Andrew Louth - Syriac Christian Church

Andrew Louth - Syriac Christian Church Andrew Louth - Syriac Christian Church

13.12.2012 Views

COSMIC THEOLOGY 73 the distinction between heaven and earth (Myst. 3:672A). Again the church is an image of the human being, the soul being the sanctuary, the body the nave, and the mind the altar within the sanctuary. Conversely the human being is a mystical church, the body ‘radiant by virtue through the ascetic force of the soul’, the soul a sanctuary in which the logoi of the senses are conveyed to God by reason, and the mind an altar on which ‘he summons the silence abounding in song in the innermost recesses of the unseen and unknown utterance of divinity by another silence, rich in speech and tone’ (Myst. 4:672A– C). Maximus then devotes a chapter to an elaborate account of how the church is an image of the soul considered in itself (Myst. 5:672D– 684A). Then follow two chapters that explore other examples of division. First, the parallel between Holy Scripture and the human person: body/soul corresponds to Old Testament/New Testament (the New being the inner reality of the Old), and also to text/meaning (the meaning being the inner reality of the text) (Myst. 6:684A– D). Second, Maximus explores the parallels between what he calls three human beings: the cosmos, the Holy Scripture, and the human being ‘who is ourselves’ (Myst. 7:684D–688A). There are two striking things about the divisions of being as presented here. First of all, as we have seen division is normally presented by Maximus as something negative (‘indivisibly’ is one of the ‘Chalcedonian’ adverbs). Here, not so, or not apparently. In chapter 2, he makes it clear that the division between sanctuary and nave, between the invisible and the visible, is a matter of complementarity, not opposition. But in another way these divisions are not oppositions, for one term always stands higher than the other: the visible world points to the invisible world and in a way adumbrates it, similarly the nave and the sanctuary, or body and soul, or Old Testament and New Testament, or the text of Scripture and its meaning. These divisions are not separations, but representations of a tension, a tension which draws onwards and upwards—towards the final consummation. By holy communion of the spotless and life-giving mysteries we are given fellowship and identity with him by participation in likeness, by which man is deemed worthy from man to become God. For we believe that in this present life we already have a share in these gifts of the Holy Spirit through the love that is in faith, and in the future age after we have kept the commandments to the best of our ability we believe that we shall have a share in them in very truth in their concrete reality according to the steadfast hope of our faith and the solid and unchangeable promise to which God has committed himself. Then we shall pass from the grace which is in faith to the grace of

74 INTRODUCTION vision, when our God and Saviour Jesus Christ shall indeed transform us into himself by taking away from us the marks of corruption and bestow on us the original mysteries which have been represented for us through sensible symbols here below. (Myst. 24:704D–705A) What these divisions do is, it seems to me, to set up a set of echoing correspondences. Sanctuary/nave is reflected in invisible/visible, heaven/earth, soul/body, mind/reason, New Testament/Old Testament, meaning/text. So the movement between sanctuary and nave in the liturgy interprets and is interpreted by movement between the other divisions. There is still the circular movement—from sanctuary to nave and nave to sanctuary—that Denys celebrated, but it is subordinated to the movement from nave to sanctuary, from earth to heaven, towards our final rest in God, that undergirds Maximus’ vision. The divisions cease to separate and fragment, and become a kind of ladder. So the liturgical movement celebrates the healing of the five divisions by the Incarnation as Maximus expounds it in Amb. 41, and the rhythm of the liturgy enables the participant to realize the healing power of divine grace. The divisions are not done away, rather they contribute to the multiplicity inevitable in creatures who are ‘after God’ (as Maximus often puts it): from isolating and diminishing, they come to represent the richness and diversity of God’s creation. The movement between God and humankind in the Incarnation, ascetic struggle leading to contemplation as a healing of divisions within the human person and the cosmos, the liturgy as celebrating the mutual encounter between divine self-emptying and human deification: these are the themes Maximus draws together in his vision of the cosmic liturgy that is the reality of the humblest celebration of the divine liturgy.

COSMIC THEOLOGY 73<br />

the distinction between heaven and earth (Myst. 3:672A). Again the<br />

church is an image of the human being, the soul being the sanctuary,<br />

the body the nave, and the mind the altar within the sanctuary.<br />

Conversely the human being is a mystical church, the body ‘radiant by<br />

virtue through the ascetic force of the soul’, the soul a sanctuary in<br />

which the logoi of the senses are conveyed to God by reason, and the<br />

mind an altar on which ‘he summons the silence abounding in song in<br />

the innermost recesses of the unseen and unknown utterance of<br />

divinity by another silence, rich in speech and tone’ (Myst. 4:672A– C).<br />

Maximus then devotes a chapter to an elaborate account of how the<br />

church is an image of the soul considered in itself (Myst. 5:672D–<br />

684A). Then follow two chapters that explore other examples of<br />

division. First, the parallel between Holy Scripture and the human<br />

person: body/soul corresponds to Old Testament/New Testament (the<br />

New being the inner reality of the Old), and also to text/meaning (the<br />

meaning being the inner reality of the text) (Myst. 6:684A– D).<br />

Second, Maximus explores the parallels between what he calls three<br />

human beings: the cosmos, the Holy Scripture, and the human being<br />

‘who is ourselves’ (Myst. 7:684D–688A).<br />

There are two striking things about the divisions of being as<br />

presented here. First of all, as we have seen division is normally<br />

presented by Maximus as something negative (‘indivisibly’ is one of<br />

the ‘Chalcedonian’ adverbs). Here, not so, or not apparently. In chapter<br />

2, he makes it clear that the division between sanctuary and nave,<br />

between the invisible and the visible, is a matter of complementarity,<br />

not opposition. But in another way these divisions are not oppositions,<br />

for one term always stands higher than the other: the visible world<br />

points to the invisible world and in a way adumbrates it, similarly the<br />

nave and the sanctuary, or body and soul, or Old Testament and New<br />

Testament, or the text of Scripture and its meaning. These divisions<br />

are not separations, but representations of a tension, a tension which<br />

draws onwards and upwards—towards the final consummation.<br />

By holy communion of the spotless and life-giving mysteries<br />

we are given fellowship and identity with him by participation in<br />

likeness, by which man is deemed worthy from man to become<br />

God. For we believe that in this present life we already have a<br />

share in these gifts of the Holy Spirit through the love that is in<br />

faith, and in the future age after we have kept the<br />

commandments to the best of our ability we believe that we shall<br />

have a share in them in very truth in their concrete reality<br />

according to the steadfast hope of our faith and the solid and<br />

unchangeable promise to which God has committed himself.<br />

Then we shall pass from the grace which is in faith to the grace of

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!