In Progress
Please bear with us while we work on making these available.
- Creed Modification
- The Schism
- Augustinism & Plotinus
- Development of Doctrine
- Apostolic Succession
- Implications
- The Cultural Argument
- An Orthodox Filioque?
- Theology vs. Economy
- The Sum of All Errors
- The Bracket Approach
- Historiography
- We’re Just Jews
- The Socio-Economic Motives for Conversion (Constantine, Byzantines, Celts & Rus
- The Orthodox Understanding of the Word “Christian” (coming soon)
- The Doctrinal Riches of the Anathemas (coming soon)
- Roman Catholicism and the Orthodox Patristic Consensus (coming soon)
Filioque 
irishanglican said
How do “you” Orthodox explain the development of the Trinity in the second and third century? And what does the east think of the early Christian apologist Tertullian? And his Trinitarian witness?
Fr. Robert
[] said
Frankly, we don’t bother. We don’t accept the concept of doctrinal development, which is itself a heterodox idea that we specifically reject.
While, I’m not in the East, I can say that Orthodoxy does not regard Tertullian as a father, if that’s what you’re asking (“what do we think of him”) – his relationship with Montanism makes that impossible [since, first and foremost, Orthodox fathers must be Orthodox – obviously] – but he says many good and useful things and exhibited many pious qualities. We can’t sum up a particular person in any way, really, Father or not.
irishanglican said
If your not from the East or Orthodoxy, I guess your just giving your opinion. I can give that also.
As to doctrinal develpoment, and especially the doctrine of the Trinity. One would have to completely reject the true history of the second and third century Church, plus. Very poor in my opinion!
A close read of Tertullian shows that he rejected the moral and spiritual laxity that he at least believed he saw in the Catholic Church in his time. And he even left off the Montantists for his own piece of the historical church (in his time). And his writings stand on their own sense of Catholic merit.
The best work to date on the real Tertullian, would be T.D. Barnes: Tertullian: A Historical and Literary Study. Also Gerald Bray’s works on him are very good.
Just a personal comment, you might want to quote some sources before you make judgment on great men that are hard to grasp like Tertullian. But thanks to give some opinion.
Fr. Robert (Anglican and Irish)
[] said
Oh, I’m Orthodox. I’m just not Eastern. As for sources, do your own research – and personally, I don’t see the need to prove anything; I’m comfortable with you thinking whatever you choose about Tertullian, Orthodoxy, me, or anything else. I was merely humoring you by answering your question which now, it seems, was simply a pretense to debate some issues on ground that of course an Orthodox person will not accept.
Orthodoxy doesn’t determine what to think by hashing things out in comment sections of blogs. We don’t work it out with Fr. Robert, and then decide to think whatever comes out of that discussion. Nor does my opinion count, and neither was I offering it.
What Orthodoxy has decided is for our benefit anyway, not for everyone and their brother, or people who have nothing to do with it. Orthodoxy does not regard Tertullian as a father – that’s not something we’re committing to a vote, have ‘perspectives’ on, or need to prove. It simply is what it is. If you want to know what is, we may answer you. If you’re desiring to debate what you think, you’re just going to bore us – that’s a Protestant endeavour.
While we appreciate your interest in various books, this really has nothing to do with us. The assumption is that we’re on some kind of religious spiritual path seeking something we don’t already have. The consensus patrum and the decisions of our councils are not something we need new investigations to determine on such mundane matters. That’s for people ‘creating’ or constructing a religion. We’re busy keeping the one we’ve received.
irishanglican said
The same old stuff from this site! Anti-Intellectual, the lack for true historical theology, etc. I was not seeking anything but honestly. But, I would go with the old Latin theologian Tertullian anytime, over half-baked “Orthodoxy” in disguise!
“Reason without goodness is not reason, and goodness without reason is not goodness.” – Tertullian
Father Robert
[] said
Tautologies aside: You’re right: we would define “intellectual” somewhat differently, but as an adjectival category in it’s own right, we’re not seeking to be “intellectual”. As Tertullian has said, “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?”
And agreed, we’re not looking for “historical theology” – we’re comfortable with Orthodox theology rather than something that ‘develops’. Orthodox theologians aren’t academics, but are in pursuit of the true theology – theosis – the deifying union with God, which can only be obtained through the lifelong journey and pursuit of true prayer. This is why the title of Theologian is given to but a few Saints who embody this for us, none of whom are doing academic theology.
So now that we know we’re not interested in the same things, perhaps you’ll find you’re looking in the wrong place – I’m sure there are any number of religion forums out there where you can do your own thing in whatever manner you choose. We bear you no ill will; we just aren’t interested in participating in any way in what you’re wanting to do. We’re not ‘constructing’ a religion here, out of some sort of religious part set – we’re keeping our religion. Orthodoxy isn’t a belief system; it’s an asceticism. Building belief systems is for people interested in religious philosophy, which is something else entirely – i.e. heterodoxy – which, incidentally, is the point Tertullian was making.
irishanglican said
This site, and its attitude is one of the reasons I have chosen myself at least, to run from “your” (“our religion”) and your “asceticism”. But thank God there are other Orthodox and Eastern Christians who manifest the spirit of Christ!
All the “tautology” and BS aside!
Fr. Robert
[] said
Certainly yes, go find those people. We’ve no real interest in taking responsibility for what you run from, embrace, or what spirits you prefer.
If all of that leads you to throw off your heterodox presuppositions and embrace Holy Orthodoxy (the thinking, not just the affiliation) instead of just flirt with it, we’ll be happy for you.
The particular “Christ” you’re talking about, in the meantime, isn’t here.
irishanglican said
Blogdom has its real limits, especially blogs that are hidden, as to the people and who they really are (as this one).
If there are any real people here? E-mail me. We called it, to ‘man-up’ in the Royal Marines!
Fr. Robert
[] said
Of course, switching the issue now to “who” couldn’t have any relevance except to ad hominem or argument by force, so really, now you’re just wasting our time. Any further posts on your part will be banned as obnoxious [again]. Please leave now. There are other more gullible people for you to go bother.
And as for the marines (other than perhaps in recent years), they haven’t been known for trolling around looking for people to set straight. Whatever their ‘ministry’ or purpose is, it isn’t boring everyone to death.