon on the Beatitudes[/u]]

Edited August 21, 2008 by Apotheoun

[mortify]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1633253' date='Aug 20 2008, 11:10 PM']The persons of the Trinity are not reducible to their relations, nor can it be said that there are "relations of opposition" within the Godhead, because God is beyond any form of opposition. God is adiastemic (i.e., beyond any kind of "intervals" or "oppositions").[/quote]

In God all is one except the opposition of relations, this is De Fide.
[quote]Pagan philosophy must not be confused with Christian theology.[/quote]

This includes neoplatonic distinctions within God.

[Apotheoun]

St. Basil says:

[God's] energies are various, and [His] essence simple, but we say that we know our God from His energies, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence. His energies come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach.

[St. Basil, [i]Letter 234[/i]]

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='mortify' post='1633288' date='Aug 20 2008, 09:43 PM']In God all is one except the opposition of relations, this is De Fide.

This includes neoplatonic distinctions within God.[/quote]
There are no "relations of opposition" within God, nor are there neo-platonic distinctions within God, pagan philosophy has no place in Christian theology, and it was explicitly condemned in the Synodikon of Orthodoxy, which is chanted on the Sunday of Orthodoxy at the beginning of Great Fast (Lent).

That said, the persons of the Trinity are truly subsistent, and so they cannot be reduced to "relations": the Father is the sole cause within the Godhead, and He eternally causes the Son by generation ([i]gennasin[/i]), and He alone causes the Spirit from all eternity by procession ([i]ekporeusis[/i]), and this is the teaching of St. Maximos the Confessor, and all the other Eastern Fathers.

Edited August 21, 2008 by Apotheoun

[jeffpugh]

I've had the OP idea too... almost as strong as a calling, but I realise it was sort of a retaliation against the de-beautifying or stripping down of the traditions of the Latin Church. After a bit of contemplation, I think I'm here to stay for now, because I can't just flee from these gems of the west and let them be snatched up by time, but stay and preserve them so my sons and daughters, their kindred, and so fourth may have them. There must be a preservation of both Churches. Though the Latin rite is the biggest, we're arguably losing it more and more in many aspects. There is great beauty in the Latin rite. I am quite surprised that someone like STM said he wanted to switch "rites", when he regularly attends the highly acclaimed extraordinary form. talk about Drama and beauty!

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1633299' date='Aug 20 2008, 10:00 PM']I've had the OP idea too... almost as strong as a calling, but I realise it was sort of a retaliation against the de-beautifying or stripping down of the traditions of the Latin Church. After a bit of contemplation, I think I'm here to stay for now, because I can't just flee from these gems of the west and let them be snatched up by time, but stay and preserve them so my sons and daughters, their kindred, and so fourth may have them. There must be a preservation of both Churches. Though the Latin rite is the biggest, we're arguably losing it more and more in many aspects. There is great beauty in the Latin rite. I am quite surprised that someone like STM said he wanted to switch "rites", when he regularly attends the highly acclaimed extraordinary form. talk about Drama and beauty![/quote]

The reason why I said that was because I went to a school Mass that was absolutely atrocious and was kind of upset by how badly said it was... But seriously I do love the Eastern Churches (not the fact, though, that some of them don't accept all the Church's dogmas).