"We must insist on the full ontological reality of Ousia-Sophia. This is no mere self-determination of the personal God; Ousia, and therefore Sophia, exists for God and in God, as his subsistent divinity. Yet here is no “fourth Hypostasis”; we do not transform the Holy Trinity into a quaternity, but merely recognize precisely in the Ousia the divinity of God a principle “other” than his hypostases." What did he mean by this?
>>25404549That the essence of wisdom is part of god the same as any other part as far as we recognise such, but not in the way god is a trinity being, rather, it's just part of the substrate of divinity of each part.Presumably the guy either a gnostic or feeling around the edges of it, it has that sort of pong.
>>25404549>Yet here is no “fourth Hypostasis”; we do not transform the Holy Trinity into a quaternity, but merely recognize precisely in the Ousia the divinity of God a principle “other” than his hypostases.Sounds like the nonsensical mental gymnastics of the Trinity is being fused with an additional layer of Sophia autism.
sounds like a secret mason/kabbalist doing their thing
>>25404549I think he hypostasizes the relationship between the Persons of the Trinity as the hypostasis of Sophia that is not a Person, but it is a hypostasis somehow.
