I think William of Ockham, despite his issues, did have a good point:
"There is to be no multiplication of essences without cause."
The simplest explanation is best which requires the least amount of correction and neologism.
I fully embrace eucharistic ecclesiology, but ask this question: Is the Church intended by Christ to be an infallible guide to the truth which is visible and knowable?
I do not think that a division in a common union of Churches based on misundersta…
I was suddenly struck by a small flash of insight: it really all falls into place if you acknowledge a single fact: The Logos in the flesh is a new MODE of existence for the Logos. And this mode is single, united and dynamic. This really makes clear…
I think Fr. Anthony's video is an excellent birds eye view of the times and the issues that is made quite palatable for those not used to in-depth investigation.
Rem, I think as you do on this issue. And objectively now, this is I think an important…
Sorry in context I meant he believed that the Non-Chalcedonians think that. That the humanity assumed by the Logos was only used by the Logos as almost a puppet without its own natural energy and natural will. He would say that is what YOU really th…
Yes that was aimed at share the faith.
Rem, is there a difference between composite nature and composite Hypostasis? This is perhaps one of the last things I myself am not clear on: are we speaking of synonyms or different things when we speak of c…
It seems honestly the Chalcedonian camp is complicating things. The Alexandrians have always insisted on the full humanity and divinity of the one Christ. The issue for them is that abstract natures do not exist in reality, they only exist in real i…
I think he believes that the humanity is complete, but it is only operated by the energy of the Logos and that the humanity doesn't function with its own natural energy and spiritual powers, etc. I think he and other traditionalist chalcedonians rac…
It's fascinating because I discussed this with a Chalcedonian priest and these were his words: "I spoke with a Coptic bishop once and I was very impressed with him. They know now that they can't support Dioscorus and Severus and that they have to ac…
Thanks so much Mina. One final distinction: composite vs. synthetic. I understand these terms to be synonymous, but of course some understand composite the same as conjoined, and synthetic as fake, etc.
I believe the chalcedonians oppose composite …
Fr. John Behr threw me off then:
"Building upon such analyses, Severus presents his Christology in the following terms : When the simple hypostasis of the Word of God, who is before all things, united manhood to himself, it is not possible that a s…
Can you explain to me in a bit more detail Severus' idea of Composite Prosopon? I think a chalcedonian would say the Prosopon= person, and the person who assumed flesh was the Logos. To say he is a composite person, Prosopon, sounds like the Incarna…
This is part of what really bothers me Mina: Yes, history is written by the winners, and there is quite a bit of rhetoric against the Copts and co., even in the desert fathers like Euthymius and Gerasimos of Jordan and such. To say nothing of the ap…
It's funny because Leontius says this in the beginning of his works:
"The upshot is that, out of friendship for the truth, one has to
reject utterly all who say ‘one incarnate nature of God the Word’
in any sense intended by heretics, but one also …
What do the non-chalcedonians think of John Philoponos, the Grammarian? I understand nobody likes him, right? Although he had interesting scientific theories.I also heard he deliberately wrote misleading articles and would attribute the to Pope Timo…
I think all of the above is very well reasoned, but I would ask, given the Post-Chalcedonians were not refuting St. Cyril but trying to describe his concept (Which is nothing less than the Logos making the complete humanity taken from his mother his…
So here's another question pertaining to the previous: If Leo gets all his Christology from St. John Cassian and Dioscorus gets all his Christology from St. Cyril, who would pit the saints against one another and insist on one over the other? Should…
Have you noticed that Leo got all his Christology from St. John Cassian? In fact it was in his works against Nestorius sent to Leo when Leo was Archdeacon that we hear about "in" two natures.
I am only interested in your opinion regarding the rather clarifying terminology of Leontius of Byzantium and John of Damascus especially in their finer distinctions regarding Hypostasis and nature and the use of aristotles categories to refute euty…
Can't go wrong starting with the acts of Chalcedon: http://ixoyc.net/data/fathers/624.pdf
The Defense of Chalcedon in the 6th Century: The Doctrine of 'Hypostasis' and Deification in the Christology of Leontius of Jerusalem http://golibgen.io/view.p…
So, I get the gist of what you are saying regarding being in two natures, but perusing over St. John of Damascus, I notice he says the Hypostasis of Christ is obviously composite, one out of two hypostases BUT with the interesting caveat that the hu…
Understood sir. I was working on the basis that those hierarchs holding communion with the teaching of the head of a church implicitly subscribe to this teaching. :D
I am happy to be corrected on this issue though. :) Thank you.
Then why did Pope Shenouda reject theosis?
"In the early 2000′s, Pope Shenouda published an 8-part series of booklets against the concept of theosis, in which he characterized the notion in Islamic terms, as being “shirk” (associating the creature …