What do you think?
Rate this book
Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View
Bible, Church, An Eastern Orthodox View; Volume One In the collected works of Georges Florovsky is an excellent introduction to Orthodox biblical exegesis and ecclesiology. It should be read by Protestants, many of whom are unfamiliar with Orthodox views on Scripture, as well as Roman Catholics for an alternative view to their own tradition, as well as Orthodox themselves who are looking for a short, academic but intelligible introduction to this topic. Fr. Florovsky is considered by some to be one of the most outstanding and profound theologians of twentieth-century Orthodoxy. The first section of the book deals with the Church's proclamation of God's revelation to man, the Gospel, in the Holy Scriptures, and the "catholic" nature of the Church itself. The Church is labeled "catholic" because it possesses within itself a distinct universality and applies to all mankind. The Scripture needs to be proclaimed as God's Word revealed to man through the first to the ancient Hebrew tribes in the form of the Old Testament and to the entire world through the New. The Bible should not be treated as a "history" book as such, nor is it a manual on the natural sciences, as many "fundamentalists" of various sects today uphold.
126 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 1972
14 people are currently reading
173 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
January 16, 2018
Forgive me, as much of my review will consist of my own paraphrastic notes I wrote for each chapter for comprehension. This is a short work of Fr. Georges Florovksy consisting of several essays he wrote on the "Bible, Church, [and] Tradition." The essays are mostly excellent, and this serves as a useful primer for introducing someone to how Orthodox Christians conceive of the authority of the Bible, Tradition and Scripture, authority of the Church, etc. My one complaint is that I was under the impression that this would be a more technical, more difficult text. At times, it seemed like Fr. Georges Florovsky could have got his point across in fewer pages and been just as effective. That being said, they were excellent essays, and I recommend especially to the reader his essay entitled, "The Catholicity of the Church."
Exemplary quote: "Ultimately, tradition is the continuity of the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church, a continuity of Divine guidance and illumination" (106).
Here are my notes:
Chapter I: The Lost Scriptural Mind
Modern man finds faith untenable. He either ditches faith or believes it is only salvageable by abstracting some essential kernel from the husk of traditional and biblical categories. This is not a sacrifice Christianity can make, without sacrificing itself. Instead, Christianity ought to seek to vigorously preach the tradition of the church, the Bible, the Creeds. These actually address modern man's issues more than does contemporary theology. Modern theologians are concerned with how they may make Christianity tenable for modern man. The Creeds are concerned with what God has done.
How can we understand Christianity in such a way? Only through the lived faith of the church and active faith. In other words, we must believe in order to understand. The traditional doctrines of Christianity are situated within the life of the church and cannot simply be abstracted from it.
Modern man has a tendency toward either Nestorianism (liberalism) or Monophysitism (neo-orthodoxy). In the former case, modern man does not want to believe in the incarnation in earnest; he does not want his redeemer to be a divine person. He wants a human redeemer aided by God. The opposite tendency tends toward the total passivity of man in salvation in which God does all.
Chapter II: Revelation and Interpretation
The Bible is a sacred book. It has the twofold purpose of edification and evangelization. The epistemological principle whereby we know the Bible is the witness of the Church (most books are first used in the liturgy and later formally declared to be a part of the canon by formal declarations of the Church). The Bible concerns not the Deus absconditus but the Deus revelatus. The Scriptures are not mere witnesses to the revelation of God, but are the revelation of God himself. They bear witness to the Magnalia Dei. These mighty works happened in time and history, yet the writers of Sacred Scripture were not mere chroniclers; their accounts are full of meaning and interpretation. For example, the accounts of Christ's life were not simple lists of things Christ had done in no particular order. Rather, the writers sought to present an ikon of Christ's life. In sum, the Bible's philosophy of history brings fact and meaning together.
The history it presents is not a mere divine monologue, but represents a dialogue between man and God, more specifically, a dialogue between God and his covenanted people (Israel and the Church). It is to this people that the message of the Bible-- not the mere words-- is entrusted.
The Bible is inspired by God. The humane aspects are not, however, obliterated on this account. Rather, the Scriptures transmit the Word of God in human idiom; the words of the Bible are transfigured by the Spirit. Our theological reflection and formulations concerning the Bible cannot ever replace the Bible. These two are different in kind. Though "eternal truths" can be abstracted from the Bible, this does not exhaust the Bible because the historical character of the Bible is intrinsic to it, not something to be thrown away as chaff. The Church affirms typology not allegory (qualification forthcoming!). In allegory, the allegorist seeks to abstract from the letter some suprahistorical, supertemporal principle, whereas in typology, the type anticipates its anti-type further in history. The Old Testament is the property of the Church and no longer belongs to the Jews (who reject Christ). When doing theology, we must be careful to understand the historical conditioning of the text.
Chapter III: The Catholicity of the Church
The Church is the πλήρωμα of Christ. The catholicity of the Church is not empirical or phenomenal, but belongs to the very essence of the Church; it is not the claim that the Church is to be found all over the world (for if this were true, the Church would not have been the Church at Pentecost). What it refers to is the wholeness of the Church, as expressed in its etymology (καθ' ὅλου): to put it in another way the catholicity of the Church refers to its integrity and purity. Moreover, the Church is not catholic because it embraces the "whole," but it is catholic through and through. All of its parts are also catholic.
The development of a catholic consciousness consists not in individualism or a subjection of the individual will to the collective. Rather, its telos is the abdication of self-reflexive consciousness; in loving his neighbor as himself, he does not simply do to his neighbor as he would do to himself, but grows to regard his neighbor as himself. Catholicity is the end of the human personality, which consists in a "concrete oneness in thought and feeling."
"The Church is the living image of eternity." (45). Learning from the tradition of the Church consists not in archaeology. The tradition does not merely exist in the past; it is in a sense timeless. "Tradition is a charismatic, not a historical, principle." (47). The bifurcation between Scripture and tradition is a category mistake, for the Scripture exists within the tradition of the Church. The tradition of the Church cannot be understood from the outside; it is not a body of authoritative teachings to be studied, but something to be experienced.
"The opinions of the Fathers are accepted, not as a formal subjection to outward authority, but because of the inner evidence of their catholic truth." (53). Though priest and hierarchs serve as public mouthpieces for the Church, they are not alone the guardians of the faith. The guardian of tradition and piety belongs to the whole Church, to the whole Body of Christ.
Chapter IV: The Church: Her Nature and Task
The Church is a divinely-established, apostolic community, whose principium unitatis is found only in Jesus Christ. The Church is the body of Christ. As such, Christ does not stand above the Church merely as master, but is in a real sense a part of the body itself. Paul goes even so far as to say that the Church is the πλήρωμα of Christ; the incarnation is fully actualized in the subsistence of the Church. The Church is constituted by participation in the sacraments in unity with the Bishop, all of whom act as Christ's ambassadors in persona Christ. The Eucharist is the mode of Christ's presence in the Church. Futhermore, the Church is an eschatological society; it has one foot in this present age and one in the life to come; it is where heaven and earth meet.
She is to be a witness to the world as a new creation in Christ. The task of the Church in history is muddled by an antimony. To opposite tendencies have existed simultaneously in the Church. The desire to recede from the world to attain higher communion with God, and the desire to remain in it to attempt to transform it. These to desires are summed up in the difference between the Christian imperium and the monastery. No solution, Florovsky contends, is possible in history. He hints at the end of the ideal of a universal monasticism as the eschatological vision of Earth.
Chapter V: The Function of Tradition in the Ancient Church
Tradition is Scripture rightly understood, not some supplementary source of other doctrines. It is the Church which possess the correct interpretation of the Scriptures. The regula fidei does not refer to any particular confession, but to the content of a catechumens confession before baptism, whatever the particular wording may be; it was the same content as the apostolic deposit entrusted to the Church.
Heretics make use of the data of Scripture but ignore its proper form or pattern. It is that that they usually distort. The Church possess the canon of truth whereby the proper pattern of sound doctrine is apprehended. This rule, of course, is the preaching of the Apostles preserved and kept by the succession of Bishops and Presbyters.
Athanasius in his dispute with the Arians accused them of ignoring the scope (skopos) of Scripture; they prefered the immediate, grammatical meaning, abstracted away from the immediate contexts, where it's situated in the whole sweep of Biblical revelation, and its relation to the tradition of the Church. Athanasius believed in the sufficiency of the Scriptures.
The rule of worship also serves as the rule of faith, that is to say, we can derive doctrines from the universal liturgical practices of the Church. St. Basil exemplifies this method in de Spirtu Sancto. The tradition of the apostles has a double mode: unwritten oral tradition and the writings. Many things are passed on only in mysterio. This is not some esoteric doctrine given to small group of initiated, but given to all who are members of the Church. Florovsky contends that in mysterio ought to be interpreted as meaning by the mysteries of the Church, viz. the sacraments. It is in these, the liturgical rites, etc. that we come to understand the faith aright, and because of their unwritten nature are less subject to corruption and distortion.
Chapter VI: The Authority of the Ancient Councils and The Tradition of the Fathers
Florovsky begins with a plea to avoid anachronism. Strictly speaking, there is no "conciliar theory" of the Church in the early centuries. Councils convened occasionally to deal with disputes in different localities with the purpose of clarifying the truth in order to maintain unity among the churches. In a sense, with the imperial Church nothing changed. Councils were still occasional. While they were occasional, they were also charismatic events. What was the standard of truth for the Oecumenical Councils? It was Christ himself or the Truth, as found in Sacred Scripture.
Where does truth lie? With the tradition? Sic et non. Not just any old tradition qualifies something as truth. In fact, the gnostics were among the first to appeal to tradition. The verity of some theological supposition is not based on the fact that it is tradition, but tradition exists because-- my gloss of Florovsky-- God in his goodness was pleased to bestow upon the Apostles the apostolic deposit and by his Spirit guard that deposit against calumnies and errors of the heretics. The authority of the council is thus not procedural or canonical but charismatic. Even the councils are patient to misinterpretation. It is the Fathers of the Church, who both proceed and come after a given council, who are the proper interpreters of the councils and of the tradition. That then is the principle role of the Fathers. They are those who zealously guard the deposit and teach apostolic doctrine.
Chapter VII: St. Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers
What does it mean to follow the Fathers? It must be said that the Church at present is not simply the offspring of the Fathers who lived long ago, but it is always the Church of the Fathers. The Church is the Church of the Fathers in that it possess the mind of the Fathers. To possess the mind of the Fathers is not to simply restate, pristine for every generation the dicta probata patrum. This is the case because the age of the Fathers is now, as long as the Church possesses the charism of truth and the presence of the Holy Spirit, Fathers will always remain within her walls.
Theology is not done after the manner of Aristotle but after the manner of the Apostles. It is not just a series of scientific demonstrations, but it represents the visio fidei, available only to those within the Church's walls, who have purified themselves. These also are able to experience the truths of the faith, not just know them in abstracto.
Florovsky uses Palamas as a test case. He did not simply restate the positions of the Fathers, but in studying them, he was able to provide an answer to new problems that arised in a manner consistent, indeed consonant, with the "mind of the Fathers." God is not known to man in his nature, which dwells in light inaccessible, but we do know God according to his energies. There is a distinction, a real distinction, according to Florovsky, between God's energies and his essence. If this were not the case, so Palamas argues, the eternal generation of the Son and creation of the world would be the same kind of act or even an identical act. We must admit of two different kinds of activity in God, though: one kind kata physin, another free energies or activities; this distinction is necessary to maintain the necessity of the Godhead on one hand, and the total contingency of the created order on the other.
Exemplary quote: "Ultimately, tradition is the continuity of the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church, a continuity of Divine guidance and illumination" (106).
Here are my notes:
Chapter I: The Lost Scriptural Mind
Modern man finds faith untenable. He either ditches faith or believes it is only salvageable by abstracting some essential kernel from the husk of traditional and biblical categories. This is not a sacrifice Christianity can make, without sacrificing itself. Instead, Christianity ought to seek to vigorously preach the tradition of the church, the Bible, the Creeds. These actually address modern man's issues more than does contemporary theology. Modern theologians are concerned with how they may make Christianity tenable for modern man. The Creeds are concerned with what God has done.
How can we understand Christianity in such a way? Only through the lived faith of the church and active faith. In other words, we must believe in order to understand. The traditional doctrines of Christianity are situated within the life of the church and cannot simply be abstracted from it.
Modern man has a tendency toward either Nestorianism (liberalism) or Monophysitism (neo-orthodoxy). In the former case, modern man does not want to believe in the incarnation in earnest; he does not want his redeemer to be a divine person. He wants a human redeemer aided by God. The opposite tendency tends toward the total passivity of man in salvation in which God does all.
Chapter II: Revelation and Interpretation
The Bible is a sacred book. It has the twofold purpose of edification and evangelization. The epistemological principle whereby we know the Bible is the witness of the Church (most books are first used in the liturgy and later formally declared to be a part of the canon by formal declarations of the Church). The Bible concerns not the Deus absconditus but the Deus revelatus. The Scriptures are not mere witnesses to the revelation of God, but are the revelation of God himself. They bear witness to the Magnalia Dei. These mighty works happened in time and history, yet the writers of Sacred Scripture were not mere chroniclers; their accounts are full of meaning and interpretation. For example, the accounts of Christ's life were not simple lists of things Christ had done in no particular order. Rather, the writers sought to present an ikon of Christ's life. In sum, the Bible's philosophy of history brings fact and meaning together.
The history it presents is not a mere divine monologue, but represents a dialogue between man and God, more specifically, a dialogue between God and his covenanted people (Israel and the Church). It is to this people that the message of the Bible-- not the mere words-- is entrusted.
The Bible is inspired by God. The humane aspects are not, however, obliterated on this account. Rather, the Scriptures transmit the Word of God in human idiom; the words of the Bible are transfigured by the Spirit. Our theological reflection and formulations concerning the Bible cannot ever replace the Bible. These two are different in kind. Though "eternal truths" can be abstracted from the Bible, this does not exhaust the Bible because the historical character of the Bible is intrinsic to it, not something to be thrown away as chaff. The Church affirms typology not allegory (qualification forthcoming!). In allegory, the allegorist seeks to abstract from the letter some suprahistorical, supertemporal principle, whereas in typology, the type anticipates its anti-type further in history. The Old Testament is the property of the Church and no longer belongs to the Jews (who reject Christ). When doing theology, we must be careful to understand the historical conditioning of the text.
Chapter III: The Catholicity of the Church
The Church is the πλήρωμα of Christ. The catholicity of the Church is not empirical or phenomenal, but belongs to the very essence of the Church; it is not the claim that the Church is to be found all over the world (for if this were true, the Church would not have been the Church at Pentecost). What it refers to is the wholeness of the Church, as expressed in its etymology (καθ' ὅλου): to put it in another way the catholicity of the Church refers to its integrity and purity. Moreover, the Church is not catholic because it embraces the "whole," but it is catholic through and through. All of its parts are also catholic.
The development of a catholic consciousness consists not in individualism or a subjection of the individual will to the collective. Rather, its telos is the abdication of self-reflexive consciousness; in loving his neighbor as himself, he does not simply do to his neighbor as he would do to himself, but grows to regard his neighbor as himself. Catholicity is the end of the human personality, which consists in a "concrete oneness in thought and feeling."
"The Church is the living image of eternity." (45). Learning from the tradition of the Church consists not in archaeology. The tradition does not merely exist in the past; it is in a sense timeless. "Tradition is a charismatic, not a historical, principle." (47). The bifurcation between Scripture and tradition is a category mistake, for the Scripture exists within the tradition of the Church. The tradition of the Church cannot be understood from the outside; it is not a body of authoritative teachings to be studied, but something to be experienced.
"The opinions of the Fathers are accepted, not as a formal subjection to outward authority, but because of the inner evidence of their catholic truth." (53). Though priest and hierarchs serve as public mouthpieces for the Church, they are not alone the guardians of the faith. The guardian of tradition and piety belongs to the whole Church, to the whole Body of Christ.
Chapter IV: The Church: Her Nature and Task
The Church is a divinely-established, apostolic community, whose principium unitatis is found only in Jesus Christ. The Church is the body of Christ. As such, Christ does not stand above the Church merely as master, but is in a real sense a part of the body itself. Paul goes even so far as to say that the Church is the πλήρωμα of Christ; the incarnation is fully actualized in the subsistence of the Church. The Church is constituted by participation in the sacraments in unity with the Bishop, all of whom act as Christ's ambassadors in persona Christ. The Eucharist is the mode of Christ's presence in the Church. Futhermore, the Church is an eschatological society; it has one foot in this present age and one in the life to come; it is where heaven and earth meet.
She is to be a witness to the world as a new creation in Christ. The task of the Church in history is muddled by an antimony. To opposite tendencies have existed simultaneously in the Church. The desire to recede from the world to attain higher communion with God, and the desire to remain in it to attempt to transform it. These to desires are summed up in the difference between the Christian imperium and the monastery. No solution, Florovsky contends, is possible in history. He hints at the end of the ideal of a universal monasticism as the eschatological vision of Earth.
Chapter V: The Function of Tradition in the Ancient Church
Tradition is Scripture rightly understood, not some supplementary source of other doctrines. It is the Church which possess the correct interpretation of the Scriptures. The regula fidei does not refer to any particular confession, but to the content of a catechumens confession before baptism, whatever the particular wording may be; it was the same content as the apostolic deposit entrusted to the Church.
Heretics make use of the data of Scripture but ignore its proper form or pattern. It is that that they usually distort. The Church possess the canon of truth whereby the proper pattern of sound doctrine is apprehended. This rule, of course, is the preaching of the Apostles preserved and kept by the succession of Bishops and Presbyters.
Athanasius in his dispute with the Arians accused them of ignoring the scope (skopos) of Scripture; they prefered the immediate, grammatical meaning, abstracted away from the immediate contexts, where it's situated in the whole sweep of Biblical revelation, and its relation to the tradition of the Church. Athanasius believed in the sufficiency of the Scriptures.
The rule of worship also serves as the rule of faith, that is to say, we can derive doctrines from the universal liturgical practices of the Church. St. Basil exemplifies this method in de Spirtu Sancto. The tradition of the apostles has a double mode: unwritten oral tradition and the writings. Many things are passed on only in mysterio. This is not some esoteric doctrine given to small group of initiated, but given to all who are members of the Church. Florovsky contends that in mysterio ought to be interpreted as meaning by the mysteries of the Church, viz. the sacraments. It is in these, the liturgical rites, etc. that we come to understand the faith aright, and because of their unwritten nature are less subject to corruption and distortion.
Chapter VI: The Authority of the Ancient Councils and The Tradition of the Fathers
Florovsky begins with a plea to avoid anachronism. Strictly speaking, there is no "conciliar theory" of the Church in the early centuries. Councils convened occasionally to deal with disputes in different localities with the purpose of clarifying the truth in order to maintain unity among the churches. In a sense, with the imperial Church nothing changed. Councils were still occasional. While they were occasional, they were also charismatic events. What was the standard of truth for the Oecumenical Councils? It was Christ himself or the Truth, as found in Sacred Scripture.
Where does truth lie? With the tradition? Sic et non. Not just any old tradition qualifies something as truth. In fact, the gnostics were among the first to appeal to tradition. The verity of some theological supposition is not based on the fact that it is tradition, but tradition exists because-- my gloss of Florovsky-- God in his goodness was pleased to bestow upon the Apostles the apostolic deposit and by his Spirit guard that deposit against calumnies and errors of the heretics. The authority of the council is thus not procedural or canonical but charismatic. Even the councils are patient to misinterpretation. It is the Fathers of the Church, who both proceed and come after a given council, who are the proper interpreters of the councils and of the tradition. That then is the principle role of the Fathers. They are those who zealously guard the deposit and teach apostolic doctrine.
Chapter VII: St. Gregory Palamas and the Tradition of the Fathers
What does it mean to follow the Fathers? It must be said that the Church at present is not simply the offspring of the Fathers who lived long ago, but it is always the Church of the Fathers. The Church is the Church of the Fathers in that it possess the mind of the Fathers. To possess the mind of the Fathers is not to simply restate, pristine for every generation the dicta probata patrum. This is the case because the age of the Fathers is now, as long as the Church possesses the charism of truth and the presence of the Holy Spirit, Fathers will always remain within her walls.
Theology is not done after the manner of Aristotle but after the manner of the Apostles. It is not just a series of scientific demonstrations, but it represents the visio fidei, available only to those within the Church's walls, who have purified themselves. These also are able to experience the truths of the faith, not just know them in abstracto.
Florovsky uses Palamas as a test case. He did not simply restate the positions of the Fathers, but in studying them, he was able to provide an answer to new problems that arised in a manner consistent, indeed consonant, with the "mind of the Fathers." God is not known to man in his nature, which dwells in light inaccessible, but we do know God according to his energies. There is a distinction, a real distinction, according to Florovsky, between God's energies and his essence. If this were not the case, so Palamas argues, the eternal generation of the Son and creation of the world would be the same kind of act or even an identical act. We must admit of two different kinds of activity in God, though: one kind kata physin, another free energies or activities; this distinction is necessary to maintain the necessity of the Godhead on one hand, and the total contingency of the created order on the other.
October 3, 2022
This book is a collection of many different articles that Georges Florovsky wrote in different sites through different times.
Florovsky tried firstly to find how the human dealt with spiritual matters in modern age. He argued that an individual may adapt one of the following points of views. The first is the new Nestorianism as he focuses on the human and psychological side of the redeemer and neglect the divine side. On the contrary, the new Monophysite which make him passive in encountering with God and wait for the divine act. Florovsky claimed that the modern human crisis is just the recurrence of the old Christological debate.
According to Florovsky, the scripture is about God as well as man. Christ, who is both God and human, is the fullness of the revelation so He is the center of the scripture; old and new. Additionally, the church is the body of the Christ; therefore, the scripture is preserved in the church and only in the church we can understand the scripture. He also argues that the history is directed towards its purpose from the beginning to the second coming of the Christ and he called it the scared history which is told through the whole scripture.
In the light of the above, the Church; the body of the Christ; is catholic as mentioned in Nicaean Creed. Catholicity means that the Church gathers all people, romans and barbarians, from all ages. The Church is united and this unity comes from the Head, the Christ, who ensures this unity through Eucharist. The Holy Spirit also dwells in the Church once and forever since the Pentecost. Consequently, the Church is the new reality in the seen world and the new creation in Jesus Christ so no salvation outside the Church.
Florovsky stated that the Christ is present in his Church with his community. He established the Church through his incarnation, death and resurrection. The Church is the fullness of Christ's incarnation.
With many quotes from St. Athanasius, St. Basil, St. Irenaeus, St. Augustine and others; Florovsky argued that Tradition is the core of the Christian life. Tradition which includes scripture is controlled by the rule of faith and the rule of worship. The Scripture has main authority within Church but it is always a part from Tradition. Therefore, we can only understand the scripture with out the Church and we can only receive the Scripture, as St. Augustine said, in the Church.
The last pillar of Tradition that Florovsky discussed is the Ecumenical Councils. Ecumenical Councils have shaped the Church that we know today. Authority of these councils comes from appealing to the fathers. He argued that fathers of the Church are the fathers who had the gift of teaching so they follow the steps of the apostles. Also, the councils always followed the consensus of the fathers who were led by the Holy Spirit.
In the final article, Florovsky argued that Gregory Palmas' theology is extension of St. Athanasius and St. Cyril's theology as they all talked about the Theosis although it is apparent from the quotes that Palmas' theology is more exaggerated than the others. Palmas' writings about the energy and grace were different than that of Athanasius, Cyril and the Cappadocians.
Finally, the editor of this book tried to collect different articles that covered the topics of the Church and Tradition and he succeeded. These different articles that were written on different occasions led the reptation of many ideas, information amd even sentences
Florovsky tried firstly to find how the human dealt with spiritual matters in modern age. He argued that an individual may adapt one of the following points of views. The first is the new Nestorianism as he focuses on the human and psychological side of the redeemer and neglect the divine side. On the contrary, the new Monophysite which make him passive in encountering with God and wait for the divine act. Florovsky claimed that the modern human crisis is just the recurrence of the old Christological debate.
According to Florovsky, the scripture is about God as well as man. Christ, who is both God and human, is the fullness of the revelation so He is the center of the scripture; old and new. Additionally, the church is the body of the Christ; therefore, the scripture is preserved in the church and only in the church we can understand the scripture. He also argues that the history is directed towards its purpose from the beginning to the second coming of the Christ and he called it the scared history which is told through the whole scripture.
In the light of the above, the Church; the body of the Christ; is catholic as mentioned in Nicaean Creed. Catholicity means that the Church gathers all people, romans and barbarians, from all ages. The Church is united and this unity comes from the Head, the Christ, who ensures this unity through Eucharist. The Holy Spirit also dwells in the Church once and forever since the Pentecost. Consequently, the Church is the new reality in the seen world and the new creation in Jesus Christ so no salvation outside the Church.
Florovsky stated that the Christ is present in his Church with his community. He established the Church through his incarnation, death and resurrection. The Church is the fullness of Christ's incarnation.
With many quotes from St. Athanasius, St. Basil, St. Irenaeus, St. Augustine and others; Florovsky argued that Tradition is the core of the Christian life. Tradition which includes scripture is controlled by the rule of faith and the rule of worship. The Scripture has main authority within Church but it is always a part from Tradition. Therefore, we can only understand the scripture with out the Church and we can only receive the Scripture, as St. Augustine said, in the Church.
The last pillar of Tradition that Florovsky discussed is the Ecumenical Councils. Ecumenical Councils have shaped the Church that we know today. Authority of these councils comes from appealing to the fathers. He argued that fathers of the Church are the fathers who had the gift of teaching so they follow the steps of the apostles. Also, the councils always followed the consensus of the fathers who were led by the Holy Spirit.
In the final article, Florovsky argued that Gregory Palmas' theology is extension of St. Athanasius and St. Cyril's theology as they all talked about the Theosis although it is apparent from the quotes that Palmas' theology is more exaggerated than the others. Palmas' writings about the energy and grace were different than that of Athanasius, Cyril and the Cappadocians.
Finally, the editor of this book tried to collect different articles that covered the topics of the Church and Tradition and he succeeded. These different articles that were written on different occasions led the reptation of many ideas, information amd even sentences
March 6, 2024
“Christianity from the very beginning existed as a corporate reality, as a community. To be Christian meant just to belong to the community. Nobody could be Christian by himself, as an isolated individual, but only together with ‘the brethren’, in a ‘togetherness’ with them. Unus Christianus-nullus Christianus [One Christian, no Christian]. Personal conviction or even a rule of life still do not make one a Christian. Christian existence presumes and implies an incorporation, a membership in the community.”
“In our time nobody would consider it possible for everyone to be converted to a universal monasticism or a realization of a truly Christian, and universal, State. The Church remains ‘in the world’ as a heterogeneous body, and the tension is stronger than it has ever been; the ambiguity of the situation is painfully felt by everyone in the Church. A practical programme for the present age can be deduced only from a restored understanding of the nature and essence of the Church. And the failure of all Utopian expectations cannot obscure the Christian hope: the King has come, the Lord Jesus, and His Kingdom is to come.”
“In our time nobody would consider it possible for everyone to be converted to a universal monasticism or a realization of a truly Christian, and universal, State. The Church remains ‘in the world’ as a heterogeneous body, and the tension is stronger than it has ever been; the ambiguity of the situation is painfully felt by everyone in the Church. A practical programme for the present age can be deduced only from a restored understanding of the nature and essence of the Church. And the failure of all Utopian expectations cannot obscure the Christian hope: the King has come, the Lord Jesus, and His Kingdom is to come.”
May 27, 2018
I read this back in 97 when I was studying Theology and it had been most helpful for some of my assessments. This time it was an absolute pleasure to read it for recreational purposes. This is a fantastic summary of Orthodox mindset when it comes to BIBLE, CHURCH & TRADITION.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews