Answering the Orthodox: Divine Simplicity, Created Grace, and Beatific Vision

Please consider supporting my work by becoming a patron!

General Support: $2.99 per month for voting privileges on stream and video topics.

Tier 1: $5 per month for monthly book recommendations on philosophy and theology, detailed outline of notes for each stream, and q&a priority, plus periodic exclusive Book Review Streams.

Tier 2: $10 per month for everything in Tier 1 plus monthly exclusive written articles and I commit to doing a video topic of your choice so long as it pertains to philosophy or theology.

[ClassicalTheist]

Didn’t realize YouTube put so many ads on this thing. I reduced the number. While monetization is necessary in my situation, I want to keep it at as minimal as I can

[atreides]

I will watch ads for Classical Theist

I will post comments for the algorithm

[hap]

God bless you and your family. May God give you many blessings

[UnionistInitiative]

21:40 one thing that you commonly see among these people are quote mines and piety, there’s very little engagement of the composition question which actually explains the assumptions these saints make.

[thereasonableman]

The thing that is useful to keep in mind, is that historically, the position of the Eastern Orthodox in relation to Rome is not one of good faith. Absolutely everything that comes from Rome, pre and post-schism, that isn't directly tied to ecumenical councils, is considered garbage by more "traditional" EO people.

Beardless priests? Oh they're effeminate, ridiculous. Even though the point is to curtail pride, which EO attitudes neatly illustrate.

Unleavened bread for the Eucharistic Host? Clearly judaizing, even though Christ would certainly have used unleavened bread at the Last Supper since he perfectly followed the Mosaic Law.

Original Sin? That's barbaric and denies salvation for infant innocent children. At which point one might consider that if they don't think baptism is generally necessary for a child to be saved, so they're not really separated from God, and they don't believe in created infused grace, why do the EO even baptise infants?

Baptism by pouring and not submersion. Clearly inferior custom, even though both symbolise the same thing in different ways.

Church not being submissive to the ruler? Clearly the Popes were arrogant and wanted honors above their station! Even though the temporal should clearly submit to the spiritual, not the other way around.

Celibate priests? Exageration and rigidity, even though in the East a married man can be ordained a priest, but a priest cannot marry, and only unmarried priests can become bishops. So they absolutely know that celibacy is superior to marriage for the clergy.

Meditative prayer? Clearly dangerous and likely to lead to delusions and maybe even demonic influence. Even though clearly any Church Father would ponder and think about God and the Gospels. Presumably, I guess you can pray or think about God, not both at the same time.

Seriously, of course most EOs wouldn't admit it. But at some point, it's hard not to see that many of their more educated members that accept all this as true just hate everything Latin, and would only ever accept a Reunion if every single Latin tradition was obliterated.

My point is, thanks for the video, great information, but unfortunately I'm pretty sure the Orthobros don't care about your points and will keep on hating Rome and thomistic philosophy by proxy.

[TheTijuT]

Dear Classical Theist, you are doing a tremendous service to our Church. May God be with you in your own pilgrim journey towards your unique calling - a singular, particular and perfect synergestic participation in the life of the Most Holy Trinity.

May our Lord and our Blessed Mother give you comfort and bring you all the nourishment you need - material and spiritual - as you work on your mission.

[willbennett]

Would you have another conversation with Jay Dyer? He hasn’t really faced a strong representation of the Catholic position.

[CLARKA]

God bless you,
great video, this (created grace and how it’s reconciled with partaking of the divine nature) was a topic I had stumbled upon after watching your debate with jay dyer a number of years back. keep up the good work

[GeorgeGreen]

just gonna start hitting autoreplay to support my dude

[johnnotrealname]

First and only 13 minutes late, is this stand-alone? I have been looking for one of these so Thank You so much.

[realcoastalzoomer]

Thanks so much for all the content CT!

[igorlopes]

0:05
I love that "short little video" here means a 25 minute video lmao 😂😂😂😂

[Geego]

Sounds like uncreated grace through created means. Couldn't the problem be solved by referencing his infinity and avoid the mess of identifying actions with essence. I'm dumb though.

[igorlopes]

Now that we are talking about easterners, might I ask something? There is a post from the New Liturgical Movement site "The Theology of the Offertory - Part 4: an Ecumenical Problem" that claims that the byzantine Proskomedia does have a sacrificial theme (before the anaphora)

Verifying this claim might add good information for when you talk about the Offertory in the Novus Ordo series

[oggolbat]

Hey, I sent you a question about divine simplicity via email a few weeks ago, I don't know how often do you check it but I hope you see it. Have a blessed day!!

[michaeliannone]

Is time cyclical or linear? May be a good video topic I dont know. It came up in a convo with a friend, theres a lot there i think. Great video!

[igorlopes]

Could you eventually when you have time talk about non-thomistic approaches to Divine Simplicity that are not heretic? It would be a good video idea since it is important to know where exactly is the line that can't be crossed regarding the Doctrine of God

[josephscott]

As someone who is inclined to Orthodoxy and Classical Theism (including Divine Simplicity) I think its worth mentioning to distinguish Orthodox people, pundits, or theologians who say x. And orthodoxy as such. In the same way I wouldnt take the more progressive wings of catholic belief and critique their point as though they were what traditional Catholicism is. I think even Gregory Palamas shouldnt be read as though hes saying that the uncreated energies as different parts of God. I think its clear that when Orthodox talk about the God beyond being, they are not making just another metaphysical theory, but an epistemological one about the absolute limitation of man to perceieve the essence of God and about therefore the complete partiality and incompleteness of our philosophical statements about God. This is still even consistent with holding that God should be understood in the classically theistic mode. Orthodox would just be more hesitant about trusting the conclusions of philosophy about God, always emphasizing the sense to which God's Essence is beyond any of our positive statements about Him. A point St. Thomas, I think, would have agreed upon. In fact, the Orthodox approach is almost exemplified in that revelation that was so great before St. Thomas' death that made him say that everything he had written was straw in comparison to what had been revealed. The last thing Id say, I dont think the idea of beatific vision is bad per se, but the metaphor is off. It strikes me a bit too static. Something St. Sophrony says, at the beginning of, "On Prayer" is that "Prayer is infinite creation." Yknow St. Maximus had that phrase "Everymoving Repose." That is to say a rest that is always climbing and transcending to greater heights. Again, at least as far as I understand the concept, and I have not read St. Thomas extensively, the theology of the Beatific vision is fine from an Orthodox perspective. The metaphor is just a tad bit static and bkring for what really is as St Gregory of Nyssa says an Infinite outstretching of self-emptying love. Anyway, just wanted to say that I thought this was a very good video, and didnt see in it anything in contrast to Orthodox doctrine. From the Carholic tradition I'll leave one of my favorite quotes ever by

Thomas Merton:
What is serious to men is often very trivial in the sight of God. What in God might appear to us as "play" is perhaps what he Himself takes most seriously. At any rate, the Lord plays and diverts Himself in the garden of His creation, and if we could let go of our own obsession with what we think is the meaning of it all, we might be able to hear His call and follow Him in His mysterious, cosmic dance. We do not have to go very far to catch echoes of that game, and of that dancing. When we are alone on a starlit night; when by chance we see the migrating birds in autumn descending on a grove of junipers to rest and eat; when we see children in a moment when they are really children; when we know love in our own hearts; or when, like the Japanese poet Bashō we hear an old frog land in a quiet pond with a solitary splash--at such times the awakening, the turning inside out of all values, the "newness, " the emptiness and the purity of vision that make themselves evident, provide a glimpse of the cosmic dance.

For the world and time are the dance of the Lord in emptiness. The silence of the spheres is the music of a wedding feast. The more we persist in misunderstanding the phenomena of life, the more we analyze them out into strange finalities and complex purposes of our own, the more we involve ourselves in sadness, absurdity and despair. But it does not matter much, because no despair of ours can alter the reality of things; or stain the joy of the cosmic dance which is always there. Indeed, we are in the midst of it, and it is in the midst of us, for it beats in our very blood, whether we want it to or not.

Yet the fact remains that we are invited to forget ourselves on purpose, cast our awful solemnity to the winds and join in the general dance.

[RobertDryer]

Does simplicity preceded trinity, or does trinity preceded trinity, or are they congruent? If congruent then is there a theological preferred order?

[livingstranger]

What’s a good book that goes just above the basics of Thomistic metaphysics? I either get the basics or stuff that is too advanced.