www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology eastern church and agustine/aquinas

How does the eastern catholic church (in communion with Rome) view the teachings of augustine and aquinas?

Askance!

LOL! Tell me more.....

That myopic point-of-view drove me out of the Orthodox Church years ago. I had hoped eastern Catholics had better vision. Those I know do.

Well, our late Patriarch Joseph Slipyj had an icon of St Thomas Aquinas placed in the St Sophia Cathedral in Rome along with St Augustine. Can't imagine any EC's theological education being complete without a solid background in the thought of both of these great Saints.

(The Greek Orthodox have referred to the Bishop of Hippo as "Saint Augustine the Great.").

Even though the thought of St Augustine tended to be at variance with that of the Cappadocian School, this does not take away from Augustine, even though some Eastern quarters refers to him as "Blessed" indicating a "lesser" acknowledgement of his status as a result.

Eastern Orthodox copiously used Aquinas' moral theology and, as Fr. John Meyendorff (memory eternal!) wrote, there were those, like St Gennadios Scholarios, who were very well versed in Aquinas and who esteemed him highly, calling him "Blessed Thomas" in some published personal invocations to the great Dominican and, as one Orthodox theologian wrote, "Had you been born in the East, O Blessed Thomas, you would not have defended the Western aberrations on the procession of the Holy Spirit!"

(I can hear Marduk being roused in the background . . .).

To somehow wish to denigrate the place of these two in Christian history is myopic indeed!

Alex

All of the Orthodox, to my knowledge, revere St. Augustine, especially old school Russians. Fr. Seraphim Rose wrote a book defending the Russian school's acceptance of St. Augustine in the teeth of Greek traditionalist attempts to revive a bare, traditional theology sans the intervening centuries of generative links of teachers who came before this generation. This is touchy, because Orthodox in former Ottoman lands withstood any Western influence longer because of their isolation. Much of his presence in Russian theological traditions come in through the influence of contact with the West, yet became part of their tradition: Much of his writings are orthodox. He is commemorated in the Prologue from Ohrid.
He gets a bad rap in Roman Catholic circles too. Some of his writings are considered "material heresy" by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches (who would express this concept differently).
Unfortunately, an Augustine only diet in the West helped provide the framework for the Protestant movement. Two criticisms the Orthodox have that have some validity that diminish his stature were that he did not read Greek fluently and was never an ecumenical council father.

St. Thomas in the end would probably have agreed with the Eastern Fathers: He had a vision before his death and said "I have seen things that made my writings as straw."

I personally do not consider Aquinas theology per se, but the absolute summit of philosophy. There is much to learn from him in merely organizing thought, making disctinctions, breaking things down in their component parts. I part with him in attempts to analyze the Almighty.

It was in connection with Aquinas that the saying "the cow jumped over the moon" came into being.

His fellow monastics, seeing how seriously Aquinas took his scholarly work, agreed to do a prank on him by telling him that at a certain time a "cow will jump over the moon."

When the time came to execute their prank one evening, all the Brothers made such a commotion, calling to Thomas to come out and see the phenomenon.

Thomas rushed outside and when he got there, he was greeted by laughter from his fellow monastics, convinced that they got the better of him.

To this, Aquinas responded, "Yes, I would rather believe that a cow can jump over the moon than that a monk could tell a lie . . ."

Alex

My husband, Eastern Catholic convert, agrees. Flaws in Lutheran theology drove him out of protestism, he resisted Catholicism because of the same connection with Augustine. He embraced Orthodoxy, because, although they venerate Augustine, he is not a pillar as high as a Saint. No one is perfect.

+1

Something which a lot of folks are unaware of is that St. Augustine is commemorated as one of the holy fathers by two ecumenical councils (V and VI). Also, "blessed" is really more a synonym of "saint" in eastern usage rather than a lower ranking. Hence St. Theophylact of Ohrid is referred to as "blessed" in some places and "saint" in others.

Regarding St. Thomas Aquinas, he was admired by Byzantine theologians, including St. Gennadius Scholarius, even after he came out firmly against the Florence union.

Dear Swan (or "Lebed" in Ukrainian . . .)

In fact, the title "Blessed" in the East could be used in one of three ways.

According to one Orthodox source, "Blessed" could be used to indicate a Saint whose life was hidden from the world but to which later witnesses attested following the Saint's repose.

Certainly, that doesn't apply to St Augustine.

Those Orthodox Churches (and even just theological circles) who refer to him as "Blessed" do indeed do so in order to indicate a problem with his theology which prevents him from being named a full "Saint." Other examples include "Blessed Jerome" (the scripture translator) and "Blessed Gregory of Nyssa."

As Fr. Prof. John Meyendorff (+memory eternal!) indicated, individual Orthodox referred to Thomas Aquinas as "Blessed" and even privately venerated him as such (he once quoted such a private prayer in one of his books that said, "Had you not been born in the West, O Blessed Thomas, you would not have defended the heresy of the Filioque!"). I think I must have mentioned this before, but you'll have to forgive my failing memory and slow mind these days . . .

In the akathist to St Maximos the Greek, Jerome Savonarola (whose one-time disciple Maximos was when he was in Florence) is also referred to as "Blessed Jerome." This reflects the high esteem in which Savonarola was held by Russian theologians in the 19th century especially.

The third way that "Blessed" is used in Orthodox Churches is something akin to "Venerable Servant of God" in the West i.e. a holy person who is honoured locally, but not yet canonized, even by a local bishop.

Alex

Canonization is just a formal recognition. People can venerate a person, so as long as they're not formally out, if that makes sense. I'm pushing for Matushka Olga of Alaska's canonization, thanks to Father Michael Oleksa's effort and work, on the North American mission; and its history.

Dear Lester,

Yes, I venerate the Holy Matushka Olga as well!

There is that wonderful website with icons of her, prayers etc.

What is her current "status" if one may use such a term, within Orthodoxy?

I take it she has yet to be formally glorified - has she been locally glorified?

Alex

Not yet formally canonized. St. Herman of Alaska was in a similar situation, although formally canonized in 1970(?). If not for the local Aleuts, we wouldn't have known about him. As Father Michael attested, he wasn't known for his ascetic feats, despite being of the same spiritual family as St. Seraphim of Sarov. He was known for calling out the abuses of the company which took advantage of the locals, abusively.

I'm not sure where your information is coming from. Saint Augustine is considered a saint in the Orthodox Church, irrespective of what some latter-day polemicists may think. Two ecumenical councils have a bit more weight than, say, Fr. John Romanides. As with St. Theophylact of Ohrid, the title "Blessed" is interchangeable with "Saint" in his case.