Grammar of Theology: Logical Argumentation from Origen to the Cappadocian Fathers, in Vox Patrum 37, 2017. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Grammar of theology: logical argumentation from Origen to the Cappadocian Fathers
Vox Patrum
The article outlines the philosophical and linguistic background of the Post- Nicene theological debates concerning the relationship between the Father and the Son. A sharp focus dwells of the provenance of the term hypostasis, the philosophical and grammatical understanding of the terms hypokeimenon and ousia and the Stoic definition of the signifier and thing signified. The article shows new aspects of the anti-Eunomian polemics of the Cappadocian fathers, which come into sight due to comparison of theological concepts with Hellenic linguistic and grammatical theories. In such a way, the comparison demonstrates methodological and technical strand of the theological argumentation of the Cappadocian fathers and their affinity for the exegetic methodology of Origen.
Vox Patrum
In the paper our attention is focused on the way in which both Saint Basil of Caesarea and his opponent, the anomoian Eunomius of Cyzicus, integrate in their theological thought the philosophical teaching about the formation of concepts (™p…noia) in human mind and their relation to the external objects. Our inquiry will provide the evidence that the two theologians are acquainted with the same philosophical material concerning human mind’s concepts; nevertheless each of them opted to use a different element from the related philosophical traditions in order to provide support to different theological purposes. Eunomius’ rationalistic doctrine of God’s knowledge, which goes hand in hand with his account of human language and mind, prompted Saint Basil to advance an empirical epistemological view that both makes possible a talk about God based on sense data and keeps fully intact the transcendence of God’s essence.
Apodictic and Dialectical Reasoning in Gregory Palamas and Their Aristotelian Sources
Mikonja Knezeviz (ed.), Aristotle in Byzantium, “St. Sebastian Orthodox Press”, Alhambra, Los Angeles 2020, 301-323
In this paper we investigate how Gregory Palamas understands the difference between apodictic and dialectical reasoning, as well as the priority he gives to the former in matters of Christianity. Using philosophical thought and, mostly, Aristotelian thought, the foundation of any of his arguments is solid: man cannot understand the divine essence, but he can describe the ad extra manifestations of God through apodictic syllogisms. Regarding the structure of our study, it consists of four subsections. In the first, we discuss the ontological conditions and the scientific range of apodictic and dialectical reasoning and we come to the conclusion that the former, in contrast to the latter, is characterized by objectivity. In the second subsection, we elaborate the four data on which dialectical reasoning is based and conclude that, according to Gr. Palamas, any limits can only be applied in the field of creation. In the third subsection on dialectical reasoning and on true theological propositions, we attempt to approach the methodological and conceptual questions that Gr. Palamas raises regarding the apodictic and the dialectical method. In the last subsection, we briefly present the impasses of the Platonic and Aristotelian theory based on the Christian criterion and highlight the importance of the middle term according to Gr. Palamas for the correctness of a syllogism. It becomes clear that the hesychast theologian manages to combine in an exceptional way the theories of Plato and Aristotle and to participate in a special way in the formation of the Orthodox Christian Epistemology.
"Who was the greatest Church Father? A philosophical dispute of the 11th century", Βυζαντινός Δόμος 29 (2021) 145-161, 2021
The article offers an insight into a peculiar cultural event, the philosophical dispute of the 11th century. The lack of references to it in the extant sources indicates that this dispute was not the biggest one that ever happened in Byzantium and renders a detailed and complete reformulation of the dispute unattainable. Nevertheless, taking the narrations of the extant Synaxaria for the 30th of January into consideration and focusing on interesting strands of this controversy, such as the “sinner” John Chrysostom, the participation of Michael Psellos and the curious vision of John Mavropous, I shed light over intriguing and unknown aspects of this peculiar philosophical conflict. Furthermore, my research contributes to the discussion about the reception of the Three Hierarchs and their works during the last part of the 11th century.
Patterns of Biblical Exegesis in the Cappadocian Fathers
: S.T. Kimborough. (ed) Orthodox and Wesleyan Spirituality Vol 2. (Biblical Theology – Papers of the Orthodox-Methodist International Theological Consultation. Crete. 2002). SVS Press. 2006. , 2006
In this lecture 1 I would like to consider some fundamental principles involved in the Early Church's use of the Scriptures, and to demonstrate their continuity in some of the classical Greek Fathers. I begin my remarks with a brief consideration of the Kerygmatic proclamation of the apostolic period, and then move on to consider some exegetical patterns among the Cappadocians. Much modern comment on the patristic approach to biblical interpretation has been obsessed with fixing them as Antiochenes or Alexandrians, a scholarly categorisation that derives from the fifties of the previous century. It is abundantly clear, however, even from a cursory reading of the great fourth century exegetes, that they do not follow these rules of being literalists or allegorists which we imposed on them 2. The strong 'Antiochene-Alexandrian' divide has meant that much patristic scholarship has begun its consideration of Greek exegesis from the starting point of hermeneutical method rather than that of exegetical principle, which was what most concerned the Fathers as theologians. An important case in point is the Cappadocian exegetes who are simultaneously, and unrepentantly, Alexandrians and Antiochenes, and who each advanced deep considerations on what it is that constitutes the authentic Christian use of the scriptures. The Scripture Principle of the Early Kerygma. In a recent essay on the role of scripture in the origins of the Church, Jacques Gillet argued: '[The New Testament writings] do not aspire to oppose the Christian experience to that of Israel, to erect in the face of the Hebrew Scriptures a new and concurrent corpus … The writings of the New Testament did not appear right alongside those of Israel but in their wake and at their end. They are at bottom a reading of, and commentary on, the Jewish scriptures.' 3 This seems to me to state the process of origins correctly but radically to miss the point (the 'at bottom' aspect) that peculiarly distinguishes the Christian scriptures and their fundamental charism. They are not commentary on the Scriptures of Israel 4 , however much they may derive their focus (even at 1 Given at the Orthodox Academy on Crete, August 2002, as part of the Orthodox-Methodist Dialogue on Biblical Interpretation. 2 For an excellent contemporary overview see TG Stylianopoulos. The New Testament. An Orthodox Perspective. Vol. 1. Scripture, Tradition, Hermeneutics. (Holy Cross Press. Brookline. Ma. 1997). (esp. ch. 4. pp. 101-122.) 3 J Guillet SJ. "The Role of the Bible in the Birth of the Church." in P M Blowers (ed). The Bible in Greek Christian Antiquity. (University of Notre Dame Press. Notre Dame, Indiana, 1997). p.35. 4 Unless we are so to redefine the meaning of commentary that it becomes neologistic. I take commentary to mean precisely a literature that 'follows after' (the plot, or the higher meaning) another authoritative corpus of literature. The Christian writings set out to convey the Jesus story, From: Biblical Interpretation in the Christian Church. SVS Press. New York. 2005 (?) Papers of The Methodist-Orthodox Colloquium. Crete. 2002 times their apparent genre) from that task. They are fundamentally and coherently commentaries on the significance of Jesus and are the confessions of the community's faith in the centrality of his person and, from that basis of Christo-centric confession, only then an explanation (Hermeneusis) how this surprising message finds its validation in key instances of the old story of Israel's covenant life with God. In other words, the Old Testament becomes the commentary on the New, since chronological priority has little significance in the eschatological priority of the Kairos of salvation. This principle of soteriological order (Taxis) is a distinctive mark of how the Apostolic and patristic writers approach exegesis. The Christian genre of Scriptural Commentary, as such, and it is an interesting thing to reflect on, is the invention of the Gnostics, making its first appearance with Heracleon, and being appropriated for the wider Church by the Alexandrian theologians. Many of the important Fathers, and some whom we will consider in this paper, resisted the very notion of a biblical commentary in the sense of following the narrative line of a determinative text. Their understanding of biblical exegesis remained that of the more ancient period, a more discontinuous, confessional, and event-centred typology of the Christ-event. 6 The context is their confused complaint about the obscurity of the parables. Mt. 13.10 f. 7 'It is an evil and faithless generation that asks for a sign. The only sign it will be given is the sign of Jonah. And leaving them standing there he walked away.' Mt. 16.4. 65 That is the doxology 'through the Son'. 66 On the Holy Spirit. 2. (4). Jackson: Basil. p. 3. 67 On the Holy Spirit. 9 (23). Jackson: Basil p. 15 (translation emended). 68 'Those that trample on worldly things and rise above them, are witnessed as being worthy of the gift of the Holy Spirit. The world cannot receive God. Only the saints can contemplate him through purity of heart.' On the Holy Spirit. 22 (53). Jackson: Basil. p. 34. 69 'This is, as it were, in a shadow and a type. The nature of the divine is very frequently represented by the rough and shadowy outlines (skiagraphia) of the types… The type is an imitative anticipation of the future.' On The Holy Spirit. 14 (31). Jackson: Basil. p. 19. 70 Commentary on Ps. 1. It was a text given prominence in Gregory and Basil's compilation of the Philokalia of Origen (ibid. chs. 2. 1-5) cf. G Lewis. (tr.
Theologia Corporum and the Cappadocian Fathers
2012
Nietzsche levels the charge against Christians that they are “Despisers of life,” of their own material, bodily existence in this world. Christianity is a religion of despisers of the earth, despisers of the body, “world-slanderers.” Having invented an other world “Apart, Beyond, Outside, Above” this one, Christians seek to escape this present life, renouncing it and so become “preachers of death.” How are Christian theologians to answer this charge? Does Christianity affirm this life? Does Christian theology have the ability to love the body and to remain faithful to the earth? This paper seeks to address questions like these as part of a larger project (a work in progress) of a theologia corporum—a theology of bodies. The basic thrust of this project is to trace an orthodox Christian theological reflection upon, and affirmation of, bodies taken in three interrelated senses: the corporeal (regarding the material world as such), the corporal (regarding human bodies), and the corpora...
[2016] Responses to Revelation: Alexandrian and Cappadocian Text Production and Hermeneutics
In the second decade of the 20 th century a small group of Jewish German intellectuals was considering resuscitating Schelling's late project of a philosophy of revelation. In his Star of Redemption, Franz Rosenzweig (1886-1929) reads the attempt of thinking revelation, which plunged idealism in an abyss of trans-speculative silence and in the depths of the via negativa, as the dawn of a different, thoroughly positive, line of approach not only to revelation itself but also to the thought that goes to revelation's encounter. Rosenzweig construes revelation as a complex speech-act that invites and enables a liturgical response. Instead of a semantics of revelation stretched beyond its speculative limits, Rosenzweig envisages a pragmatic of revelation and a performative-liturgical semiosis. Our group reunites three philosophers with a patristic background and an expertise in the modern and recent philosophies of language. We shall use the semantic-pragmatic tension at the heart of the Rosenzweig-Schelling debate to explore the possibility of a performative liturgical function of patristic literature as an alternative to the already well-studied semantic and speculative directions of this same literature. Our central concern will be taking seriously this literature's claims to being an extension of and a diligent response to scriptural revelation. To this end, we propose a set of analyses of Origen's exegesis of Proverbs 22:20-21, John 1:1-2, and Phillipians 2:6-11, as well as a few, more comprehensive, interpretations of Cappadocian homiletic literature, which we shall place in dialogue with Rosenzweig's Sprachdenken, Benveniste's theory of enunciation, and Austin's performative linguistics; with Lévinas' philosophy of language and its Lyotardian elaboration, as well as with Zizioulas personalist reformulation of patristic ontology.
Constantine's Letters, 2019
The article examines the so-called «Social model of the Trinity» and its implications for theology, religious anthropology, and ecclesiology in its social dimension. The Trinitarian approach of the Cappadocian Fathers is lifted up as a potential source of inspiration for a more complex and dynamic understanding of the Trinity in the West, urging the West to learn from and integrate critically its valuable emphases. The article is constructively critical to the Latin philosophical-theological approach to the definition of the Trinity, suggesting, however, that the commonly accepted 'de Régnon Paradigm' among most Western scholars does not reflect de Régnon's original intentions and does not do justice to the natural affinity and even overlapping of ideas and emphases between the so-called 'Latin' and 'Greek' approaches to the philosophical-theological question of the Trinity.