created/uncreated grace

[Maryslittleflower]

the problem is this does not deal with why the idea of created grace is wrong. you cannot define grace as being of God, and then say that our experience is created grace of God's uncreated grace. it would be like saying it's okay to say there was a time when the Son was not, but He is still eternal.

The idea of created grace doesn't mean that at one point it wasn't existing (as in your example of the Son), it means that there was a time when we weren't receiving it. Created grace seems to refer to the instance - to the event of its reception.

I don't know if this example is good enough (and totally correct), but let's say you have a friend who you want to give a present to.. but you never meet this friend, so one day you invite them to dinner to give the present. The event - dinner - is a one time event that only came after you having the gift. This example is of course very imperfect..

but to relate it to grace, - we see grace as not formally distinct from God's Essence (there is a virtual distinction*). He gives Himself, but He creates an instance and a way for us to receive this gift. The gift is eternal, but the instance is not, because we are not eternal. This is similar to the relation of created and uncreated grace, though maybe I'm missing some points here.

*In Catholic theology: The distinction between the Divine Persons is different in ways because of their relations. If the Son was the same Person as the Father, it wouldn't make sense that there are two Persons at all. But they have the same Essence. God's operations (Energies) have a virtual but not full distinction from His Essence.

 

[Maryslittleflower]

but that is what St John says, that the uncreated was beheld by physical eyes

St John the Apostle? could you let me know in which book, the Gospel or one of the letters?

 

[ArmyMatt]

The idea of created grace doesn't mean that at one point it wasn't existing (as in your example of the Son), it means that there was a time when we weren't receiving it. Created grace seems to refer to the instance - to the event of its reception.

I don't know if this example is good enough (and totally correct), but let's say you have a friend who you want to give a present to.. but you never meet this friend, so one day you invite them to dinner to give the present. The event - dinner - is a one time event that only came after you having the gift. This example is of course very imperfect..

but to relate it to grace, - we see grace as not formally distinct from God's Essence (there is a virtual distinction*). He gives Himself, but He creates an instance and a way for us to receive this gift. The gift is eternal, but the instance is not, because we are not eternal. This is similar to the relation of created and uncreated grace, though maybe I'm missing some points here.

*In Catholic theology: The distinction between the Divine Persons is different in ways because of their relations. If the Son was the same Person as the Father, it wouldn't make sense that there are two Persons at all. But they have the same Essence. God's operations (Energies) have a virtual but not full distinction from His Essence.

but that is the problem, while we are creatures, we are created to be filled with God's grace, not that He creates an instance for us to receive it. He just is, and we encounter He Who is.

 

[ArmyMatt]

St John the Apostle? could you let me know in which book, the Gospel or one of the letters?

yes, his Gospel opening in the Greek

 

[Maryslittleflower]

but that is the problem, while we are creatures, we are created to be filled with God's grace, not that He creates an instance for us to receive it. He just is, and we encounter He Who is.

In Catholic theology we truly do have God living in us.. I think these are slightly different points. We do encounter Him but as creatures, this is one way to explain it..

Here's a link explaining some difference in terminology that I just came across... https://thebananarepublican1.wordpr...sence-energy-uncreated-created-grace/#more-27

 

[ArmyMatt]

In Catholic theology we truly do have God living in us.. I think these are slightly different points. We do encounter Him but as creatures, this is one way to explain it..

Here's a link explaining some difference in terminology that I just came across... Essence, Energy, and Uncreated and Created Grace

and again, there are no created effects as grace. grace is only bearing as the uncreated. this is not simply a distinction in terminology.

 

[Maryslittleflower]

yes, his Gospel opening in the Greek

I thought you meant about Moses.. I was looking for it and couldn't remember where it could be found. I know there are some Church Fathers who spoke of these instances (Tabor, maybe Moses on Mt Sinai) in connection to uncreated light, - but it's unclear how this was meant.. in Catholic theology - I looked it up, the light is like a visible representation of the uncreated light. It's still something miraculous and heavenly. With Tabor, it seems complicated in terms of how it relates to Christ's Person, and I read that in Catholic theology, as the Apostles saw this light, in their intellect they understood more about uncreated light and the Light of Glory in Heaven.

In terms of St John, I think this can be interpreted in different ways, it doesn't mention these miracles with light, it talks about Christ being the Light of the World.. as for how it relates to the miracles, I will let the theologians figure it out

 

[Maryslittleflower]

and again, there are no created effects as grace. grace is only bearing as the uncreated. this is not simply a distinction in terminology.

I understand it's a difference in theology

 

[ArmyMatt]

I thought you meant about Moses.. I was looking for it and couldn't remember where it could be found. I know there are some Church Fathers who spoke of these instances (Tabor, maybe Moses on Mt Sinai) in connection to uncreated light, - but it's unclear how this was meant.. in Catholic theology - I looked it up, the light is like a visible representation of the uncreated light. It's still something miraculous and heavenly. With Tabor, it seems complicated in terms of how it relates to Christ's Person, and I read that in Catholic theology, as the Apostles saw this light, in their intellect they understood more about uncreated light and the Light of Glory in Heaven.

In terms of St John, I think this can be interpreted in different ways, it doesn't mention these miracles with light, it talks about Christ being the Light of the World.. as for how it relates to the miracles, I will let the theologians figure it out

and for us, it is not a representation of the uncreated, but is the uncreated.

and in the original Greek, the prologue of John is pretty clear

 

[Gregory Thompson]

This came up in another topic and it was suggested a separate thread be started here..

I just thought to clarify the Catholic position about whether grace is created or not. I think this definition is pretty accurate:

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=36982

God himself, insofar as in his love has predetermined gifts of grace. there are three forms of uncreated grace: the hypostatic union, the divine indwelling, and the beatific vision. In the first of these, God has communicated himself in the Incarnation of Christ's humanity (the grace of union) so intimately that Jesus of Nazareth is a divine person. In the second and third communications, the souls of the justified on earth and of the glorified in heaven are elevated to a share in God's own life. all three are created graces, considered as acts, since they all had a beginning in time. But the gift that is conferred on a creature in these acts is uncreated.

From what I understand, sometimes it's mentioned by people that Catholics believe in "created grace".. but I don't think it really means what is often assumed. We don't believe that the grace itself - the gift itself - is created, but the occasion, the act of the grace in the creature.

I was reading through the catechism to confirm what was said there in the "sacramental economy" .
.
This was in the section for sacraments of salvation: "From the moment that a sacrament is celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, the power of Christ and his Spirit acts in and through it, independently of the personal holiness of the minister. Nevertheless, the fruits of the sacraments also depend on the disposition of the one who receives them."
.
The part I bolded, is similar to the grace being created by the creature, but this ignores that the grace comes from God, is this is popular interpretation lately?

 

[ArmyMatt]

I was reading through the catechism to confirm what was said there in the "sacaramental economy" .
.
This was in the section for sacraments of salvation: "From the moment that a sacrament is celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, the power of Christ and his Spirit acts in and through it, independently of the personal holiness of the minister. Nevertheless, the fruits of the sacraments also depend on the disposition of the one who receives them."
.
The part I bolded, is similar to the grace being created by the creature, but this ignores that the grace comes from God, is this is popular interpretation lately?

I don't think the bolded part is that problematic per say, and not with the idea of grace being created. one could read that as someone can receive unto condemnation as well as salvation depending on their disposition.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I don't think the bolded part is that problematic per say, and not with the idea of grace being created. one could read that as someone can receive unto condemnation as well as salvation depending on their disposition.

The part I was concerned with was the concept of people creating their own grace, i really only trust God's kind of grace. The way the subject topic was worded seemed to indicate that God was not part of the equation, depending on their disposition. The quote from the catechism, I didn't find any issue with it.

 

[ArmyMatt]

The part I was concerned with was the concept of people creating their own grace, i really only trust God's kind of grace. The way the subject topic was worded seemed to indicate that God was not part of the equation, depending on their disposition. The quote from the catechism, I didn't find any issue with it.

yes, in that I think we would agree with you. we do not generate grace, nor is there a created indication of grace. grace is the unveiled encounter of the created with the uncreated directly.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

yes, in that I think we would agree with you. we do not generate grace, nor is there a created indication of grace. grace is the unveiled encounter of the created with the uncreated directly.

So then, if the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, the post reformation groups may have a similar ripple in the spirit.

 

[ArmyMatt]

So then, if the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, the post reformation groups may have a similar ripple in the spirit.

many of us would say that

 

[Gregory Thompson]

many of us would say that

Thanks for the perspective.

 

[~Anastasia~]

So then, if the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, the post reformation groups may have a similar ripple in the spirit.

To be completely fair, various reformations and Church splits and new denominations surely develop almost exclusively with the DESIRE to embrace God's Truth. I think it is often a lack of understanding what the issues are, or what they imply, that causes errors to be recycled or retained when attempting to reform.

It's a pity that folks don't seem aware that there is no need to reinvent the wheel, since the Church didn't go anywhere. But they can see Orthodoxy and it's visual similarity to Catholicism and assume we share their beliefs in all things, or in other cases they don't study long enough to realize that part of what they reject actually WAS taught by the early Church. It takes a very open mind, time to study and investigate, and a willingness to discard what you think you know if you turn out to be wrong on a particular point. Most rather forge ahead with what they think they know, and ever diverge. To be fair maybe correcting some errors, but at the same time sometimes retaining others or creating new ones.

But the whole inheritance regarding created grace is a big one in Protestantism too.

It's a fascinating thing to study, but very grievous sometimes to see people dig deeper into what isn't true and doesn't profit their souls. Lord have mercy on us all.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

To be completely fair, various reformations and Church splits and new denominations surely develop almost exclusively with the DESIRE to embrace God's Truth. I think it is often a lack of understanding what the issues are, or what they imply, that causes errors to be recycled or retained when attempting to reform.

It's a pity that folks don't seem aware that there is no need to reinvent the wheel, since the Church didn't go anywhere. But they can see Orthodoxy and it's visual similarity to Catholicism and assume we share their beliefs in all things, or in other cases they don't study long enough to realize that part of what they reject actually WAS taught by the early Church. It takes a very open mind, time to study and investigate, and a willingness to discard what you think you know if you turn out to be wrong on a particular point. Most rather forge ahead with what they think they know, and ever diverge. To be fair maybe correcting some errors, but at the same time sometimes retaining others or creating new ones.

But the whole inheritance regarding created grace is a big one in Protestantism too.

It's a fascinating thing to study, but very grievous sometimes to see people dig deeper into what isn't true and doesn't profit their souls. Lord have mercy on us all.

Yeah, I've done a lot of research, so I can see what you're saying.
.
My main issue with a spiritual system that creates a currency out of the soul is very similar to what appears in the spirit realm as a "bridge" for demonic activity. So anything even taking on an appearance like this it definitely raises a flag.
.
but in all fairness, the fruit must also be considered.

 

[Markie Boy]

Observation here - So I am struggling to see if I can be Catholic or not, and grace is a point of interest.

Coming from a Biblical point of view, I have a harder time with all the "grace and graces" of Catholicism.

I had a conversation with a life long Catholic at our parish this week and they stated something like "If it wasn't for all the graces earned by all our prayers, and sacrifices, and prayers, and martyrs, nobody would go to Heaven". What????

There also seems to be a large focus on suffering and guilt, more than the resurrection and joy as well.

It seems whatever is being done, doctrine or not, in Catholicism has people thinking like this??

 

[Markie Boy]

I have to ask - do the Orthodox claim that the person must co-operate with God's grace or energies for them to be effective?