Recap

Speaker 1 0:01

We were still reading, which St Augustine introduces into Latin-speaking theology, and that is the analogia entis, the analogy of being. I think we said quite a bit about that, and it is true that Chadwick differs in his opinion about the use of analogy in St Augustine, because, according to Chadwick, analogy in Augustine is something mathematical and exact, whereas Metropolitan Callistos prefers to say that it is not mathematical and exact. It is an analogy and it's not to be taken too literally, and so on. I think Metropolitan Callistos says that because he wants to maintain a sort of openness to a fruitful dialogue, an element on which to build and to bring Augustine closer to the Cappadocian Trinitarian doctrine. So we did that and also in the process. Also in the process, we discussed some elements regarding participation, the good, absolute good, the good, the beautiful, and so on. After we mentioned Plato and participation, we come to paragraph number five.

The Logistikon: “noesis” and “dianoia”

The place of the body

Speaker 1 1:59

I think we began to read that as well. The point is that St Augustine wants to look to man. Having established that we can know God also through his creation, through knowledge of his world, having established the analogia entis, he then goes on to say so, therefore, let's take a look at ourselves, since we were created in the image of God and see what we can understand about the Holy Trinity reflected in man. And there I began to talk about the fact that both in Plato and in Augustine, when we say man, we don't actually mean man, body and soul, the psychosomatic entity which we have before us, the real man, the true man, both according to Plato and to a lesser degree in terms of emphasis, but nevertheless, in Augustine I'll qualify that in a moment it's the soul. The soul is the real man, and not only that, but it's a part of the soul that is the real man. Plato refers to it as the logisticon. Now, the logisticon is located in the head, according to Plato, and it consists of two aspects. One aspect, noesis, the intuitive aspect, is that which is capable of immediate apprehension, the immediate grasping of the truth of reality. The other aspect is the dhyanoya. Dhyanaya is that aspect which is the reasoning faculty of man. The reasoning power gives us knowledge by means of what we call dialectic discursive thinking, as in mathematics, as in logic. A plus b equals c, then we know C, so it has a successive character, whereas the nous of man in Plato, noesis, the intuitive aspect. Well, noesis is from the nous, is of the nous. So noesis is intuitive knowledge, it's that immediate grasping of reality.

“Mens” and the two Analogies of Mind

First Analogy of Mind

Second Analogy of Mind

Speaker 1 5:11

Now, when it comes to Saint Augustine, we have to qualify things considerably. Why? Because although he's deeply influenced by this Platonic anthropology, he is a Christian and he knows that you cannot dismiss, simply discard the body, but he doesn't really know what to do with it. So, also with Augustine, then, his focus is on the soul, and his focus is on that part of the soul which survives death. What Plato calls the logisticon, augustine calls mens, so the mind. That's where we have. The analogies of mind come in and we have the mind, the mind's knowledge of itself, different aspects of the mind in which St Augustine discerns a trinity Mind, the mind's knowledge of itself and the mind's love of itself. Notizia is the word for knowledge, not scientia, but notizia. And then the love of itself is amor, the amor sui, the mind, the love of itself, is amor, the amor sui, the mind's love of itself. But then the second analogy of mind to which saint augustine refers in book 10 of the day trinitate is, is memory, understanding and will. So memoria, intelligentsia and voluntas. And this is what St Augustine sees in us and he says that this is the image of the Holy Trinity.

Augustine and the Orthodox tradition

Speaker 1 7:00

The commentary on Psalm 134 goes on to talk about Christ as our mediator between God and man, about by following a man we are following the God-man. And then he talks about the bread of angels this food is the truth, talks about the good of all goods. He refers to his own experience. If, as is possible, indeed very well possible, anyone's mental sight is stronger than mine and he can keep the gaze of his heart fixed on him. Who is, then let him give praise as he is able. Let him give praise as we are not able is able. Let him give praise as we are not able. But thanks be to him who, in this psalm, has so tempered his praises as to enable both strong and weak to praise him. There's a lot of good. Actually, I was talking about this the other day. What's the problem?

The revelation of “I AM” to Moses

Speaker 1 8:03

St Saint Augustine and this whole question of the place of Saint Augustine in the Orthodox tradition, and I think that it boils down to our lack of understanding as to what is a saint. What do we mean when we say saint in the Orthodox tradition? What do we mean when we say sanctity or holiness? What do we mean when we say theology and who is a theologian, these basic questions keep coming back to us again and again. But at any rate, he goes on to say about God, referring to Moses, the revelation of I am to Moses, where he does not focus on I but on being. Essay so I am true being, I am being, because true being is hard for the human mind to grasp, he says. And a man was being sent to men, though not by man.

Speaker 1 9:20

God immediately tempered his praises by saying something else about himself that could be grasped with ease. He did not wish to remain at a level of praise which could not be reached by those who would praise him. Go, he said. Say to the children of Israel the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob has sent me to you. This is my name forever.

Speaker 1 9:49

Exodus 3.15. Surely, lord, you have that earlier name. You yourself said I am Ego sum quesum. He who is has sent me to you. Why have you changed your name? Why are you now saying the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob?

Speaker 1 10:14

Is it not reasonable to answer by saying the words I am, who am, are true, but you cannot grasp them? The words I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob are true and you can grasp them. The words I am, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob are true and you can grasp them. They're more concrete, less abstract. So I am who am. That relates to me, but I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. That relates to you. Question of relation If you fail at what I am to myself, you can grasp what I am to you.

De Trinitate Book IX

Speaker 1 11:01

No one should suppose that God's words I am who am and he who is has sent me to you are his only eternal name and that his other words I am, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob are a temporal name. When God said I am, who am and he who is has sent me to you, he did not need to say that this was his name forever, for that would be understood even without his saying it, for he is and really is. And by the fact that he really is, he is without beginning and without end. But in the case of what he is for man's sake, end. But in the case of what he is for man's sake. I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. He has forestalled any human anxiety that this might be temporal and not eternal by assuring us that he is leading us out of what is temporal to life eternal, is leading us out of what is temporal to life eternal. This, he says, is my name forever. Not because Abraham or Isaac or Jacob is eternal, but because God makes them eternal hereafter, without end. Indeed, they had a beginning, but they will not have an end. So lots of interesting points there.

Speaker 1 12:33

I read it, and I read it rather quickly because I want to move on to Augustine on the Trinity. So now we're going to read from Book 9 on the Trinity the De Trinitate of Augustine, and here it is the object of our present inquiry is Trinity, not a Trinity, but the Trinity which is God, the true, supreme and only God. The reader, then, must be patient. We are still inquiring, and such inquiry deserves no censure, provided that our search for what must baffle knowledge and expression be made in unshaken faith. So he's writing at a time he thinks this question has not been resolved. We are still inquiring, we're still inquiring, who is still inquiring? The Second Ecumenical Council has taken place, 381, and it was based on the theology of the Cappadocian fathers St Basil, st Gregory and the other Gregory. St Gregory, nyssa, st Basil's younger brother in particular. Nyssa, st Basil's younger brother in particular.

Speaker 1 14:10

Affirmation indeed calls at once and rightly for censure from any who may see and instruct to better purpose. Seek the Lord, and your soul shall live. Psalm 69, 32. But we are warned against any rash boast of having already attained. Seek his face always. Psalm 105.4. If anyone thinks that he knows something he does not yet know, as he ought to know. But if one loves God, one is known by him. 1 Corinthians 8.2.3. He does not say has known him, which would be dangerous presumption, but is known by him. So elsewhere, after saying now that you have come to know God, he at once corrects himself Rather, are known by God. Galatians 4.9.

“Sure faith” and “sure knowledge”

Speaker 1 15:09

And most emphatic is that other passage. Brethren, I do not consider that I have attained, but one thing I do forgetting what lies behind and reaching out to what lies ahead, I am intent to follow after the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Therefore, let those of us who are perfect be thus minded. Philippians 3, 13-15. By perfection in this life, he understands nothing but to forget the things which lie behind and to reach out intently after the things which lie ahead. The safest intention is that of seeking continually until the goal of all our effort and our reaching out be attained. The intent is rightly directed only if it sets out from faith.

The vision of Christ in glory in this life

Speaker 1 16:14

A sure faith is itself a beginning of knowledge. But sure knowledge will not be perfected till after this life, when we shall see face to face. So here I'm pausing, because it's important to say that St Augustine is introducing the understanding that true knowledge is not possible in this life. And he says sure knowledge will not be perfected till after this life, when we shall see face to face in patria, in the kingdom of heaven. So he makes a distinction between faith and knowledge. It is a sure faith, it's a strong faith and sure knowledge. Let us then be thus minded, convinced that the temper of the truth seeker is safer than that of rashly taking the unknown for known, that of rashly taking the unknown for known. The reason why I paused there sure knowledge will not be perfected till after this life, when we shall see face to face.

The threefold light of Christ

Speaker 1 17:36

But the vision of God is possible in this life, the vision of Christ in glory is the state in which the Holy Spirit reveals that Christ is our Creator and our God, and it is the moment when the person beholding is sanctified or has reached that dynamic state of sanctification. So it contains many things. What Saint Augustine doesn't seem to be aware of is that this is possible in this life. It may not be given to everyone, but it is characteristic of the saints the vision of Christ in glory, the vision of the risen Lord. So this is the point of sanctification. It is the vision of Christ's glory, but it's also the glorification of the person beholding Christ's glory, of the person beholding Christ's glory. This is very important. The light of Christ is threefold and reveals the mystery of the Holy Trinity.

“Not yet, but in the life to come”

Sanctification a dynamic state: Irenaeus of Lyons

Speaker 1 18:52

I just said a moment ago that it is not possible to behold the glory of Christ but by the Holy Spirit. Only in the Holy Spirit, through the Holy Spirit, is this given, the other comforter. And in seeing Christ we see God, the Father, because no one can come to the Father but by me, and he who has seen me has seen the Father. Christ is the express image of the Father. These are all biblical references. So this is very important, it's highly significant. And what is characteristic of that Western theology that follows the Augustinian approach is that everything is to be given to be experienced, to be seen and so forth in the life to come, not yet, but in the life to come, which is deeply disappointing and seems to be ignorant of the fact that sanctification begins in this life and continues in the next. Because together with this view of the scheme of things vis-a-vis short knowledge to use the exact phrase here is this idea that perfection is a static state whereas it is in fact a dynamic one.

Irenaeus compared to Plato, Origen and Augustine

Speaker 1 20:17

Saint irenaeus, spiritual grandchild of the apostles, because he was the spiritual child of saint polycarp of smyrna, and saint polycarp of smyrna was a disciple of saint john the theologian. Well, saint irenaeus is very keen stick by the apostolic teaching. One of his famous works is called the apostolic preaching. Well, saint iranese tells us very plainly that the life of man is the vision of god. And he says just as those who see the lights are in the light, so it is that they who see god are in god, partaking of his brightness. And when he says that he's not referring to the life to come, he's referring to now. When he does refer to the life to come, he speaks of it in terms of continuous growth, continuous progress, increase, learning, increasing in knowledge, knowledge of God, of course. So for Plato, there's the spiritual aspect of man, rational aspect of man. The spiritual aspect is capable of grasping spiritual reality. So that means ultimate reality, because that reality is spiritual. No materiality is involved in real being, real existence, involved in real being, real existence.

Appeal

Speaker 1 22:08

And Augustine is influenced by that, though of course he accepts the incarnation, he accepts the resurrection of the body and so on and so forth. But his focus on the mens, the nous, the spiritual faculty of man, first of all, is philosophical. Secondly, his focus is at the exclusion of the body. He doesn't know what to do with the body. So he talks about what he knows, what he understands. Origen had this problem. Well, I mean, he didn't regard it as a problem, he thought he understood. But he had this approach we don't know what to do with the body. The body is going to be resurrected, the Bible says that. But what do we do with the body? So that is not the biblical view of man, it's not the patristic view of man, and all of this feeds into what we're saying. And perhaps this is a good place to stop and, god willing, we'll take this up again, because we will also discuss the differences between theosis and the life to come in the Orthodox tradition and what the Roman Catholics referred to as the beatific vision.