Instances of epistemological confusion between academic and ecclesiastical theological edification

  1. Lemma
  2. Φαινόμενα επιστημολογικής σύγχυσης ακαδημαϊκής και εκκλησιαστικής θεολογικής παιδείας
  3. Greek, Modern (1453-)
  4. Koutalis, Vangelis
  5. Integration - Patristic studies - Orthodox Anthropology - Orthodox gnosiology - Mysticism and Orthodox spiritual experience - Sources of knowledge (empiricism/rationalism) - Modern physics :QM - Status of theology
  6. 26-02-2017
  7. Instances of epistemological confusion between academic and ecclesiastical theological edification
  8. YouTube
  9. ecclesiastical theology - academic theology - Orthodox doctrine of the Uncreated and the Created (Άκτιστο-Κτιστό) - charismatic knowledge - ontology - Physics - Cybernetics
  10. Πλατφόρμα Τηλεκπαίδευσης ΕΚΠΑ - YouTube - Ἀντίφωνο - Scribd - Ζωηφόρος
    1. <p>Tsitsigkos, S. K. [Τσιτσίγκος, Σ. Κ.] (2010). <em>Φαινόμενα επιστημολογικής σύγχυσης ακαδημαϊκής και εκκλησιαστικής θεολογικής παιδείας</em> [Transcript of a presentation made at the scientific meeting Ηθική διαφθορά και παιδεία, organized by the Holy Metropolis of Chalkida, 23/01/2010, available from].</p>
    1. According to the lecturer, the knowledge of God is twofold, cognitive (either cataphatic or apophatic) and charismatic, in accordance with the twofold reality of God, the unknowable, hidden God and the knowable, revealed God. This distinction, of knowing through reason and knowing through the heart, is also reflected in the distinction between the academic and the ecclesiastical theology. Distinguishing, however, between different kinds of theological knowledge is not the same as separating them and representing them as opposite poles. Instead of any ontological and gnoseological dualism, the method and the object of knowledge are common in both cases, since the Orthodox doctrine of the Uncreated and the Created, as well as that of the Synergy, do not imply a radical differentiation of God from the world. Quite the opposite: the Uncreated energies of God permeate the created universe. In the Patristic tradition, the scientific knowledge of nature, far from being rejected, is evaluated as a source for theological knowledge. What is actually rejected is its elevation into an exclusive path of knowing.

      Modern epistemology points out that there can be no definite and stable demarcation of science from non-science, of facts from values. The lecturer argues that theology may well be seen as possessing all the distinctive features of a science proper. The ecclesiastical doctrines could be compared to the scientific paradigms and the ecclesiastical history to the theoretical production and progress of historically evolving bodies of knowledge. Theology also, just as physics, is grounded on “reiterating discursive normativities (laws)”. Just as cybernetics, it employs symbolic language. Similarly, the research method pertaining to theology has two branches, one that is theoretical, involving the study of the sources of divine revelation and one that is practical, involving the testimonies of the living tradition. To be sure, theological knowledge is not objective. Neither is the knowledge produced by the natural sciences, strictly speaking, such. In both cases, knowledge is ‘objective-subjective’ and its acquisition presupposes the effective, respectively, educational and moral preparation of the knowing subjects.