Y URTEODOX THEULOGY An Introduction HaVLADIMIR LOSSKY ORTHODOX THEOLOGY: An Introduction Translated by JAN AND IHITA KESARCODI-WATSON ST, VLADIMIR'S SEMINARY PRESS 1978‘ary of Congres tating Pubcon Da oun Foreword Prologue FAITH AND THEOLOGY Chapter One THE TWO MONOTHEISNS i, Inrodsction ii The Negative and de Positive Wy iit The Tanity ix, Trinitarian Texmiology ‘The Procesion of Persons and the Divine Ateibutes Chapter Two THE CREATION i Introduction The Creative Tinity and Divine Less 4k Creation: Time and Eternity ji Creston: Cosi Order *, Image and Likeness WE Chetan Anthropology Chapter Three ORIGINAL SIN i, Inuoducion ee ii The Meaning of the O18 Tesement The Incarnation Chapter Four CHRISTOLOGICAL DOGMA i. Introduction : fi, "Form of God and “Form of Sera li, Two Energies, Two Wis iy, Duality and Uaity ia Cit ‘. Redemption vis Resusection Posscript IMAGE AND LIKENESS Table of Contents B 2 3 36 40 45 st ss 38 6 ” » 85 95 100 102 107 110 us 19FOREWORD Ik was a mesing with Leite Oupely an his wife in Ont les chica te Eepioning! ft taaton yo now hie bs You, The Guys ad Ieee nayg aoe Hons ofS Sep an? Aba ‘stp ite oe Sy Beg tes une, 1 Gone Tor ce uo betes Ue Ent Oe ‘ctuatta of Cisne an Angas "We fl oligo any thin ag which was or cmt pet for Wadi Lond ad A pee" on Em thon' ame» toe commnat+ teat of alleen in wt Sod wont fo Ue mip co tn in Fase cps, cen the pen a Soe the 3 Loy, ood ae ogi Ronan wi wi nig, mah reponse for tert atacion san Onn bots fe Niclas expos, Bejan fea tldva ftps etas a) ws ac mre fay elon ad bens wee done fore ging opto Onfrd and war now (hat tht fan) oa eslogy well tested ts ct ‘be sane becouse 9 hs eon geist {ee te Tsim tnew ety toch of whl Thad ey sal Loss The Mytiel Theaogy of the Bose Chacha er tl cone ot of Cnt espns Of mbt spicy eve wt, he ont of GA i nite n dingy rom a Center Ron watt on toy ioe Sight Sattphe Hebe We, wees feat ee tri aon by Lemide® orn hand an em Ts Shes among yet alae el, tc, net feipspoper on by Lente oo "The ean” bat ser 75 corriopox PasoLocy ack ses ofthe Meseger de "Bsercbt de Patrace rane tn Europe ovina (Now 46 47,48, $5, 30 [1964903], Svoamal dsated song te Engr commanty in Pats, “afing a ses of ated pees by Loy, under the geo fia beading, Thologie Dogmatiqae, Teaedy seal em, Sti here and then vowed to proffer ‘trasation int Engh tthe soonest propiioss moment. ‘That moment bas fe longer in coming than I had hoped, and twas att tome yess ater (150), hea Tate 3 wife who was an xe in both Pench nd Rusa, that twas clear wat fete. Eten then, it wat not uot ste 1974, on our aeal in Australi, thot we actly Began Ont ined has been thoroug For the French (he ball of the sep), Ita (my wile) would mike the ial translation, chp by chapie, 1 would compare this tans Int wil my owe: we would dics our diferences (often the most tecme of the sgt); aller agreement on these, Tomi eevee ee pe se nl eel Die English sense, but‘so acepsbe and, x0 fara proved whiny power, cet Deologie ene, ‘This tas Stage often took me longer than sll the eters togeter ‘We would then discs my final version and etabah the thips tow has nthe case ofthe Rosine Postript, elge and Liktes’—ovr metbod was identeal, with the crion of the second sage, my Inowledge of Rauian ing minimal Ins, onthe otter hand isan expert the Tangage "er result ou have before you an English rendering of a work we conte to be of calle compare to the bat Lntypredored, end in seng i forth, we can ony hope {thas the impact on cers at Losi’ oer works com tinue to have on me “Though Taow intrct snl in Tdian spiritual, de suet ete this may suggest away fom he Ontodoe tration of Crstendoet may be more appuene thre Tne een oo devoted mainly to nds al eed Enter Spirited (gam Pritashsn, New Debi, 1976), Sees to lata cena edesvour by reference o words From Lows Mute Theology in whi he declare bit rossworD ° ‘theological tsk tobe but “theos logos"—conveyng. Tadmit an immense debe to Lossy, and fel rather that [have moved to # different tradition of expreson in moving the while to the Hind and Buddhise word, than in any sense avay ‘om the heatt ofthis man's teaching, of rather, “conveying.” recall Nicolas Zemov, whose sllststed lectures 08 "The Tage” in the Ashmeleaa Theatee were + highlight of my seats in Oxford, in conversation confessing with 3 wy sale thar Oxodoxy numbers the Buddha among its saints. He ‘was refering tothe Famous sory of Sts, Barlaam and Joasaph, 4 Christianized version of «Buddhist legen, inal probability the work of Se John of Damascus Yer the broader point ‘hich e was trying to make aso holds trae. ‘Indeed, an interesting study coold be done lining parle lels between Lossky's expression of the Onhodox tiation and the orthodoxy of Hinduism at leas. I would naturally fot care to underate the differences presented by the status (of Cast i the forme, but I nonetheless am ever more con- ince that, in their quest mystics, enuch that is central to these two great traditions i Irgly shared, Perhaps this ‘stro of ll mystcoms, ia thee very nature. Peehaps there 1 no place moce replete with Religious Knowledge, ot the “wisdom” (gnosts, which orginally comes from the Sanskrit, jing,” “sscred knowledge") it conveys, than. in these Lneition’ varying myscims,” The tile of Losky’s main Book i n0 accident. Nor i i an accident that Hinduism tnd Buddhism (also Jainism, Sikhism) sometimes ae called "mysteq” religions (om the Greek mprteion, “that which is hidden"; “ido,” that 18, fom teely “mundane re Searches, being open only to what Lossy rightly syles "he shoes"). Bat here is sot the place to delve further into tis. I men tion these parses oF possible parallels only to show why T belive there may be more to the wore of this great the ‘logian than what be presents as an apologist for just one tradition think there is more. T thik his message is uni Sesil ina way carely found among thote normally sled “theologians” in academies purporting to study this science For Lasslys “conveying” i ia the tadition of the Cap-10 ‘oxrioo0x THEOLOGY fpuocian Father, of Dignpsios the Aropagte, and of citer Ecar (by whom be wes much influenced), a tad tion whith peas to the human contion where 1s 20m, ft its prose conte nd spetoalafliatone, 0 the bo Thun contion bere nd now thared i anvetaly and 0 ‘Reel to some condition enjoyed only by afew of ern tation as paragon forthe roe. Tamm not denying Loss ‘SFirmation of Chis a same way “super” You tusey have to lock atthe chapter tiled “The Two Moor thes” i this preset ek to note him affiming tha Noram soggestng tat go alongwith eveything be says. aon mel ugeng that his andcesending of Corsini, ide that shed by the thee fave mentioned, i one that deady bat cosmic embrace, and seal tome way te Claes al people, merely eames Spit snd at one erly parochial In tones In ti, he sand ab 2 salutary coe Erte to many of te desictie aves Chisiaiy fhe more parochial Kind has perptted ins own name. In this, Dis wocks—snd ot leo this present one—are suey Ciulally important ia he. growing” worldwide yesring, Sinalles by tach developments 2 he ennai! movement thin Chany, for sos, more mutual sharing song {plies of efferent shapes and aidan rally, itis well to note that pee vey smi to the ap pended Postscript, luge ad Lice” barappestd as chap. {ers of hated Theology. Os pec, however i endred tira fom a Husian redaction wich orally appeared Ss Obuar | Polsbie i Zharnal Moshorsot Path, 3 (ose), pp 5364, and not Lom the Frond at in-ytcal Theology. There se minor differences, and these have thei interstAlto, the Prolog, "Fath tnd. Theslgy,” ong inalysppeicd ae “Poi ce Theslogie" in Contact 13, 34 (9). pp. 163576, snd aot in the Merger The reason fer tieittuson bere ofthese two pleces 38 Prologue and Povtcrip sould be fal ces. Apatt from the coc fo Pst is Pagibapsg pac ah oo foes pee rom Loss mate yeas, the ater, “Tage and Likeness” (Obras | Podsbie") anyway smmatizes Lossy's "con ‘ering of Orthod teaching 6n divine aod hams “shape” ouwor a most splendidly, and the former, “Faith and Theology” ("Foi et Theologie"), likewise, the teaching on the place and nature of theology generally. Accordingly, the latter ‘well concies this presenstion, andthe forme, quite as well, begins “ses” its ground, T should also draw attention to the toy excellent, and, to ay Knowledge, exhaustive bibliogaphy of wotls by Lossky found at the end of Dr Image and Likeness of God, ‘another ecent wansation (1976) of selected pieces by Tosiky, again from the preses of St, Viadimir's Seminary. Indeed, SE Vladimir's has in recent years published, or 18> ppblied, all of Losity’s welings presenly available in English, ately great sevice. Two Codicils [A word of very spacial thanks in two dietons. Fity again fo the Ouspeatiy, whore kind permision to peed {ih this translation, Hot Yo mention the entsting of the French foc to me inthe fist place, his rendered the pro ct possble, Aad secondly, to Me. john H. Erickson of St ‘Vislimirs Seminsy Pros, who eocouragemeat snd simple Enendship, exprencd entzely through leters, have. been langely intrest ia seeing ie piee to the press. "hou alo ad that, ws is Foreword fhe work of coe hand, the tata is very csc aad in every Sens the woth of twoor eter, of four My wife is more igus San ly 01 more theologian than she. Bot gether {5 weak has been conceived and together excoted lax Kesascomi Parson, La Trobe University, Vietoria, Anstralia 1 October 1977Profogue FAITH AND THEOLOGY Authentic guosi is inseparable from a chasms, an ile luminaton by grace which tansforms our intelligence. And since the object of contemplation ia personal existence and presence, tile goosis implies encounter, secproity, faith a8 5 persoal adberence 9 the personal presence of God Who reveals Himself In the strict sease, among the ascetics of the Cheistian ast gnosis constitutes the peak of the life of peayer—a peak where gnosis is glen by God to man “who knows himself fallible” says Erageus, sd transforms his indigence in an unfolding of faith. We know ragrvn's formula, which has became an adage: "The one who has pacity in peayr etre ‘heologian, and the one who i tre theologian hss pity in pape "But perity in prayer implies the state of silence. The hesychasts are the "slats"? encounter and itt, gnosis is placed beyond the vole; it demande the surmouating 2nd Srrest of thonght. Acconingly, this notion of silent gnosis as tre theology oes not ectly correspond to theological teaching, 2 theology which can snd must be expresed though language. ‘The direct foundation of theological tesching i the Inca tation of the Word just as iis for iconography. Siac the ‘Word has incarnated Himself, the Word can be thopht and taught-aod in the same way the Word can be painted ‘Dat the Incamnation of the Wotd has no other goal than to lead us to the Father, in the Spirit Theology ss word land as thougit mast necessarily conceal a gnostic dimension, inthe sense of the theology of contemplation and silence. Te B“ ‘oxrioo0x Hx0Lo3r is ater of opening owe ugh 0 rey whi oe nt Re ot ee mode of tag ee Zech dos tot nile oe nl toc ba Ea al LEN So sae mora nd id y template ike 5 telogia tachg oes fell it ay Cer or rns 0 ce conan ad SSE etecige aes epee onl seen “Thecloeal ingests tt ot sea ine 2 elven ling ye os fos Sip wo fae ott pon jo cone ee Free nb: fut ps te ele True Ede hinkag. concen Cisse, seeped eng cots one's mally td BORE! Gea ear ac nk te ee Of sft ge vin fat yond ny, of wht cite ee went st acleai we ie Sat Get iliget-on welding i es Shih uid tent he ean coir te mnpsg of Be vor! whi coming Tolga eng Si the conta, b made for ie so Ee eae an We ate pc {etic eaten td pins fae mt see at at foge tntenpaton: anor acl Frm nun of Slog sac snd ten ses ot kat ws mga nll Nowibed i coy Celanese ble alee at sel top te lene, han, by «new we of ong sad wel “he i why eslgy mus be pie and mast dpe sty pate Gel h ee Grpey of Mesa, © Se Sion thc New Thelin bos thon Inve mee te mane ‘Nidan’ ie etree Renaies einen bape pe eter See ee ange Tp ae ew ng th i logy bos eae Terps “Seah Ear act ge ie Peet elo th so becomes hindance, and fo ere ape tale hacieecaTeeet sot Eel ibion of eet Bist ef Proce (ups FAITH AND TEOLOGY 3 7 sad 8) reds ws tthe intellect, unl has achieved i poy lf and aoe a's ns floured by prayer: then ie prefers tedlopial ought hich low ito“ el Bat coe mat not fog Uhat ere is prayer which surpasses Cs “latte state of those who, in lity ae fied with vine ea “Theological thoughe must cipote to praise and epress ‘contemplation One must avid h becoming 2 fight betoe the mcsary “contraction” of prayer, 10 replace te mystery lied in silence with meatal Shamate cul handed, ce (sn, and whose we canis but whic ae wlialy ore wk theology with tun fatness between the “autre wore” heed by St Paulin the “iid heater” (te one which goeeEeyond the opposition ofthe seabe haven and he ilps hezven Shi represents the Divine Isl the Uncrate) and ‘pineme, the contact tenpiation of the theclopan? Phe ‘fg tem could well be sop, wisdom. Caray, sem [St divine ame, But one et taketh word int pimitve Sense which, in ancient Gres, indisted cetit bursa ‘gai, mostly 2s, tthe inpred sl of the cafeeman 2nd he srt) With Homer, oplia the Evteyvos cost of ihe ancient Greeks, quliiel te sill of the catonan, of the ant of the post. The Seprugin bas tandated by Sophia the Hebrew expession which Sevgnates Divine Wit dim ss God's perfect tahaique in His work. ‘This sense nies wih tha of eronomy, of catia prudence porone td sophie ate bee vey cos “Theology at rophis i connected at once to gros and to epitome Ie restons, bt seks always to g0 Bord con fepis, Here a neesty moment of te felre of baman tough breaks in before the mystery Sat it wats to make lnowable A thology tat consiutes elf ito asym [salways dangerous Tt inprsons inthe enclosed spre of thought the rei to which it mst open though i St Pal, Knowiedge of God wis nel nto a per sonal reltlonhipexpesied in tems of tcp seo:6 ‘onTH0ox THFOLOSY iy whe bj of ag (ot il a Tan Go ila cts Seton dog, eer hk Ee Tae oe was One ai der ei aie SP GE whan eer ey poe sd itl pei ty Solar ee Rah ree ee one te ac pc) as ces rare (at) Carag oo ‘arp Sante en! oe Stefan” Senet os Sees ite ASAD eae Farm asp TuzoLocy ” Irenaeus) implies the very faculty of receiving it, “The heretics who have perverted the se of tut,” St leeaseus wrote, "preichthemvelves when they belive hat they are presching Cavsianity (Avera Iucreser, Book Ill Th Ely i the peconal existence of man iti his nature made to autimiate self to divine hfeboth motifed i thee Sse of separation snd desth and viified by the presence ofthe Holy Spirit Fath as ontological partkipation included fn periomal mesting i therefore the fist conliton for theological knowledge "Tcology opie would therefore be the apacy, the sult apt coe thoght tw clin to fd Rf tnd inspired words which would bear wins Ja the la geht not inthe limiteof hora shows, in repli {othe acede of the moment Ie ist mater of the tet reconsraction of ovr facies of Knowing, conditioned by the presence in us of the Holy Spt. "You have ceived the Snoioting ofthe Holy One an you al know - = The Sinting you have ceived frm Hm ermine in you and You have nonce tobe taught. Ad as His aolating teaches Jo about everthing. as i has taught you, abide Him" {F Jota 250,"27). ‘The anciting-chrim~denates ete the presence ofthe Holy Spt Chanians ar the anointed, the "Gist of the Lord. Nobody therefore can tach 1 che truth Mf this presence which opens to al koow edge is ot alendy Within bt is tte Chvitian eons poston of the Platonic avamnern, since the clrsm gives ['kaowledge of all things the Christian know ally Bat beology i neesary to acute thi knoniedge lead the Prophets, parcel in Jeremiah, one Cas the notion fof tis kaonledge which wll be given to all men by the Spint of God: "Tsll place My low in he depehs of thee being sad Tahal waite eon tei hers... They all all now Me...” (Jet 3133334), Ouiside of fsth theology bas ao sate: i can ealy be used on interior evidence of the tat inthe Spt, on the teaching ofthe tuth bythe tuth ie. "The repula fe the fist acantion of this evidence. Ts his intetioe evidence thats sresed by St. AUgostine nis reste om the Interior18 ormovex THEOLOGY Maser: Tove spoken tall However tose ia whom Scolating dors ct spe, tore wha ace nt taught inwardly ithe Holy Spt always departed andac. The fea of Hin ‘Who teaches is found io the bevens I speak of the Lorkvuc” “Only the acto of inst inthe feat slows tbe best not wo fenain in slit. Only the Interior Mater, fetches Where ising ab, extemal word sl theca to 9 purpose No oe eat tteore ase the exch ight of teah- ingin the Cnc. The Spt gven toa snanng the Miner alone te Chit. he Spt which inspire whe teaches smst be found inthe who len, cue they "ill tar noting. Ty wil therefore be not ey isencs but ingen Each must become witners to the th, The sense Sf external teaching fo ante the pf of the Spit thet oor thoght abo potptes i th Fath et be tart ms acute, with ah erential conscious he “hbstance of things hoped for her presence in us aih mois and sive the intel, ales the inligenee rf toogh a logether sw ontological eles wih God,» reetonip proper tothe Cuan snd which Fite ctevon within us 6ftath ‘Gol speaks to us Uvouph His Son, the Inaction 2 couplsht fevelaton: it reveals and it consiutes seve fiom iuele."To thine theatogily 1s ot te thik of thi fevelation, but to tink by tans of ithe Fates often invoke “out plomply.” In fa, toe metiod of th "less Goch propery dents theology) is bse on sn arpronchopponte fo tat of spevltion. Theology sa Trot fact Teaton, "God hae spoken fo wt Sally Ahr His Son” (Heb. 1:2). The phlospy ich spc Inte Sn God sar on ite onan rw an eae SBeslogian, the poit of departure i Chis, and W's also the point of srl. The lompher res himselt to an dentro another es o fom a Brovp of generaliaed fats According tan ide. For cetain poopie the serch for God ceresponds to an iohrent neces in their hough Sou ust exists thi hel conepion ofthe universe might Be coherent Thee follows the sesch for sigumeat to Fam AND THEOLOGY 9 dermansate the existence of tis seesny God vence these "proofs ofthe extence of God," profs” which the {helogan can well do ibn Tt Bereore no sping thatthe notin of the abe solute sould be very diffrent scording to the philosophers The God of Dexartes iss mathematicians Gol t [sty the inate Ideas of material truths 2 saprene mater tkian who has calsated eventing isl tery 1 aces {Sry Iris by the will of sich Ged that wo pall es Ga never cass For Leite, Gods aeesry fo justify he precnabled harmony Between oot pecepna and el Ferenc peron constutes 4 closed worl” Hence, tht all theo wort nay corepood hat they tay form ut single tne, there must be ropene Monat in which the monads Converge aod order therecves harmoniously, in sus wap thar he tof pacepten for one cmcdes with tha oF ereepon forall” Only God, it has been ssi could wee Be"Hlmdoogy. Kents ertte thot qesions mets By: we know oly out perceptions an Rant, to explain EX ously of knowl eran analy of con tik, But he nese the ict of Got inthe moal sphere {bt himin is Ctiae of Pacical Rewon, God appa 36 the secs postte of moral Ife. Ia his pve I, Kint wars poling sad psctsing Lthern fn his met pista, e fefuses ll spetultion pon Gol, Bat, in his les: he posites Gate exten The God of Bergson {Ba God of cestive esi, Te is the limps, aa Sot in becoming 1 oe ii to ges od a eile fone nthe philosophies of sntiquy. Eten bere, 2000. Siete God Sf Ate th anon moves posted Bye eames of meeps He i i ele ta on beings primary substance—thowght which thks i Sa and moves isl te pelea a Pst never [pesls or almost aevernof God, However, was ser. 12y fox him to give foundation to cen very conctete det, the pouty of fost maa, of 4 sige. Sovates was fondamnel by the oy bese he practi’ a diferent fs fete te one, How then wa one fo asf te use,20 lonrii0ox HroLocy how to construct State where the jast man had his place? Rastng himeelf thos from this fundamental demand towards the knowledge of that which really Plato discovers stable realty inthe world of ideas which thought slone can grasp. Going even bigher, he has preseatinent of the "Good ‘whichis beyond being” (the seventh book of The Republi) then he reaches this point, be fonpete the search for just Saaz, and justice itselt, in contemplation. The point of de- parture and the pint of artival, nevertheless, remain human, The Republic concludes with the necesity oF giving power to philosophers, or rather of obliging them fo govern, at Ieatt for # certin time for those who know bestitade do ‘ot wish to descend again into the cave ‘Theologial procedure is quite different Since God re veils Himself to us, our whole thooght-really, oor whole Approach, out converiatio™should respond and corespand to this fact, should conform to this revelation gathered in faith, Philosophers constrict an ides of God. For the the- clogian, God is someone Who revesls Himself 2nd Who Cannot be known outside of revelation, One mast open one- {elf to this pesonal God, to encounter Him in a total ax volvement: chat isthe only way to know Him, But this con- ‘ete and. personal God contains the abstract and imper- Sonal God of philosophers Who isnot, most often, a mere ‘mirage, bot also reflection in himan thought ofthe personal God: Certsiniy, starting from this reflection, by efleeton or by speculation, iis imposble to know the ral God. The pro- cedare of faith ig necestry, Fundamental, primordial. ‘But then this God of the philosophers takes His place in the total reality of the Tiving Gol as Clement of Alexandsia ‘Prete, "He will grow unto the plenitude of Chest” Christ is the perfect mensure of all dings: He breaks the closed ‘stems in which the philosophers imprison and denature the teflection of the living God in human thought—but He also rings His accomplishment to the intuitive attention whidh the philosophers have devoted this reflection, ‘Nevertheless, one cannot make from these intitons, from these thoughts, an introduction to theology: that wold be to revesse the correct relationship. One has no right Farm ano THEOLOGY a start from a treatise De deo sno, from a God Who is & purely intellectual substance accesible to teasoa, possessing AIL perfection to an eminent degre, containing all ideas of all things, principle of every order and every tality. For then, to go Lom tis God othe Trinity, one must jrtapoce for resins of credibility, it wil be sutd~the God of sever ton mith that of the palcsophers, Now, in producing these reasons, one remains On the level of "natural theology.” one conzines to play the phlosopiers’ game, A Chest hat ‘origi to separate, even in thought, tke One and the Theee ‘when he speaks of God. To go, rationally 5010 speak, fom the One to the Thee, is 2 four de force, an intelectual com juring trick rather than a logical development ‘One must therefore stat {rom faith~and that isthe only way to save philosophy. Philosophy ite, on its suit, demands dhe renuncation of speculation; questing God, it tains the moment of supreme ignorance: a. negitve wy ‘where the failure of human thought is ackaowledge Here, philosophy ends in 2 mysticism and dies in becoming the ex perience of an Unknown God Who can no long even be famed. Iti this Unknown God tat Se. Paul came to pretch (to the court) upon the Areopagus. In fact, we know that the alae tothe Unknown God was erected in honour of one fof the many gods whom one was afraid of ignoring or dis regarding, Athens being a mighty motherciy. Paul, never. theless, seems to have kaown the best of Greck thovght, Stoic for example, and itis to the best of this thought that be wished to reply. If the summit of philosophy is 2 question, theology mast eply by beacing winess that wanscendence is revested in the immanence ofthe Incsrnation. The notion of revelation implies this immanence. But, inthis immanence ise, God revels Himself 2s tansccodent. To evoke tanscendence feriouly in a Clirstan perspective, one most go. beyond fot only all the nations of the created world, but also the no- tion of the first cause of this world, Divine earaity inthe cretion supposes yet spain a link with its effect. God mast be conceived beyond plosopbicl tanscendencet one must transcend the tanscenence ofthis ist causality which pts2 ‘onriio00% THEOLOGY Ge in relation with the world. One must adit that the Sori hus been crested ficely by God, but tt Gol might fonts well noc have cestel Cretion ss Gee at of Mioze wl, In the geat Pitonic eadion, God is always Concave asthe pritiple of everthing tnt exists and te So Sevelops fom them, wid ontologies bree or Ghrisians on the conta, allemasationam i impose, Ee entlopeal break tl, cleston ex mo fee Here i propersand fundamenalsgiven ofthe biblical wad tha, whether Juda Chan of Abrahamic "The word would pot ave exited mere God oot even that which He ig Faas, God als Himself. “Tam He Whos" Christan have wanted t ee ia this divine name Ge sesponse to all human philosophic They have sified the philosophers by teading this pasage. The being that one Canot nate anes Himself Name above sl i Sipendet of every ter exsence. Ie wil abuser de tebvocton of be uate" seprsed” from ll being~and il ontelogially sexe the ulerse, sth abil tai Ton ye feist same of "Himy Who in an absolue trunae"k his Corfe (Book 7), Se. Augestine evokes Nsmedtaton ons te “Tho ist ell me iom aa, ing ia truth eg som qui som. And T head Tee a9 one teks inthe beat andT could no tonge dobe. 1 could ave AEabhed see ey the fac hat Is alive an that fia case trah which can be known in contemplating Craton: brings rel do ot ave being, "ey ae because they ave fom Thee, they ae aot esse they are not Wht, Thaw “This name—at lat, such a uadestod by St, Acgusine and many of te Fats God a8 plenitude of beings ‘ana howeve, on Be concepadl sphere. ‘We conceive ing by sariag from what we Kaow st being fom bags. Tea aly “apante ne Ope mu ose Gad Teyond al that can Be knowa a5 bing. As Hegel hs shown, the concept of being is opposed to tat of anche: bing fe ‘nothgmess, while Coninting two conceplini, isn kad Gody the Ting Gols i beyond this supreme conceptual couple’ Hegel crique sees at belg Fam AND nugoLocy 23 de most vacuous of notions, the mast abtrct and im poverished of concepts, virwally identical t0 is opposite, footing, The notion of being is, ia sum, ous thought be comming its own objec. Concete brings exist concrete. The foncept of being is none othe than our thought sbout them, ‘what is absiacly common to them. One knows Hegel’ solotion: to find reality, one aust think being and non- being together, think them together as movement 38 con crete becoming; Hege!’s God i divinized dialectic: Becom- Jing appests 25 the Hist concrete concep. let us remember only tat the concept of “being” can: sot denote the highest but only the lowest ‘The Living God rust he evoked beyond the opposition of being and. ooa- being, beyond all canceps, including, oF course, that of be coming. He cannot be opposed to anything. Hie kaows no hothingoess which would oppose Hm. Thovght must go boon seo apponch Hii naming Hi, Ose must grasp Him by aot geasping, Low Him by not know. ing, Such is the only ‘natural theology for a. Chistian "Aningiar inating inatingibilver” said. Nicholas of Gasi, in a compact formula that may be translated thus “That whichis beyond all atinment canaot be attained ex cept in a manner which does not attain it.” One cannot fox (Goa with » concep, even that of essence. Sock is "les! ‘ignorance God therefore remains transcendent, radially tan sceodeat by His nature, in the very immaneace of His mani festaion. ‘Tha is why’ the apopatic (oe negative) way hat heen adopted by Christians, finding its perfec expression in the Poeudo-Aseopagite who wrote his Myutzal Theology to- ‘wards the end of the fifth century. ‘The apophatic wa, ia the Dionysian sense, demands in speaking of God the nega: tion of the highest ames, even the One of Plotinas does ‘ot sit tis God Who transcend every human notion One ‘would find dhe same attiude in St Augustine: "God is He {Whom we know best in not knowing Hin” Tt is He sbout Whom we have no knowledge unless it be to know how we 4a not know Him ( De ordine). And in his De doctring ‘hvstina, Augustine stresses that one cannot even 519 that4 ‘oxruoeox mHroLoce God is ineffable, since by sying this we say something and rae 2 "battle of words" which must be overcome by silence, "Thos is demonstrated te breskdown of uman thought before the radial transcendence of God. Philosophy took i+ ‘Sells fa ag ths breakJown inthe grest Platonic line. Plat, Inthe Phedo and in The Republic (Look 6, 19.5259) evokes the Beautiful which arpa al possibly of expression.” La the Parmenider i found the first hypothesis about the One: Lf the One is relly one, I is not beng, since the hought of being imple a dyad, tat of being and nonbeing. We can Ihave 90 opinion, thought, or knowledge of It; It is beyond tverything, Dionysus ws to cite this text Iteally—wvhat 5 tore, without naming Psto. Fisally, itis well known that Plotaus elaborated dhs negative way most remaslably ‘On revelation, the Fire Epistle of Joha states: “No one dna eve seen God” (1 John 4:12). And Se. Paul says: "God lone possesses immorality, He resides in inaccessible ight; ‘no man has sen Blin or can see Him (1 Tim, 6:16) ‘One must understand thatthe apophasis of Easteenthe- logy not borrowed from the philosophers. The God of the Christians is more transcendent than that of the pilos ophers. In Plotius, the One, the Absolute that cannot be inimed, is in a cetsin manner jn continuity with the Intel Ic, and finally withthe world, The univesse appears 25 2 manifestation, a5 2 degradation of the Absolute—rmoreover, fithout any’ estatrophie process. One must remember Plotinus aversion for the gndstcs. Cosmegony coincides with ‘eogony. Far Christians, on th coateary, the break is radial between the living God—the Trinty-and the crested worl, se much ini intligble modality a in its sensble modal ‘The Fathers have used the philosophical technique of neg tion in order to posit the transcendence, absolute this time, of the living God, The apophaticsm of ‘Ozthdox theology is fo technique of interionantion whereby one absorbs onesel Jnto an absolute more or les "conatural” with the Intellect, It i 2 prosration before the living God, radially un grsspable, unobjecufiable and unknowable, becuse He is personal, beenose He is the fe plenitude of pewsonal ex Intence, “Apopbat is tbe incription in burn Language, i FarTH No THEOLOGY 2 eoloicl longnoge, of the mystery of faith. Foe this we Leowable God revels Hinsel, and, becse ‘He. tat end, in His fee personal existence, His vey essence, He Gan cally make Hitelf' paripston. "No-one bak eer Sern God: His only Son, He Who isin de bosom of he Father has manifested Him fo ws” (John 1218). This my tery of faith as personal encosnter and ontoogsa pte tn isthe toi foundation of theological language, 2 ha ipoge that apophass opens to the sence of dsicationChapter One THE TWO MONOTHEISMS, 1 Intodaction God is not the object of a since, and theology differs tadisally fom the thought of plulosophers. The theologian ‘oes act search for God as # man secks an objec be is scined by Him as one is seized by a person. And itis be ‘ute he has initially been found by God, becuse God, one Ihight sy, bas gone forth to find him in the encounter of Tevelaton, that he can then search for God, as one searches fora presence with all one's being (and 30 also with one's intlltt). ‘The God of theology is 2 "Taou"; He isthe lie ing God of the Bible, the Absolute, certainly, bu 2 personal “Absolute whom one tan address intimately fa pest “The selationship of “T-Thou” between a dewree and a sonal God is, of course, sso encountered outside of the Jadaco Christan tradition. But this god isnot then the su preme and unique God he is only one ofthe numerous divine Pevsonages of a polytheism Polytheism is in general only [Re lesser aspect of + monotheism; bat the absolute into which the "gods" teabsorb themtelves i sever pessona.” The “fous, in Inia, even the “personal” godare no more thn aspects manfeststioas of an impersonal absolute: mai festations 28 contingent, for the non-Christian Orient, 2 the ‘would which they coaftont, Being destined lik itt efface themselves, to abior themselves in the inwardness of Tota] entity. And thie Identity ignores “the other,” engulfing all petonal relationship. imi in the religion of ancient Greece, the gods had to submit to an anonymous and dominating "Necessity." The Philosophers placed above these gods, not = Person, but 2 aPy ‘onriH000x THEOLOGY superior univers of sabity and Tht, the sphere of besuy Gi sa imperonal being~thos Plt the Sroes and. even ‘Aritole And "NeoPlatonsn” was to end in 2 "oye. iii" of sborption whch reminds oe of Inia Tt is worth pausing a while on Potinay, who cepresents perhaps the pesk. of non-iblical.antiguy, and” whose Eeoghe il £6 assimilated apd wsed by numerous Father, Staining throgh ther» toe fulflinet For Plots, dhe fit lve of knowledge is located in the World Soa!’ which integrates he vets ty of the Cosmos and of which the goer 20 many aspects, Above thin maa as 3 te hear of the world nage, sn ‘ven higher degre of unity. This level of be i lo that of being, oe rater, there isan identity Between VOOR and fing, bxween thought snd its abject, the objet exile bo Giuse it thought, the thought, breate Be bie finally redces to an intelectual esence. ‘This ident, howeveh fot bao, sine i transposes elf ino a alenating ‘eiprociy in whch themes sl sobs. To know he One Falp in then, neceuary to tanacend vob. ‘When one goes beyond the thought and the thought ce ali, the ultnite dyad of Being and nteligence, one a Five 2t nondntligence nod non-Being, the negation here indisting something positive, « tanxendeace. But then Slence imposes sell: One cannot name the inefable, since it oppotes ef to nothing since nothing lini it. The only say fo attain it is through not knowing ithe nooo igs, 4 breskingthrougs beyond eveything, whichis ce S59. Philosophy colminstes and suites 5 the threshold of the unknowable. One con only now the One before sod ftter the ec; that io 57 one cannot Know it ice Tt isnot the eet. And during the later, tere i no longer anything cls, ene 0 kaowing. Four tes ia his ey orp tel um Plone knew estas. Bat this nome of divine natore is achieved ad canceled out simultaneously fn the impersonal of uaknowing. ‘Against the majoriy of eliglns and metaphysis where the selationship "Thos" duappens a8 Soon a2 one eae tures ino the sphere proper to divily, the Dile aims ‘rue wo woNorESMS » the ieducibleultimay of 2 personal God, at once absolute fand personal. But then, ia connection with the full revla tion of Christianity, anather Limitation emerges: the God of the Jews hides the profundities of His naure; He manifests isself only Uuough His auborty; His name islé is wn pronounceable, He surrounds Himself with inacesble light Zod man cannot see Him without dying” nether tue reciproc ly nor face to face encounter are pole between this te tlying divine mond an the hurity of the crested, From God alone comes speedy, Word; from man comes ooly the cbscurty of obedience and of faith, "Theology," ip the proper sense, ait is understood by the Fathers, remains closed fo bse. ‘Thus outside of Christianity one sees these oppositions: among the Jews (and later ia Islam, which is "Abaamic") 4 monotheism wich affirms the personal characte of God but i ignorant of His nature, a living God but not the divine life; inthe ancient world (and still today in talons alien to the Semitic) 2 metaphysical monotheism which anticipates the nature ofthe Absolute bat can only gain access to it by dissolving the peson. On one hand one finds a personal Imystcim of sbsorption where Knowledge of God proves, possible, since His person itself must be reaborbe! into the ineffable; on the other, a personal obedience ta per sonal God but without a vision Of the divine nature, 3 kagw- tle forbidden bythe person of God since this is closed upon sei: on one side, nature drowning the person, on the other fide te divine person hiding nature. Thus, outside of Chis tianty an imperble knowledge (since it denies the known tnd the knower) and a forbidden knowledge (siace thee i fo common messire, no mediation, between the Creator and ‘he creature) ate opposed, CCustianity frees man from these two limitations, by re veiling fly and at once the personal God and His nature Te thus accomplishes the best Of Istel and the best of the other religions of metaphysis, not asa cultural synthesis, but Ia Christ and throwgh Christ. Ia Him, indeed, humanity snd Givinity ate united, and divine aature communicates itself to uman nature to dell its this isthe answer to Israel. But30 ‘oxrionex THz0L03r the Son i csubstantial with the Father and with the Spit find thi is he ansver to impersonal metaphysics, The devine ‘aru isnot beyond the person: its Fullaes, on th conta, resides ia the communion of the divine persons, and its com munication to man is effected by 2 personal cumusion. Bat these answers are dificult understand, and tis falfllmeat in Citi both “scandal” and “folly — "scandal to the Jews": how could the unique the tan sendent, the God without common measute. with san, have a Son, Himself God, and yet a mn, haraisted and crucified? ~ "folly tothe Gresks”: how could the impersonal Absolute incarnate itself in 2 person, how could unmoving eternity enter into time?” How could God become that which one rust, secesaiy, go beyond to merge with Him? “Thor Chunisnty at ooce fulfils and scandals, But whatever ay be the atid ofthe "Grek" and the Jews ‘who deny Civ n the Church—that i to sy in the ody oF dis Word which ces all ings makes Anew, pice fu pts every tith i ts proper place—there should be no dlifeence between Grek and Jew ‘Two dangers appear here: the fit is hit the theologian ima be "Greek the Church that he may allow ine to be dominated by bis forms of expression tothe point of Inelctaling revelation and to lose at once the bbc sense of the otc and hs existential character ofthe en Counter with God. which is concealed in the apparent ao thropomorpiam of Tel "To this danger, which goes fom the Scholanis tothe itcllecale of the sneteeahceatury, corcesponds in oat agen iaverse danger: thet of 9 some: fwhat raced” lcm which wes to. oppo. the Hebrew tuition to "Grek plilesophy,” and tempts tt mike theory in paly Semi categories, ‘Dut theology most be of universal expression, Tt at by accident thst God as paced the Fatrs of the. Church ins Grek stings the demands for hclty in pilsophy ‘ie Two MONOTHEIS ey snd profundity ia gnosis have forced them to puify snd to Sanctfy te language of the philosophers and of the mys fic, 10 give to the Christian message, which sacides but goes beyond Israel all ts universal seach, I. The Negative andthe Postve Way God is known in revelation at in = personal tlstonship. Revelstion is slays reveition to someone tis made up of cocounters which order themscives into a history. Revel fiom in is totality is therfore 2 history; i is Uh sealty of history, ffom creation to the parousi. Revelation is thus a "theowxmic relationship whigh iar clades us, Not only can we aot know God out it but we cannat judge i "objectively" from oxtide, Revelation ous of 0 “outside,” for it i this relationship between God and the werd within which, like # oF not, we find our selves ‘But in the immanence of sevelation, God affirms Hlim- self to be tznscendent to crestion, Tf one were 10 define 4 transcendent that whigh escapes the sphece of our knowl- fege and experience, one must say that Gos not only i not 4 pat of this world but even transcends His own revelation. God is immanent and transcendent at the same tine immanence and transcendence mutually imply one snother Pure transcendence it imposible: if one conceives God 28 the transendent cause of the universe, He cannot be purely transcendent since the very ides of 2 cause implies that of tlfec. In the dialectic of revelation, immanence allows us fo name transcendence, But there would be no iemanence Whateoever if trancendence were aot, init depth inaces le. “That ie why we cot think of God in Himself, in His sence in His tcresy. To attempt to think of God in Him- Self reluces us to sence, as aesther thought nor language fan imprison the infinite in those concepts whic, in defi lng, limit, That i why the Greck Fathers had recourse, for Knowledge of God, to tbe negative wy.2 lorrionox sxoLocy “The negative (spophatic) way attempts to know God not in what He is (that is to sy, in relation to out experi fence as creatures) but in what He is not. It proceeds Series of negations. The NeoPlaonists and India use this ‘Way t0, ait is imposed on all thought which toss to God, raising itself towards Him, Te calminates, with Plotines, in the suicide of plulosopty, ia the metamorphosis of the Philosopher into the mya, Dut outside of Christianity, it nly ens inthe depersonalization of God, and of the maa ‘who seeks Him. ‘Thos an abyss separates this quest from Christan theology, even when the latter appears to follow the way of Pltines. Indeed, a Gregory of Nyssa or a Pseudo- Dionysius the Accopapite (ia his treatise, Ow Mystical The cology) doce not se, in spophaticism, revelation bat the fe- eptacle of evelation: they ative atthe peesonal presence (of shddden God. For them the negative way is not fsalved fn a void where subject and objet will be reabsorbed: the human person is not dissolved but has acess to a face (0 fice encounter with Ged,» union without contasion accor trace Apaphaticim const i nepating that which God is not: one eliminates first all creation, even the cosmie glory of the starry heavens and the intelligible Tight of the aagels Inthe sy. Then one excndes the most lofty atibutes, poo! ‘ess, lve, wisdom. One finaly excludes being itself. God ie none of allthis in His own nature He is the unknowable He's not.” But here is the Christian paradox; He is the {God to Whom Tsay "Tho," Who calls me, Who revels Hine self 2s personal, 25 living. To the litoegy of St. Yohn Chrysos. tom, before the Lord's Praver, one prys: "Aad prant us, O ‘Loed, to date to inveke Thee with confidence and withost fear, by calling Thee Fethez” "The Greck txt says exactly ‘hist "Thou, Exauoewoy Gcby (se, God on hiah Whom fone cannot sume, the apaphatic God), to name Thee Father fand to dare to invoke Thee.” One prats to have the audacity fnd the simplicity to s37 "Thou" to God. ‘Thos, side by side with the nesstive way, the postive way, “catphatio" opens out. God Who isthe hidden God, Deyoad ll that reveals Him, is also He that reveals Hinwelf ‘ru rwo wonomieisus 3 He is wiso, love, goths Bt Hi tue rei Kowa ine Sep and tat sec why He ee Him The emioent meron of ppt most the eat woe Hust py St comps by coc Shah nace sapere them fem bei led Titi te linted wong Caray God we, Totin te toa ene of can ort poser Aad isles se sto el seco of sate Tie ight some een love expen do at st the dine ecco combate te tts by eh ‘Sim commer soll wiht see suc, ‘shy cer becoming exhumed, or beaming Oetied Feat cts. Oo pst concep ele ws fo Fench Gute ine sos ele bin meses en Ect ine Hin ute can sees sehen enone, oe woul be devine’ hy Hs seo: He de ‘a! by ng el hat psy why Hepes. 'S Cupuy of ys fos merc! i his es pon the Sing of Sons in he este mpl mrtg Fi sa nt he Coe) wih God The ee oe Stes be beloved te st seckng ts Ga The beloved Sons and ecpes Gad este ue the mre the sal ows ins eno He sper ae te more loves Hig There Gol satin th sper, the me tit ors posse whch sor tl and ree ea tein pas The mre fled wit God the me eee in mcm he ul ete wih the ine pss bt sa ene Sept in he nea Bic Succ p o0 sh eee Thos ae tsi bdomes rena nn hfe aon OF eel ee Tove anny onerfows ad reves Sef fom Sheng to begune™ Gregory se Gite moc tf tse on key te ey wate eek te ost Be Go "Te ean of etre with th Cette snes he where the sol he ore Bi rans percenes tin Stance ines) ‘Soruned bet sonys fie Renee ul nd te die Shea's tune whch lows acl forth love. God SG: Zale endo nehell h ovess Hina ‘onriios0x TieLoce and conceal Him at the same time; and we cannot reach Him unless it be inthis rlaonship which, to et, demands that in His esence God sense forever bu of teach “The Old Tester itl tons this negative MEE this i dhe imag, 0 often used by The Chan cones Fates, of dotinca“Tie hav mde drs Hs soe Eats Pal 17, and Solomon, in his payer of conseaticn of te Temple (Bok of Kings) sys fo Gals “Thea Whe tas wished to nell n dane” Let ws tink ao of the ‘tos of Sal The experience ofthis tansendence is appropriate © the myst lfe ofthe Chitin: "Even when Tam une to Thee” sys Se Maca, "ven whan Seams tn me {bat Tmo longer am separste from They I know tit Thou 3% the maser ond I he sees” Ths no longer te inctabie fsion of the esny of Plotin, but peronal relationship which fr fom Liming the Absolute, te veals it tobe "ater," that i to iy alway ow, nexus. Ul. This is the relationship betwece the person of God, 2 nature a4 sch iacesble (the Uden of eacace here doc ‘ot bar lovee the contrany—buteepesents the logis est of voyage ote Tie” whch wold oud nd exhawst God), andthe person of many man even in is hinges 36 person mb inthe uton, dor oot betome abolished but i fansfigued and remains, or tthe fall Becomes, 2 pesca Oterwise these ho longer eligi that it mp, + bon, relationship. “The source of tue Cheiien theology is thas the con fesion of the Incarnation ofthe Son of Go. Through the Incarmaton, ded, = peson emtes in hanself the te scandent, unknowable store of vn, to human nate ‘he union ofthe two natures tn Chit shat ofthe open celestial and the ext, cried st far asthe thas a, Indeed, 8 Hell Tn hist tanscendene is mae nenanent and gives us the pssbity of talking shot God, that i of being theologian Here le all theme, that a ay see (and sees) God in Chin, tat he may sce (and ses) in Ghist the sing fot of the vine tate, This talon thot mitre advise bumaniy in single person rie Two MoNoTHES 38 excludes» setapysielapophsis which would sweep sway the Tiiniy to engulf Huet in the mperona on the con try, it manages to establish revelation a8 an eXOun + “Orth Crec thowght has a cae opened and closed the vay ty Chisy I pent dy toca te ges Toe the celestial Besa, nt of Go teat of he dive Ii doned iby thrsting the wise man back towards» al tion throug eason Some have wished to oppose the joe Le vine of the socent world to the sombre character of Gutnty, This st forget the tape sense of destiny io the Grech theatre, and the shacp scam of Plato, is ees tion “bodytem" (0Oua~ohye), the dualism which be Jnueduced between the sensible athe intelligible, to die {hulfy at once the sul, simple efleton, and fo invite She to fle from it Js certain way, acer thought prepares {he way mot only for Chistian, where superseded, ot {ho fore more tT cre lina of he gros 7 femsand Monchseiam, where it set against Chis, “Tut whichis acing fo this hough, hat which would heat ence a chance of fllment snd 2 stumbling bck for the selty of the Incertion. St Augosting, when he ‘members his you, is the sda wimes of this con [fomtaton between Antiqty and Christaiy: "There T have Ha" be supe in tcaling his Ocovery of the Ennead), Shai he Begining was the Word (ee escorts Senin Pltinas). 1 bave ead that the han soa lens Tiesto the ig but eno et ight. But T have er nly not found thatthe Word cme fo this world sad was fo rcied thee I have ot found tat tie Word became Tesh I have found tat the Son cane the equal of te Fath bot not tat He snnlted Hine, humited to denn onthe Cross and tat God the Father gave Hin {Be ame of Jesun” iin on the comtery, wth this very fame that heblogy starts