:up: :up: :up:
You seem wonderfully calm now...
I still have my "moments"' but it's been a work of God's grace upon my very physis.
The "voluminous nature of your glossary contributions" is the fact that I was concerned with for AMR, given the preciousness of time from which he offered to have a conversation on this topic...
Yes, though it was my hope that the voluminous nature of my definitions would produce a clarity that prevents misunderstanding and invites examination rather than creating dissension.
Low-context English requires much delineation in verbiage compared to Greek terms. The inclusion of usage and function of those terms is to demonstrate I AM representing the Eastern application, and I'm NOT designating the ousia as "having" the hypostasis. This carries over to Christological simplicity, since there wouldn't be the complexity of expressing prepositions if the hypostasis underlies the ousia and its physis/es (Mia-/Dyo-).
Have you encountered St. Spyridon's 'explanation' of the Trinity? He was a simple and wonder-working peasant, and had more knowledge of the Trinity than any of his peers, and walked around casually doing healings and all manner of wonders with great simplicity of soul and great joy... So the think-tank-theologians asked him about the Trinity, how he understood it, and had mountains of words forming competing accountings for each one's point of view, and they had been getting nowhere in their quest to persuade each other...
And poor ol' Spyridon didn't even know most of the words they were using, but he did know the Trinity... So when they asked him for his opinion, they were much like the Athenians Paul encountered, drooling for some new idea so they could keep discussing with each other... And his eyes dropped to the ground, and they were concerned, because they knew who he was and what he could do, for by then he was very famous... But he knelt down along the road and picked up an old, used, and discarded brick... And he stood up and held it in front of him, and said: "This Brick is made of Clay, Water, and Fire..." And, handing it to the one who asked the question, he said: "Trinity", and departed...
Like so many such wonderful Orthodox Saint examples, no I hadn't heard of him so I googled. The first thing that comes to my mind is the modern Protestant cessation/continuation dichotomy over gifts from 1Cor. 13.
And the fact that the brick example lends much more support to Uni-Hypostaticism than Multi-Hypostaticism... LOL..., though I've always thought individual inanimate items in creation to be woeful examples of God's constitution.
EXCERPT FROM ARTICLE
According to the witness of Church historians, St Spyridon participated in the sessions of the First Ecumenical Council in the year 325. At the Council, the saint entered into a dispute with a Greek philosopher who was defending the Arian heresy. The power of St Spyridon’s plain, direct speech showed everyone the importance of human wisdom before God’s Wisdom: “Listen, philosopher, to what I tell you. There is one God Who created man from dust. He has ordered all things, both visible and invisible, by His Word and His Spirit. The Word is the Son of God, Who came down upon the earth on account of our sins. He was born of a Virgin, He lived among men, and suffered and died for our salvation, and then He arose from the dead, and He has resurrected the human race with Him. We believe that He is one in essence (consubstantial) with the Father, and equal to Him in authority and honor. We believe this without any sly rationalizations, for it is impossible to grasp this mystery by human reason.”
As a result of their discussion, the opponent of Christianity became the saint’s zealous defender and later received holy Baptism. After his conversation with St Spyridon, the philosopher turned to his companions and said, “Listen! Until now my rivals have presented their arguments, and I was able to refute their proofs with other proofs. But instead of proofs from reason, the words of this Elder are filled with some sort of special power, and no one can refute them, since it is impossible for man to oppose God. If any of you thinks as I do now, let him believe in Christ and join me in following this man, for God Himself speaks through his lips.”
At this Council, St Spyridon displayed the unity of the Holy Trinity in a remarkable way. He took a brick in his hand and squeezed it. At that instant fire shot up from it, water dripped on the ground, and only dust remained in the hands of the wonderworker. “There was only one brick,” St Spyridon said, “but it was composed of three elements. In the Holy Trinity there are three Persons, but only one God.”
Clay, Water, and Fire are "parts" and represent a process, not at all indicating God, His Word, and His Spirit. No simplicity, eternity, aseity, infinity, phenomenology, immutability, etc. And not addressing anything of personal or essential traits or any true ontology or economy, etc. There clearly aren't three hypostases represented here, and "elements" are "parts" (no simplicity), while three is quantification (no infinity).
Combating Arianism with such a miraculous manifestation is valid to eliminate a Monad with a homoiousios emergent or created Son; but the competing anathemas throughout history could never be excluded via the brick example, and it's a wholly cataphatic representation, at that. I think it does more harm than good at the true theological level for actual definition, even if it could suffice on some other level for mere illustration and description.
Words. Theology requires words rather than objects, because the Logos is uncreated and objects are all created. Other than man created in God's image (as a singular hypostasis, BTW), created things cannot represent God. God could not have manifested His Logos in flesh as a brick, but did so as [The-]-anthropos.
Protestantism is so rife with such shallow concepts, that exceedingly few are actual Trinitarians in any purity of understanding. The English term "person/s" is a main culprit, along with abysmal low-context language patterning of the mind.
I am glad you found calm...
You were a vital catalyst for that. Er... the Christ in you was, with you as the vessel of mercy for my judgment.
And I've come to the position of so valuing Chalcedonian Christology (which demonstrates the "how" mechanism of Christ's constitution that is essential for our salvation) and the ontological Gospel of Paul (which the Easterns disciple, but not with exegetical Western application), I'm more conversational and accommodating regarding Theology Proper.
Still attending services?
Arsenios
Yes, on many occasions. Were it not for the immutable fundamental truth that God's Rhema IS His singular hypostasis (and that's the core essential for the Gospel and faith), I could easily be Antiochian within the Holy Communion. Alas...
