A Contempo rary Synthesis of

St Maximus'Theology:
The W'ork ofFr. Dumitru Stiniloae

Calinic Berger

To fully appreciate the infuence of St Maximus the Confessor in

contemporary orthodox theology, one cannot overlook the contribu-
tion of Father Dumitru Stiniloae (r9o3 -r9g).Stiniloae's engagemenr
with the writings of St Maximus spanned decades, from the r94os to
the r99os, during which time he translated and published all of rhe
saint's major work s: the Mystagogia (in ry++);' On the Lord's Prayer the
Ascetic Discourse, the Chapters on Loue, the Gruostic Cbapters, and rhe

Questions arudDoubrs (all inry+z)f rheAnswers to Tvtalassius (in r94g);,

the Ambigua to Jobru and Tvtornas (in ry81);o and finally, the Epistles,
and the complete Sborter Theological arud Polernical Works (all in ry9o) )
Stiniloae provided these rexts with thorough introductions and exren-
sive annorations, some ofwhich have been translated into French and
Modern Gre ek,n and which not only presenr information from modern
scholarship bur also his own, often inspired, refections.
I Reuista Tbologic,i ,4:i-+ Os+4 fiG-t\r; )4,2-B (rs+d rs-r6. As Ioan L Ici, Jr., has
noted, Stlniloae 's transladon of the Mystagogia in Reaisti Teologicd inexplicably was never re-
printed, though Fr. Stiniloae had prepared a substandal introduction and 85 notes for rhe text,
which were subsequently published in rhe modern Greek edirion (see below, n. 6). See diac.
Ioan I. IcI,Jr., De la Dionisie Areopagitul k Simeon al Tbsahnicului: integral cornentariilor li-
turgice byzantine. Studii fi texte (Sibiu: Editura Deisis, zorr), t7g n. o.
z Filocalia,v. z (Sibiu: Tipografia
Arhidiecezanl , rs+).
3 Filocalia,v. (Sibiu: Tipografia
1 Arhidiecezanl , rg+8).
a Sf Maxirn M,irturisitorul, Scrieri, Partea
L Arnbigua. PSB vol. 8o (Bucuregri: Editura
Insdrutului Biblic, r9 83).
., 5 Sf Maxirn Mirturisitorul, Scrieri, Partea a II-a. Scrieri Si epistole hristologice Si duhouni-
ceyi.PSB vol. 8z (Bucuregd: Edirura Insdtutului Biblic, r99o).
6 "Commentaire des Ambigual' translated
by Pdre Aurel Grigoras, in Saint Maxime le
Confesseur: Anrbigua.Trans. Emmanuel Ponsoye (Paris: Les Editions de lhncre, r994).Two

t89
 VII Contemporary Readings: Calinic Berger

This work of translation and annotation-an enormous achieve-

ment in itself-had a decisive"influence on Stiniloaet own *reological
work, in which the thought ofthe Saint is prominent and his writings are
cited more than those ofany other Church Father. Such is evident already
in his early Christological monograph,Jesus Cbrist or the Restoration of
Man,published in 1947,7 as it is in his other major works, published de-
cades larcr- Orthodox Dogmatic 7h eology (rgz 8),' Ortb odox Spirituality
(r98r
),e and Sp irituality and C ornmunio n in tb e O rtb o dox Liturgy ( r 9 8 6 ),
God and Man (r99o),'o and The lrnrnortal Image of God (rggs);' Addi-
tionally, St Maximus figures notably in several important articles, culmi-
nating in his major study, The Christology of St. Maxirnus the Confessor
$9 9 o) :' Certainly, Stiniloaet remarkable production and dedication to
St Morimus places him in an elite group of scholars.

The,Discoyery and Significance of St ffaximus

in Stiiniloaeb Theological Project
Stiniloaet devotion to the Confessor cannot be properly appreci-
ated or understood outside of the overall goal and context of his own
tJreological work. Fr. Stiniloae was first and foremost a man of the
Church; his workwas driven by the needs ofthe Church-in particu-
lar in its efforts to confront the cultural and secular trends of the mod-

volumes in the modern Greek patristic collection Epi tas Prgas(edited by Panagiotis Nellas)
have included Stiniloae's annotadons and introducluonsz Mystagogia tou hagiou Maxirnuou
tou Homologetoa. Tfans. Ignatios Sakalis (Athens: Apostolike Dilfonia, ,gzi: *d,although
in a shortened form, in rhe Ambig*i: Philosophika kat Thcologlka Eroterba'. Peri Diapboron
Aporion ton Agion Dionltsiou hai Gregorioa. Tians. Ignatios Sakalis (Athens: Apostolike Dia-
konia, 1978).
T lkusHristossaaRestaurareaomului.z"dEd(Craiova:EdituraOmniscop,rggS).Hence-
forth cited as Rcstaurarea.
8
All citations below (as,TDO) will reference both the Romanian version and English
uanslation (EI),Tlte Erperience ofGod,yols, tans.Ioan IonitiandRobert Baringer (Brook-
line : Holy Cross Press, rg94-zotr).
e AII citations below (as SO) will reference both the Romanian yersio n $992) and English
translacion (Eif), Orthod,ox Spirituality.Tlans. Archim.Jerome (Newville) and Otilia Kloos
(St" Tikhods Press, zooz).
to Omul Durnnezeu in Dumitru Stiniloae, .Sra dii de Tbologie Dogmatic,i, Ortodox,i. (E&
Si
itura Mitropoliei Olteniei: Crafova, ry 9t) ry7 -7o 6.
tt Chipul nemuitor al lui Dumnezeu, Lvol, (Buchuest: Cristal, 1995):
t2 Published in Dumitru Sdniloae, Studll de Tbologie Dogmaticd Ortodoxd (Editura Mi-
ropoliei Olteniei: Craiova, ry9r) n-ry4.
 7 Contemporary Synthesis ofSt Maximus'Theology: The Work of Fr. Dutnitru Stiniloae

ern world-and fueled by his own quest to know God. Additionally,

; the centrality he accorded ro St Maximus mu$ be seen in relation to
:e several prior evenrs in Stiniloae's life, not the least ofwhich was his dis-
ly covery of the writings of St Gregory Palamas and the Philokalia.
,f Stiniloae's quest rc know God began very early. He was raised in a
deeply religious family and already by age ten had read the enrire Bible
7 and wanted to become a priest. So, perhaps rhe first key event affecting
), his theological formation was tle fact that he dropped out of seminary',
i- because he found the seminary instruction ofhis day unsatisfring and
i- divorced from any living experience. However, under rhe influence of
'r Metropolitan Nicolae Bilan, he returned, finished his licentiate, and
f, was sent abroad for studies in Athens and Germany.
In Athens, Stiniloae discovered the writings of St Gregory Pala-
mas'4 and recognized in them apatristic, theological expression ofwhat
he was seeking: a theology based on living e4perience. In the wridngs of
*I
Palamas, Stlniloae wrote, met a God who comes towards rnan, opens
Himselfto him like light, *rough prayer. He fills him with His energies,
1
yet remains incommuriicable ... incomprehensible, apopharic."'5 From
tg Lv to r 9 z9 Stlniloae visited libraries *uough Europi .oll..tirrg copies
of manuscripts with writings of Sr Gregory Palamas, all ofwhich were
unpublished.'6 He spenr ren years laboringover them, the fruit ofwhich
was a major monograph in ryr8:7 but also a detailed knowledge ofPala-

13
) He went to study literature at the Universiry of Bucharesr for rwo years,. r gLr-L+. A use-
, ful biography in English is Maceij Bielawski, The Philokalical Yision ofthe World. in the Tlteol-
I ogy ofDumitru Stnnihae {Bydgoszcz: W'ydawnicrwo Homini,ryg7) ry-47.
ra This was most likely through the person and work
I
of Professor Gregory papamichail
(t874-r956),though the latter did not take up the topic ofthe essence/energies distinction (see
Bielawksi, zI). Stiniloae cites Papamichail in several places in his book on Gregory Palamas
(e.g., Viaya, +t, rtiL, 16z). About the work of Papamichail, see [oan I. lcL,Jr., Grigorie Palarna.
Scrieri I. Tornosure dogmatice, uiafa, slujba. (Sibiu: Deisis, zoog) ry.
15
Cited in Bielawski, op. cit.,27. ln rhe preface tohis Life and Tbachings of St. Gregory
Palamas, Stlniloae emphasizes the importance ofthe Orthodox docrrine ofthe uncreated en-
ergies (which present aliving, indmate Godwho unites Himselfto man through His grace) in
confronting the secularizing trend of modernity, which has as its basis a distanr God, seen as
an abstract entiry, impersonal and devoid oflove.
16
For example, in Paris he obtained photographs of the codex Coislinianus graecus roo,
containing exclusively the writings of Palamas (Icl, Grigorie Palama, z7-29).
?
v Waya g fnu,ip,itura Sfintului Grigmrc Pahmallhe Life and Z+arhing of St. Gregory Pala-
zar] (Sibiu, 1938). Citations here are from the second edition (Bucuregti: Edirura Scrip ta, 1991,).
Prior to the monograph, Stlniloae had published an arcicle and an ample ranslation of Pdamas
intheAnuarulAcaderniei Teohgice Andrelane (v.6, r9z9-ro,5z-72, arrdv.9, r93r-77,5-7o),

,9r
 YII Contemporary Readings: Calinic Berger

mire t}eologft t.hat would remain an essential feature ofhis thought for
the duration ofhis career. I o
a
(
Sometime in the late r93os, Sdniloae was privy to the rediscovery:'
a3

of the Pbilokalia in Romania.'e This occurred first through the writer'

and theologian, Nichifor Crainic,'o who had made a great study of Or-
drodox mysticism," and later through r'ro of Stlniloaet students who
returned from Mount Athos with the Greek version of St Nicodemus."
During this period, Stiniloae was not only the rector of the Theo-
logical Academy in Sibiu, but also the editor ofa major newsPaPe r, Tele'
graful Romi.n,'l inwhich he engaged in a sustained debate through the
r93os with another leading intelle ctual, Lucian Blaga, over the nature of
Romanian culture, religion, and mysticism.'a Blaga's grouP sought to
de-Christianize these categories entirely.

r&'stiniloae's workwith the manuscripts helped clarifr certain dates and events in the life
of Palaimas (Bielalvski, z7-28),and corroborate Symeon the New Theologran's authorship.of
an importa4t hesychastic manual (Waya, jg-47, esp. +t, +6-7; this is also referre d to in his Or-
thodox Spiritualityr, zr8, ET 267).
re For detailsron Sriniloaet discovery of the texts, hii scholarly methodology in translhr-
ing, and thevarious circles intercsted in rhe Philokalia in Romania at that qime (fust at thc
Brincoveanu Monasrcry and later in the "Burning Bustf movement), sec Ioan I. Ici,Jr., "Filot
calia de la Sibiu, t946-t948,1n faqa RomAniei soveitizatel in Filotei Sinaitul. Trezia miifii 1i
cerul inimii (Sibiu: Deisis, zoog) 5-26.
20 Stiniloae notes that Crainic had showed him the manuscript (Viapa,
)9, n. z),which
places Stiniloae's exposure to the writings before 1918; though he didnot obtain the Greek
version irntil after rhat. On Crainic, see Ioan L.Icl,Jr., Nicbifor Craink Carsurile de misticd
(Sibiu: Deisis, zoto) 76 pp,b ryy Crainic had received a ryped version of the Pbllokalia n
Romanian, lnterspcrsedwith Paisian teachings, but itwas,unpublishable dueto thepoortrans-
lation (Ic{ Ciainie, y -8),
2t Crainict course in mlnticism, taught at the Universiry of Bucharest, formed the basis
of Stiniloae's course, which hc gready enriched irt content and thought with his vast knowledge
of the writin gs of dte Pbilokalia, St Maximus, and St Gregory Palamas, all placed in &alogue
with contemporary thought, and finally published as h is O*hodox Spl*tual*y n t9 8 r (se e lci,
Crainic,S6-7).
D The smdents were hieromonls Arsenie Boca and Seraphim Popescu. the Phllokalla
was that publishedby Panagiotis Tzelatis in Athens, 1893. Stiniloae had three older, yet incom-
plete, renditions of the first volume in Romanian, which he referred to for help with obscure
passages (sec Ici; "Filocali ei g-w, n. s).
23 He was rector of the Andreina Theological Academy in Sibiu kom ry16 rotg46 (pro-
fessorfrom r9 zgto1916)- aurrdedrcrof TblegrafulRomd.nfromryrgto 1945, forwhichhe wrote
more than 11o articles.
2a Thesc articles were collected and published as Pozilia d-lui Lucian BkgafaSd de

Creyinism Si Ortodoxie (Sibiu, r94z).

,9L
 A Contenporarl syntbesis ofst Maximus'Theology: Tbe work oJ'Fr. Dumitra Stdniloae

rr ln this conrexr, Strniloae immediately realized the importance

of the Philokalia in countering the popularization of "new religious
v
'experiences"' vrhich were subjective, ambiguous, directionless and
lr "held to be avalue in themselus5"ur-inodrerwords, as exacdy the an-
tidote to the false mysticism popul arizedby the inteiligenrsia. The writ-
o ings ofthe Philokalia, and specifically those ofst Maximus,,6 provided
an authentic Christian mysdcism which was based on the patristic sci-
t, ence of the soul, tested through generations, and which properly as-
t- sessed the value of the world. Moreove& he saw its value,not only for
e monasdcs but for all Christians, since its writings presented,a "practical
)f teaching ofthe Orrhodox way of life" which "can rransform us day to
o day,'give us "step by step" guidance tourards a definitive goal of trans-
formingpassions into virtues, which culminate in love and union with
God. The content of the Philokaliawas therefore essential for the life
ofthe Church, since it could provide a "precise and specifically Ortho-
fe
dox content to preaching and chrisrian living."', so important did
rf
r- Stiniloae see these writings he "could not wait ten or even a hundred
years'f that it might take for the critical editions of the writings to be
t-
compiled.'8 He began translating immediateh somedme in 1943. This
le
)- would eventually result in his life-longproject ofproducingthe nn'elve
Si volumes ofthe expanded and richly-annotated Romanian Filocalia.,g

:h
Howeve! thi Greek Pbilokatiawas not Stiniloaet 6rst exposure
:k to St Maximus,'o nor can it entirely explain his grasping of the Saintt
Z irnportance and subsequent dedicarion to his writings. Indeed, through
'Jr
the r93os, the prevailing scholarly opinion (which stiniloae knew
s-

is
r 25 Stiniloae,
26
Prefece, Filocalia,vol. r, tr.
le ibid.,ro n. z.
27 ibid.,z-9.
i,
28 Stlniloae
set out on this task systemadcally, consultingthe scholarship ofhis day, which
ia le d him to reassign authorship and re-order rhe wrirings chronologically. He lamenred the fact

ll- that critical editions did not exist, except for Diadochus and Evagrius, but even these were un-
re obtainable in rhe circumsrances of rhe day (Preface, Filocalia,vol. r,7).
2e
Published in rwelve volumes, 1946-199r. For an overview ofthe conrenrs of Stiniloae's
)- Philohalia,see MaciejBielawski, "Dumitru Stiniloae and HisP& ilokatiai in L. Tirrcescu (ed.),
le Dumitru Stdniloae: Tiadition andModernity inTheology (Pordand: The Ccnrerfor Romanian
Studies, zooz) z5-52..
le r St Maximus was cited dbeit briefy, in Crainic's Coure on lulystbisnt (see Ici, Crainic, r89,
zrz) and also in Stiniloae's monograph on St Gregory Palam es (Walq 68-9).
 YII Contemporary Readings: Calinic Berger

wellr'), was that St Maximus was "devoid of originalirl!'t' Yet in ry+4

Stinilcrae published a translationof r$eMystagogia. It is in the preface
of this ranslation that Stiniloae mentions t}re "beautiful srudy" of
Hans IJrs, von Balthasar, Kris rnis c b e L iturgi e,published in t9 4r,which
went against the poor estimation of St Maximus then en aogue and
demonstrated ttre Saint! "majestic and personal synthesis of the great
philosophical currents of antiquity, as well as the principles ofpatristic
thoughu"3, Stiniloae recognized the Saintt profound importance in
providing a patristic psychology and mysticism, and a theological
foundadon for the integration of the transcendent and communal as-
pects of the world and the Church, which he sawpreserved in Ortho-
dory and permeadng the soul of Romanian culture.3a Significandy, in
rhis preface he also tells us that he had ready for publication at thae
dme more than half of the Saint's corpas (by ,g++,when he was but
+o yeers of age). These translations would comprise the second and
thirdvolumes ofthe Romanian Philokalia, wliqh doubled the alloca"
tion ofthe Saint! writings as compared to the Greek collection.lt EveR
before the,appearance ofthe l[ystagogi4, however, Stiniloae had pub-
lished his Christologied monograph,Jesus Christ.or tbe Restoration of
Man (rg+i,that washeavily indebted to St Maximug. Therefore, be,
tween r94r (tlre appearaqce ofvon Balthasart book) andJanuary ry+7,
when the new regime brcibly transfered him from Sibiu to Bucharest
(having removed him as dean of the Theological Academy and editgr
of TelegrafulRomin), Stiniloae had ranslated halfofthe corpus ofsq
Maximus, andpublished a major Chrjstologt..l monograph incorpo'
3 I
He mentions dl significant studies in Reaista Tbologicd y (rS + d $ 4. ln the preface to
Filocalia,v.z (rhe fust containing the writings of the Confessor), Stiniloae analyzes this schol-
arship briefly and credits von Balthasar for changing the established opinion of Sr Maximus,
demonstradng his original synthesis of Evagrius and Dionysius (rr n. l). H" also notes von
Balthasar's work in esablishing a proper chronological order of the Saint's wridngs and calls
his Die gnostiscben Centurien de Maximus Confasor (tg4r) "remarkable" (r1 n. 3). It is perhaps
noteworthy that Stiniloads ra&don of providing his translations of pauistic texts with rich
annotations beginswith th e.Gnostk Centuries ofSt Maxirnus n Filocalia u z, precisely in &a,
logue with von Balthasa/s work.
32 Preface, Filocaliav. 2,. ro;

'3 Reaista Tbologici 3a $g++) $ +.

v He mentions specifically the poem, "Mioriga."
3t To fie 1891 Greek version, the Romanian added,the Liber asceticus, Questiones et du-
bia,and,the Qtaestiones adThaLassiuraz.Icinotes that thiswas the fust complere uanslation of
rhe latter into a modern language,("Filocaliai rl).

,9+
 A Contem?orary Synthesis ofSt Maximus'Tbeologl: Tbe Work of Fr. Durnitru St,iniloae

rating his thought, as well as the first volume of the Philokalia.r6 That
such accomplishments took place in such a short period, and in the
midst of great upheaval in Romania and personal tragedy (the death
of his young daughter in April ry45), is truly astonishing.lT
These details are importanr because onlywithin rhe contexr of his
goal ofcreating a living the ology and a vibrant spiritual life in the Church
can we understand the place ofst Maximus in Stiniloaet work. His dis-
covery of St Maximus came at the apex ofhis work on St Gregory Pala-
mas, at the threshold ofhis work on the Philokalia, and in the midst of
a struggle with a de- Christianizing culture and the n governmenr. Vith-

in this crucible, St Maximus provided the core of Stiniloaet synthesis:

Palamas explicated theological aspect of our union with God through
His uncreated energies, the Philokaliaelucidated the human aspecr by
providingpractical guidance in prayer and life, and St Maximus placed
the path, the goal, the world, and the Church, in a synthetic and all-
encompassingvision, which was notably and outstandingly Christocen-
uic. Stiniloae turned to St Maximus'thought decisively, therefore, for
a coherent Christological vision of the world, expressed at times with
technical doctrinal precision, which could thereby ac as a framework,t
to incorporate and evaluate conremporary theological insights and give
guidance for social concerns.re

An Example ofSt Maximus in Stiniloae's Methodology:

Kenosis in Fr. Sergius Bulgakov
Ife aposition to briefy analyzethe definitive influence
are now in
of St Maximus in Stlniloaet own theological writings, which has been
noted by several scholarsao and can even be said to distinguish him
from other Orthodox theologians engaged in the same overall project
36 the Filocaliaappearedonly afterhe left Slbiu.
37 Here we should note
his touching dedication of the first volume of rhe Rommi a Filocalia:
"Lord, accept the rvork of this translation as a prayer for the soul of my precious child, Mioara."
38 "The mysticism
of Saint Maximus is a Christological mysticism, without ceasing to be
an all-encompassing system, in which the wodd enters and is redeemed for all eternity in all its
splendor." (Intro, Filocalia z:21).
3e Reuista
Tbologicd, 143-4 Q944) fi6.
a Notably, Andrew Louth, who notes the many contributions of Stiniloae in "Recent Re-
sbhrch on St Maximus the Confessor: A Surveyi'SVTQ+z (tgg8) 6l-8+;Bielawski (in Tirrcescu,
op. ch., $, n.*) states: "It would be really useful to add one more chapte r about Stiniloae ro the
excelient book of Aidan Nichols, BTza ntirue Gospel!'

i95
 I

YII Contemporary Readings: Calinic Berger

I
of making theology bodr relevant and patristically grounded. As not' e

ed a$ove; the definitive influence of St Maximus is already evident in I i

(
his early Christological study,rlesus Christ or the Restoration of Man
(r9+r),*' from which we will take an example. I t
ln his methodology, Stiniloae at dmes will comPare tlre Christo- !
l
I
logical and philosophical positions of his contemPoraries directly to I

*tlr. of St Maximus.a'For example, Stlniloae analyzes at length the I

Christology ofFr. Sergius Bulgakov; as exPressed in his rg3, mono$aPh,

Agnets Bozbil.a, Bulgakov did not read St Ma,ximus carefully,aa had alow
esdmation of the Saint's theology,as and openly disagreed wit}r St Max-
imus over the issue of gnomic will in Christ.n6 Stlniloae respected Bul-
gakoU yet took exception to many of his views, which we cannot address
here.aT One such view, not deemed controversial by others,as was Bulga.
kov's nodon of kenosis.A briefoverview ofstlniloae's analysis ofthe lat'
ter can be utilized to illustrate Stlniloae's methodology.
Accordingto Bulgakov, inthe kenosis,the\(rord of God laid aside
His divine properties and energies (such as His omnipotence, glory;

ar fuStlniloae himself says, rhe work "is not a book of dogmatia, strictly speaking' but
rather book
"a ofthought, ofChristian meditation in the broad sense," seeking to bring thg fl-el-
contemporary person ofJesus into the questions and smrggles offie day. Stiniloae describes his
metlodology as taking the dogmas of the Fathers as "an unchanging axis" around which the
'fux" ofvarious questions can be arranged, thereby allowing tleology to be "fresh, contemPo-
rary, speaking to each ti.me in its languagei while allowing it simultaneously to "maintain itself
6rmly connected with the uadition ofrhe Church" (Restaurarea,Preface, 7-8).
a2 For exampl e, Restdurarea, chs. and 6, passim.
1
a3 Sergius Bulgakov, Thelamh ofGol. English uans. BorisJakim (Gqpd Rapids, Eerd-
manns, ,ooa). See dso, Rowan S7'illiams, Sergii Bulgahoa. Tbuards aRusian Political Tlteol-
agy (E&nburgh: T&T Clark,tggg).On Bulgakov, most recendy: NikolaiSakharov, "Essendal
Bulgakov: His Ideas about Sophia, the Tiinicy and Ch'ristl SYTQsstt-(zort) $5'2o8. (Inless
notedi all citations below will be referenced toJakim's transladon.
a This is evident from his pauciry ofcitations. His most extensive inclusion ofSt Maximus
is in a brief overview of Monothelitism (The Lamb of God, z+'82).
a1 This perhaps reflected the scholarship of the day. He claims that St Maximus did not
possess'an integral tJreological doctrine, especially on the most important quesdons, in par-
ticular the question of how the simultaneous operation of.the two wills in Christ is posible.
Although he affirms *re future dogma, he does so without theological preparadon, andhe is
{
far from being 6rm and consistent in applying i (Th e Lamb of God, tt).
4 Lamb ofGod, z4s-6, n. rg.
I Such as his ambiguous notion ofperson being "uncreatef and variously decouple d from
nature.
* E.g. Sakharov, who is not shy to criticizeBulgakov over other issueq, says "Bulgakov's
most signiGcant contribudon comes from his interpretation of Christ's kenosi s" (art. cit.,ry1).

196
 A Contemporary Syntbesis ofst Maximus'Theology: Tbe Work of Fr. Dumitru St,iniloae

not- etc.)+t and, most importantly, His divine self-consciousness, remain-

lt in ing G9d objecdvely in nature, but not in activity.r. using st Maximus,
Wan Stiniloae comes to completely different conclusions: in the ,Incarna-
tion, the I(rord of God did nor leave aside self-consciousness, albeit as
isto- man this d-eveloped according to human narure .5, In this development,
ly to the lack ofgnomic will directly follows from the fact that the ir,r**
r the nature of Christ was nor an hypostasis independent from the !7ord5,-
:aph, and so His human will did not deliberate in a separare, or "autono-
rlow mousl'manner from Him, its divine subject. Nor did the'Word Incar-
Max- nate lay aside His divine attributes,, bur maniGsred them according
Bul- receptivity of each person, not in an overwhelming
to_ th-e
dress which would prevenr communion between Him and his fello* hu-
-rr.r.i
ulga- man beings, but just enough to reveal His identity. In this, the kenosis
elat- revealed that divine omniporence does not consist primarily in over-
whelmingpower, but in love.ta
aside
n' 8.8-"[T]he Man who is also the pre-eternal God srops having His diviniry for Himselfl
/ory, as it were: He retains only the narure ofDiviniry not its gl ory" (Larnb of God,zz4). "By this act
the S-e1ond hypostasis removes from HimselfHis proper hyposratic will or .r.rgy *hil. ,.taining
,g" but His filial obe&ence by keeping inacdve His proper lr-yposiatic acrualiry" (toii of crd, ,r5).
t0 'That is, rhe hypostasis of the Logos, ceasing to be a divine hypostasis A. Ui-r.f
re eYer-
*frl.
beshis remainingsuch in His objective being, becomes eltuman hypostaslsiAis consciousnes of self is
ich the redized *nough human consciousness" (Larnb of God, zzg; see also 271, za).Heremained God
EmPo- in activiry for rhe tiniry and the world, bur not "for Himself
n itself t' E.g., Jesus did not waffie in His knowle dge as do other people , there is not seen in Him
a Progress or correction in what He said. All is ultimate truth, clear, absolutely certain, from
the first moment of His appearanc€ in the public arena. Ir is divine vision and knowledge,
: Eerd- framed in human forms ofknowledge and expression. These forms are rhus tJrose which prJg-
'Theol- ress with natural human capaciry to grasp and render divine wisdom. The actvities Jf
age, the
;sendal both nacures meet in a whole, without the lighrof divine knowledge replacing rhe organ of
Unless human knowledge and its aciviry" (Restaurarea, ry4-
52 See his discussion
).
in this regard, almost totally indebted to St Maximus, in Restaurarea,
aximus t7z-84.
53
lid not
- See his many citations
the natures that were a
of St Maximus, Restaurarea, r4r, n.r. For example, "Neither of
hypostasis are activated in a manner separare from the other. Through
in par- each the other is made evident. Being truly borh one and the other, as God He was H. who
ossible. moves His humanity, whereas as man He was He who uncovers His own divinity. He suffered
rd he is divinely, so to speak, thus sufferingvolunrarily, for He was nor a simple (V,}ag) man, and per-
formed miracles humanly, thus performing them through the body, for He was nor , r,"k d
(Tupvdg) God" (PG 9t:rooD and also, ,osZA); "Neither-does He do human
things humanly.
:dfrom For He does them through His omnipotent will, not subject to any ne cessity. His s-uffe Ang He
not according to som€ punishment, as wirh ui, b.rt according to rhe kenosis oirhe
gakovt
:l_drfd
\tr7ord incarnate for us" (PG
9r:rzoB).
it.,ry). 5a Restaurarea,
r+7-8 (with several cirations from the cent. Gnost.), and ryz-4.

)97
 VII Contemporaryt Readings: Calinic Berger

Stiniloaet analysis ofBulgakov's kenosis theory also demonstrates

a key characteristic of his synthesis: the constant weaving together of
St Maximus' thought with that ofst Gregory Palamas. Bulgakov found
nineteenth-cenmry Protestant notions of kenosis to be, in his own words,
"rather ortlodox," and based his own theory on them.ti Stiniloae, on
the other hand, sees them as impoverishing the nodon of the lncarna-
tion, for it is precisely by doinghuman things divinely and divine things
through His human nature that the uncreated energy of God fows in
and through Christ to all human nature and thereby to all creation.t6

Stiniloae's (Jse of St Maximus' Doctrine

ofthe Logos-logoi
As a final example, we will briefy look at Fr. Stlniloaet use of a
specific doctrine of St Maximus. Readers ofFr. Stlniloaeb work cannot
but take note of his widespread and systematic use of Maximus'doc-
trine of the logoi,which he closely relates to doctrine of the uncreated
energies of St Gregory Palamas. Here we will make a few observations
ofhow Stlniloae incorporates and synthesizes these doctrines.
First, while Stlniloae maintains the ontological connection estab-
lished by St Maximus berween the one Logos and the many logoi in his
overall doctrine of participation, he creatively draws out the implica-
tions contained in the Confessor's teaching tJrat the one Logos is the
hypostatic or ?ersunalLogos of God.t' Due to this fact, in Stiniloae's
view, the logoiofthings possess ontological and existential (that is,per-
sonal) dimensions simultaneously. From the ontological perspective,
the logoi are the unchanging models and goals of all things, according
towhich Godcreates, sustains, andguides them to Himselfts The logoi
pre-exist in an eternal, undifferentiated, and unchanging unity in God
the Logos,te andwithout departingfrom this simple unity, become dif-

55 Larnb ofGod, zzo, n. rz.

56 Restaurarea,rl4.
t' E.g- "Moreover, woul&he not also perceive that the manylogoi are one Logos, seeing
that all things are relatingto Him without beingconfusedwith Him, who is the essentiallyand
personally distinct (ivo$o$,r urd\iyun6auro.r) Logos of God the Father, the origin and cause
of all things..l (Amb.7.r5, PG 9rto77CD).
58 See especially, Anb
7t5-zo, ro7 7C-toBtD.
5e E.g., "Stricdy speaking, the divine logoi do not subsisr in the divine Logos in a disdnct
[i.e.
di$erentiated] manner" (Commenr on Amb 7.t6, roSoAC, RI 8r, .r. +l). h Sr Maximus: "ln

,98
 A Contem?orary Synthesis ofst Maximui Tbeology: The Work of Fr. Dumitru St,iniloae

ferentiated and dynamic in the act ofcreation.6o More specifically, they

*wills"
are divine or rhe "thoughts ofGod, in conformiryiowhich things
are brought into existence frro"sh the divine will."6'Thus, even frot
tlre ontological perspe criye, Stxniloae , sees the hgoi implying apersonal
God, since each being is created'ht the *ppropiirte time" inj giuen
destiny by God, which is union with Himself,6, From the exis-tendal"
perspective, Strniloae sees a personal God revealed by the multiple
"meanings" which each of the logoi rnediate, which are specific intin-

Ggdthe logoi of all things are stgadfastly fixedi (Arnb7.r9, roSrA); "...the principles
Ddro,] ,..
which preexist uniforrnly [povoer8a6] in hirn" (,4d Tbal.6o, pG
9o:6zslx)i;The logoi of all the
beings that exist essentially ... pre-exist and are immovably fixed in God ... these logii are clearly
incomrptible" (Amb 4L.ts,gr:rrL9A, c). see ako r{mb ro.rzo, rzo5c. cf, Dionisius, DN 1.g,
PG 3:824C: "... and all the exemplars frapdSet'yyara] ofexistent things must pre-exist under rhe
form ofone super-essential un ky lplarv tnepobqrc,t Eyuott] . . . And we give the name of bamplars'
to those laws [rtdyo,] which, pre-existent in God as an uniry, producJth. essences ofthings ...".
e tn st Maximus, e.g.: ".;. the one Logos is many logoiand the many are one. Acclrding
to the creative and sustainingprocession ofthe One to individual beings... rhe One is many;
(Amb 7.zo,9r:ro8iC); "...cvery divine energy indicates through itselftfe whole of God, inji
visibly present in each particular thing, according to the logos-through which rhat rhing exists
in its own.way... [God] is truly all things in all things, ncaergoingiut ofHis own iniiuisible
srnpllcity Qamb zz,7,9r:tz57BC). Cf Dionvsius, DN 4.r1 " [He is in] all things through a super-
essential and ecstatic power whereby Heyt stay within Himself .!.
6r Introducd on, Ambigaa,
28. St Maximus, following Dionysius, calls tihe ligoi "wlls"
pa'\ltaral (A-b. 7.24,gt,roB5BC;DN 5.8, 8z4c). In staniloae's view,lthe logolof thirrgr,
existing before the ages, do not have self-existence, but are potential logoi nGoJor in the zu-
preme Logos. The entides of the world do not thereby have pre-cxisrence' (Note on Amb.
7.t6,
9r:ro8oAB, 8o n. 4z). This is in conuast to Origenist doctrine. (St Maximusmakes the poten-
tial/actual distinction e4plicitn lmb 7.r9, ro8rAB .) the logoi,existing in a uniry in tie one
Logos, only pre-exist as "possibiliricsi which are made known in th. act ofcreatioq which is an
act of the divine will-and thus, the logoi "do not move themselves towar& material existence,"
i.e. as iftheywere self-existent (ibid., 8r, n.43). Sriniloae conrinues: "This docuine ofthe divine
logoi of things connects these logoi to the divine will.... The logoi of creatures rhus are eternal,
because nothingtemporal exists in God, but at the samc time theydo not belongto His essence,
but are expressions of His will..." (Comment on Amb 7.r7,9r:rogoCD, Az, n.
45).
62
See Introductiln, Arnbigua,29. Elsewhere, Stiniloae writes, "God sees and wills in the
logoi the movement and goal of things, which is their deification. But as rhe Fathers affirm the
paradoxical eternal existence of the divine logoi and their dependence on the divine will, so Sr
Maximus unites the paradox of the goal of God for rhose crearures wirh their will ro advance,
or not' towards that goal. In this way, St Maximus avoids the conclusion ofthe apocatasrasis....
These two paradoxes have sometling in common: borh imply divine freedom, or a personal
God. Atthe same time, they make possible the existence of he., personal .r."*.r..." (Com-
ment on Amb 7t7,gttroloCD, 82, n. 44, cmphasis mine). "The one Logos, multiplied in the
manylog_oi of creatures... must be understood both as a hlpostaric Vroid... and as apersanal
presence[in crearures] of infinite intensiry and richness" (Comment on Amb 7.zo,9izto8tC,
81, n.5o, emphasis mine).

,99
 YII Contemporary Readings: Calinic Berger
n'
tions and words of G od directed towards each, individual believer. The
"meaning" always proceeds from the logos and is never detached from
it, yet reveals an always deeper dimension, or new, personal aspect of
communicadon berween God and man through things.6*
One consequence of Stiniloae's personal-ontological interpreta-
don of the logoiis that the contemplation of nature, which is the abil-
ity to see the logoi of things unaffected and undistorted by passionate
attachment, becomes clearly a form ofpersonal dialogue between God
and the human person.6t Through ascetic purificadon and the seeking
of the logoi, man sees the thoughts and "loving intentions"66 of God
personally directe d to him. Since they are rooted in the personal Logos,
the logoi foster personal dialogue, ultimately conveying Godt love to
us and stimulatingour love for God.6'W'ithout this existential-dialog-
ical aspect, the world itselfwould have no meaning.68
Stiniloae's emphasis on thep ers o nal aspect of the Logos- logo i doc-
trine highlights his notion that "person]'or interpersonal communion,
is always the goal (of the contemplation of nature), and "nature" is the
means and irreducible ground ofthis communion. [n this mannet the
Logos-logoi doctrine allows Fr. Stlniloae to establish a theological foun-
dation for an ascetic spiritualitywhich leaves no aspect ofreality outside
of the divine-human dialogue.n'

The Logoi andthe Uncreated Energies

Anodrer important aspect ofstaniloaet utilization ofst Maximus'

thought is his integration of the Saint's logoi doctrine with that of the
63 For Stlniloaet explanadon of the disdnction berween "reason"
067oq, rapiune) end
"meaning' (,r6ryga,sens),see TDO rz18-9ff,ET z:z9ff.The former (logos) rsapprehendedpri-
marily through human reason, whereas rhe latter (rneaning) through a higher human faculty
("intuition") which includes yet transcends reason, involving the human will and belonging
"more properly to the domain of relations between the human person and the Divine Person"
(TDO r:zo, ET r:r3).
64 TDO :cz4r,Eil z:14.
6' See TDO u47-46,8T ztzT-41,and ch. z4 ofhis Orthodox Spirituality,"The Contem-
plation of Gdd in Creation" (SO r64-183, W zo7-27).

"67 E.B,TDO vol. r, 245, ETvol. z, 4o-r.

SO ry5,ry7-8;W zr4,zr7.
"6e E.g.,TDO r:242, ET z:75.
One can see the Logos-logoi doctrine implicitly pre sent in many of his refections as
well; for example, the section endtled, "The knowledge of God in the concrete circumstances
of lifci' TDO r :99-ro yUf uu7 -tzz.

+oo
 A Contemporary Syntbesk ofSt Maximui Theology: The Work of Fn Duminu St,iniloae

uncreated energies as elaborated by St Gregory Palamas, an issue which

has yet to receive a definitive clarity among St Maximus'many com-
mentators.T'Stiniloae deftly integrates the logoi and uncreated ener-
gies, all the while remainingwithin the framework esrablished for the
logoiby St Maximus. It could be said thar Stiniloae sees the logoi and
energies as complemenrary, which can be demonstrared by drariirrg at-
tention to some of Stiniloaet basic distincrions in this regard.
First, each logos, while clearly pre-existing and uncreated, is always
identifiable through aspecifccreated thingorsp ecfi.c a*ribute of God.r'
The uncreate d energies, on the other hand, are not integrally connected
to specific beings or artributes. Therefore, the logoi, to an exrenr, have
become intelligible through their manifestation in particulars; rhe ener-
gies are not associated with particulars and thus remain beyond intelli-
gibility." However, this does nor mean that uncreated energies cannot
be mediated drrough created things.7,

70 The issue
fy by Lar slhunberg, Man arud the Cosmos (New York: SVS
is treate d very brie
Press, 1985) Lr7'+jt Vasilios Karayiannis, Maxime le Confesseur: Essence et Energies de Dieu
(Paris: Beauchesne, 1993) u1-LL; andJean-Claude Larchet,I a Tbiologie des Enerlies Diuines:
Des origina i saintJean Damasclne (Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, zoto) 192-5. Key rexts from
St Maximus on this questionincludetArnb 7.o,PG 9rto76A-to77B (energies, norlogoi);Arnb
7.r5-zrPG 9r:ro77C-rc84I- (logoi,nor energies); Amb zz.z,PG 9r:rz56D -n57C (bofi ener-
giesandlogoi);Amb 4z.t4,PG 9r;t1zlB-ryzeD (logoi); Cap. Gnost.I.+7-5o,55, PG 9o:rrooC-
rro4c; II.6o, 88, PG 9o:rro6A, rrzoc. Thunberg (op. cit., ryo),J. Farrell (Free choice in st.
Maxirnus Confessor, St. Tikhon's, t989, ryg),Karayiannis (op. cit.,zr5) and Larchet (op. cit.,
_the
y5) cite the one text that includes both logoi and energies (Arnb zz.z,9r.tz57 AB) r,ot
cited by Balthasar, Sherwood, or Lossky, as nores Karayiannis, op. cit., zt9 n.285. -".o.
7r Ofcourse each created being has a pre -exisdng
, logos. Yet St Maximus also refers to the
amributes of God-e.g., goodness and the other works which "did not begin in dme" and exisr
"around God" and in which creatures parricipate by "grace"-as'logoi" (Cap. Gnost. r.4g-5o,
PG 9o:rrooC-rrorB), thehighestofwhichlogoiislove(Amb ro.rr9,9r:rzo4D). On Stiniloae's
view of the attributes, vis-I-vis Godt essence, see TDO 186, to6,W utoz, rz7.
72 *Ihe logoi can
in turn become transparent to the energies, as St Maximus states in,4mb.
zz.z (PG 9t:r257 AB): "... the intellect, when naturallyperceiving all the logoi that are in beings,
in whose infinite number it contemplates the energies of God, reckons the differences of th.
divine energies which it perceives to be multiple and infinite." Commendng on this passage,
Stiniloae notes: "St Maximus alternates in attributing to the mind the grasping of the divine
energies or of the divine logol of things; hetter said, the logoi are seize d with the mind, but rhe ir
gnergetic chatacter with our entire being. The mind is rhe organ ofknowledge of intelligible
beings" (Ambigua, zz6, n. z9 5).
73 For example, "In its
rurn, nature can be the medium through which rhe believer receives
divine grace or the beneficenr uncreared energies" (TDo vol. r, zz4,ET vol. z, 3). AIso, else-
where : "all the time that we know by concepts rhe divine energies in narure, we haye rhe con-
sciousness that these concepts are inadequate for the energies which are manifested through
nature" (SO r95, ET a7).

+ot
 I4I Contemporary Readings: Calinic Berger

Secondly, rhis disdncrion can be seen in the factthat the uncreared

energies reveal the logoi inthings and rhe attributes ofGod "in motion."r*
This becomes especially clear in natural contempladon, in which the
ascent through created things to see their logoioccurs not only through
asceric purification, butwith the help of ' g racel'which Stiniloie iden-
tifies as the uncreated energies.T5 The energies serve to illurnine the
mind to see the logoi in things and lead the mind through the logoi to
their source, the one, personal Logos of God.r6
The distinction between the logoi and energies is also evident in
Stiniloaet description ofthe difference between contemplation in this
present life and in the future age. In the present life, we look directly at
created things and through them we behold their logoi,which reveal
the one Logos. However, in the future age we will see the logoidirectly
in the one Logos, and created things only indirectly. This is not because
the created things will disappear, but because they will become rrans-
parent in the infinite light of the uncreated energies.TT

74 "Theoperations
[energies] which produce rhe attributes of the world are, therefore,
bearers of certain attributes found in God in a simple and incomprehensible way. The opera-
dons [energies], therefore, are nothing other than the attribures of God in mocion. ... God
Himself is in each of these operations or energies, simultaneously whole, active, and beyond
operation or movement. Thus His operations [energies] are what makes Godt qualities visible
in creatures, creadng these with qualities analogous, but infinitely inferior, to God Himselfi
and then imparting His uncreated operadons or acributes ro them in higher and higher de-
grees" (TDO vol. r, ro4, ET vol. t, :r,5).
75 ln general,
Stiniloae equates "grace" and "uncreated energies.'For example, he uses both
the term "grace" and "uncreated energies" for the raising up of the human mind beyond its
namral powers for the direct contemplation of God (Preface, Filocalia uzz; also,Preface, Fi-
localia yzt, n.1).It could be argued that St Maximus also equates "grace" and "divine energyi'
both ofwhich convey "deification" after the cessation of narural powers (compare Cap. Gnost.
t.47, goittooC and 2.88, 9o:rfi6D;Also compare, Amb 7tz,9ruo76CD wir}r OTP 9r31AB, t
RT PSB 8o r91, and On the Lord\ Prayer, 9o$77A,ET Phrlokalia uzBT).ln his description
of Melchizedek, St Maximus refers to the "divine and uncreated grace, which exists eternallv
and is beyond all nature and dme" (Arnb. rc.4a, 9r:rr4rB), which Stlniloae notes alludes ro
Palamas'teachinglongbefore Palamas (RT rar, n. fi4).
'n E.g., the energies assist us in seeing the logoi, pulling a person higher as by a "thread"
(SO ry6-7,8T zt6).
77 For example"The
logoi ofthings in the world, far from becoming unnecessary after the
revealed vision of God, will help us understand the fecundity of rhe divine Logos.... Of course,
then [in the future age] we will look directly ar rhe Sun of fughteousness, or ar his lighl and
indirecdy atthe logoi ofthings; in the same way now [in the present age] we do not look at the
dire ct light of the sun, but only see its blurre d refection from things. ln orher words, when we
contemplate God directly we will conremplate the logoi of rhings in Him Himself, nor in

40L
I
A contemporary synthesis ofSt Maximus'Theologl,: The work of Fr. Dumitru St,iniloae

A 6nal note should be made regarding the fact that on a few occa-
sions Strniloae srares that rhe logoi are uncreated energies.T8 These in-
stances should be seen in rheir context: in each, Stiniloae is referring
specifically to the crearion and sustaining of things, which in his interl
pretation occurs through the divine will ofGod, in accordance with the
logoi, and by means of the uncreated energies. By referring to the logoi
as energies in this context, Stlniloae is not disregarding the distincti,on
between the logoi and the divine energies, which is clearly articulared
and mainrained throughout his works. Lnsread, he is emphasizing rhat
the logoi,as "divine wills" or "creative, volitional powers of God"r, ,h.r.-
bv arso possess an energetlc character.--""
Dy also character."8o uertainly,
Cerrainly, St
5t Maximus does
not call the logoi "energies" and neither does he assign them a directly
energetic aspecr, though he does refer ro che logoi as }ilipara,citing
Dionysius.s' Therefore, it would appear that, in this instance (of assign-
ing an energedc character to the logoi as e,iltrlyara, and thereby calling
them "energies"), Sriniloae is interpredng the logoi notentirely bar.d ot
the confessor's own writings, but also in the light ofDionysius.s,

things, as now. Then we will see them so much better illuminated, more profoundly, more
clearly" (So 165, ET :o4; referringro st Maximus,
euest. ad Tbal.55,pG 9o.536). "Thus, ifin
this life we first behold created things and only rhrough them, with great difficulry, God, then
we will see first God and uansparendy in His light all creared things, in a manner all the more
clear and complete, and more-deeply, than we see them in objecdvity...'i This light
"rr.".thly
Stiniloae calls the "energies of God, more infinite than an ocean" (Comment on Cap. GnJst.
2.88, PG 9o:rr65D IET Philokalia zt6o, arexr in parall elwithArnb.
T.rz, gr:ro77 Al\1, Filoro-
lia, z:zor,n.r). See also, Introdu ction, Filocalia ziLz-).
78
These are very few, e.g.: his introduction to the Ambigua, zg;hiscommenr on Amb. zz
(226,n.295);andSO 3r9, ET y+.
7e
Sciniloae writes, "This doctrine of rhe divine logoi of rhings connecm rhese logoi to the
divine will. Thus Dionysius the Areopagite (DN 5:8, PG 1:824C) affirm"d thar the lo[oi are di
vinewills.... The logoi are not... inert models, but creative, volitional powers ofGod, wliich imply
the thought ofthe models ofthings. The logoi ofcrearures, though they are eternal, b..",rs. noth-
ing rcmporal exiscs in God, nevertheless do not belong to His nature, but are expressions of His
will" (Note on Amb 7t7,9r:to8oCD, 82, n. +s).To say rhat the logoiinthis insiance are "wills"
or "powers" does not imply that they have an ontic existence. [n a prwious nore, Stiniloae writes:
"the-logoi of fiings, existing b{ore the ages, do nor haye self exisience,
but are potential logoi in
God or in the supreme Logos. The endties ofthe world do nor therebyhave pre-exisr.rr.." (6orn-
ment on Amb.7.16,9r:ro8oAB, 8o n. 4z). And again: "... [the act by which] He creates
[rhings]
according to the model of the logoi pre-existent as possibilities (not as real existencer), i,* L,
of goodness'and fius of His will" (commenr on Amb. 7.t6,9r:rof,.!rB, gr, n.
a3).
80
CommentonAmb. zz 9r:rz57AB,p. zz6, n. LgS.
" 8r Amb.7.z4,9r:ro85B.
82
Hereisthepassage fromDionysius(DN5.8,PG 1:824C)whichgive thelogoianar;;ive/
energedc asPect: "But we say that the being-making (oiotonotor)6) logoi of all biings, which

+o,
 I/II Conternporary Readings: Calinic Berger

Concluding Thoughts
\7e will conclude with a few briefobservadons. First, dre influence
of St Maximus is ubiquitous in Fr. Stiniloae's work. It is prominent in
his discussions of the Tliniry of Christ, the Church and the world, as-
ceticism and deificadon, and most especially, in his integral view ofper-
son and nature in both the Holy Tliniry and humanity. Indeed, in con-
temporary Orthodox theology, Stlniloae! dedication ro the Saint, as
evident from his extraordinary accomplishment of transladng the enrire
coryus,and the subsequent infuence ofthe Saint on his own rhought is,
perhaps, unique. But not only in content, but also in methodology, we
could say that Fr. Stiniloae is truly a disciple of St Maximus: in his pri.
marygoal to serve the Church, inhis refusalto separare dogmafromlife,
and in his willingness to cire theologians and thinkers from every era,
accepting the good while leaving aside the unacceptable. As a result, he
produced arich theologicalsynrhesiswhich is both *adidonal and con-
temporary simultaneously.s,
Secondly, one must appreciate the place ofStMa:rimus in Stiniloaet
theological synthesis, which sought to integrate Orthodox thought and
life: St Gregory Pdamas revealed to him a God that comes ro man, em-
bracing and enlighteninghim with His uncreated energies; rhe Phlhka-
lia prcsented a step-by-step guide to purificacion and deification; and St
Maximus synthesized these aspects, revealing that tJre desire to receive
the gift of deification was rooted in human narure,84 embedded in the
very structure of the world, and in all cases, fulfilled in Chrisr. These
themes are wonderfully synthesized in &e conclusion to Fr. Sti.niloae's

pre-exist uniformly in God, are paradigm s.Qrdpa}etyyara), which theology callspredetermina-

tions, and divine benefcent volitions (0ilripara), determinadve and creative (&Qoprottr<,ir rai
noupr,il) of beings, according to which the Super-Essential both pre.dercrmined and pro-
duced all beings."
83
Stiniloae repeatedly summarized his dreological project as an effort ro uncover the sig-
nificance of the light and unchanging truths of the dogmas for the concerns and suuggles of
the practical Christian life (for example; in the prefaces to borh his, first book of systematic
theology,Jesus Christ or the Restoration ofMan, and in one his lasr, the Ortbodox Dogmatic
Theology).In the former, he states that "The dogmas are concise formulae with a narrow scope,
and exactly due to this limited scope, and to the restricted character oftheir content, is thepos-
sibiliry of their remaining an unchanging axis in the continual flux oflife...." Theology thereby
becomes 'both alive and new, but also faithful to the unchanging doctrine of the Church"
(Prefrce, Rrs taurarea).
8a
SO zr8 n.46.
1
I

A Conternporary Synthesis ofSt Maximus'Theology: The Work of Fr. Dumitru St,iniloae

great work on Ortlodox asceticism and mysdcism: "The incarnation of

the \Word... gaye man the possibility ro see in the human face of Logos,
concentrate d anew, aillhe logoi and divine energies. This final deification
will consist ofa contemplation and experience ofall the divine logoi md
energies conceived in and radiatingfrom, the face ofChrist."8t

8t SO Ef y+.
1r9,

+ot
 KNO\TING THE PURPOSE
.IOI{THROUGH
OFCRE
THERESURRECTION
Proceedings of the Symposium on
St Maximus che Confessor
Belgrade, Octobe r r$-Lr, LorL

Edited by
Bishop Maxim (Vasiljevii)

'ard, zorz.

the key to all the

i, and in addition
e and intelligible.
the burial appre-
ile hewho is initi-
:cion apprehends
,ching." Sebastiah Press
& The Faculry of Orthodox Theology - University of Belgrade
I Economy g)66)
LOtt