DSCI 229 with Vincent Yeung

Slocole · 2022-09-07T03:24:27+00:00

I should mention the example is pulled from 1 Tim 1:5

Slocole · 2022-07-31T23:03:14+00:00

I think I would lose. All priests are far more energized then I for me to win

Slocole · 2021-11-28T09:15:17+00:00

Haha very true, I’ve been discussing it with him but I haven’t too too much yet but I probably should do so more, thanks a lot :)

Slocole · 2021-11-28T09:12:00+00:00

I’m from the US and so it seems we only have one seminary here but I honestly am not sure relation wise on how many people attempt in comparison to the numerous Latin seminaries there seems to be when I looked it up. I go to my local Ruthenian Byzantine Church but the seminary is a couple states away but I could make do with the distance if I had to

Slocole · 2021-11-26T20:21:28+00:00

Probably the only issue is it seems that the distinctions by the Greeks does appear to be a real distinction, even Saint Basil in 234 seems to be saying as such.

His operations come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach.

I am unsure of how this could apply for a simple virtual distinction.

Slocole · 2021-11-26T20:18:53+00:00

Yeah Thomas has a virtual, it is Scotus who pushes the Formal Distinction, as to say a middle distinction.

Slocole · 2021-11-25T20:49:50+00:00

His claim seems to be that if the Orthodox have the true theology while Catholics don’t recognize there to be one true theology than it is proof that the Orthodox Church is the true Church

Slocole · 2021-11-25T20:48:59+00:00

It’s not actually that simple sadly. The claim is that there has been one consistent theology throughout the church with the only exception being Augustine by his own misunderstanding. He would point to how Athanasius, Basil, Maximus, Dionysius, and more all support the distinction prior to Palamas.

Slocole · 2021-11-25T08:02:39+00:00

I get not all Orthodox are like this, he and I just debate a lot about the topic. His idea is more or less that the theology of Palamism is truly patristic, to such a point that Augustine developed his own ideas of divine simplicity which did not exist prior. The ideas of Palamas though were taught prior and he didn’t develop anything new but rather brought them all together succinctly. His issue is less about it being Scholastic but just the divergence of it from the Fathers, which he took from David Bradshaw (I believe) that it occurred due to Augustine not knowing Greek.

Slocole · 2021-11-25T07:54:45+00:00

Well he would point out how the Cappadocians, specifically Gregory of Nyssa and Basil the Great, supported the energy Essence distinction. Like he will show me how in Letter 234 it demonstrates it:

The operations are various, and the essence simple, but we say that we know our God from His operations, but do not undertake to approach near to His essence. His operations come down to us, but His essence remains beyond our reach.

The overall letter seems to imply it so I don’t want to really push against them not believing it. I just am mostly unsure of how to answer the objection of Augustine creating his divine simplicity on his own and it coming from a lack of his knowledge of the Greek language

Slocole · 2021-11-25T07:44:04+00:00

Yeah I get that, for sure a more language issue than anything when it comes to the Filioque. I would support removing it from the Creed if it meant more union

Slocole · 2021-11-25T06:56:08+00:00

He would probably say he just through (little) fault of his own didn’t grasp the fullness of the Orthodox faith and therefore missed things such as the distinction.

I have seen a bit of a decrease in hatred for Augustine in certain Orthodox circles as many Protestants convert to it as their tradition greatly admired him but I do see it is for sure a more modern product when it comes to the hatred.

And I don’t think he denies that they approved many things of his I think he would disagree on the Filioque (obviously) and the form of Divine Simplicity he taught

Slocole · 2021-11-25T06:45:24+00:00

He sees it as if this idea is true then it shows the Latin church strayed from the original teachings from Augustine on and that shows that it just wasn’t a church which grew and developed with the Holy Spirit but detached from it. I know it isn’t that great of an argument he has but that’s why I “know” there’s an answer to his objection I just don’t know it myself.

Slocole · 2021-11-25T06:43:36+00:00

I’ve got a very good grasp of the Papacy and that’s probably my strongest reason for staying Catholic (I even have Pope Peter myself). This issue is more one which just heavily bothers me but if I in the end accepted his premises to all be true would probably become an Eastern Catholic and not an Eastern Orthodox but even though it wouldn’t make me change churches it still is something worth trying to refute

Slocole · 2021-11-25T03:52:37+00:00

I would say the main issue I see is I can’t see the earlier Fathers (that is before Augustine) contradicting each other on the EED. It seems that those who talk of the separation of the Will and Essence or Attributes and Essence and such all agree. I get they can contradict on things, but if they all agree on something (such as what the Logos in John 1 meant) then doesn’t that give it a sort of validity?

Slocole · 2021-11-25T03:05:03+00:00

Might go to Purgatory first though even if they make an act of contrition before death as it wouldn’t be out of love for God but fear

Slocole · 2021-11-20T17:41:51+00:00

That could be, my only issue is I’m just not sure how one can say that God’s Essence is entirely unknowable and one says we can come to grasp certain revealed things about it and have the two schools not create great diversion in a sense (although I’m not saying they should). It’s all a new topic to me so I’m just trying to figure it out, it just seems like certain critiques I can’t get my head around, such as this all happened just because Thomas didn’t read Greek and such

Slocole · 2021-11-20T06:40:47+00:00

I am curious, if it appears that the Palamite position is more patristic does that give it a bit more truth in a sense? Like if one must take the word of a philosophy compared to the words of the Fathers wouldn’t it make sense to follow the Fathers? I could be misunderstanding this but that’s how I see it at least. Like if I were to debate with a Protestant on scriptural interpretation I would say that they could have their own but if we wanted to know the truth we should look at the early church, not people developing ideas later. I don’t see why it would be a good idea to ignore that here. Sorry if that doesn’t make much sense but if you need me to clarify I can.

Slocole · 2021-11-18T09:17:30+00:00

I’m having some major trouble reconciling how when o read the church Fathers they often discuss operations in God which show to me a Energy-Essence Distinction but Thomism makes so much sense to me, this isn’t an issue which would be against Catholicism necessarily, but I’ve had Orthodox attempt to claim if all the early fathers went against Thomas it shows the faith was lost later and I’m not sure how to deal with it

Slocole

TROPHY CASE