作者theologe (表达你我的信仰~)
看板Christianity
标题[讨论] Siecienski的和子论史一书的书评
时间Wed Apr 5 14:17:22 2017
A. Edward Siecienski(简称AES)2010的着作:
The Filioque: History of a Doctrinal Controversy.
https://goo.gl/gX44Kd
除了作者访谈这篇很值得参考外,
amazon上面就有一篇清楚介绍本书论点的书评,摘录如下:
https://goo.gl/OzzQ53
By Jacobon June 23, 2011
.....
Siecienski's method is to read the fathers' and theologians' arguments per
the internal relationships of the Trinity and
avoid any type of simple
reduction into a "pro-Western" or "pro-Eastern" model, except where the case
is obvious like in Photios, Aquinas, and Anselm. This is an important move.
When Western fathers like Hilary and Ambrose say that the Spirit proceeds et
filii or even Filioque,
Siecienski denies they are saying what later
Filioquist polemics say they are saying. What Siecienski implies but does not
say is important: these fathers do not teach the development of the filioque
, and if they do not teach the development of the filioque, they are actually
witnesses to the normativity of the Eastern model.
The hero of this story is St Maximus the Confessor. He demonstrates a way to
interpret Western fathers who spoke in language similar to the filioque as a
way of expressing the eternal relationship between the Son and the
Spirit--which he thinks is what the Filioque was trying to do. The text under
consideration is his Letter to Marinus, and the reception of that text at
varying points in European history says a lot about the presuppositions of
either side. The Latins originally championed the text and saw Maximus as a
good Roman Catholic. Did not Maximus say the Filioque was orthodox and did he
not appeal to the Pope?
The Orthodox then responded that Maximus specifically
denied causality to the Son. Whatever else Maximus may have meant by
Filioque--and it's not clear he understood precisely what Filioque would
later mean--
he is not using the term in the sense it would later be used. The
Latins realized this and at other points in history they denied the
authenticity of Marinus.
Maximus is reading the Filioque to say (if not accurately) that
the Spirit
proceeds through the Son from the Father alone. For him this is the superior
understanding for
it maintains both an eternal relationship between Spirit
and Son yet maintains the causality of the Father alone. He says while the
Spirit does not derive from the Son, his procession from the Father always
presupposes the Son (Siecienski, 77). What this eternal relationship entails
exactly is not clear, and it would be the work of Gregory II of Cyprus and
St. Gregory Palamas to expand upon it.
As is the case with many polemical controversies, after a while there is not
anything new being said. One notices a common theme, a charge and a counter,
running behind the numerous florigela and Scripture references. The East
charges the West with introducing
two causes into the Godhead, the Father and
the Son. Since the time of St Gregory of Nazianzus all admitted the monarchia
of the Father. The Father is the principle of unity as he causes the other
two persons of the Trinity. When the West began positing the Son as part of
that cause, which they had to do if they were to uphold filioquist logic, the
East responded that the West is introducing two causes in the Godhead. The
West responded that it was positing the two persons as one cause of unity. To
the East, that was a distinction without a difference.
.....
1.
老鱼读书的方式有问题,不是新闻XD
2.
其实作者在访谈中有说他有故意或尽量中立谈、让原始资料呈现自身;
让大家猜不出他是正教信徒,他还有点小得意:p
3.
按这篇书评,许多教父表面上谈「和子说」(老鱼的误读大概是在这边),
但并不是後世理解或东正教拒绝的和子说版本。
关键在於圣灵是「父子二来源说」,还是「出於天父的单一来源」。
故应该是老鱼讲的反过来的意思,教父、甚至西方教父,有些即便用「和子说」词汇,
但在存有学上可能还是东方的「出於天父的单一来源」XD
Maximus的"the Spirit proceeds
through the Son from the Father alone"
就是代表。(其他见上文标色处)
不过更完整的讲法应该是东西方讲的东西可以互相补充
(如前分析--
#1OuePz1T推文处,西方是经世三一论的角度),
但存有学或内在三一论上应坚守东方的立场。
--
你们中间有人对他们说:「平平安安地去吧!愿你们穿得暖,吃得饱」,
却不给他们身体所需用的,这有甚麽益处呢?(雅2:16)
--
※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc), 来自: 220.130.205.94
※ 文章网址: https://webptt.com/cn.aspx?n=bbs/Christianity/M.1491373046.A.ECF.html
1F:推 jacklin2002: 唉,先想尽办法把人家弄进水桶,然後再开嘲讽,讥笑 04/05 21:04
2F:→ jacklin2002: 别人的读书方法有问题,几天没来,你的一千零一招还 04/05 21:04
3F:→ jacklin2002: 是没变。 04/05 21:05
4F:→ jacklin2002: 有种你就取消检举,跟老鱼来场光明正大的辩论,尽搞 04/05 21:06
5F:→ jacklin2002: 些奥步没意义。 04/05 21:07
6F:→ theologe: 老鱼要发言,还不简单吗?一堆人都可以借他当分身阿XD 04/05 21:07
7F:→ jacklin2002: 又在钓鱼罗?PTT站规禁止一号多用好吗? 04/05 21:08
8F:→ theologe: 我这篇他若要回应,他也可以在天主教板回应阿。 04/05 21:10
9F:推 evilcherry: 其实只要他不打算来一言堂根本不会违反板规。 04/05 21:10
10F:→ evilcherry: 好辩却硬要规定人家怎样辩,怪谁? 04/05 21:11
11F:→ jacklin2002: 你文章写在这,他回在天主教板谁看啊?像我就没去那 04/05 21:11
12F:→ jacklin2002: 里,写在那里谁看得到啊? 04/05 21:11
13F:→ theologe: 之前pin也可以把老鱼的私信贴上来,前例太多了。 04/05 21:12
14F:→ theologe: 但老实说,我不期待他的发言水准XD 和子论是每个基督徒 04/05 21:14
15F:→ theologe: 都应该有一定了解的议题吧,怎麽只期待老鱼上来秀他的下 04/05 21:15
16F:→ theologe: 限呢?XD 这也太可悲了吧。 04/05 21:16
17F:推 jacklin2002: 随便 你继续开嘲讽吧 你开心就好 04/05 21:21
18F:→ jacklin2002: 反正人家都在水桶里了 打不会还手 骂不会还口 爽 04/05 21:22
19F:→ theologe: 唉 你眼里看不到议题的讨论,只看到你自己心里的阴影XD 04/05 21:29
20F:→ theologe: 老鱼之前的言论都躺在板上,无论他要不要发言,该做的纠 04/05 21:30
21F:→ theologe: 正都是必要的。我只是尽公共讨论的义务而已。 04/05 21:31
22F:→ theologe: 和子论可不是我跟老鱼间的私人问题阿XD 04/05 21:31
23F:推 jacklin2002: 讥笑别人不会读书,你的公共讨论义务真伟大( ̄︶ ̄)b 04/05 21:32
24F:→ theologe: 讲出事实,有何不对吗?XD 你去找找网路上的资料,有哪 04/05 21:34
25F:→ theologe: 个说Siecienski这本书是把东正教给KO掉的XD 04/05 21:35
26F:→ theologe: 老鱼散布不实的言论,纠正之是人人有责的XD 04/05 21:36
27F:→ jacklin2002: 所以我刚刚就说过 反正人家现在不能回嘴 你爽就好 04/05 21:37
28F:→ theologe: 所以我刚刚就说,和子论是我跟老鱼间的私人问题吗?XD 04/05 21:41
29F:推 bettis: 奇怪了,违规结果不是违规的人的错?颗颗 04/05 21:49
30F:→ pinjose: 以信用来说,老鱼一向忠实原意 04/05 22:19
31F:→ theologe: 怎麽有点爆笑的fu~ XD 04/05 22:19
32F:→ pinjose: 至於某君话的信用... 04/05 22:20
33F:→ pinjose: 看老鱼文章就是可以放心看,他不会立场变来变去 04/05 22:21
34F:→ pinjose: 是就是,不是就不是,这基本的 04/05 22:21
35F:推 amosvalen: 教义都是讨论好几代的~~等PTT300周年~~再来评论双方的 04/05 22:32
36F:→ amosvalen: 功过还不算太迟~~ 04/05 22:33
37F:→ sCHb68: 某君连千年的教义都不放在眼里了,还PTT300周年? 04/05 23:11
38F:推 bettis: 原来千年的教义都绝对是对的,那地球是平的,太阳绕地球 04/05 23:22
39F:→ bettis: 转(笔记) 04/05 23:22
除了叫阵外,有没有人可以帮老鱼的论点找到支持阿?XD
1.Siecienski这本书把正教会对和子论的批判给彻底KO掉=
解决了这个冲突、彻底证明了和子论的可靠性。
2.本书作者是一个忠心护教并对东正教一战大有战功的天主教徒
要是这本书真的有这麽劲爆的结论,
那网路上找不到一篇摘要此「战果」的书评吗?XD
※ 编辑: theologe (220.130.205.94), 04/06/2017 00:05:25
40F:→ pinjose: 先学会诚实呈现别人原话吧 04/06 06:59
41F:→ pinjose: 只会搞这种扭曲别人话的小动作,一点都没长进 04/06 07:00
42F:→ theologe: 没错阿,请去照做吧XD 希望看到你的长进 加油XD 04/06 07:39
43F:→ speed2: 幼稚 04/06 22:06
44F:→ Kangin75: 不要用theologe这种帐号 04/07 16:52
※ theologe:转录至看板 Catholic 10/25 20:07