scholarly journals Love in Dionysius the Areopagite and St Maximus the Confessor

2021 ◽  
pp. 123-137
Author(s):  
Andrew Louth
Keyword(s):  
Seventh Century ◽  
Sixth Century ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Love Of God ◽  
Cappadocian Fathers ◽  
Psychic Energy ◽  
The One ◽  
Maximus The Confessor

Love (erōs, agapē) is a fundamental category in the sixth-century Dionysius the Areopagite and the seventh-century Maximus the Confessor, the latter being confessedly dependant on the former, and both formative for the later Byzantine tradition. Both are indebted to earlier thinkers, both pagan thinkers such as Plato, Plotinus, and Proclus, and Christian thinkers such as Origen and the Cappadocian Fathers. Dionysius’s teaching on love presents a fundamentally metaphysical account, with cosmic entailments. He assimilates the two Greek words for love, erōs and agapē, seeing them both as manifestations of beauty and responses to beauty, and using them more or less interchangeably for the ecstatic love of God for the cosmos and the love that underlies the creatures’ return to union, to the One. Maximus shares Dionysius’s sense of love as metaphysical and cosmic, but his teaching is much more practical, and presents love as something that can be attained by the Christian or monk, though it requires genuine ascetic struggle. He makes more of a distinction between erōs and agapē than Dionysius, seeing erōs as perfecting the soul’s desire, while agapē perfects the soul’s thumos, psychic energy. Maximus’s understanding of the interrelated psychological makeup of the soul, influenced by Evagrius, though with its own characteristic emphases, also underlies his sense of what is meant by the restoration of the cosmos.

scholarly journals St Maximus the confessor’s teaching on movement

2013 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Vladimir Cvetkovic
Keyword(s):  
Christian Tradition ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Christian Philosophy ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Cappadocian Fathers ◽  
Maximus The Confessor ◽  
Supreme Being

The article aims to present how the Byzantine scholar St Maximus the Confessor perceived the notion of movement (kinesis). St Maximus exposed his teaching on movement in the course of his refutation of Origenism, which regarded the movement of created beings away from God as the cause of breaking the original unity that existed between the Creation and the Creator. By reversing Origen?s triad ?rest? - ?movement? - ?becoming? into the triad ?becoming? - ?movement? - ?rest?, St Maximus viewed the movement toward God as the sole goal of created beings, finding in the supreme being the repose of their own movement. In addition to the cosmological view of the movement, St Maximus developed a psychological and an ontological view on movement, relying on previous Christian tradition. By transforming and adapting Aristotelian and Neoplatonic notions to the basic principles of Christian metaphysics, St Maximus creates a new Christian philosophy of movement which he supported primarily with the views of the Cappadocian Fathers and Dionysius the Areopagite.

scholarly journals Toward the philosophy of creation: Maximus the confessor

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 127-155
Author(s):  
Vladimir Cvetkovic
Keyword(s):  
Seventh Century ◽  
Gregory Of Nyssa ◽  
The Core ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
The World ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Philosophical Argumentation ◽  
Doctrine Of Creation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Maximus The Confessor

The article aims to present the philosophical argumentation in favor of the Christian idea of the creation of the world exposed in the work of the seventh century author Maximus the Confessor. Maximus the Confessor developed his doctrine of creation on the basis of the philosophical arguments of his Christian predecessors, above all, Gregory of Nyssa, Nemesius of Emesa and Dionysius the Areopagite. The core of Maximus? argumentation on the creation of the world is similar to the position of the Alexandrian philosopher John Philoponus (6th century), but it is additionally enriched with ideas deriving from the works of the aforementioned Christian authors. Some of the ideas that form the scaffolding of Maximus? doctrine of creation are: the fivefold division of beings, which has its climax in the division between the created and uncreated nature, the movement of creatures towards God, who alone is the true goal of their movement, the eternal existence of the world in logoi as expressions of divine will, God?s providential care not only for the universal but also for the individual beings and the deification of the entire created world as the initial purpose of creation. Maximus? views on creation are conveyed in a language that combines Aristotelian, Stoic and Neoplatonist philosophical vocabulary.

God, Hierarchy, and Power

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley M. Purpura
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Historical Development ◽  
Spiritual Leadership ◽  
Sixth Century ◽  
Orthodox Christianity ◽  
Underlying Assumption ◽  
Divine Power ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Maximus The Confessor

What are the religious justifications for the historical development and maintenance of hierarchy as the model of ecclesiastical organization in Orthodox Christianity? Beginning with its Christian coinage by Dionysius the Areopagite in the early sixth century, this book explores the theological development of ecclesiastical “hierarchy” in Byzantium. By presenting case studies of historically disparate Byzantine theologians who draw upon Dionysius’s hierarchic conception and engage it theoretically, liturgically, and pragmatically—Maximus the Confessor, Niketas Stethatos, and Nicholas Cabasilas—this book suggests a common tradition of constructing authentic ecclesiastical hierarchy as foremost that which communicates divinity. It is by this conception that each author is able to affirm the divinizing potential of church order and sacramental validity even while negating the authority of those that may fail to function in a divinely imitative way. For all four Byzantine authors, including Dionysius, this interpretation of hierarchy relies on an underlying assumption that only divine power is believed to be authentic and only divinely reflective authority is legitimate. The authors suggest that true power is recognized paradoxically by humble service and kenotic self-giving. Constructing power, authority, and hierarchy in these ways has resonances in other genres within the tradition of Orthodox Christianity. The theological trajectory posited by the study of the four Byzantine authors reshapes several issues of spiritual leadership and ecclesial organization within contemporary Orthodoxy, provides insight for historians, and prompts rethinking the ways both secular and religious power are understood by modern theorists.

scholarly journals «One Energeia» in Cyril of Alexandria (Commentary on John 6, 53)

2021 ◽  
pp. 93-139
Author(s):  
Ханс Лоон ван ◽  
Феодор Юлаев
Keyword(s):  
Seventh Century ◽  
Cyril Of Alexandria ◽  
In Christ ◽  
The One ◽  
Maximus The Confessor

В настоящей статье анализируется одно выражение свт. Кирилла Александрийского (ок. 378-444). В своём «Толковании на Евангелие от Иоанна» (Ин. 6, 53) святитель, объясняя действие Евхаристии через сравнение с воскрешением дочери Иаира (Лк. 8, 53-54) посредством повеления Христа и протягивания Его руки, называет животворящую ἐνέργεια одной и сродной. В VII в. это место было введено моноэнергистами для доказательства того, что во Христе есть только одна ἐνέργεια. В статье сначала рассматривается, какое значение придавалось выражению «одна и сродная ἐνέργεια» различными поборниками моноэнергизма, прп. Максимом Исповедником (579/580-662), а также несколькими богословами Нового времени. После этого исследуется, что именно подразумевал сам свт. Кирилл, когда писал этот фрагмент. Автор приходит к выводу, что одна ἐνέργεια - это божественная ἐνέργεια, которая действует как через повеление, так и через прикосновение. Это не синтез божественной и человеческой энергий. Человеческая ἐνέργεια не упоминается в этом контексте, но из других мест становится ясным, что, согласно свт. Кириллу, Христос имеет также и человеческую ἐνέργεια. This article analyzes one expression of St. Cyril of Alexandria (c. 378-444). In his Commentary on John 6, 53, the archbishop elucidates the working of the Eucharist by comparing it with the raising of Jairus’s daughter through Christ’s command and the stretching of his hand. In this context St. Cyril calls the life-giving ἐνέργεια one and cognate. In the seventh century, this passage was adduced by the Monoenergists to argue that in Christ there was only one ἐνέργεια. In this article, at first it is studied what meaning was given to the phrase “one and cognate ἐνέργεια” by various Monoenergist protagonists, by Maximus the Confessor (579/80-662), and also by a few modern theologians. After that the author investigates what St. Cyril himself will have had in mind when he wrote this passage. He comes to the conclusion that the one ἐνέργεια is the divine ἐνέργεια, which is at work both through the command and through the touch. It is not a synthesis of the divine and human ἐνέργειαι. The human ἐνέργεια is not mentioned in this context, but from other passages it is made clear that according to St. Cyril, Christ also had a human ἐνέργεια.

scholarly journals The Divine Processions and the Divine Energies

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-70
Author(s):  
David Bradshaw ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Fourth Century ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
The Real ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
History Of ◽  
Real Importance ◽  
Cappadocian Fathers ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Maximus The Confessor

The concept of the divine energies (energeiai) is commonly associated with the late Byzantine theologian Gregory Palamas. In fact, however, it has biblical origins and figures prominently in Greek patristic theology from at least the fourth century. Here I briefly trace its history beginning with the Pauline usage of energeia and continuing through the Cappadocian Fathers, Dionysius the Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor, and Gregory Palamas. I argue that the divine processions in Dionysius function much as do the divine energies in the Cappadocians, although Dionysius enriches the concept by setting it within the context of a Neoplatonic pattern of procession and return. Dionysius’s own work was in need of a further synthesis in that he does not explain the relationship between the divine processions and the divine logoi, the “divine and good acts of will” by which God creates. Maximus the Confessor then introduced a further element into this complex tradition through his argument that certain “natural energies” must necessarily accompany any nature. I argue that the real importance of Palamas from the standpoint of the history of philosophy lies not in originating the concept of the divine energies, but in using it to synthesize these disparate elements from the Cappadocians, Dionysius, and Maximus.

scholarly journals Turbulent Ethnopolitical Processes in the Eastern Taurica in the Sixth and Seventh Centuries

2021 ◽  
pp. 71-89
Author(s):  
Viktor N. Zin’ko ◽  
Alexey V., Zin’ko
Keyword(s):  
Seventh Century ◽  
Sixth Century ◽  
Byzantine Empire ◽  
Urban Buildings ◽  
Seasonal Migrations ◽  
Archaeological Materials ◽  
Byzantine Period ◽  
Scanty Information ◽  
The One ◽  
Early Byzantine

This paper presents the results of archaeological researches allowing the one to reconstruct ethnopolitical processes in the eastern Taurica in the sixth and seventh centuries. By the sixth century, the eastern Crimean steppes were depopulated and used for seasonal migrations of the Hunnic tribes. The Byzantine Empire made a significant influence on the ethnopolitical processes in the Bosporos in the sixth and seventh centuries when annexed this country in 527/528. Archaeological researches supply scanty information about the urban buildings of the Bosporan capital in the sixth century. Alternative archaeological situation developed with the preserved Early Byzantine layers of the Bosporan town of Tyritake, where continuous many-year-long archaeological research uncovered large areas. According to the archaeological materials and a few epigraphic finds, Bosporan Greeks constituted the overwhelming majority of the population of Tyritake in the sixth century as before, being mostly the persons of moderate means, engaged in fishing and agricultural production, crafts and petty trade. After the raid of the Turks in 576, Bosporos and Tyritake declined, with only isolated residential houses reconstructed in certain areas in these towns; these houses lived to the third quarter of the seventh century when they were burned down by the Khazars. Bosporos constantly experienced the pressure from nomadic hordes, which, over the centuries, moved here and there, replacing each other, along the great tract of the steppes. The turbulence of ethnopolitical processes in the Eastern Taurica especially intensified in the Early Byzantine Period. Following the Khazar devastation, all the Bosporan settlements were depopulated, and the insignificant remnants of the former population concentrated in the fire-ravaged town of Bosporos, which for centuries became an out-of-the-way provincial town forming a part of different polities.

Mystical Theology and the Exegesis of Transfiguration in St. Maximus the Confessor

2019 ◽  
pp. 145-176
Author(s):  
Григорий Исаакович Беневич ◽  
Дмитрий Александрович Черноглазов
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Mystical Theology ◽  
The One ◽  
Maximus The Confessor

В статье рассматриваются толкования прп. Максимом Исповедником события Преображения Господня, которые сопоставляются с его учением о мистическом богословии. Доказывается, что Преображение созерцается прп. Максимом как своего рода «эйдос» или парадигма мистического богословия. Проводится сравнение некоторых ключевых понятий мистического богословия прп. Максима, с одной стороны, с «Ареопагитиками», а с другой - с учением свт. Григория Паламы. Сохраняя верность основным моментам учения «Ареопагитик», прп. Максим придаёт ему более отчетливое христологическое и опытно-антропологическое истолкование. Что касается учения свт. Григория Паламы, то, несмотря на некоторые отличия в терминологии (особенно понимания апофатики), экзегеза Преображения прп. Максима и его учение о мистическом богословии в целом могут быть согласованы с основными положениями Паламы. При этом необходимо помнить, что прп. Максим отвечал на иные вопросы, природа и характер восприятия Фаворского света не были в центре его внимания. The article discusses Maximus the Confessor’s interpretations of the Transfiguration of the Lord, which are compared to his doctrine of mystical theology. It proves that Transfiguration was contemplated by Maximus to be a kind of paradigm of mystical theology. A comparison of some key concepts of Maximus’s mystical theology is made, on the one hand, with that of the Corpus Areopagiticum, and on the other - with the teachings of St. Gregory Palamas. Remaining loyal to the main points of the teachings of the Areopagite, Maxim gave them a clearer Christological and experimental anthropological interpretation. As for the teachings of St. Gregory Palamas, despite some differences in terminology, (especially the understanding of apophaticism), Maximus’s exegesis of the Transfiguration and his doctrine of mystical theology as a whole can be reconciled with the main provisions of Palamas. At the same time, it is necessary to remember that Maximus answered other questions, the nature and character of the perception of the light of Thabor was not at the centre of his discussion.

Secular Monograms, Social Status, and Authority in the Late Roman World and Early Byzantium

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ildar Garipzanov
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Social Power ◽  
Fifth Century ◽  
Seventh Century ◽  
Sixth Century ◽  
Late Antique ◽  
Imperial Authority ◽  
Christian Culture ◽  
Noble Identity ◽  
Late Roman

This chapter examines the use of monograms as graphic signs of imperial authority in the late Roman and early Byzantine empire, from its appropriation on imperial coinage in the mid-fifth century to its employment in other material media in the following centuries. It also overviews the use of monograms by imperial officials and aristocrats as visible signs of social power and noble identity on mass-produced objects, dress accessories, and luxury items. The concluding section discusses a new social function for late antique monograms as visible tokens of a new Christian paideia and of elevated social status, related to ennobling calligraphic skills. This transformation of monograms into an attribute of visual Christian culture became especially apparent in sixth-century Byzantium, with the cruciform monograms appearing in the second quarter of the sixth century and becoming a default monogrammatic form from the seventh century onwards.

After Chalcedon

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian E. Daley, SJ
Keyword(s):  
Eighth Century ◽  
Seventh Century ◽  
The Third ◽  
John Of Damascus ◽  
Perceived Impact ◽  
Orthodox Theology ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Maximus The Confessor ◽  
Severus Of Antioch

The Council of Chalcedon’s definition of the terms in which Nicene orthodoxy should conceive of Christ’s person remained controversial. Leontius of Byzantium argued for the correctness of the Council’s formulation, especially against the arguments of Severus of Antioch, but suggested that more than academic issues were at stake: the debate concerned the lived, permanently dialectical unity between God and humanity. In the mid-seventh century, imperially sponsored efforts to lessen the perceived impact of Chalcedonian language by stressing that Christ’s two natures were activated by “a single, theandric energy,” also remained without effect: largely because of the monk Maximus “the Confessor”, who argued that two complete spheres of activity and two wills remained evident in Christ’s life. Maximus’s position was ratified at the Lateran Synod and at the Third Council of Constantinople. The eighth-century Palestinian monk John of Damascus incorporated these arguments into his own influential synthesis of orthodox theology.

scholarly journals Hiketeia

1973 ◽  
Vol 93 ◽  
pp. 74-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Gould
Keyword(s):  
Dominant Role ◽  
Ancient Greece ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
The Other ◽  
Sixth Century ◽  
Dead Body ◽  
Greek Literature ◽  
The World ◽  
The One ◽  
Working Out

To Professor E. R. Dodds, through his edition of Euripides'Bacchaeand again inThe Greeks and the Irrational, we owe an awareness of new possibilities in our understanding of Greek literature and of the world that produced it. No small part of that awareness was due to Professor Dodds' masterly and tactful use of comparative ethnographic material to throw light on the relation between literature and social institutions in ancient Greece. It is in the hope that something of my own debt to him may be conveyed that this paper is offered here, equally in gratitude, admiration and affection.The working out of the anger of Achilles in theIliadbegins with a great scene of divine supplication in which Thetis prevails upon Zeus to change the course of things before Troy in order to restore honour to Achilles; it ends with another, human act in which Priam supplicates Achilles to abandon his vengeful treatment of the dead body of Hector and restore it for a ransom. The first half of theOdysseyhinges about another supplication scene of crucial significance, Odysseus' supplication of Arete and Alkinoos on Scherie. Aeschylus and Euripides both wrote plays called simplySuppliants, and two cases of a breach of the rights of suppliants, the cases of the coup of Kylon and that of Pausanias, the one dating from the mid-sixth century, the other from around 470 B.C. or soon after, played a dominant role in the diplomatic propaganda of the Spartans and Athenians on the eve of the Peloponnesian War.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document