St. Augustine of Hippo and his place in Holy Tradition?

[Orthodox Andrew]

Do you think that he his underrated in the Orthodox Church?

[Philip]

I don't know if underrated is the correct term, but I feel that some of his good writings are overlooked because of his errors.

[Xpycoctomos]

Maybe.. but if it helped us avoid the problems and tendancies of the West... I think his underratedness was lesser of two evils.

[xristos.anesti]

August.... who?

I think that if Nestor was in the west and Augustine in the east, today we would have Augustinian churches of the east and Nestorian Theology in the west.

As far as I am concerned, Augustine is not a Saint. Sorry, he was so wrong that it was only his luck that he lived in the jungle with no connection with 99% of Church thinkers, and when the west separated, the little jungle man became the foremost thinker. If he was in the east, he would have been declared a heretic, and that would have been it... the list would have been: Arius, Augustine, Nestor,...

Actually, I would take Origen and Nestor over Augustine any day....

[Orthodox Andrew]

August.... who?

I think that if Nestor was in the west and Augustine in the east, today we would have Augustinian churches of the east and Nestorian Theology in the west.

As far as I am concerned, Augustine is not a Saint. Sorry, he was so wrong that it was only his luck that he lived in the jungle with no connection with 99% of Church thinkers, and when the west separated, the little jungle man became the foremost thinker. If he was in the east, he would have been declared a heretic, and that would have been it... the list would have been: Arius, Augustine, Nestor,...

Actually, I would take Origen and Nestor over Augustine any day....

Saint Augustine is actually a Saint in the Orthodox Church.

[Lotar]

As far as I am concerned, Augustine is not a Saint.



Wow, I'm so glad it's up to you to decide. Who does pass your criteria for being a Saint? Is it okay if I venerate St. John Maximovitch?

[xristos.anesti]

Wow, I'm so glad it's up to you to decide. Who does pass your criteria for being a Saint? Is it okay if I venerate St. John Maximovitch?

I did not say: I DECIDE HE IS NOT A SAINT, I said AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, thanks for twisting my words.

As far as other part of your question is concerned, sorry, venerate who you wish, but - give me a chance to do the same.

Augustine, as far as I am concerned, is not one of those.

[xristos.anesti]

Saint Augustine is actually a Saint in the Orthodox Church.

I think he is called Blessed Augustine in Serbian Tradition, I am not sure he is a saint for us.

Not all traditions have the same saints.

[Lotar]

I did not say: I DECIDE HE IS NOT A SAINT, I said AS FAR AS AM CONCERNED, thanks for twisting my words.

As far as other part pf your question is concerned, sorry, venerate who you wish, but - give me a chance to do the same.

Augustine, as far as I am concerned, is not one of those/

What is the difference? It's like saying, "As far as I am concerned, Baptism is only a symbol." If the Church says he is a Saint, HE IS A SAINT. There are St. Augustine churches in Greece, he has a feast day on the Church calender, etc.

[Lotar]

Blessed = Saint

[xristos.anesti]

Blessed = Saint

Does not translate that way in Serbian or Greek or Russian.

Holy=Saint
Blessed is not Holy.

Again, I am not sure if Serbian Church thinks of Ausgustine as a Saint.

[Lotar]

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/bless_aug.aspx

[Vasya Davidovich]

It is my understanding that there is significant differences in the way Orthodox view Augustine.

The man was a heretic and the father of heretics. Category: Arius.
The man was in error as per his theological writings, but sublime as per his devotional works. Category: Tertullian.
The man was a Saint. Category: St. Basil.
It is my further understanding that for many years Orthodox were as blind to the existence of Augustine as he was to them. And that it is only in more recent years that Orthodox have wrestled with his theology and devotion.

Unfortunately, the jury seems to be still out the matter.

Some people (and jurisdictions) make the assumption that he is a defacto Saint, because he was never anathematized. Others want him lumped with Arius and Nestor.

I daresay this issue will continue to be contentious until the next council.

[Vasya Davidovich]

P.S. & F.Y.I.: FWIW, I do not believe Augustine to be a Saint either. Thankfully, my decisions are not final, nor are my beliefs binding.

:)

[xristos.anesti]

I am just saying what I was taught.

What is the reason that Serbian Church should consider him to be a Saint?

A Greek sesitivity?

We have no such sensistivities towards Latins. Personal (theological) views of Augustine of Hippo were wrong and not Orthodox. Such were Nestorius and Arius. The only differemce was that Nestorius and Arius were such in the East, where everyone else was and many had a chance to correct them and oppose them. Augustine is not such a case. He is a "Latin" father, so for the sake of sensistivity towards Latins, Greeks maintained positive oppinion towards him, same as they did towards filioque for nearly 1000 years and many other Latin practices that were heterodox.

Here we have Augustine, man of a wrong theology. Many were called heretics in the East for much less. But given that they were so few Latin fathers that meant something for the first 500 years, Augustine was pushed into forefront.

It is incorrect to assume that just because he is a saint of the Latin "church" that comes from the period of when we were together, that he is automatically a saint of the Orthodox Church. After all, would the person that invented Filioque clause be our Saint (if Latins knew who he was and made him theirs)?

If you like him, good for you.. many liked Arius also, and it was hard to convince them othervise. Before you ask, yes for me, Augustine is like Arius.

Sensitivity or not, I say what I whink, and what we were thinking was the question here.

Enough said.

Many years.

[Lotar]

St. Ambrose of Milan was the first to teach the filioque, not St. Augustine.

St. Augustine was never satisfied with his book on the Trinity, he wrote in it that he defered to the Greeks, and it was published against his will.

He was a model of piety, and that is why he is considered a Saint. Have you ever read his Confessions?


IMO, it is frankly ignorant to claim that he was merely tolerated out of "Greek sensitivity" or ignorance. St. Photius and St. Mark of Ephesus both were familiar of his works, and spoke highly of him.

Similairly, the whole anti-"Latin" thing is disturbing. Take a look at history, and often it was Rome that stood against the heresy of the East. After all, the first schism between East and West was do to the error of the Greeks, not Latins. Not everything East is gold and not everything West is dung.

St. Augustine was wrong on the filioque, original sin, grace and predestination. So what? He wasn't corrected by the Church, and if he had been, the rest of his life indicates that he would have changed his opinion. St. Gregory of Nyssa taught an Originisteque form of universalism that was condemned by a Ecumenical Council. Should we then stop considering him a Saint? How about St. Constantine? His theology had to have been worse than any other Saint's.

So much is attributed to St. Augustine that really isn't his fault. It is the fault of those who held up his personal opinions above that of the rest of the Church, and then expanded upon them.

[Lotar]

I really don't see why people so want to tear him down. Was the Church in error for having him on the Church calendar for the last ~1500 years? :(

[Vasya Davidovich]

Hi, Lotar. :)

Hope you don't mind, but I am going to pick on Augustine today. And, by extension, you. ;)
St. Ambrose of Milan was the first to teach the filioque, not St. Augustine.
I don't think Xristos Anesti was claiming that Augustine taught it, but that the Greeks treated both Augustine and the Filioque in the same manner.
St. Augustine was never satisfied with his book on the Trinity, he wrote in it that he defered to the Greeks, and it was published against his will.

He was a model of piety, and that is why he is considered a Saint. Have you ever read his Confessions?
Being a model of piety is not enough. I can name a number of Protestants who were models of piety.

We don't consider them Saints. Why not? They did not believe, or teach, Right Doctrine.
IMO, it is frankly ignorant to claim that he was merely tolerated out of "Greek sensitivity" or ignorance. St. Photius and St. Mark of Ephesus both were familiar of his works, and spoke highly of him.
Why not? As you said, his Confessions are beautiful.
Similairly, the whole anti-"Latin" thing is disturbing. Take a look at history, and often it was Rome that stood against the heresy of the East. After all, the first schism between East and West was do to the error of the Greeks, not Latins. Not everything East is gold and not everything West is dung.
Good point.

However, I think that one is quite justified in being anti-Latin in the sense that one is anti-Augustinian. After all, it is due to Augustine, his theology, and his successors that we have the Western churches that exist today... complete with all their baggage.
St. Augustine was wrong on the filioque, original sin, grace and predestination. So what? He wasn't corrected by the Church, and if he had been, the rest of his life indicates that he would have changed his opinion. St. Gregory of Nyssa taught an Originisteque form of universalism that was condemned by a Ecumenical Council. Should we then stop considering him a Saint? How about St. Constantine? His theology had to have been worse than any other Saint's.
So what?!? That's quite a mouthful of errors you have there.

And he was corrected in a local council. Unfortunately, the name of the council does not leap to mind. :confused: It was, in any case, a rebuke to the extremes that he was embracing in his rejection of Pelagianism. However, someone with a better memory than I can cite the council in question.
So much is attributed to St. Augustine that really isn't his fault. It is the fault of those who held up his personal opinions above that of the rest of the Church, and then expanded upon them.
Let us not forget that his "personal opinions" were the opinions of a bishop, a shepherd and pastor of men. They were also etched into the memory of the Church through his local councils. His "personal opinions" were also his teachings... if later people fell into error through them, it is because there is but a small and shallow foundation of Orthodoxy (and too much of Augustine) in them.

[Lotar]

Hi, Lotar. :)

Hope you don't mind, but I am going to pick on Augustine today. And, by extension, you. ;)


No, I don't mind. :D


I don't think Xristos Anesti was claiming that Augustine taught it, but that the Greeks treated both Augustine and the Filioque in the same manner.

Read his post again. He stated that St. Augustine invented the filioque clause, which is false on two counts: he didn't make up the idea of double procession, and he never made any attempt to add anything to the Creed.


Being a model of piety is not enough. I can name a number of Protestants who were models of piety.

We don't consider them Saints. Why not? They did not believe, or teach, Right Doctrine.

We don't consider them Saints because they were not part of the Church, among other reasons.

I think you will have a hard time finding a Saint who was not wrong on some count, especially any that wrote prolifically.



Why not? As you said, his Confessions are beautiful.


Indeed, but if he was just another heretic, it seems to me that they would have condemned him, as you two here seem so keen to do, instead of defending him.


Good point.

However, I think that one is quite justified in being anti-Latin in the sense that one is anti-Augustinian.

Even now, Latin is not equivalent to Augustinian, let alone before the Schism.

After all, it is due to Augustine, his theology, and his successors that we have the Western churches that exist today... complete with all their baggage.



Then one could make the case for striking off St. Ambrose for his influence on St. Augustine. Also, we could take off St. Hilary, St. Jerome, etc.
And why not St. Cyril for his influence on the Monophysites?


So what?!? That's quite a mouthful of errors you have there.

Not really. The first is common to a majority of Western Saints, and the last three are really stemming from the same issue.


And he was corrected in a local council. Unfortunately, the name of the council does not leap to mind. :confused: It was, in any case, a rebuke to the extremes that he was embracing in his rejection of Pelagianism. However, someone with a better memory than I can cite the council in question.


And he ammended his writtings. He wrote some rather extensive retractions, and his writings against the Donatists are far from predestinarian.


Let us not forget that his "personal opinions" were the opinions of a bishop, a shepherd and pastor of men. They were also etched into the memory of the Church through his local councils. His "personal opinions" were also his teachings... if later people fell into error through them, it is because there is but a small and shallow foundation of Orthodoxy (and too much of Augustine) in them.


The council of Orange was in England, not Hippo.

He had an unfortunate influence, yes, but this is due to an undue concentration on the errors that he did have. Even then, it was long after his death that his influence grew to this level.

[Vasya Davidovich]

Thanks, Lotar. :)

That was fun.

[xristos.anesti]

Lotar,

I think you misread what I said (at least when it comes to your view that I connected Augustine and filioque).

I said: It is incorrect to assume that just because he is a saint of the Latin "church" that comes from the period of when we were together, that he is automatically a saint of the Orthodox Church. After all, would the person that invented Filioque clause be our Saint (if Latins knew who he was and made him theirs)?

The point I was trying to make is that one should not be considered our saint if he is considered as such by the Latins just because that person lived in a time when we were together, and to point to this - would a person who invented filioque at Toledo be considered our saint if he was a Latin saint (as that person would come from time when we were together)?

This is all just a matter of observation and personal oppinion. Augustine is a saint for you, well enough; he is not for me.

I am anti-Latin, any day of the week (except on Wednesdays LOL). Why? I have my reasons and they are all that I have. I am not expecting all Orthodox to be so, but I am.

In the end, each to their own.

[Lotar]

Lotar,

I think you misread what I said (at least when it comes to your view that I connected Augustine and filioque).

I said: It is incorrect to assume that just because he is a saint of the Latin "church" that comes from the period of when we were together, that he is automatically a saint of the Orthodox Church. After all, would the person that invented Filioque clause be our Saint (if Latins knew who he was and made him theirs)?

The point I was trying to make is that one should not be considered our saint if he is considered as such by the Latins just because that person lived in a time when we were together, and to point to this - would a person who invented filioque at Toledo be considered our saint if he was a Latin saint (as that person would come from time when we were together)?




Sorry for the mix-up.

1.) They didn't, so the point is moot.

2.) There were not two Churches nor a Church and a heretical sect that somehow ended up in communion with the Church. If the "Latins" had a Saint, then that was/is a Saint of the Orthodox Church, because they were the Orthodox Church.


This is all just a matter of observation and personal oppinion. Augustine is a saint for you, well enough; he is not for me.

I am anti-Latin, any day of the week (except on Wednesdays LOL). Why? I have my reasons and they are all that I have. I am not expecting all Orthodox to be so, but I am.

In the end, each to their own.


Yes, I see that you want union with the Anglicans, but the Roman Catholics are too far gone for you...

I suspect its something to do with nationalistic reasons (Catholics did bad things to Serbs). Well, good luck with that.

[xristos.anesti]

Lotar,

unless I was eating magic mushrooms this morning, which I was not, this thread was about Augustine of Hippo not about me and my feelings.

You talking about me and Anglicans and Latins and what who did to whom is beyond sense, as you have no clue what you are talking about when it comes to that.

Not all that seems like something is something.


Back to the heretic:

The only reason why the Orthodox Church would even consider Augustine a blessed man was a concept that Church at one area decides, due to her invariable veneration for a person, that he/she is a Saint.

This is exactly what happened with Augustine. Latins took him as one, and Greeks decided to say O.K. because they were Greeks and for the political and all the other reasons (that they had for nearly 1200 years - the same reasons for which they wanted to commune with Latins when they knew, for well, that those were the real heretics) Greeks always had a soft spot when it comes to Latin heretics whilst smashing their own (eastern) with a full force.

There is no reason why Augustine would be a saint.

He was a Theological Father, he was not a monk who did strugle for Christ, he was not a wonderworker, he was not a Godbearer.. he was a Theologian, and in every single aspect of his theology he was wrong.

So, why would someone who created more heresies than all others put together, with a deeper consequences for the history of the Church be considered a Saint?

Beacause Greeks needed Latins....

I do not.

Augustine is not a saint.




As far as what who did to whom and why I don't like someone, please, keep your oppinions to yourself.


Many years.

[Orthodox Andrew]

St. Augustine was the Bishop of Hippo in the Orthodox Church. It was not like he was just some random theologian.

[xristos.anesti]

Time for me to chill out for a very long time...

Ta ta.

[Lotar]

The only reason why the Orthodox Church would even consider Augustine a blessed man was a concept that Church at one area decides, due to her invariable veneration for a person, that he/she is a Saint.

This is exactly what happened with Augustine. Latins took him as one, and Greeks decided to say O.K. because they were Greeks and for the political and all the other reasons (that they had for nearly 1200 years - the same reasons for which they wanted to commune with Latins when they knew, for well, that those were the real heretics) Greeks always had a soft spot when it comes to Latin heretics whilst smashing their own (eastern) with a full force.

Who was on the right side of the Nestorian controversy? The Monophysite? The Monothelite? The Iconoclast? ect. ect. ect.

If the "Latins" were heretics, then the Church fell into error, since at least in the face of the Monothelite heresy, they were the only ones who preserved the Faith.


There is no reason why Augustine would be a saint.

He was a Theological Father, he was not a monk who did strugle for Christ, he was not a wonderworker, he was not a Godbearer.. he was a Theologian, and in every single aspect of his theology he was wrong.

Have you read about his life? If he was not a monk who did struggle for Christ, who is?

He was not wrong in every aspect of his theology. He was correct in a number of areas.

[Lotar]

BTW, why would the 6th century Greeks "need" the Latins?

[Orthodox Andrew]

I would just like to say on a personal note. That in my icon corner, sits an icon of St. Augustine.

I am aware that his theology has errors. But I have always used his struggle for Christ as an example of how a great sinner can become a Saint.

I don't think we can use the fact that aspects of his theology were heretical, or because the Roman Catholic Church holds him in such high esteem, as a reason to disregard the sainthood of an official Orthodox Saint.

I mean, I would hope we would not turn on the Prophet Abraham, just because Muslims consider him the father of Islam.

[OrthodoxBeliever]

I would say that Augustine is indirectly responsible for the divisions found in Christendom.

or should I say the doctrines he entertained are responsible for the divisions.

[xristos.anesti]

Who was on the right side of the Nestorian controversy? The Monophysite? The Monothelite? The Iconoclast? ect. ect. ect.

If the "Latins" were heretics, then the Church fell into error, since at least in the face of the Monothelite heresy, they were the only ones who preserved the Faith.


So, we are all then Monothelite and Iconoclast and Monophysite... Given that "they (Latins) were the only ones who preserved the faith".

This is the typical western view. Not true, however.

We did not remain Orthodox because Latins were such, we remained Orthodox becuse we fought to be so. Which Latin ever did anything to keep Orthodoxy in the East. Cardinal Humbert did the most.

In face of all these heresies, it was not the West that kept Orthodoxy in the East, it was East that fought heresy in the East.

Anyway, this is not the point of this thread.

This tread is about Augustine, and not about what West wants us in the East to belive about West.



Have you read about his life? If he was not a monk who did struggle for Christ, who is?

He was not wrong in every aspect of his theology. He was correct in a number of areas.

Again, he was wrong in all aspects of his Theology, and being such and at the same time being the father of the Western thought, and that West from him receved and conceived so many dangerous ideas, in my books, he is far from being even close to the remark:"If he was not a monk who did struggle for Christ, who is?"

I can think of many who were that before him and after him, just need to open my little Church calendar.


BTW, why would the 6th century Greeks "need" the Latins?

Because, historically, Greeks were always suckers for united Christendom (Roman Empire - Post St. Constantine and Ante Ottomans), and they were doing anything and everything to maintain the unity.

But I suppose, you do not get that from the sites you read, for if for you Augustine was "a monk who did struggle for Christ" I really do not know what to say.

Anyway, this is all off the topic... but that seems to be the go...

Many years.


P.S. Thanks for answering my PM.

[ExOrienteLux]

As far as predestination goes, St. Augustine wrote an entire book titled On the Free Choice of the Will, which is about as far from predestination as you can get. In it, he even calls those who ascribe to the idea 'fatalists' and 'determinists'.

Also, before you burn him in effigy, can I ask if you've ever actually read any of his works, particularly his Confessions? Also, keep in mind that there is a world of difference between St Augustine's theology and Augustinian theology. I'm at a Reformed Presbyterian college that considers itself in the tradition of Augustinianism. A lot of the people in my class are disagreeing very vehemently with the actual writings of St. Augustine.

-Philip.

"Thou hast made us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in Thee."
-St. Augustine

[Illume]

August.... who?

I think that if Nestor was in the west and Augustine in the east, today we would have Augustinian churches of the east and Nestorian Theology in the west.

As far as I am concerned, Augustine is not a Saint. Sorry, he was so wrong that it was only his luck that he lived in the jungle with no connection with 99% of Church thinkers, and when the west separated, the little jungle man became the foremost thinker. If he was in the east, he would have been declared a heretic, and that would have been it... the list would have been: Arius, Augustine, Nestor,...

Actually, I would take Origen and Nestor over Augustine any day....


Wow.

[Maximus]

St. Augustine is a saint.

I like his stuff that I have read.

[Padraig]

St. Augustine is a saint.

I like his stuff that I have read.

Maximus, if we keep agreeing I'm going to start questioning the nature of reality ;)

Kevin

[Maximus]

Maximus, if we keep agreeing I'm going to start questioning the nature of reality ;)

Kevin

I was about to say the same thing about your post over on that female headcovering thread. :thumbsup:

Anyway, questioning the nature of reality is a good thing.

[Lotar]

We did not remain Orthodox because Latins were such, we remained Orthodox becuse we fought to be so. Which Latin ever did anything to keep Orthodoxy in the East. Cardinal Humbert did the most.



Hmmm... St. Leo the Great ring a bell? ;)

How about the Pope of Rome (name escapes me) who talked the Emperor Justinian into abandoning Monothelytism and restoring Orthodoxy to the East?


Anyway, this is not the point of this thread.

No it is not, but the "Latins were heretics" comments make it so.


This tread is about Augustine, and not about what West wants us in the East to belive about West.

LOL. ^_^

I'm sorry, but this sort of thing is my pet peeve. History is history, don't try to twist it to make your position look stronger. Otherwise, anyone who knows what they are talking about will never take you seriously, and it can lead people astray who later learn the truth and then wonder if all of our arguments against Rome are unfouned.


Again, he was wrong in all aspects of his Theology, and being such and at the same time being the father of the Western thought, and that West from him receved and conceived so many dangerous ideas, in my books, he is far from being even close to the remark:"If he was not a monk who did struggle for Christ, who is?"

That only shows that you have never actually sat down and read one of his books.



Because, historically, Greeks were always suckers for united Christendom (Roman Empire - Post St. Constantine and Ante Ottomans), and they were doing anything and everything to maintain the unity.

Then why did they allow a schism over Monothelytism?



But I suppose, you do not get that from the sites you read, for if for you Augustine was "a monk who did struggle for Christ" I really do not know what to say.

Anyway, this is all off the topic... but that seems to be the go...

Many years.


I don't really read much in the way of sites. Books are really the way to go.


P.S. Thanks for answering my PM.


Wow...

Sorry if I didn't get back to you right away, I was at work.

[xristos.anesti]

I will answer in somewhat of a point form:

The facts are there for people to see, and make their oppinions.
St. Leo the Great was one of the great (hence the name :D ) Bishops of Rome... probably not many more came after him...

Also, I am not twisting the history, damn how can I do that?

History is the past time, it happened already, I can not change what happened.

On the (actual) point of what you say (about me - twisting it) I am not doing that, but rather unwinding it - untwisting it, so for you who are believer into this twisted history it may seem so. The ones who belive and enforce lies, the truth is like a lie, but that does not make the truth a lie.

I have to admit I did not read all the books by Augustine (but I did not read Arius either), I did, however, read enough. Same with Hitler and Lenin and Marx, I did not read all of their books (well Hitler wrote only one, others did more), but from what I did read I saw that they were idiots... No need to read all of the books of a heretic to see that he is a heretic when placed into the context of history.

And Augustine wreaks of schizm and heresy.... a lot.

Greeks allowed many schizms with the West, but generally they were the driving force in one Empire one Church vision. So, for that vision, they needed Latin West. Once, not more... not ever again.

I have no reasons to be taken seriously, many that tell the truth never are, but the record is here, and if that is all I can do - that will be enough.

Latins were and still are heretics, or do you think that they might not be, is it that I am twisting history?....

In the end, again - each to their own. You want to believe that we are Orthodox today because some Latin kept our Orthodoxy, you go for it; you want to see Augustine as a saint, also - be marry; but on the same time, allow me (a knuckle dragger from the East) to do not look at your views as correct and for that reason, not do so.







P.S.

About PM... disregard, thanks.

[Lotar]

Well, all I can say is good luck with that. Believe what you want. I can see that you haven't read him, and that you haven't read (or given any creedance) to any history books on the matter. It rather seems that your views have been tainted by too much reliance on the internet.

They were the other half of the Church. They had Saints that were every bit as great as those in the East. Eventually they fell from grace, but that does not destroy the great legacy that they abandoned, the legacy that is rightfully ours. What makes your hatred of what was half the Church so strong, I can only imagine.

What does this have to do with St. Augustine? Nothing other than only those who hold to an extreme anti-"Latin" way of thinking regect him.

But then, in doing so, they contradict what the Church has continuously stated about this great Saint, from St. Photius to St. Mark of Ephesus to St. John Maximovitch to Fr. Seraphim Rose. But, again, why trust what they said, or the Church calendar, when I read this dude who wrote something on the internet.

I guess I rambled on to say more than, "good luck with that", but I swear this is it. I'm done with this thread. :)

[Xpycoctomos]

Why does much of the Orthoox Church, then, refer to him as St or AT LEAST Blessed? I have never seen him put anywhere near the ranks of Arius and Nestorius.

While I am glad that the East did not rely on him to heavily because of his errors (or at least his partial departure from the Eastern Christian mindset), to act as if he were just some loony toon at best and a heretic at worst... doesn't seem to find much support in the Tradition.

John

[Padraig]

The universal Church has recognized Augustine as a Saint. Whatever our disagreements with any of the saints might be - God knows I have my issues with several of them -, he is a canonized saint. St Nicholai Velimirovich includes him in the Prologue, as he is included in all Synaxarions.

We aren't going to agree with everything everybody says. I'm living proof of that. But ultimately the Church has proclaimed him to be glorified. If one doesn't want his intercessions, than don't ask for them. But a communicant of the Orthodox Church cannot change the fact that St Augustine has been glorified.

By the by, I prefer Origen myself.

Kevin

[Matrona]

Why does much of the Orthoox Church, then, refer to him as St or AT LEAST Blessed?

"Blessed" is not a lower rank of saint in the Orthodox Church.

[Xpycoctomos]

Oh, I didn't knwo that. What's the difference then? Becuase on the same Calendar there will be Saint whoever next to Blessed Augustine.

[Xpycoctomos]

But a communicant of the Orthodox Church cannot change the fact that St Augustine has been glorified.



Actually, I can.. but I choose to reserve these powers for special occasions. I just don't like to be a show-off, ya know?

[Matrona]

Oh, I didn't knwo that. What's the difference then? Becuase on the same Calendar there will be Saint whoever next to Blessed Augustine.

There is absolutely no difference whatsoever. It's just a flourish.

[Xpycoctomos]

There is absolutely no difference whatsoever. It's just a flourish.

I'm having a hard time figuring out what you wanted me to focus on in your post... try using Italics... it really makes the words pop out on the screen. ;)

Thanks for the info.. interesting.

John

[Matrona]

I'm having a hard time figuring out what you wanted me to focus on in your post... try using Italics... it really makes the words pop out on the screen. ;)

Thanks for the info.. interesting.

John
I use emphasis because this particular misconception about Orthodoxy, infuriates me beyond many others.

[xristos.anesti]

Yes, I was wrong.

Apologies where needed, accept them if you can... for not just wrong, but bloody stupid I am.

Sorry, guys...

[Robbie_James_Francis]

May I ask specifically what teachings of Saint Augustine the Eastern Orthodox find to be heretical? I'm not asking in order to argue, but I've never actually read anything by Augustine, and know little of his theology, so I was wondering what parts of it were incorrect and why.Thanks. :)

[Orthodox Andrew]

If anybody is interested. Fr. Seraphim (rose) wrote a book on St. Augustine.

http://www.stherman.com/catalog/chapter_one/bl_aug_book.htm

[minasoliman]

I read that book, and I found it very refreshing.

I liked St. Augustine (he's actually my personal intercessor) because of his life and his piety. It wasn't until after this when I confronted his beliefs, and I thought to myself, how can I reconcile my love to him to his beliefs. Then, Fr. Seraphim provided a quote, which I don't have at the moment. Basically, St. Augustine later in his life acknowledged some of his theological errors and asks for forgiveness and not to take all his writings at heart. Such a pious statement all the more makes me love St. Augustine.

Another is when he wisely lead one friend who erred in heresy, yet brought him back in love and patience.

Finally, his struggles as a youth echoes mine, and any other youth that I've encountered, which makes me even more admire him.

His mother is inseperably venerated by me because I want her tears to save me as much as it has saved Blessed Augustine.

If anything, let us grant forgiveness to Blessed Augustine as he asked for it in any place where he has erred. Perhaps, the Holy Spirit have allowed such pious man to live without any condemnation. We must also thank him for his contributions against Pelagianism.

God bless.

[xristos.anesti]

This thread has made me think about stuff, not just stuff but about myself in and around stuff.

I am full of hate and can not reconcile some things, that should be reconciled.

What is the point to be full of hate and expect better tomorrow when my feelings about many things do not warrant that.

I know what has to be done,
I am just not sure I want to do them.
I know where I am supposed to go,
I am just not sure I want to go there.

There is no point in stating one thing and living the other.

What do I want? and when do I want it?

Orthodoxy is the faith, but I am not worthy of it...

For now, I am not sure of anything apart that I can not go further this way...

You just can not follow in hate the Teacher of love...
You just can not follow in ego the Teacher of humble...

I just can not follow.

Many years.

[Kolya]

What do I want? and when do I want it?

Orthodoxy is the faith, but I am not worthy of it...

For now, I am not sure of anything apart that I can not go further this way...

You just can not follow in hate the Teacher of love...
You just can not follow in ego the Teacher of humble...

I just can not follow.

Many years.

My friend. Please just look a bit further down the road. The Teacher has sat down to wait for you. Give Him your bundle of hate - He knows what to do with it. Of course we can not follow if we try to carry our own burdens, they're too heavy for us! That is why He exchanges a light one for your heavy one.

Many years my friend - do not despair!:)

[prodromos]

There is another St Augustine. The one that was sent by a pope (Gregory?) to take the Gospel to England in the 4th Century only to find the church already well established.

[Orthodox Andrew]

This thread has made me think about stuff, not just stuff but about myself in and around stuff.

I am full of hate and can not reconcile some things, that should be reconciled.

What is the point to be full of hate and expect better tomorrow when my feelings about many things do not warrant that.

I know what has to be done,
I am just not sure I want to do them.
I know where I am supposed to go,
I am just not sure I want to go there.

There is no point in stating one thing and living the other.

What do I want? and when do I want it?

Orthodoxy is the faith, but I am not worthy of it...

For now, I am not sure of anything apart that I can not go further this way...

You just can not follow in hate the Teacher of love...
You just can not follow in ego the Teacher of humble...

I just can not follow.

Many years.

We all fail to be worthy to Christ. But God wants us to continue, and beat our sins. It his Satan who wants us to give up, not God.

[Xpycoctomos]

I read that book, and I found it very refreshing.

I liked St. Augustine (he's actually my personal intercessor) because of his life and his piety. It wasn't until after this when I confronted his beliefs, and I thought to myself, how can I reconcile my love to him to his beliefs. Then, Fr. Seraphim provided a quote, which I don't have at the moment. Basically, St. Augustine later in his life acknowledged some of his theological errors and asks for forgiveness and not to take all his writings at heart. Such a pious statement all the more makes me love St. Augustine.

Another is when he wisely lead one friend who erred in heresy, yet brought him back in love and patience.

Finally, his struggles as a youth echoes mine, and any other youth that I've encountered, which makes me even more admire him.

His mother is inseperably venerated by me because I want her tears to save me as much as it has saved Blessed Augustine.

If anything, let us grant forgiveness to Blessed Augustine as he asked for it in any place where he has erred. Perhaps, the Holy Spirit have allowed such pious man to live without any condemnation. We must also thank him for his contributions against Pelagianism.

God bless.

deserved a re-post.

[minasoliman]

Dearest xristos.anecti,

I also do not deserve to be where I am right now. As a matter of fact, if it is what we deserve, we do not even deserve to live one more second of our lives. But Christ who is merciful, understands our sufferings and wants you to share it with Him. It's all part of our theosis. Why else did Christ our God suffer passions?

My friend, even if we all do not deserve Orthodoxy, Christ asks you to come in anyway. Do not reject.

God bless you and strengthen you.

Pray for me a sinner.

[pjw]

I did not say: I DECIDE HE IS NOT A SAINT, I said AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED, thanks for twisting my words.

As far as other part of your question is concerned, sorry, venerate who you wish, but - give me a chance to do the same.

Augustine, as far as I am concerned, is not one of those.
sorry if i'm not allowed to post here, but i couldn't resist the temptation. lol. just wanted to say, i thought a saint was anybody who was in Heaven??

[Michael the Iconographer]

I don't know if underrated is the correct term, but I feel that some of his good writings are overlooked because of his errors.

St. Augustine does have some pretty nasty errors, though! Is it true he was black? If so when I write his icon I want to give him black skin.

[xenia]

I just can not follow.


The healthy do not need a physician.

No one is hopeless, YOU are not hopeless.

Staying out of the Church is like saying this: I have a sickness unto death but I will not go to the hospital to be cured because I am too sick to be in the hospital. I am too sick to take the medicine that will cure me.

Christ can cure you, dear friend. He is curing all of us together. Please don't give up.

Love,
Xenia

[Servus Iesu]

St. Augustine does have some pretty nasty errors, though! Is it true he was black? If so when I write his icon I want to give him black skin.

I imagine he was darker skinned, but not sub-saharan black. Of course, I have no evidence for that. Wouldn't he have looked like other North Africans though?

[Marjorie]

St. Monica apparently has a Berber name, so he would have been half-Berber if this is correct. From what I've seen, they weren't, like, sub-saharan black, but definitely darker-skinned...

In IC Xc,
Marjorie

[Xpycoctomos]

You'll have to judge for yourself as to the authenticity of this icon (according to Orthodox traditions) but here is an icon I found of St. Monica, Mother of St. Augustine which has her pretty dark.

http://www.odox.net/Icons-Monica.htm

And here are some of the very Saint himself. The first icon i\is what the site claims to be the oldest known icon of St Augustine (6th century). But it is a mosaic and, so, is a bit difficult to decipher.

The second seems to fit what our idea is of a traditional icon and he looks dark, but not "black" per se. Seems to kind of fit waht Marjorie and others were suggesting.

http://www.odox.net/Icons-Augustine-Africa.htm

[Michael the Iconographer]

I imagine he was darker skinned, but not sub-saharan black. Of course, I have no evidence for that. Wouldn't he have looked like other North Africans though?

He is not depicted as being dark skinned in most images I have seen of him, but rather as being caucasian. That is almost impossible. I would think he would have skin which was a good bit darker than even arabic people have.

[Michael the Iconographer]

The second seems to fit what our idea is of a traditional icon and he looks dark, but not "black" per se. Seems to kind of fit waht Marjorie and others were suggesting.

http://www.odox.net/Icons-Augustine-Africa.htm

The skin on that icon of St. Augustine is no darker than any other caucasian saint is given. You must remember that different cultures give different hues to skin in icons. The skin of Byzantine and Greek icons tends to be much, much lighter than the same icons written by slavic and Russian Iconographers.

[minasoliman]

Hmmmm....I guess if you look at a native Algerian, you can get some accuracy of the skin color there...where exactly is Hippo in Africa...For example, southern Egypt you have a huge number of blacks (I mean BLACKS...so there are black Egyptians...hehe)....so if Hippo is south enough, he could be really dark. If north enough, he could have been any color, ranging from the Meditteranean "olive" color (that's what someone said my skin color was) to the dark tan.

God bless.

[minasoliman]

Did a quick google search, and I did some working.

According to this website:

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/twayne/aug1.html

It is written:


Augustine was born in Tagaste (modern Souk Ahras, Algeria) in 354 and died almost seventy-six years later in Hippo Regius (modern Annaba) on the Mediterranean coast sixty miles away.

I have attached a map of the area just to give an idea of how close to the Meditteranean these two cities are. I colored them in blue for people to make them out. Hippo is much north, and borders right on the Meditteranean. Tagaste borders Tunisia in the West. They're not far from one another.

The point is that it's north, so it's MOST probably that St. Augustine was of a light complecture, though possibly not European style white.

God bless.

[Xpycoctomos]

The skin on that icon of St. Augustine is no darker than any other caucasian saint is given. You must remember that different cultures give different hues to skin in icons. The skin of Byzantine and Greek icons tends to be much, much lighter than the same icons written by slavic and Russian Iconographers.

Huh, looked darker to me (not in the mosaic). But pehaps that's because I'm comparig him to russian style (I have no idea). St Seraphim is pretty darn white lol

[Michael the Iconographer]

Huh, looked darker to me (not in the mosaic). But pehaps that's because I'm comparig him to russian style (I have no idea). St Seraphim is pretty darn white lol

I suggest you do a thorough study of iconographic skin styles. For a comparison look at my page and look at the way I paint caucasian skin and then how I painted the skin for St. Moses the Ethiopian. Moses's skin is MUCH darker than the way I paint caucasian and arab skin. Each iconographer has his/her own method of skin painting and some like to paint darker skin than others. Even within Russian iconography there are some who paint skin much lighter and some who paint skin much darker. My point is this: there are many iconographers who give caucasian people very dark skin (myself included) so unless the skin looks like it is definitely sub-saharan african you can't say that dark skin by one iconographer means the person was dark skinned.

[Xpycoctomos]

I suggest you do a thorough study of iconographic skin styles. For a comparison look at my page and look at the way I paint caucasian skin and then how I painted the skin for St. Moses the Ethiopian. Moses's skin is MUCH darker than the way I paint caucasian and arab skin. Each iconographer has his/her own method of skin painting and some like to paint darker skin than others. Even within Russian iconography there are some who paint skin much lighter and some who paint skin much darker. My point is this: there are many iconographers who give caucasian people very dark skin (myself included) so unless the skin looks like it is definitely sub-saharan african you can't say that dark skin by one iconographer means the person was dark skinned.

I had a longer post... but deleted it. In short... this conversation has taken a quick turn into ridiculousville.

[Michael the Iconographer]

I had a longer post... but deleted it. In short... this conversation has taken a quick turn into ridiculousville.

Edited. Not lowering myself to that level.

[Maximus]

I had a longer post... but deleted it. In short... this conversation has taken a quick turn into ridiculousville.

And it's getting worse!

[Lotar]

St. Monica apparently has a Berber name, so he would have been half-Berber if this is correct. From what I've seen, they weren't, like, sub-saharan black, but definitely darker-skinned...

In IC Xc,
Marjorie

And his father was a city official, which means he was probably of Italian heritage.

I doubt he was black, but he almost definately wasn't northern European white. :D

[Michael the Iconographer]

And his father was a city official, which means he was probably of Italian heritage.

I doubt he was black, but he almost definately wasn't northern European white. :D

But don't berbers have skin that is nearly as dark as black people? And don't people from the rest of northern Africa other than Egypt have about the same tone to their skin as the berbers do?

[Maximus]

Must resist, must resist the urge to speculate on the ethnicity of St. Augustine . . .

Stretch out with your feelings, Max . . . trust the farce

Anyway, now that I have surrendered to the dark side . . .

The word Berber, as I recall, comes from the same root as Iberian.

The Berbers are members of the Mediterranean subgroup of the European geographical race (no longer referred to by the archaic designation "Caucasian").

The Iberians were a dark white people who once ranged from the Caucasus in the East to the Iberian Peninsula in the West. They spoke non-Indo-European languages. The Basques of the Pyrenees and the Georgians of the Caucasus, as well as the Berbers, appear to be remnants of this once numerous subgroup of the European geographical race.

St. Augustine was probably an olive-skinned white guy with dark hair and brown eyes, but who knows?

And who cares?

[Michael the Iconographer]

And who cares?

The only reason I ask is so that when I do get arround to writing his icon, I can make it accurate. And with that I am going to end my discussion of his ethnicity.

[Maximus]

The only reason I ask is so that when I do get arround to writing his icon, I can make it accurate. And with that I am going to end my discussion of his ethnicity.

Okay. That, at least, makes some sense.

[Lotar]

But don't berbers have skin that is nearly as dark as black people? And don't people from the rest of northern Africa other than Egypt have about the same tone to their skin as the berbers do?

Most people in Northern Africa have skin tones about the same as the rest of the Mediterranean. Berbers are slightly darker. The area St. Augustine came from was originally part of the Carthaginian empire; so it was settled by the Phoenicians, then later also by Romans. They share a lot of the same ancestory as the Syrians and Lebanese.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Okay. That, at least, makes some sense.

It makes little difference to me what ethnicity any of the saints are except for the fact that when I write an icon of someone I want to be accurate. Thus if St. Augustine is Berber I will give him a Berber skin tone, and that seems to be the case. Black skin (whether Berber, Sub-Saharan African or Indian) is actually quite easy to paint. I just use Burnt Umber as the base color instead of forrest green and stop about 3 highlights short of how light I would go if I were painting caucasian skin.

[Lotar]

And who cares?


What's wrong with speculating?
It's not like his skin tone would change my opinion of him.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Most people in Northern Africa have skin tones about the same as the rest of the Mediterranean. Berbers are slightly darker. The area St. Augustine came from was originally part of the Carthaginian empire; so it was settled by the Phoenicians, then later also by Romans. They share a lot of the same ancestory as the Syrians and Lebanese.

Yeah, that whole mediterranean region has alot of mixed blood in it. I doubt there is anyone there who is pure anything. There was so much trade and travel in the mediterranean region going back thousands of years that every culture seemed to inter-procreate with every other culture. (Is inter-procreate a word? I guess it is now!) Including the sicilians. Which makes the whole "pure sicilian" thing in mobster movies look a little humorous.

[Michael the Iconographer]

What's wrong with speculating?
It's not like his skin tone would change my opinion of him.

His skin tone won't change the fact that I still have major issues with his major case of nearly heterodox scruples in the Confessions.

[Maximus]

Most people in Northern Africa have skin tones about the same as the rest of the Mediterranean. Berbers are slightly darker. The area St. Augustine came from was originally part of the Carthaginian empire; so it was settled by the Phoenicians, then later also by Romans. They share a lot of the same ancestory as the Syrians and Lebanese.

My guess is that St. Augustine, since he came from a family well-off enough to provide him with a fine classical education, would have looked like an Italian and less like a sunburnt Berber.

But I am only guessing.

If I wrote an icon of him, I would make him look like either Charlton Heston (a rather Nordic type of guy), Anthony Quinn (a Mediterranean-looking dude), or Pee Wee Herman (splitting the difference).

[Michael the Iconographer]

My guess is that St. Augustine, since he came from a family well-off enough to provide him with a fine classical education, would have looked like an Italian and less like a sunburnt Berber.

But I am only guessing.

If I wrote an icon of him, I would make him look like either Charlton Heston (a rather Nordic type of guy), Anthony Quinn (a Mediterranean-looking dude), or Pee Wee Herman (splitting the difference).

Luckily I am bound by pretty tight rules as to how I can depict people in icons and thus you won't see me depicting him as anything so silly as Pee Wee Herman!

[Maximus]

His skin tone won't change the fact that I still have major issues with his major case of nearly heterodox scruples in the Confessions.

Oi!

I swear this forum will drive me back into the LCMS someday!

What "nearly heterodox scruples?"

[Michael the Iconographer]

Oi!

I swear this forum will drive me back into the LCMS someday!

What "nearly heterodox scruples?"

Many of the Fathers of the Church and many Orthodox priests that I know barely recognize St. Augustine as being a saint because of how overly scrupulous and unforgiving of his self he was. The fact he is recognized as a saint and not a heretic is proof that he did not go overboard, but he was close. Just like my favorite patristic saint, St. Ignatius of Antioch, nearly going overboard with his desire for martyrdom.

[Maximus]

Luckily I am bound by pretty tight rules as to how I can depict people in icons and thus you won't see me depicting him as anything so silly as Pee Wee Herman!

Don't let those rules keep you from detecting rather obvious jokes.

[Lotar]

Yeah, that whole mediterranean region has alot of mixed blood in it. I doubt there is anyone there who is pure anything. There was so much trade and travel in the mediterranean region going back thousands of years that every culture seemed to inter-procreate with every other culture. (Is inter-procreate a word? I guess it is now!) Including the sicilians. Which makes the whole "pure sicilian" thing in mobster movies look a little humorous.

Especially Sicilia. :D

The west coast was settled by Carthaginians, the east coast by Greeks, and the central part was inhabited by native tribes. Then Rome took over, and people came from everywhere. Then the Vandals took over. Then Byzantium. Then the Arabs. Then the Normans. etc. etc. etc. Plus more Greeks and Albanians fled there after the fall of Constantinople.

Sometimes you can tell by the last name where they originated from. For example, my Grandma's maiden name was Albanese, which means that part of my family were most likely Christian Albanians who fled to Sicily to avoid the Turks in the 15th century.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Don't let those rules keep you from detecting rather obvious jokes.

I figured Pee Wee was a joke! :P Archbishop JOB would have a cow if he saw me to write an icon of St. Augustine looking like Pee Wee. I must try to resist the thought of having fun at my Archbishops expense, even though it would be hilarious to see his reaction to such a thing!

[Maximus]

I figured Pee Wee was a joke! :P Archbishop JOB would have a cow if he saw me to write an icon of St. Augustine looking like Pee Wee. I must try to resist the thought of having fun at my Archbishops expense, even though it would be hilarious to see his reaction to such a thing!

Well, you could do St. Cyril of Alexandria as Ernest P. Worrell.

Know what I mean, Vern? ^_^

http://www.wherehouse.com/amgcover/dvd/full/t2/26/t22606rowjs.jpg

[Lotar]

My guess is that St. Augustine, since he came from a family well-off enough to provide him with a fine classical education, would have looked like an Italian and less like a sunburnt Berber.

But I am only guessing.


I agree.



If I wrote an icon of him, I would make him look like either Charlton Heston (a rather Nordic type of guy), Anthony Quinn (a Mediterranean-looking dude), or Pee Wee Herman (splitting the difference).


If I thought he was black, I'd make him look like Jules Winnfield (Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction). ;)

I have seen an icon of St. Moses the Black that did look similiar to that.

[Michael the Iconographer]

Well, you could do St. Cyril of Alexandria as Ernest P. Worrell.

Know what I mean, Vern? ^_^

http://www.wherehouse.com/amgcover/dvd/full/t2/26/t22606rowjs.jpg

That might actually go over really well at my parish, knowing how crazy of a sense of humor my friends at church have!

[Matrona]

If I thought he was black, I'd make him look like Jules Winnfield (Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction). ;)

If that icon happened to be inscribed with Jules's version of Ezekiel 25:17, I'd die of laughter. :D

[Lotar]

If that icon happened to be inscribed with Jules's version of Ezekiel 25:17, I'd die of laughter. :D

:D :D rolf :D :D
Oh man, that'd be so great. ^_^

[Michael the Iconographer]

Oh man, that'd be so great. ^_^

I would personally rather see an icon of "Saint" Sir William Wallace with Mel Gibson's face on it! :D

[Matrona]

http://www.wherehouse.com/amgcover/dvd/full/t2/26/t22606rowjs.jpg

I've seen that movie...

(Maybe this post should go in the skeletons thread? :D )

[Matrona]

:D :D rolf :D :D
Oh man, that'd be so great. ^_^

You know, I can almost do that "Say what again!" and "What does Marcellus Wallace look like?" bit from memory... Had a tough time explaining the Pulp Fiction poster in my living room when Father was here to bless my hizzy though. :D

[JM]

Found this on Orthodoxwiki.
Reception of Augustine in the Orthodox Church

http://orthodoxwiki.org/images/thumb/3/3b/Augustine-Rose.jpg/250px-Augustine-Rose.jpg (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Image:Augustine-Rose.jpg) http://orthodoxwiki.org/skins/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Image:Augustine-Rose.jpg)
Book by Fr. Seraphim Rose (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Seraphim_Rose)


The Fifth Ecumenical Council (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Fifth_Ecumenical_Council), held in Constantinople in A.D. 553, listed Augustine among other Fathers of the Church (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Church_Fathers), though there is no unqualified endorsement of his theology (http://orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=Theology&action=edit) mentioned (just as there is none for most saints of the Church):
We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Athanasius_of_Alexandria), Hilary (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Hilary_of_Poitiers), Basil (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Basil_the_Great), Gregory the Theologian (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Gregory_the_Theologian), Gregory of Nyssa (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Gregory_of_Nyssa), Ambrose (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Ambrose_of_Milan), Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople (http://orthodoxwiki.org/John_Chrysostom), Cyril (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Cyril_of_Alexandria), Augustine, Proclus, Leo (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Leo_the_Great) and their writings on the true faith.[1] (http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-14/Npnf2-14-111.htm) (emphasis added) In the acts of the Sixth Ecumenical Council (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Sixth_Ecumenical_Council) (not yet translated into English), he is called the "most excellent and blessed Augustine" and is referred to as "the most wise teacher." In the Comnenian Council of Constantinople in 1166 he is referred to as "Ό Αγίος Αυγουστίνος - "Saint Augustine."
Despite these acclamations, most of his works were not translated into Greek until circa 1360 by Demetrios Cydones and some Orthodox Christians identify errors in his theology—especially those in his Triadology (http://orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=Triadology&action=edit) which gave rise to the Filioque (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Filioque) addition to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Nicene-Constantinopolitan_Creed)—and regard him as being one of the major factors in the Great Schism (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Great_Schism) between the Church in the East and in the West. Thus, there are those among the Orthodox who regard Augustine as a heretic (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Heresy), although there has never been any conciliar condemnation of either him or his writings.
More moderate views regard Augustine as (1) a theological writer who made too many mistakes to be included among the Church Fathers (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Church_Fathers) but still a saint (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Saint), (2) a theological writer among many in the early Church (but not a saint (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Saint)), and (3) a theological writer with, perhaps, the title "Blessed" before his name. It should be noted, however, that the Orthodox Church has not traditionally ranked saints in terms of "blessed" or "saint" (i.e., suggesting that the latter has a greater degree of holiness than the former). Saint "rankings" are usually only differences in kind (e.g., monastics, married, bishops, martyrs, etc.), not in degree. The practice of ranking by degree is much more characteristic of the Roman Catholic (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Roman_Catholic_Church) tradition.
There are at least two books explicitly dealing with the issue of Augustine's place in Orthodoxy: The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church by Fr. Seraphim Rose (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Seraphim_Rose) (ISBN 0938635123 (http://orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=Special:Booksources&isbn=0938635123)), which is generally favorable toward Augustine, citing his importance as a saint in terms of his confessional and devotional writings rather than in his theology, and The Influence of Augustine of Hippo on the Orthodox ChurchISBN 0889467331 (http://orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=Special:Booksources&isbn=0889467331)), which tends to see Augustine as the root of all Western Christendom's errors. (There is also a condensation of this book into a booklet titled Augustine of Hippo: An Orthodox Christian Perspective.) The former's cover (shown on right) includes a traditional Greek icon (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Icon) of Augustine, where he is labelled as "Ό Αγίος Αυγουστίνος"—"Saint Augustine." by Dr. Fr. Michael Azkoul (
Another view is expressed by Christos Yannaras (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Christos_Yannaras), who descibed Augustine as "the fount of every distortion and alteration in the Church's truth in the West" (The Freedom of Morality, p. 151n.).


I guess that makes him a Saint.

[Xpycoctomos]

Yes, he is. He just hasn't influenced the East too much... and many Orthdoox are thankful for that. But that makes him no less a Saint.

John

[jckstraw72]

im down with Augustine.

[Xpycoctomos]

im down with Augustine.
hypocrite! ;)

[jckstraw72]

hypocrite! ;)

say whaaaaaaaa?!

[NyssaTheHobbit]

This is one of the major issues I have with staying with the PCUSA, or going Lutheran (which hubby was raised as): How do I reconcile with the Reformers using Augustine's errors as the basis for their theology? I can't go with the other churches, because while they correct some of the errors of the Reformers, they create new ones. But I may have to drag Hubby kicking and screaming into Orthodoxy. ;)