Forwarded from Pure World Truth
All the rest of them, with the Tasimanes, returned home. As I was sitting there I asked whether anyone could speak both languages that I needed. There was somebody, whom I asked to say to the Turks [Muslims] on my behalf that what they had performed outside there I thought it was good, "for you addressed yourselves to God - to whom else?- for the deceased one. I wanted, however, to know what was that you exclaimed to God?" Tasimanes using the same interpreter said that he would explain: "We asked for forgiveness from God for the deceased, for his own sins committed in his soul." Retorting myself I said, "Very well, but the judge is merciful, indeed, and dispenses mercy; and he who will come as judge of every race of men, even according to you, is Christ. You must be addressing, therefore, the prayers and the exclamations to Him. Thus you, too, invoke him as God, as we do, who believe that as an inborn Word of His he is indivisible from the Father; for there was no time when God was without reason or without the natural word." (Source: Saint Gregory Palamas, Littera & Dialexis Patrologia Migne βPG, CL, COL. DCCCVIII)
Dyer tried to explain this quote away by saying:
βThe Palamas quote going around by RCs is laughably misread: it's a reductio, arguing Muslims inconsistently invoke the Word of Allah in the Koran, yet deny the Word.
Much like when we say to a Muslim - "you also think Allah has a Logos!". It doesn't mean they actually do.
The rest of the debate (which | read last night) shows Palamas did not actually think Muslims ("apostate
Chioni") worship the Triad LOL - his whole argument is the OT teaches Triad!β https://x(dot)com/jay_d007/status/1911102621953196191?s=46
But Dyer didnβt bother to exegete Palamas at all. Palamas clearly states that the Muslims addressed (past tense) themselves to God and to no one else:
βFor you addressed yourselves to Godβto whom else?β
He then shifts to the present tense, saying that Muslims are now addressing Christ without realizing it:
βYou must be addressing, therefore, the prayers and the exclamations to Him. Thus you, too, invoke Him as God, as we do, who believe that as an inborn Word of His He is indivisible from the Fatherβ¦β
If Gregory Palamas believed Muslims were worshipping a different god, he wouldnβt have told them they addressed themselves to God and to no one else.
Once again, Jay Dyer tries to explain these quotes away by citing a line from Gregory Palamas in Triads as supposed proof that Palamas believed Muslims worship demons, therefore arguing that Palamas didnβt believe Muslims and Christians worship the same God.
Jay Dyer: βRCs are misquoting St Gregory Palamas again, as if the Triads teach the conception of God pagans and Muslims have is adequate: remember Vatican 2 says they "adore" and "worship" the One God. In fact, Palamas says the opposite, that their positions are demonic and not salvific, which is the true sense of "knowing" God, beyond a confused conceptual knowledge which gets you nothing.β
https://x(dot)com/jay_d007/status/1935762066083611102?s=46
But Dyer didnβt give his audience the full context. The people Palamas was referring to in that quote were Greek polytheists, not Muslims:
Gregory Palamas, Triads, 1.1.18 -
βBy examining the nature of sensible things, these people have arrived at a certain concept of God, but not at a conception truly worthy of Him and appropriate to His blessed nature. For their βdisordered heart was darkenedβ by the machinations of the wicked demons who were instructing them. For if a worthy conception of God could be attained through the use of intellection, how could these people have taken the demons for gods, and how could they have believed the demons when they taught man polytheism? " In this way, wrapped up in this mindless and foolish wisdom and unenlightened education, they have calumniated both God and nature. They have deprived God of His sovereignty (at least as far as they are concerned); they have ascribed the Divine Name to demons β¦.
Dyer tried to explain this quote away by saying:
βThe Palamas quote going around by RCs is laughably misread: it's a reductio, arguing Muslims inconsistently invoke the Word of Allah in the Koran, yet deny the Word.
Much like when we say to a Muslim - "you also think Allah has a Logos!". It doesn't mean they actually do.
The rest of the debate (which | read last night) shows Palamas did not actually think Muslims ("apostate
Chioni") worship the Triad LOL - his whole argument is the OT teaches Triad!β https://x(dot)com/jay_d007/status/1911102621953196191?s=46
But Dyer didnβt bother to exegete Palamas at all. Palamas clearly states that the Muslims addressed (past tense) themselves to God and to no one else:
βFor you addressed yourselves to Godβto whom else?β
He then shifts to the present tense, saying that Muslims are now addressing Christ without realizing it:
βYou must be addressing, therefore, the prayers and the exclamations to Him. Thus you, too, invoke Him as God, as we do, who believe that as an inborn Word of His He is indivisible from the Fatherβ¦β
If Gregory Palamas believed Muslims were worshipping a different god, he wouldnβt have told them they addressed themselves to God and to no one else.
Once again, Jay Dyer tries to explain these quotes away by citing a line from Gregory Palamas in Triads as supposed proof that Palamas believed Muslims worship demons, therefore arguing that Palamas didnβt believe Muslims and Christians worship the same God.
Jay Dyer: βRCs are misquoting St Gregory Palamas again, as if the Triads teach the conception of God pagans and Muslims have is adequate: remember Vatican 2 says they "adore" and "worship" the One God. In fact, Palamas says the opposite, that their positions are demonic and not salvific, which is the true sense of "knowing" God, beyond a confused conceptual knowledge which gets you nothing.β
https://x(dot)com/jay_d007/status/1935762066083611102?s=46
But Dyer didnβt give his audience the full context. The people Palamas was referring to in that quote were Greek polytheists, not Muslims:
Gregory Palamas, Triads, 1.1.18 -
βBy examining the nature of sensible things, these people have arrived at a certain concept of God, but not at a conception truly worthy of Him and appropriate to His blessed nature. For their βdisordered heart was darkenedβ by the machinations of the wicked demons who were instructing them. For if a worthy conception of God could be attained through the use of intellection, how could these people have taken the demons for gods, and how could they have believed the demons when they taught man polytheism? " In this way, wrapped up in this mindless and foolish wisdom and unenlightened education, they have calumniated both God and nature. They have deprived God of His sovereignty (at least as far as they are concerned); they have ascribed the Divine Name to demons β¦.
Forwarded from Pure World Truth
and they were so far from finding the knowledge of beings the object of their desire and zeal-as to claim that inanimate things have a soul and participate in a soul superior to our own. They also allege that things without reason are reasonable, since capable of receiving a human soul; that demons are superior to us and are even our creators (such is their impiety); they have classed among things uncreated and unoriginate and coeternal with God, not only matter, and what they call the World Soul, but also those intelligible beings not clothed in the opacity of the body, and even our souls themselvesβ
Dyer might think Islam teaches polytheism, but Gregory Palamas didnβt. Nowhere in the Triads does Palamas call Muslims polytheists. In fact, Muslims arenβt even mentioned in the context Dyer claims. As the other quotes show, Palamas viewed Muslims as monotheists who worship the same God he did.
The Eastern Orthodox Council of Blachernae infallibly dogmatized the theology of Gregory Palamas as binding:
Blachernae (Constantinople V) [AD 1351] Canon II:
ββ¦This evil one has also involved himself with many other circles against the Church. Now retreating and now advancing, he attacks the truthβsometimes with doctrines containing nothing sound, and sometimes with pleasures, which he is accustomed to enjoy and the end of which is separation from God. Most recently he has found favour with Barlaam. This man, a monk of Calabrian origin, steeped in Hellenic learning and relying wholly upon it, proceeded against the truth and those who adhere to it in a holy manner, and accused them of ditheism for saying that not only is the Trihypostatic and wholly imparticipable essence of God uncreated, but also the grace of the Spirit that is eternal and deifying and participable by the worthy. When a divine synod was convoked on these matters, he was refuted and condemned by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ on the basis of the theological writings of the holy Fathers, which supported the truth of the teaching of the current most holy Metropolitan of Thessalonike, Palamas, and of the monks.β
Some Eastern Orthodox try to argue that Blachernae only affirmed certain parts of Palamasβ theology, not everything he taught. But Canon 4 says otherwiseβit explicitly states that the Orthodox must hold to his writings, his thinking, and his fighting by EVERY MEANS in defense of Scripture, the Orthodox faith, and Holy Tradition:
Canon IV: This frequently mentioned most honourable hieromonk, Kyr Gregory Palamas, and the monks who agree with himβwho in their writing and thinking, or rather, as already said, in their fighting by EVERY MEANS in defence of the divine Scriptures, and our common religion and tradition, have scrutinized and comprehended with precision nothing that is not congruous with the divine Scripturesβwe hold to be not only superior to all their opponents, or rather, to those who contend against the Church of God, as the earlier synodal tomos puts it, but we also declare to be the MOST RELIABLE defenders of the Church and of Orthodoxy, and its champions and helpers. For thus will the tomos issued in relation to those synods possess reliability and certainty, just as it now indeed does.β
The top Eastern Orthodox scholars affirms that Palamasβ teachings are dogma, and that his voice is the very expression of Orthodox tradition:
βBut if Gregoryβs insight and solution are important, so is his impact on the later Palamite synthesis. Part of that synthesis was actually prepared in the thirteenth century by Patriarch Gregory II of Cyprus. In a very real sense, the fundamental distinction between the essence and the energy is none other than the βworking pieceβ of Palamas theology. Even so, its formal ratification as dogma by the Palamite councils of 1341, 1347, and 1351 was foreshadowed in the confirmation of the tomos at the Council of 1285.
Dyer might think Islam teaches polytheism, but Gregory Palamas didnβt. Nowhere in the Triads does Palamas call Muslims polytheists. In fact, Muslims arenβt even mentioned in the context Dyer claims. As the other quotes show, Palamas viewed Muslims as monotheists who worship the same God he did.
The Eastern Orthodox Council of Blachernae infallibly dogmatized the theology of Gregory Palamas as binding:
Blachernae (Constantinople V) [AD 1351] Canon II:
ββ¦This evil one has also involved himself with many other circles against the Church. Now retreating and now advancing, he attacks the truthβsometimes with doctrines containing nothing sound, and sometimes with pleasures, which he is accustomed to enjoy and the end of which is separation from God. Most recently he has found favour with Barlaam. This man, a monk of Calabrian origin, steeped in Hellenic learning and relying wholly upon it, proceeded against the truth and those who adhere to it in a holy manner, and accused them of ditheism for saying that not only is the Trihypostatic and wholly imparticipable essence of God uncreated, but also the grace of the Spirit that is eternal and deifying and participable by the worthy. When a divine synod was convoked on these matters, he was refuted and condemned by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ on the basis of the theological writings of the holy Fathers, which supported the truth of the teaching of the current most holy Metropolitan of Thessalonike, Palamas, and of the monks.β
Some Eastern Orthodox try to argue that Blachernae only affirmed certain parts of Palamasβ theology, not everything he taught. But Canon 4 says otherwiseβit explicitly states that the Orthodox must hold to his writings, his thinking, and his fighting by EVERY MEANS in defense of Scripture, the Orthodox faith, and Holy Tradition:
Canon IV: This frequently mentioned most honourable hieromonk, Kyr Gregory Palamas, and the monks who agree with himβwho in their writing and thinking, or rather, as already said, in their fighting by EVERY MEANS in defence of the divine Scriptures, and our common religion and tradition, have scrutinized and comprehended with precision nothing that is not congruous with the divine Scripturesβwe hold to be not only superior to all their opponents, or rather, to those who contend against the Church of God, as the earlier synodal tomos puts it, but we also declare to be the MOST RELIABLE defenders of the Church and of Orthodoxy, and its champions and helpers. For thus will the tomos issued in relation to those synods possess reliability and certainty, just as it now indeed does.β
The top Eastern Orthodox scholars affirms that Palamasβ teachings are dogma, and that his voice is the very expression of Orthodox tradition:
βBut if Gregoryβs insight and solution are important, so is his impact on the later Palamite synthesis. Part of that synthesis was actually prepared in the thirteenth century by Patriarch Gregory II of Cyprus. In a very real sense, the fundamental distinction between the essence and the energy is none other than the βworking pieceβ of Palamas theology. Even so, its formal ratification as dogma by the Palamite councils of 1341, 1347, and 1351 was foreshadowed in the confirmation of the tomos at the Council of 1285.
Forwarded from Pure World Truth
Significantly, ALL Orthodox scholars who have written on PalamasβLossky, Krivosheine, Papamichael, Meyendorff, Christouβassume his voice to be a legitimate expression of Orthodox tradition. Mutatis mutandis, the same is true of Gregory of Cyprus. As one of the scholars has recognized, what is being defended is βone and the same traditionβ¦ at different points, by the Orthodox, from St. Photius to Gregory of Cyprus and St. Gregory Palamas.β [β¦] The Palamite doctrine βmight be viewed as a punishment permitted by God, which has managed to be imposed as official dogma.β
βM. Jugie, Theologia Dogmatica Christianorum Orientalium ab Ecclesia Catholica Dissidentium, I (Paris 1926), 431; idem, βPalamite (Controverse),β DTC, II, pt. 2 (Paris, 1932), col. 1817.
Another Eastern Orthodox scholar points out that Palamas took an ecumenical approach toward Muslims:
βPerhaps worth recalling here that a friend of Cantacuzenus, the famous Hesychast theologian and Archbishop of Thessalonica, Gregory Palamas, describes in 1354 his journey to Turkish-occupied Asia Minor in a rather mystic toneβhoping, like Cantacuzenus, for a subsequent conversion of Muslims and implying the acceptance, for the time being, of a friendly coexistence.β
βMeyendorff, Byzantine Views on Islam, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 18 (1964), p. 123
βAt any rate, this particular rite was still in use in the twelfth century because Nicetas Choniates gives a detailed account of a conflict which opposed Emperor Manuel I to the patriarchal synod, and in which Eustathios, Metropolitan of Thessalonica, played a leading role. In 1178, Manuel published two decrees ordering the deletion of the last anathema from the rite, starting with the copy in use at the Great Church of St. Sophia. The anathema, quoted from Sura 112, reads as follows: βI anathematize the God of Muhammad about whom he says: βHe is God alone, God the Eternal, He begets not and is not begotten, nor is there like unto Him anyone.ββ The reason for this measure was that the emperor was afraid to scandalize the converts by obliging them to anathematize not only the beliefs of Muhammad, but also βthe God of Muhammad,β for this seemed to imply that Christians and Moslems did not, in fact, believe in one and the same God. The imperial measure provoked strong opposition on the part of the patriarch and the synod. Eustathius of Thessalonica, who acted as the Churchβs spokesman in this matter proclaimed that a god believed to be βof hammer-beaten metalβ is not the true God, but a material idol, which should be anathematized as such. After some argument between the palace and the patriarchate, a compromise solution was found. The emperor withdrew his original decree; the twenty-second anathema was retained in the ritual, but now it read simply: βAnathema to Muhammad, to all his teaching and all his inheritance.β This text was preserved in the later editions of the Euchologion. The episode is significant inasmuch as it clearly illustrates the existence in Byzantium of two views on Islam: the extreme and βclosedβ one, which adopted an absolutely negative attitude towards Muhammadanism and considered it a form of paganism; and another, the more moderate one, which tried to avoid burning all bridges and to preserve a measure of common referenceβin particular, the recognition of a common allegiance to monotheism. Manuel I belonged to this second group, and in this respect he followed the tradition which seems always to have been predominant in official governmental circles of Byzantium.
βMeyendorff, Byzantine Views on Islam, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 18 (1964), p. 124-125
βM. Jugie, Theologia Dogmatica Christianorum Orientalium ab Ecclesia Catholica Dissidentium, I (Paris 1926), 431; idem, βPalamite (Controverse),β DTC, II, pt. 2 (Paris, 1932), col. 1817.
Another Eastern Orthodox scholar points out that Palamas took an ecumenical approach toward Muslims:
βPerhaps worth recalling here that a friend of Cantacuzenus, the famous Hesychast theologian and Archbishop of Thessalonica, Gregory Palamas, describes in 1354 his journey to Turkish-occupied Asia Minor in a rather mystic toneβhoping, like Cantacuzenus, for a subsequent conversion of Muslims and implying the acceptance, for the time being, of a friendly coexistence.β
βMeyendorff, Byzantine Views on Islam, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 18 (1964), p. 123
βAt any rate, this particular rite was still in use in the twelfth century because Nicetas Choniates gives a detailed account of a conflict which opposed Emperor Manuel I to the patriarchal synod, and in which Eustathios, Metropolitan of Thessalonica, played a leading role. In 1178, Manuel published two decrees ordering the deletion of the last anathema from the rite, starting with the copy in use at the Great Church of St. Sophia. The anathema, quoted from Sura 112, reads as follows: βI anathematize the God of Muhammad about whom he says: βHe is God alone, God the Eternal, He begets not and is not begotten, nor is there like unto Him anyone.ββ The reason for this measure was that the emperor was afraid to scandalize the converts by obliging them to anathematize not only the beliefs of Muhammad, but also βthe God of Muhammad,β for this seemed to imply that Christians and Moslems did not, in fact, believe in one and the same God. The imperial measure provoked strong opposition on the part of the patriarch and the synod. Eustathius of Thessalonica, who acted as the Churchβs spokesman in this matter proclaimed that a god believed to be βof hammer-beaten metalβ is not the true God, but a material idol, which should be anathematized as such. After some argument between the palace and the patriarchate, a compromise solution was found. The emperor withdrew his original decree; the twenty-second anathema was retained in the ritual, but now it read simply: βAnathema to Muhammad, to all his teaching and all his inheritance.β This text was preserved in the later editions of the Euchologion. The episode is significant inasmuch as it clearly illustrates the existence in Byzantium of two views on Islam: the extreme and βclosedβ one, which adopted an absolutely negative attitude towards Muhammadanism and considered it a form of paganism; and another, the more moderate one, which tried to avoid burning all bridges and to preserve a measure of common referenceβin particular, the recognition of a common allegiance to monotheism. Manuel I belonged to this second group, and in this respect he followed the tradition which seems always to have been predominant in official governmental circles of Byzantium.
βMeyendorff, Byzantine Views on Islam, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 18 (1964), p. 124-125
βππ₯ππ πππ πΈπ‘π ππ πππ₯πππ€ πππ βπ ππππππ€ pinned Β«This post isnβt meant to refute Eastern Orthodoxy itself, but to call out the hypocrisy Iβve seen from many Eastern Orthodox online. Thereβs a pattern where they constantly point fingers at Catholics, yet ignore the three pointing back at them. One of theirβ¦Β»
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Hail Mary in the bible ? PROVING the Hail Mary from the bible and Aposto...
https://youtube.com/watch?v=A2rXQ-1vBIU&si=5I_9qSNRGTafVGcr
https://youtube.com/watch?v=A2rXQ-1vBIU&si=5I_9qSNRGTafVGcr
YouTube
Hail Mary in the bible ? PROVING the Hail Mary from the bible and Apostolic tradition
in this video I prove the Hail Mary from both the bible and Apostolic tradition
find us on telegram @CATHOLICAPOLOGETICSANDPOLEMICS
find us on telegram @CATHOLICAPOLOGETICSANDPOLEMICS
Forwarded from β¨ Catholic M8s β¨
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
π― In Memory of the 20 Orthodox Christians Martyred in Damascus π―
On Sunday, during the Divine Liturgy at Mar Elias Greek Orthodox Church in Damascus, 20 Christians were killed and over 50 wounded in a suicide bombing and gunfire attack.
Though they were Orthodox, they are still our brothers and sisters in Christ. As Catholics, we grieve with them, honour their witness, and pray for the wounded and their families.
Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord,
and let perpetual light shine upon them.
May they rest in peace. Amen.
Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for them.
Saint Elias, intercede for them.
βοΈ May their memory be eternal
On Sunday, during the Divine Liturgy at Mar Elias Greek Orthodox Church in Damascus, 20 Christians were killed and over 50 wounded in a suicide bombing and gunfire attack.
Though they were Orthodox, they are still our brothers and sisters in Christ. As Catholics, we grieve with them, honour their witness, and pray for the wounded and their families.
Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord,
and let perpetual light shine upon them.
May they rest in peace. Amen.
Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for them.
Saint Elias, intercede for them.
βοΈ May their memory be eternal
Forwarded from β¨ Catholic M8s β¨
π Pray for the 52 Wounded in the Damascus Church Attack π
Alongside the 20 martyred, over 50 Christians were woundedβsome criticallyβduring Sundayβs horrific bombing at Mar Elias Greek Orthodox Church in Damascus.
These were families, children, eldersβgathered in peace to worship God, and instead left injured, scarred, and shaken.
Let us pray for their healing:
Lord Jesus, Divine Physician,
pour out Your mercy upon the wounded.
Grant them strength in body, peace in spirit,
and the comfort of Your Sacred Heart.
Mother Mary, Comforter of the Afflicted,
wrap them in your mantle and intercede for their healing. Amen.
π As Catholics, we stand in love and prayer with our Orthodox brothers and sisters. May those who suffer today find hope in Christβs resurrection.
β Jesus, we trust in You.
Alongside the 20 martyred, over 50 Christians were woundedβsome criticallyβduring Sundayβs horrific bombing at Mar Elias Greek Orthodox Church in Damascus.
These were families, children, eldersβgathered in peace to worship God, and instead left injured, scarred, and shaken.
Let us pray for their healing:
Lord Jesus, Divine Physician,
pour out Your mercy upon the wounded.
Grant them strength in body, peace in spirit,
and the comfort of Your Sacred Heart.
Mother Mary, Comforter of the Afflicted,
wrap them in your mantle and intercede for their healing. Amen.
π As Catholics, we stand in love and prayer with our Orthodox brothers and sisters. May those who suffer today find hope in Christβs resurrection.
β Jesus, we trust in You.
Forwarded from The Malaysian Catholic
https://www.instagram.com/p/DLWntQeSLr-/?igsh=M21zdjM4dzgybmpk
Got a post covering the biblical inaccuracies of Ted Cruz!! Let me know what you think
Got a post covering the biblical inaccuracies of Ted Cruz!! Let me know what you think
If possible.... We may come live to take your questions. As much as I can help.... I will do my bestβ€οΈπ
Please open Telegram to view this post
VIEW IN TELEGRAM