theologoumena

[jgress]

Dear all,

What do people understand by the term "theologoumenon"? I have heard this term employed a lot, but its meaning remains unclear to me, at least in its current usage. Does it mean a doctrine that is not supported by a patristic consensus, but disputed by the Fathers? Or can it also mean a doctrine that may or may not be heretical, but on which the Church has not yet pronounced with a definitive voice (i.e. through a conciliar decision)? I am asking because from some quarters I hear that, e.g. theistic evolutionism and the Romanidean teaching on original sin are heresies, and from other quarters that they are only "theologoumena".

In Christ

Jonathan

[Maria]

Dear all,

What do people understand by the term "theologoumenon"? I have heard this term employed a lot, but its meaning remains unclear to me, at least in its current usage. Does it mean a doctrine that is not supported by a patristic consensus, but disputed by the Fathers? Or can it also mean a doctrine that may or may not be heretical, but on which the Church has not yet pronounced with a definitive voice (i.e. through a conciliar decision)? I am asking because from some quarters I hear that, e.g. theistic evolutionism and the Romanidean teaching on original sin are heresies, and from other quarters that they are only "theologoumena".

In Christ

Jonathan

The term "theologoumenon" is often applied to disputed teachings that have not been declared dogmas in Orthodox Christianity, and probably will not.

For example, the teaching on Toll Houses is considered to be a theologoumenon. Many Russian Orthodox accept Toll Houses as valid and they quote from saints and from their Holy Services as proof, while Greek Orthodox believe that the concept of Toll Houses either borders on heresy or is a heresy.

[joasia]

Can it also mean a personal opinion? I mean, we know what is absolute dogma and Orthodox teachings, but there are views that fall in between.

The question is, what "quarters" are saying what. What are their goals in believing that particular view? I believe that the Fathers, being saints, had a consensus of all the right theology that God wants us to understand. I really haven't read anything that the Fathers disagreed on. But, I think there is a level of interpretation of their explanations that may take it beyond what they really meant.

I think the Fathers knew exactly what is true, but we people who live in this century are causing unnecessary confusion. We think too much and we are not the Fathers.

In Christ,
Joanna

[JHunt777]

As far as I know, the term "theologoumenon" is not found anywhere in the writings of the Holy Fathers, but is rather a term that was made popular by the liberal Protestant theologian Adolf von Harnack in his 7 volume History of Dogma, circa 1885.

[Maria]

Can it also mean a personal opinion? I mean, we know what is absolute dogma and Orthodox teachings, but there are views that fall in between.

The question is, what "quarters" are saying what. What are their goals in believing that particular view? I believe that the Fathers, being saints, had a consensus of all the right theology that God wants us to understand. I really haven't read anything that the Fathers disagreed on. But, I think there is a level of interpretation of their explanations that may take it beyond what they really meant.

I think the Fathers knew exactly what is true, but we people who live in this century are causing unnecessary confusion. We think too much and we are not the Fathers.

In Christ,
Joanna

Yes, certain people have caused serious dissension and confusion regarding theologoumena.

For example, AB Lazar Puhalo is the formerly deposed Deacon Lev of the ROCOR. The ROCOR deposed Deacon Lev because of his persistent teachings against Father Seraphim Rose and his Toll House teachings. What really caused the ROCOR Synod to take notice was the unhealthy dissension that was being created by this former Deacon Lev. Unfortunately, AB Lazar (who has changed his last name three times) was accepted into the ranks of the retired OCA hierarchs in 2003. Thus, he has the capacity to continue creating unholy uproars and damage the image of the Orthodox Church. If people listen to him, read his internet postings, or purchase his books, they could easily conclude that we all are a bunch of crackpots.

[jgress]

As far as I know, the term "theologoumenon" is not found anywhere in the writings of the Holy Fathers, but is rather a term that was made popular by the liberal Protestant theologian Adolf von Harnack in his 7 volume History of Dogma, circa 1885.

Really? That's interesting. It's true that e.g. Fr Michael Pomazansky's book Orthodox Dogmatic Theology does not mention the term, as far as I can see.

[jgress]

Then again, I think there has to be room for the concept of an idea that is not dogmatic and for which there is no patristic consensus. E.g. whether or not angels can physically mix with women. Just because the term itself is of non-Orthodox origin is not sufficient to reject the concept that the word signifies.