David Bentley Hart a universalist

[ArmyMatt]

he called a saint a brutish imbecile, which is pretty ignorant of St. Justinian.

 

[ArmyMatt]

St Justinian codified Christian law, was a brilliant military tactician, and commissioned the creation of the greatest Church that the world has known. so there goes the imbecile part.

 

[Isaac32]

St Justinian codified Christian law, was a brilliant military tactician, and commissioned the creation of the greatest Church that the world has known. so there goes the imbecile part.

That wasn't my point of focus. I was speaking generally.

 

[Lukaris]

St Justinian codified Christian law, was a brilliant military tactician, and commissioned the creation of the greatest Church that the world has known. so there goes the imbecile part.

He was also cruel; he subjected Manichees to the death penalty. "Manichees who obstinately refused to abjure their doctrines were gathered on ships that were then set on fire so that they might be buried in the waves." quoted from chapter 2 (p.53), Byzantine Christianity: Emperor, Church & the West by Harry J. Magoulias (Rand McNally ed. c. 1970, Lib. of Cong. # 70-75615) http://www.amazon.com/Byzantine-Christianity-Emperor-Church-West/dp/B001MBI508

 

[jckstraw72]

but the Church has received the anathemas as part of the Council all the same.

 

[jckstraw72]

Being a saint has little bearing on correctness.

i hope you don't really believe that. of course the Saints understand theology far better than you and i. gaining the mind of Christ isn't for nothing ...

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

I know what the anathemas against Origen say, but they weren't issued during the council itself. Fr. John is wrong here. I am sure he is a great priest, but his historical scrutiny leaves something to be wanted.

Well, then I am pleased that we may capitalise here on your superior historical scrunity.

Of course, as good Orthodox we all know that an Ecumenical Council does not get its legitimacy from the presence of kings, emperors or popes at the council, nor even because so many participated. Rather, we understand that an Ecumenical Council gets its legitimacy, and can be considered "Ecumenical" and not just "local", because it is embraced and believed by the whole Church. The adoption of a Council's findings are thus not accepted by the Church when it ends, but when the Church, in her wisdom, adopts them.

So, please show me from the consensus of the Fathers or from subsequent Councils that we should reject the anathemas from the 5th Ecumenical Council or should only accept the Council's anathemas regarding the pre existence of souls but not the Council's anathemas regarding apokatastasis.

Please explain also, again from the Fathers or from subsequent Councils, why the anathema against apokatastasis was included later in the Synodikon of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, if in fact the Church rejected the anathemas against apokatastasis that were issued by the 5th Council.

Thanks.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

Being a saint has little bearing on correctness.

Brilliant Fathers such as Origen or Tertullian are not considered saints by the Church precisely because they were not considered sufficiently Orthodox, I should think. I know of no other reason for their lack of canonisation, since in other respects they seem to have lived rather saintly lives.

 

[Isaac32]

i hope you don't really believe that. of course the Saints understand theology far better than you and i. gaining the mind of Christ isn't for nothing ...

They have a certain kind of knowledge, i.e. "one who prays truly is a theologian." This doesn't make them experts on the facts of history, though.

 

[Isaac32]

Brilliant Fathers such as Origen or Tertullian are not considered saints by the Church precisely because they were not considered sufficiently Orthodox, I should think. I know of no other reason for their lack of canonisation, since in other respects they seem to have lived rather saintly lives.

Origen held all sorts of crazy ideas, like the preexistence of souls, and did crazy things like castrating himself. Tertullain became a Montanist, deliberately divorcing himself from the canonical teachings of the Church. Minor divergence from the teachings of the Church are not enough to keep one from canonization, though. See, for example, St. Augustine (whose divergence was arguably more than just a minor divergence) and St. Isaac of Syria

 

[Isaac32]

Well, then I am pleased that we may capitalise here on your superior historical scrunity.

Of course, as good Orthodox we all know that an Ecumenical Council does not get its legitimacy from the presence of kings, emperors or popes at the council, nor even because so many participated. Rather, we understand that an Ecumenical Council gets its legitimacy, and can be considered "Ecumenical" and not just "local", because it is embraced and believed by the whole Church. The adoption of a Council's findings are thus not accepted by the Church when it ends, but when the Church, in her wisdom, adopts them.

So, please show me from the consensus of the Fathers or from subsequent Councils that we should reject the anathemas from the 5th Ecumenical Council or should only accept the Council's anathemas regarding the pre existence of souls but not the Council's anathemas regarding apokatastasis.

Please explain also, again from the Fathers or from subsequent Councils, why the anathema against apokatastasis was included later in the Synodikon of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, if in fact the Church rejected the anathemas against apokatastasis that were issued by the 5th Council.

Thanks.

Soruces, please. Also, I'd prefer a bit less attitude from you, if you don't mind.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

Soruces, please. Also, I'd prefer a bit less attitude from you, if you don't mind.

I'd prefer a bit more facts, if you don't mind.

If you are going to challenge a thoughtful Orthodox priest such as Fr. John Whiteford as "wrong" and lacking "historical scrutiny", you had better have sufficient historical firepower yourself to defend your views.

If you cannot provide sources from the Fathers and the Councils to respond to the questions I pose, your charges would seem baseless.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

Origen held all sorts of crazy ideas, like the preexistence of souls, and did crazy things like castrating himself. Tertullain became a Montanist, deliberately divorcing himself from the canonical teachings of the Church. Minor divergence from the teachings of the Church are not enough to keep one from canonization, though. See, for example, St. Augustine (whose divergence was arguably more than just a minor divergence) and St. Isaac of Syria

The Blessed Augustine is not considered a saint my some/most Orthodox, so your arguments would seem to undermine the proposition that "Being a saint has little bearing on correctness"

 

[Isaac32]

The Blessed Augustine is not considered a saint my some/most Orthodox, so your arguments would seem to undermine the proposition that "Being a saint has little bearing on correctness"

http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8153

 

[Isaac32]

I'd prefer a bit more facts, if you don't mind.

If you are going to challenge a thoughtful Orthodox priest such as Fr. John Whiteford as "wrong" and lacking "historical scrutiny", you had better have sufficient historical firepower yourself to defend your views.

If you cannot provide sources from the Fathers and the Councils to respond to the questions I pose, your charges would seem baseless.

Even if I provided such sources, you would interpret them according to your inclinations. I'd rather let you think you are correct on the matter. Seems like a waste of time to convince you otherwise.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8153

Yes, and the Russians typically call him "Blessed Augustine of Hippo". http://www.synod.com/synod/engdocuments/enart_lardastalkmp.html

As did the Sixth Ecumenical Council.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

Even if I provided such sources, you would interpret them according to your inclinations. I'd rather let you think you are correct on the matter. Seems like a waste of time to convince you otherwise.

Well, I am not sure on what you base your assertion about my interpretation. I have a pretty balanced view of the subject of apokatastasis and I believe we should all hope for it. I really appreciate DBH and loved his book The Experience of God; however, I also really appreciate Father John Whiteford.

If you want to call people on either side of the debate "wrong" and lacking "historical scrutiny", I say bring it on. But then you have got to be prepared to defend your opinion. If you are not willing to do so, it makes your attack on Fr. Whiteford seem baseless. You should retract it, because without factual support, you do a disservice to the very argument you are seeking to advance.

 

[jckstraw72]

Jesus4Madrid ... I agree with you about Fr. John, but not on St. Augustine. He's definitely a Saint. Blessed/Saint/Venerable - it's all the same.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

Jesus4Madrid ... I agree with you about Fr. John, but not on St. Augustine. He's definitely a Saint. Blessed/Saint/Venerable - it's all the same.

Your view of Augustine certainly represents one Orthodox view, but there is a significant element of Orthodoxy that views him as having sowed the seed of Western heresy and thus undeserving of the title "saint". An extreme example of this view is that of Fr Michael Azkoul. I do not know how popular such is but it exists.

Energetic Procession has a good overview of the range of Orthodox views:https://energeticprocession.wordpre...ine-the-dialectic-of-opposition-in-orthodoxy/

My impression is that Orthodox tend to view St John Chrysostom>Blessed Augustine>Origen and their titles are adjusted accordingly.

 

[ArmyMatt]

They have a certain kind of knowledge, i.e. "one who prays truly is a theologian." This doesn't make them experts on the facts of history, though.

right, knowledge of God. something as eschatological as what happens after the Last Judgment is something that the saints know, since they commune with the eternal God. DBH is not a saint (at least not yet) and St. Justinian is. therefore, what St. Justinian says has much more weight than DBH.