| HOMEPAGE |[ CONTENTS ]

[ Introduction ] - [ Part 1 ] - [ Part 2 ] - [ Part 3 ]

AUGUSTINE UNKNOWINGLY REJECTS THE DOCTRINE OF THE ECUMENCAL COUNCILS CONCERNING THE OLD TESTAMENT LORD OF GLORY INCARNATE AND HIS VATICAN AND PROTESTANT FOLLOWERS DO THE SAME

INTRODUCTION
PART I:
AUGUSTINE'S TEACHINGS WHICH WERE CONDEMNED AS THOSE OF BARLAAM THE CALABRIAN BY THE NINTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF 1351.
PART II:
THE FIRST AND SECOND ECUMENICAL COUNCILS.
PART III:
THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES' CREED OF 381.

John S. Romanides

YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THE WORKS OF John S. Romanides in various FORMATS.
INTRODUCTION

A

In Part I we put before the readers of this study the texts of Books II and III of Augustine's De Trinitate. Here they may see for themselves the teaching of Barlaam the Calabrian concerning what the Fathers came to call the heresy of "τ γινόμενα καί τ απογινόμενα". In other words according to Augustine the prophets of the Old Testament and the prophets and the apostles of the New Testament did not see anything uncreated except by means of creatures which God brings into existence to be seen and heard and which He then passes back out of existence once their mission is accomplished. Within this category Augustine even includes such revelations as the Angel of the Lord Who appeared to Moses in the burning bush and Who is considered uncreated by both the Jews and the Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils.

In Part II we present texts of Fathers of the First and Second Ecumenical Councils which identify Christ the Logos of the New Testament with the Angel of Great Council and Lord/Yaweh of Glory of the Old Testament Who appeared to His friends the prophets of the Old Testaments. In this way the reader may see for himself whether Augustine belongs to the same tradition as the Fathers of the First and Second Ecumenical Councils. It is up to the reader to compare the texts of Part I and Part II to see whether Augustine teaches the same about the Lord Yaweh of Glory as the Fathers of the First and Second Ecumenical Councils. Thus they will see for themselves that the heresies of Barlaam the Calabrian condemned at the Ninth Ecumenical Council are those of Augustine himself

In Part III we will deal with the New Creed of 381 AD which was cloned into existence by the World Council of Churches by taking the words of the Historical Creed out of its own Patristic context and making a mixture baked by Protestants, Vaticanians and so-called Orthodox into their own Creed.

In contrast to the Augustinian assertions of Part I, which are too silly to be called heresies, both the Arians and the Eunomians condemned by the First and Second Ecumenical Councils accepted that the Logos and the Holy Spirit were the first creations of God by which He creates and sanctifies created beings, but nevertheless remain in existence permanently. In contrast Augustine's Logos and Holy Spirit are simple manners of existence of the divine essence as related to itself, somewhat like the uncreated energies of God in the teaching of our Orthodox Fathers.

What is truly amazing is that the East Romans being lead by St. Gregory Palamas at the Ninth Ecumenical Council of 1451 never realized that that the silly teachings of Barlaam, which they were condemning, were the teachings of Augustine himself. For this reason they claimed that the devil himself inspired this Calabrian to teach his new heresies. While pointing this out, this writer has never raised the question about the sainthood of Augustine. He himself believed himself to be fully Orthodox and repeatedly asked to be corrected.[ 1 ]

Augustine was completely obsessed by the Arian argument that proof that the Logos of the Father is created is the fact that He appeared the Prophets and Patriarchates of the Old Testament and the prophets and apostles of the New Testament. It is because of this concrete problem that Augustine took refuge in his peculiar argument that the Holy Trinity reveals Himself by creatures which He brings into existence to be seen and heard and which He passes back into non-existence when their missions are accomplished. In this way the receptors of revelation end up with supposedly divinely inspired words and concepts without real communion with the uncreated glory of God.

In sharp contrast to this heresy the Fathers of the Church know from their own prophetic and apostolic experience of glorification/Θέωσις that there is no similarity whatsoever between the created and the uncreated and that "it is impossible to express God and even more impossible to conceive understand God".

B

One of the keys to today's continued misunderstandings of Patristic dogma and theology is the fact that some Orthodox began dealing with St. Gregory Palamas within a non Patristic context, as pointed out in my "Notes on the Palamite Controversy and Related Topics Part One[ 2 ] and Part Two"[ 3 ]. A doctoral thesis had been published earlier than my just cited work, "The Teaching Concerning Theosis According to St. Gregory Palamas", by now Professor Georgios I. Mantzarides.[ 4 ] This thesis was translated into English with the title "The Deification of Man"[ 5 ], with a forward by Bishop Kallistos Ware. This book marks backward step into the non patristic past of Orthodox theology which had begun in the times of Palamas and especially in Russia during the reign of Peter The Great. This Doctoral thesis is not aware of the fact that a prevalent Old and New Testament term for "Θέωσις" is simply "glorification". This led a "A Lutheran-Orthodox Dialogue"[ 6 ] to claim in their statement about "ΘoΩΣΙΣ (DEIFICATION)"[ 7 ], citing Bishop Kallistos Ware about the Orthodox understanding of Christianity in terms of deification (Θέωσις)[ 8 ], that both Lutherans and Orthodox agree that, "Although the term "Θέωσις" does not occur in Holy Scriptures the idea of sharing in the divine nature (which "Θέωσις" means) does occur".[ 9 ] But neither Mantzarides, nor Bishop Ware, nor the rest of the Orthodox present, were aware that one of the Old and New Testament terms for "Θέωσις" is "glorification". The Lord of Glory's cure of human personalities by means of the purification and illumination of their hearts and their glorification, both before and after His Incarnation, is the heart and core of Holy Tradition in both Testaments. This is why St. Gregory Palamas quotes Maximus the Confessor's interpretation of Hebrews 7,3 as follows: "The Great Melchisedek is recorded as 'without having neither beginning of days nor end of life,' not because of the created nature, by which he began and ended, but because of the divine and forever existing uncreated and above every nature and all time eternally existing God".[ 10 ] Although the prophets and patriarchs of the Old Testament had reached glorification, yet they did die, but were resurrected with Christ and became members of His Body, the Church, on Pentecost.

 

FOOTNOTES

[ 1 ] Indeed his Filioque is Orthodox since part of the West Roman Orthodox Filioque tradition. In this tradition the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son refers only to the communion of essence. In contrast term "procession" in the Creed of 381 refers only the Hypostatic individuality of the Holy Spirit wherein He exists causally only from the Father just as the Son exists causally only from the Father. This West Roman Orthodox Filioque was deliberately pushed aside by the Anglicans, and indeed kept quite, in favor of those Russians who considered Augustine's Filioque to be a private opinion (θεο"ογούμενον) and deliberately choose to ignore the West Roman Filioque, as I point out on the website referred in the next footnote.

[ 2 ] The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, vol. vi, no. 2 (1960-61), pp. 186-205Also published on the internet at http://www.romanity.org

[ 3 ] The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, vol. ix, no. 2 (1963-64), pp. 225-270. Also published on the internet at http://www.romanity.org

[ 4 ] Published by the Department of Church Literature of the Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki, 1963.

[ 5 ] Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Press. 1984.

[ 6 ] "SALVATION IN CHRIST," A Lutheran-Orthodox Dialogue, Edited and with an Introduction by John Meyendorff and Robert Tobias, Copyright Augsburg Fortress.

[ 7 ] Pages 19-24.

[ 8 ] Page 19-20.

[ 9 ] Page 20.

[ 10 ] Gregory Palamas, Writings, edited and copyrighted by professor Panagiotes K. Christou, Thessaloniki, Vol. 3, p. 164. Cited from St. Maximus the Confessor's work Ambiguorum Liber, PG 1141A-1145B.

 

[ Introduction ] - [ Part 1 ] - [ Part 2 ] - [ Part 3 ]

YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THE WORKS OF John S. Romanides in various FORMATS.

| HOMEPAGE |[ CONTENTS ]

 

© HydroGraphiX. "Romanity".