Human Knowledge According to Saint Maximus the Confessor

Dimitrova

• Publisher: Resource Publications
• Year: 2016
• eBook ISBN: 9781532608506
• Topic: Philosophy
• Subtopic: Philosophy History & Theory

This book is dedicated to the synergic process of divine-human communion in the humanly possible knowledge of God, according to Saint Maximus the Confessor.These various types of knowledge play an important, but as yet unexplored role in Maximus the Confessor's teaching on God, which in many respects appears to be a synthesis and culmination of the Greek patristic tradition and the antecedent of ancient pre-Christian and Christian philosophy.Focus on this problem brings forth the major issues of Maximus' psychology: the "soul-body" relationship and a detailed examination of the cognitive capacities of the soul, including the perception of the senses, rational activity, and operations of the mind. The indivisibility of the gnoseological issues from medieval man is traced in an examination of the cognitive levels within the trichotomic structure of practical philosophy, natural contemplation, and theology. The two methods--both affirmative (cataphatic) and negative (apophatic)--demonstrate the two rational discourses in human knowledge of God. Special attention is given to the understanding of hexis (????) and gnomi (?????) concepts and their crucial place in the cognitive structure, leading to knowledge of God as Goodness and of God as Truth.

1

Saint Maximus the Confessor

His Epoch and His Importance for Byzantine Thought

Introduction

All research is, in some sense, a translation of, and a journey through, source material. Yet, at the same time, it is a search for a particular motif in the source material. Answering a major question involves opening a new horizon. In this respect, the result of the dialogue that takes place in this book is not a new discovery. Instead, it is a conversation, an act of rewriting and re-creation, as the work of any person who is reading, rather than writing, may be.1 The metaphysical position represented in the thought of Saint Maximus the Confessor also follows such a pattern.

“Not speaking for themselves” is a characteristic pattern of medieval writers from Augustine onwards, and continuing this tradition by engaging in a careful reading and critical clarification of his predecessors is an important feature of Maximus’s thought. Thus, the challenge facing anyone who wishes to understand Maximus’s texts is to read carefully and to “see through” his writings and the ideas expressed therein. Therefore, the necessary condition for fulfilling this objective is not only a reconstruction of the Confessor’s personality and of the language he uses. It also entails a clarification of the innovative elements of his thought since he is the one who “corrects” the ancient philosophical legacy of Aristotle, Plato, and the Neoplatonists; interprets and clarifies difficult places in the writings of Gregory of Nazianzus or Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite; and makes possible the transition from pre-Christian to Christian philosophy (albeit not in a chronological sense) by moving beyond the teachings of Evagrius and Origen.

The accumulation of theological and philosophical works during the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries and the formation of general theological/philosophical problems, thematic unities, and terminological conventions constitute the foundation of Eastern thought and Byzantine philosophy and theology. Maximus’s place in the center of the Byzantine thought as the “father of Byzantine philosophy” confirms the key role of the Confessor’s work and personality.2 His contributions not only had great significance for the cultural history of Byzantium during a particular period of foreign and internal political, social, and religious problems; they continue to have universal value. The descent into the illusory “dolce vita mentality” and the human inclination toward a disunited tropos of existence, as well as humankind’s tendency to forget its original mission to unite this world and return it to the creator, necessitates a figure like Maximus, who was orthodox before his successors divided household of God. The witness of such a true believer is critical when numerous heresies threaten the foundations of a way of life that is grounded in the truth of Christ.

At the time of the christological controversies in the seventh century, the physical foundations of the empire were threatened by Arab and Persian forces that made use of the instability which resulted from divisions between the Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian (Monophysite) communities. Disputes, which lasted for centuries, regarding the meaning of the Incarnation culminated in two key questions: what kind and how many energies are at work in God the Son and how many wills exist in Christ? This situation and Maximus’s involvement in it are aptly described in the following summary:

The doctrines of monenergism (one “energy” or activity in Christ) and monothelitism (one will which subsumed both human and divine aspects) were instigated by theologians close to the court, particularly the patriarch of Constantinople, as a way of shoring up ecclesiastical unity in a time of political turmoil. With Avar-Slav enemies to the North and Persians and Arabs to the East, the last thing Emperor Heraclius needed was a recalcitrant monk stirring up dissent in Africa and Italy. This was Maximus the Confessor, whose theological obstinacy had a quite unprecedented impact on Heraclius’ precarious hold on imperial rule in the declining capital of Constantinople.3Maximus had the support of popes John IV, Theodore I, and Martin I, and he found even more supporters in the West. The power of the West’s opposition to the imperial doctrines was demonstrated by the 150 bishops who participated in the Lateran Council that was convened in Rome in 649. Their opposition eventually resulted in Pope Martin 1, Maximus, and his disciple Anastasius being brought to trial on trumped-up charges in Constantinople, where they were condemned to torture and to exile under appalling physical conditions that eventually brought about their deaths.4

This backdrop for entering into dialogue with Maximus’s thought is necessary for two reasons. On the one hand, the Byzantine thinker’s existential situation and spiritual quests have contributed to the central position that he holds in the collective theological, cultural, and historical memory. On the other hand, although scholarly research has been carried out with regard to a number of Maximus’s ideas, much of this work has focused on the trinitarian, christological, and anthropological aspects of his teachings.5 However, in several texts, the issue of human knowledge is discussed in relation to other key themes.6 In fact, this is Maximus’s own approach; he does not devote a separate text to the question of human knowledge. His teachings on this topic are not presented in a systematic way. He takes a stand against the chaos of his age by disclosing the Christian truth in nonsystematic rejoinders. His thought is designed to answer the questions of his time.7 The absence of texts composed in an orderly fashion does not diminish the meaning and depth of the powerful synthesis that Maximus creates as he inaugurates the beginning of Byzantine philosophy.

Scholarly considerations of Byzantine philosophy, which had already begun in the eighteenth century, are associated with noteworthy thinkers like Basil Tatakis, Hans-Georg Beck, and Klaus Oehler, as well as with independent academic researchers like Georges Florovsky, John Meyendorff, Dumitru Staniloae, and Kallistos Ware. Maximus’ texts are not focused on a specific issue; their aim is to find the reason for—the beginning of—questioning itself. Therefore, the problem of human knowledge is addressed in a large number of his writings. Human knowledge is the place where creator and creation meet. It is the way that the ascent of human beings and the descent of God simultaneously happen in communion with the Logos. Thus, this book represents an attempt to analyze the divine-human relationship that characterizes the movement of knowledge from—and to—unity and communion. Ascertaining the scope, limits, rhythm, and consummation of the parameters of existence is the basic task of every metaphysical quest, of every cognitive act, and of every return to the beginning.

In short, this work is devoted to the synergetic process of divine-human communion, which, according to the father of Byzantine theology and the most ecumenical of the Church Fathers of the seventh century, is an integral part of the knowledge of God that is possible for human beings. Various types of knowledge play an important, but hitherto unexplored, role in Maximus the Confessor’s thought, which, in many respects, is both a synthesis and the culmination of the Greek patristic tradition, as well as a successor of pre-Christian thinking and an antecedent of Christian philosophy.

Human knowledge lies at the center of Maximus’s works: it consists of an experience of divine presence which reveals the reason and telos of everything that exists and makes humankind’s future growth possible. Extension of the limits of created nature and transcendence beyond the given are two of the great tasks that lie before human beings who strive to a...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• Chapter 1: Saint Maximus the Confessor
• Chapter 2: The Human Person as a Knowing Being
• Chapter 3: Cognitive Faculties and Types of Knowledge
• Chapter 4: Levels of Knowledge
• Chapter 5: Cataphatic and Apophatic Ways of Knowledge
• Conclusion
• Bibliography