Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite

2011 ◽  
pp. 86-103
Author(s):  
Paul L. Gavrilyuk
Keyword(s):  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius

Three Ways to Imitate Paul in Late Antiquity: Ekstasis, Ekphrasis, Epektasis

2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-117
Author(s):  
Michael Motia
Keyword(s):  
Late Antiquity ◽  
Meaning Making ◽  
Gregory Of Nyssa ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
John Chrysostom ◽  
Heaven And Earth ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius ◽  
Scholarly Attention

AbstractRobert Orsi’s argument that religion, more than a system of “meaning making,” is a “network of relationships between heaven and earth” helps us understand what is at stake in imitation for early Christians. The question for Orsi is not, “What does it mean to imitate Paul?” as much as it is, “In what kind of relationship is one engaged when one imitates Paul?” Christians argue over both what to imitate (Who is Paul?) and how to imitate (How should Christians relate to Paul in order to be like him or to render him present?). The what has received lots of scholarly attention; this paper focuses on the how. I compare the range of possibilities of how to imitate Paul by focusing on three influential accounts of mimesis: Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (ekstasis), John Chrysostom (ekphrasis), and Gregory of Nyssa (epektasis).

Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite

2011 ◽  
pp. 1087-1089
Author(s):  
Simo Knuuttila ◽  
David Piché ◽  
Pieter De Leemans ◽  
Stephen F. Brown ◽  
Fabrizio Amerini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius

scholarly journals Isaiah of Serra: a Serbian writer and translator from the 14th century

2020 ◽  
pp. 33-36
Author(s):  
Lidia K. Gavryushina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Historical Evidence ◽  
14Th Century ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Original Essay ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius

The article deals with Isaiah, the Serbian Athonite monk from the 14th century, translator of the corpus of theological works by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (5th century) from Greek into Slavic. In 1349, he apparently became Abbot of the Panteleimon monastery on the Mount Athos. He was close to the Serbian rulers and sometimes acted on their behalf as a diplomat. In 1375, he was able to assist the Serbian Church in reconciling it with the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Isaiah was also the author of a brief original essay The Story of the destruction of Macedonia by the Turks . It is found in the preface to the translation of Areopagitums and is the only piece of literary and historical evidence of the battle of the Serbs with the Turks on the Maritsa river in 1371.

“Remaining” as the Natural Expression of the Ontological Monism in Proclus and Pseudodionysius the Areopagite

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 2-19
Author(s):  
Christos Ath. Terezis ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Production Process ◽  
Comparative Investigation ◽  
The State ◽  
Middle Phase ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
The One ◽  
Natural Expression ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius

This study is a comparative investigation of Proclus’ and Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite’s positions about “remaining” as demonstrative of the ontological monism. Focusing the attention, first of all, to the Neoplatonist philosopher, who represents polytheism, it comes that “remaining” indicates the state of standstill and unchangeability of those beings which are able to function as productive principles. Thus, a transcendental and a productive plane are identified, a parameter which combines the apophatic with the affirmative approaches. The theory about “unparticipated-participated-participating” brings to the light a middle phase between “remaining” and “procession”, in order the relation “one-multitude” to develop. In Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, “remaining” appears in two planes: a) the transcendent One, which does not take part in the production process, b) the One which includes all the beings in the form of archetypical reasons. Note that this is not an eternal co-existence or an ontological identification of the beings with the One’s substance or a transition from the first One to the second, as Proclus suggests. Pseudo-Dionysius just describes the providential function of the One, which is manifested owing to its goodness. In conclusion, the main difference between the two thinkers is how they conceive the notion of “metaphysical multitude”: in Proclus, it indicates a hierarchy of beings, while, in Pseudo-Dionysius, it expresses the inner richness of the unity. In both the worldviews though, the ontological prospect which is formed is actually an optimistic one.

Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite

1962 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-59
Author(s):  
Kevin F. Doherty ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius

scholarly journals Medytacyjny charakter Nabożnych westchnień Mikołaja Mieleszki

2016 ◽  
pp. 325-349
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Kaczor-Scheitler
Keyword(s):  
Spiritual Transformation ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Ignatius Of Loyola ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius

The article points to a relationship between Mikołaj Mieleszko’s Nabożne westchnienia and meditations, and shows the meditative character of the baroque emblematic works. It also presents the division of the work into three books introduced by Mieleszko, which can be referred to the model of a three-stage mystical way to God (via purgativa, via illuminativa, via unitiva), used by St. Ignatius of Loyola (but knowing by Pseudo-Dionysius The Areopagite and fully expressed by St. Bonaventure). Moreover, it discusses the participation of human faculties in the emblems: memory, intellect, will, imagination, and feelings, which are so important for the act of meditation. Above all, emphasis is put on the goal of the reflections presented by Mieleszko in the subscriptio; they were supposed to touch the soul and convince one to a spiritual transformation. They were, therefore, just like meditations, a way of achieving inner growth.

scholarly journals Being Alive, Living a Life. The Unity of the Concept of Life in Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite

Verbum Vitae ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 1007-1024
Author(s):  
Tomasz Stępień
Keyword(s):  
Main Principle ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
The Times ◽  
The One ◽  
Ontological Sense ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius ◽  
The Universe ◽  
The Trinity ◽  
Platonic Tradition

The writings of Corpus Dionysiacum present a concept of life which is different from the one that we profess nowadays. Its view is backed up mainly by the Platonic tradition, which since the times of Plato has tended to see life as an intellectual principle. Therefore, in the Neoplatonic system we can find the conviction that life, in its fullest sense, is intellectual and at its peak is a vision of the One. In the system of Proclus, life, apart from being a principle, is also a god and the main principle of the whole world of intellectual and intellective gods. Pseudo-Dionysius in his writings exploits the concept of the unparticipable and participable principle, and since God is for him Trinity completely beyond participation and knowledge, the divine names play the role of participable henads. However, for Dionysius, names are neither hypostases nor living gods, which is clearly visible in case of the name of Life. All things participate in the name of life and in this name God is the only principle of life in the universe. However, life is not a property to own, but rather a constant struggle to approach the Trinity. Therefore, by committing a sin, an angel or a man loses life, which in the case of a man can be regained through sacramental activity. An analysis of the thoughts of Pseudo-Dionysius reveals a conception of life which is unified contrary to its shattered modern understanding. While biological, mental, moral lives fundamentally differ for us, for Dionysius those are merely aspects of the same thing, and therefore in his view life can be lost and regained not only in the metaphorical, but also the ontological sense.

Varieties of Neopatristics

2020 ◽  
pp. 527-542
Author(s):  
Paul L. Gavrilyuk
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Focal Points ◽  
Liturgical Theology ◽  
Church Fathers ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Pavel Florensky ◽  
Liturgical Practice ◽  
Pseudo Dionysius ◽  
The Church ◽  
Organizing Principles

The chapter argues that the twentieth-century neopatristic theologies were not purely historical exercises, but theologically motivated enterprises. More specifically, Georges Florovsky’s ‘neopatristic synthesis’ was a response to his ‘modernist’ predecessors, such as Pavel Florensky and Sergius Bulgakov. The organizing principle of Florovsky’s neopatristics was Chalcedonian Christology. In contrast, Vladimir Lossky’s reconstruction of ‘mystical theology’ had the vision of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and Gregory Palalmas as two focal points. It is argued that Alexander Schmemann’s liturgical theology may be likewise considered as a version of neopatristic theology with the emphasis on liturgical practice, and especially the eschatological dimension of the Eucharist, as the primary locus of theologizing. Thus, neopatristic theology cannot be regarded as a monolithic entity, but as a conglomerate of distinct theological visions, each with their own methods and organizing principles, which took as their inspiration the concept of a ‘return to the Church Fathers’ and creative appropriation of patristic heritage.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document