This is Life!: Revolutions Around the Cruciform Axis

The book to get on the problem is Joseph Farrell's, Free Choice in St. Maximus the Confessor.

Reference Perry and my blog Energies of the Trinity at:

http://energies.coffeeconversations.com/

We shred this problem all the time.

Daniel

Perry's right - the Farrell book absolutely rocks. Nothing could do more to heal the theological divisions among western Christians (and bring all of them closer together with the Christian East) than for the thought of St Maximos Confessor to be better known in the West and for her theologians to engage him. Farrell makes a good start in this direction.

I whole-heartedly agree with Chris and Perry about Ferrell's book. It not only gives Maximus' theology of the will, but also contrasts it with that of Augustine and the west. As an added bonus, it provides the best explanation I have ever seen as to why the filioque is so vehemently argued against. Unfortunately, it is out of print so it is difficult to find. For a brief outline of Maximus’ view of free will, check out
http://www.monachos.net/patristics/maximus_freewill.shtml

I was fortunate to have professor Farrell as a philosophy professor in college. Another of his works is his translation of the "Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit" by St. Photious the Great. His long introduction to the problem of the filioque and it's neoplatonic roots in Blessed Augustine’s thought is itself worth the price of the book. Someone who reminds me of professor Farrell in several ways is David Hart (of "Beauty of the Infinite", First Things). They both have the ability to drill down into the heart of subtle metaphysical questions...

Okay! Okay! I hear you all! ;-)

I've finally acquired, through the power of my university connections and a library card, a loaned copy of Farrell's book. I'll be devouring it greedily!

Thanks one and all.

If I may add my 2 cents-

Soteriology is important, but it has little redeeming value :)

Eschatology is extremely important...but its not the end of the world :)

For your reading pleasure, me response

http://kevin.seattleblogs.org/archives/000473.html

Wow. I feel like a witness to one of those great debates in the middle ages. Perry, Clifton and John have done tremendous work here; not to
dismiss others who've added to this book-length debate!

I was a Calvinist for 15 years before becoming EO. In the last few of those 15 years into Reformed theology I concluded that some of the
darkest and brightest contributions to Calvinism were Dutch. On the positive side they understood that God's law applies equally to all created things and went on to develop an impressive ontology. Abraham Kuyper's "Lectures on Calvinism" and Herman Dooyeweerd's "New Critique
of Theoretical Thought" are milestones in that tradition. And they aren't alone. John Murray of Westminster seminary, for example, had the wisdom to avoid arbitrary moralism, and seeing moral principles derived from ontological givens he gave lectures that were eventually bound into book form, his "Principles of Conduct".

Unfortunately, Calvinism was forged in an oven fueled by epistemological skepticism, biblicism, Scottish Common Sense Realism, an anthropology of depravity (Augustine), and a feudal moral theory
centering on honor and retribution (Anselm). It's hard to say how much Jerome's faulty translation of Romans 5:12 contributed, but we still hear in many of John's arguments faithful refrains of a very old song. William J. Abraham thoroughly documents the pathology of this uniquely
western problem in "Canon and Criterion in Christian Theology".

Unfortunately, there's no way we can avoid talking past one another when we're working on entirely different problems but using the same
terms. Either Calvinists have to spend more time in the fathers of the east or the EO types have to steep long enough in Reformed dogmatics
to get infected with their passion for God's sovereignty.

To be perfectly candid, I think most Calvinists idolize God's law and are dreadfully fuzzy about God's grace.

Clifton: I just want to take this time to say, "I told you so." Kevin never gives up.

Ryan:

Hey, in this case, that's great! ;-) I don't want him to give up. The conversation's just getting good.

Don't worry. As I've demonstrated, I can simply stop the conversation if I want to by not conversing anymore.

It's great to see all these links here -- thanks for the compilation! I regret that circumstances conspired to yank me out of the conversation, but I'm glad it has continued. Maybe I will drop in again.

Darren:

Believe me, we hope that you can drop in again. Our prayers continue to remain with you.