Planning To Read Aristotle.

[Apotheoun]

Google Books has the majority of the [i]Patrologia Graeca[/i] digitized, click the link below to view the texts:

[url="http://books.google.com/books?q=editions:0_YfBo8e9VitzGNTdmbhV6h&id=enknwpsyTIsC&as_brr=1"][u]Patrologia Graeca[/u][/url]

[Apotheoun]

The link below gives a list of the texts within the [i]Patrologia Graeca[/i] by author:

[url="https://umdrive.memphis.edu/mhooker/google_books-bible_judaism_christianity.html#migne_PG"][u][i]Patrologia Graeca[/i] by author[/u][/url]

The link below gives a list of the texts within the [i]Patrologia Latina[/i] by author:

[url="http://www.luc.edu/faculty/mhooker/google_books-bible_judaism_christianity.html#migne_PL"][u][i]Patrologia Latina[/i] by author[/u][/url] *

*You may need to scroll down the page a bit.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1503864' date='Apr 19 2008, 10:06 PM']I share your preference but of course there is value in studying the great figures in the history of Western thought and civilization. My personal interest in Aristotle derives from a more general interest in the history of philosophy and science. Besides this I think it can be difficult to fully appreciate the Fathers without an understanding of classical culture et cetera.[/quote]
For the Eastern Fathers the writings of the pagan Greeks are fine if your focus is simply this world, but they (i.e., the pagan Greeks) cannot lead you to true communion with the ineffable Triune God.

[Innocent]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1503911' date='Apr 20 2008, 02:27 PM']..... they (i.e., the pagan Greeks) cannot lead you to true communion with the ineffable Triune God.[/quote]

That is of course, true, but I'm interested in philosophy simply as a field of study, like Mathematics, for example, which could be very useful when I need to apply my mind to certain problems.

Of late, my ability to think clearly has suffered a lot. I'm just doing this as a sort of mental exercise. Just as I would workout extra hard for a while if I'd let myself go and become bodily weak.

[Pio Nono]

JMJ
4/20 - Fifth Sunday of Easter
[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1503911' date='Apr 20 2008, 02:57 AM']For the Eastern Fathers the writings of the pagan Greeks are fine if your focus is simply this world, but they (i.e., the pagan Greeks) cannot lead you to true communion with the ineffable Triune God.[/quote]
True, in a way, but this proposition seems to be at variance with the Biblical witness, which professes Christ as the foundation of all knowledge - in effect, all truth is impossible without the Truth (cf. John 14:6ff).

Besides, the utility of secular philosophy has always been recognized by the Church. Where would Trinitarian and Christological thought be without the Greek concept of [i]ousia[/i], or Eucharistic theology without [i]substantia[/i]? Not that they were vital, but they were definitely helpful.

Let's just be careful not to accuse secular philosophy of being good for only secular use.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Pio Nono' post='1504069' date='Apr 20 2008, 09:11 AM']True, in a way, but this proposition seems to be at variance with the Biblical witness, which professes Christ as the foundation of all knowledge - in effect, all truth is impossible without the Truth (cf. John 14:6ff).[/quote]
No, what I have said is not at all at variance with scripture, because scripture itself distinguishes between the so-called "wisdom of men", which is in fact folly, and the "wisdom of God," which He ordained for man's true glory.

My position is in line with the teaching of St. Gregory of Nyssa in his treatise entitled, [i]The Life of Moses[/i], and it also conforms perfectly with what he said in his [i]Commentaries on Ecclesiastes[/i] and his [i]Sermons on the Beatitudes[/i] (etc.), all of which are representative of the teaching of the Eastern Fathers in general, who held that it is impossible for pagan philosophy to transcend the [i]diastemic[/i] and [i]kinetic[/i] constitution of created reality and reach up to God. In fact, the Church Fathers held that one who thinks that he has transcended [i]diastema[/i] in this manner (i.e., through profane philosophy) has actually fooled himself, for he does not have the "capacity to look beyond [his created] nature (cf. [i]Commentaries on Ecclesiastes[/i], Homily 7).

[quote name='Pio Nono' post='1504069' date='Apr 20 2008, 09:11 AM']Besides, the utility of secular philosophy has always been recognized by the Church. Where would Trinitarian and Christological thought be without the Greek concept of [i]ousia[/i], or Eucharistic theology without [i]substantia[/i]? Not that they were vital, but they were definitely helpful.[/quote]
The Eastern Church condemned pagan Greek philosophy long ago in the [i]Synodikon of Orthodoxy[/i]. Moreover, unlike the West, the East does not see Triadology or Christology as a form of Greek pagan metaphysics, nor are these doctrinal truths focused upon the mind, because the experience of God is not discursive. Now it is true that the Church Fathers used Greek words taken from the profane pagan theories of the pre-Christian era, but the Fathers always altered the meanings of the words in order to serve a specifically Christian purpose. Thus, for the Fathers, there is no connection between the true God of revelation and the God of the pagan philosophers.

Pio, are you saying that the Cappadocian use of [i]ousia[/i] is identical with that of the pagan Greeks? Essence ([i]ousia[/i]) for the Eastern Fathers, and in particular for the Cappadocians, is not a "knowable" thing; instead, essence ([i]ousia[/i]) is utterly unknowable and imparticipable, as St. Gregory explained in his sermons on the Beatitudes:

"The Divine Nature, whatever It may be in Itself, surpasses every mental concept. For It is altogether inaccessible to reasoning and conjecture, nor has there been found any human faculty capable of perceiving the incomprehensible; for we cannot devise a means of understanding inconceivable things. Therefore, the great Apostle calls His way [i]unsearchable[/i], meaning by this that the way that leads to knowledge of the Divine Essence is inaccessible to thought" [St. Gregory of Nyssa, [i]Sixth Sermon on the Beatitudes[/i]].

Essence ([i]ousia[/i]) for the pagan Greeks defined what a being is, but for the Eastern Fathers the essence ([i]ousia[/i]) of God is utterly beyond definition, because God is [i]hetero-ousios[/i] in relation to the created world (cf. St. Gregory Palamas, [i]Capita Physica[/i], no. 78). In fact, God is beyond being ([i]hyper-ousios[/i]), beyond nature ([i]hyper-physis[/i]), and even beyond God ([i]hyper-theos[/i]), because He transcends created reality, and is essentially beyond any form of human thought or predication.

[quote name='Pio Nono' post='1504069' date='Apr 20 2008, 09:11 AM']Let's just be careful not to accuse secular philosophy of being good for only secular use.[/quote]
Pagan wisdom cannot transcend to God, because the vision of God is not discursive; instead, it is beyond the mental concepts of created human reason. That is why the Fathers teach that the vision of God is by grace alone, and that it ". . . is the seeing that consists in not seeing, because that which is sought transcends all knowledge, being separated on all sides by incomprehensibility as by a kind of darkness" [St. Gregory of Nyssa, [i]The Life of Moses[/i], no 163]. This is the experience of God that is beyond knowledge, it is the knowing that involves not knowing, where the soul can say, "I abandoned the entire creation and went beyond every intelligible thing in creation and forsaking every means of grasping with the mind, I found my beloved by faith" [St. Gregory of Nyssa, [i]Commentaries on the Canticle of Canticles[/i], VI, GNO, vi, 183, 6-8].

[Pio Nono]

JMJ
4/20 - Fifth Sunday of Easter

Wow...no need to take this personally, dude. I'm not going after the Greeks here, but the idea that philosophy is useless.

For a modern Western take on the Fathers, I point you towards Hans Urs von Balthasar - utterly Patristic in his outlook, but also realized the limitations of the way Patristic theology limited itself by Platonic categories.

Not being a Patristic scholar myself (I go in for the medievals myself), I cannot address any of your quotes. They're very good and convincing. However, they need to be read within the context of the history of theology and doctrinal developments since the time of the Fathers.

Where can I find a copy of the [i]Synodikon of Orthodoxy[/i]? Sounds like a resource I need to have. And was this a document of a local synod, or an ecumenical council of the Church? When was it put out? What is the earliest text transmission we have, and in what language?

And what do you make of the Constitution [i]Dei Filius[/i] of the First Vatican Ecumenical Council, which says that human reason can arrive at the knowledge of God, unaided by grace?

Oh, and for a Western voice in your favor, any Franciscan before Bonaventure would probably be in your court - especially Francis himself.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Pio Nono' post='1504725' date='Apr 20 2008, 07:25 PM']Wow...no need to take this personally, dude. I'm not going after the Greeks here, but the idea that philosophy is useless.[/quote]
I'm not taking anything [i]personally[/i].

[quote name='Pio Nono' post='1504725' date='Apr 20 2008, 07:25 PM']For a modern Western take on the Fathers, I point you towards Hans Urs von Balthasar - utterly Patristic in his outlook, but also realized the limitations of the way Patristic theology limited itself by Platonic categories.[/quote]
No offense to von Balthasar, but he is hardly giving a "modern" take on St. Gregory of Nyssa's theology, because his scholarship on Nyssa is about half a century old, and more modern research has shown quite nicely that Nyssa is not a Platonist. He uses Platonic terminology but gives it a new meaning, especially in his sermons on the [i]Beatitudes[/i], the [i]Canticles[/i], and in his treatise the [i]Life of Moses[/i], but especially in his anti-Eunomian works.

For a more modern take on Gregory of Nyssa I recommend Martin Laird's book, "Gregory of Nyssa and the Grasp of Faith, " and the published research found in the books, "Gregory of Nyssa: Homilies on Ecclesiastes: An English Version With Supporting Studies: Proceedings of the Seventh International Colloquium on Gregory of Nyssa," and "Gregory of Nyssa: Contra Eunomium II" are also helpful.

Ultimately, Gregory denies the ability of the mind to transcend the [i]diastema[/i], and so the vision of God cannot be based upon discursive knowledge, but is instead founded upon the experience of faith, which sees by not seeing, i.e., by entering into the divine darkness. Nevertheless, philosophy – as an investigation of the created world – is fine, as long as it does not presume to speak about matters that are beyond its proper sphere (i.e., the uncreated).

Edited April 23, 2008 by Apotheoun

[Innocent]

I haven't made much progress on this plan. I think that's because I've been trying to read it online and I keep getting distracted too easily. I think I could make some headway if I printed out the books from a Public Domain text and used them for reading.

If it is possible for you, could those of you who are experts in Aristotle tell me if Is this Public Domain text a reasonably good translation of the Organon? Thanks.

[url="http://www.archive.org/details/theorganon01arisuoft"]http://www.archive.org/details/theorganon01arisuoft[/url]