Introduction: Challenge of Hierarchy for Orthodoxy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley M. Purpura
Keyword(s):  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Historical Understanding ◽  
Orthodox Christianity ◽  
Power Theory ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Situational Contexts ◽  
Orthodox Theology ◽  
Maximus The Confessor ◽  
Historical Periods

This chapter introduces the question of “Why hierarchy?” The importance of answering this question is contextualized in relation to the ways Orthodox Christianity has historically addressed issues of ecclesiastical inclusion, exclusion, and power dynamics. After briefly introducing the Byzantine origins and theological development of the term “hierarchy,” this chapter acquaints the reader with the four main subjects of the book: Dionysius the Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor, Niketas Stethatos, and Nicholas Cabasilas. Although these authors span different historical periods and situational contexts they share common consideration of hierarchy in theoretical, liturgical, and practical contexts. This chapter suggest that reading the ways these authors develop and navigate ecclesiastical hierarchies in their own writings and lives can help develop an Orthodox theology of power which has resonances with modern developments in power theory and illumines present-day Christian concerns. The chapter concludes by suggesting that the insights to be gained from critically examining “hierarchy” have significance for rethinking contemporary ecclesiastical challenges and the historical understanding of ecclesiastical identities.

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.

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 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.

Thearchical Power in Theory and Practice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley M. Purpura
Keyword(s):  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Orthodox Christianity ◽  
Divine Power ◽  
Ecclesiastical Administration ◽  
Power And Authority

This chapter offers a cumulative reflective analysis of power as indicated by the Byzantines to identify authentic power with divinity, describe this divine power as paradoxical in nature, and construct hierarchy as the appropriate means of mediating and participating in true power. The four authors suggest that giving priority to divinely originated (thearchical) power—rather than providing an additional over-idealized framework of ecclesiastical administration—provides a foundation for rereading the power dynamics of Orthodox Christianity. The synthesis offered in this chapter suggests that the hierarchical discontinuities between ideology and practice are paradoxically complicated and ameliorated when hierarchy is constructed as the only means of mediating divine power. The Byzantine theologians suggest that authentic hierarchy mediates, produces, and ascribes power to its participants in a way that is believed to be uniquely communicative of, and conducive to, divine similitude. This conception of hierarchy, power, and authority poses challenges for contemporary power theorists and historians as well as theologians.

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.

scholarly journals Augustine's Paradigm 'ab exterioribus ad interiora, ab inferioribus ad superiora' in the Western and Eastern Christian Mysticism

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-107
Author(s):  
Alexey Fokin
Keyword(s):  
Christian Spirituality ◽  
Augustine Of Hippo ◽  
Christian Mysticism ◽  
Eastern Christianity ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Inner Self ◽  
History Of ◽  
Self Knowledge ◽  
Theological Thought ◽  
Maximus The Confessor

I argue that St. Augustine of Hippo was the first in the history of Christian spirituality who expressed a key tendency of Christian mysticism, which implies a gradual intellectual ascent of the human soul to God, consisting of the three main stages: external, internal, and supernal. In this ascent a Christian mystic proceeds from the knowledge of external beings to self-knowledge (from outward to inward), and from his inner self to direct mystical contemplation of God (from inward to higher). Similar doctrines may be found in the writings of the Greek Fathers (Great Cappadocians, Dionysius the Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor, etc.). Although there are many similarities in the overall doctrine and in particular details between them, it does not imply the direct impact of Augustine’s theological thought on the Greek Fathers but rather the influence of the Neoplatonic philosophy on both Western and Eastern Christianity, in particular, of Plotinus’ theory of intellectual cognition.

Spațiul sacru în biserica creștină de tradiție bizantină. Trei perspective

Transilvania ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 86-90
Author(s):  
Ancuța-Maria Ilie
Keyword(s):  
Christian Faith ◽  
Spiritual Meaning ◽  
Sacred Spaces ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Dionysius The Areopagite ◽  
Symbolic Meanings ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Maximus The Confessor ◽  
The Church ◽  
Holy Place

The creation of sacred spaces has played a central role during the evolution of christian faith and culture. The main source of inspiration has been the word of the Bible which describes the design of the Holy Place as told by God to the chosen ones at various times. The divine models have been filled with symbolic meanings by Holy Fathers and Byzantine theologians. Thus, the understanding of their writings and the Holy Bible come first when analysing the sacred spaces of the Eastern Church. This article presents the main concepts regarding the Church, it’s architecture and spiritual meaning, of three Byzantine thinkers – Dionysius the Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor and Symeon of Thessalonike.

Principii de hermeneutică biblică la Sfântul Maxim Mărturisitorul

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 377-393
Author(s):  
Gina Luminița Scarlat
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Sixth Century ◽  
Biblical Exegesis ◽  
Biblical Hermeneutics ◽  
History Of ◽  
Orthodox Theology ◽  
Maximus The Confessor ◽  
Research Studies

St. Maximus the Confessor excelled in four interpretative directions of the Orthodox theology: biblical, dogmatic, spiritual and liturgica. Better known as adogmatist involved in Christological disputes since the beginning of the sixth century, St. Maximus is less studies in terms of his contribution to the history of Eastern biblical hermeneutics. The research studies of his exegetical work are reduced numerically comparad to those that emphasiye his quality as a dogmatic, philocalic and liturgical theologian. And this may be due to the fact that St. Maximus the Confessor has not fully commented on any Old or New Testament book. In this study, the emphasis is on highlighting the hermeneutic principles used by St. Maximus especially in the works of biblical exegesis.

Psyche and Creation: Initial Reflections on Orthodox Theology and Depth Psychology

2019 ◽  
pp. 19-39
Author(s):  
Pia Sophia Chaudhari
Keyword(s):  
Depth Psychology ◽  
Orthodox Christianity ◽  
Depth Psychological ◽  
Orthodox Theology

This chapter maps the territory for inclusion of the psyche, as understood in depth psychological terms, in discussions of salvation and healing. It utilizes a case study to illustrate the possible depths of transformation a person can undergo. It also notes and briefly addresses areas of difference between Orthodox Christianity and depth psychology.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document