Professional Documents
Culture Documents
This introduces several other elements into the contrast: the One
opposed to the many, that which can be understood, and that which
is too unstable to be understood, the spiritual (soul) opposed to the
material (body); furthermore there is the notion, implicit in this, that
the human stands on the frontier between these two worlds, belonging
to both, and therefore capable of relating them in some way.
Once one starts to work with this idea of two realms, one to which
we belong, one to which we aspire, one inevitably becomes concerned
with what it is that relates these two worlds, with what I call the in
'
Translation by R. Hackforth, in ,
/
?ress, 1972, 84.
ANDREW LOUTH
rather they made use of what are fundamentally mathematieal analogies. These analogies find an eeho in the Christian Fathers, and I want
to illustrate these ideas, not from the Neoplatonists themselves, but
from the Fathers of the Church, as they are our prineipal eoncern.
What needs to be illustrated by these analogies is how everything
that is is derived from the One, without in any way compromising the
oneness of the One. So the One cannot be diminished by emanation
(so, for example, we must not think in terms of something flowing from
the One, and depleting it, as it werc), nor can the One be thought of as
one among many.
The most popular analogies for rest - procession - return arc geometrical. There is the analogy of the centre o f the circle, from which
emerge the radii, which join the centre of the circle to the circumference. It is an analogy we find in M ximos. In the first chapter of
the Mystagogia, he had compared the Church to God, as his image,
because it embraces and gathers all together, speaking of Christ, he
co n tin u e
It is he who encloses in himself all beings by the one, simple, and infinitely
wise power of his goodness. As the centre of straight lines that radiate
from him he does not allow by the one, simple and single cause and power
the origins of beings to become disjoined at their limit but rather cfrcums c r ih e s their extension in a cirele and leads back to himself the d is tin c t iv e
elements of being brought into being by h im
Christ, then, is seen as the centre of a circle, with the radii of the circle communicating with the ever-widening circumference o f the circle,
and not only doing that, but preserving it as the cfrcumference of a circle and so related to the centre that defines it.
Another circular image is found in Dionysios the Arcopagite. As he
begins his account of the Mystery of the Synaxis, or Communion, he
tells of the hierarch, or bishop, standing at the altar, praying, and then
coming out from the altar and going round the church censing it. He
interprets this circular movement of censing thus:
2
c.
225
ANDREW LOUTH
226
Gregory Palamas, C apita CL ? 8 , ed. and trans. Robert E. Sin kew iez, Studies and
Texts 83, Toronto: Pontifical Institute o f M ediaeval Studies, 1988, 173.
227
ANDREW LOUTH
228
THEOLOGY OFTHE'IN-BETWEEN
creation comes into being and is sustained in being - the Word being
present to and active in the created order his powers: it is the Word,
who became incarnate, who is at the centre of A thanasios vision, as
Florovsky expounds it.
Earlier on, Florovsky had discussed in much greater detail his understanding of creation in an article, Creation and Creaturehood, originally published in 1928. Early on in the article, he notes that the notion
of creation out of nothing was unknown, and indeed incomprehensible,
to classical philosophy; it is a doctrine that grew out of reflection on
the Biblical witness to God and the world (even though the doctrine is
hardly expressed explicitly in the Scriptures themselves). It means that
the universe, the world, might not have existed: it is contingent, it is
not self-sufficient. It is also radically new:
In creation something absolutely new, an extra-divine reality is posited
and built up. It is precisely in this that the supremely great and incomprehensible miracle of creation consists - that an other springs up, that
heterogeneous drops of creation exist side by side with the illimitable and
infinite Ocean ofheing. as St Gregory of Nazianzus says of God.7
229
ANDREW LOUTH
Lack o f interest in, or use of, the essen ce/en em ies distinction is striking in M etrpolitan John, given the way it has been pieked up by so many Orthodox theologians in
the twentieth century. However, my im pression is that his distance from Florovsky
over this is not that great, as Florovsky h im seif seem s to me to make little use o f the
distinction either.
man, but divinity, foe divine veil thrown over the world. How true was
our ancestors feeling in this temple, how right they were in saying that
they did not know whether they were in heaven or on earth! Indeed they
were neither in heaven nor on earth, they were in Hagia Sophia - between
foe two: this is foe of Platos philosophical intuition."
231
ANDREW LOUTH
now 100^ more direetly at Christianity and see what sense of the inbetween there is there. There is plenty to consider when we think of
sueh an in-between realm: angels, saints, Mary, the Mother of God,
the very notion of prayer and intercession, graee, the sacraments o f the
Church, icons - all these function as an in-between realm, in terms
of which we explore our relationship with God; we might add to this
conceptual structures such as the doctrine of analogy, analoga entis,
in Thomism, and, of course, the distinction between G ods essence
and energies in Palamite theology, and certainly political notions both the Byzantine notion of the Emperor as imitator of the Creator
Word of God, and the Western medieval development of the Papacy,
are attempts to negotiate the in-between realm that relates God and
human society. Above all there is Christ, who is him self our peace,
who has made both one, breaking down the middle wall of partition
(Eph. 2:14), our great high priest, who has passed into the heavens
(Heb. 4:14), to take just two images from the New Testament. W hat
strikes me, looking at this list, is how contentious all these issues have
been amongst Christians. Grace, which always heals what is weak and
fills up what is lacking, has been a constant cause of division, from the
Pelagian controversy in the West in the fifth century, through the later
Middle Ages when concepts of created grace and uncreated grace
are alleged to have separated East and West, to the Reformation, where,
to the Protestants, the very idea of grace was called in (question by what
they held to be a very cluttered in-between. There seems to be a constant struggle between those who negotiate the in-between with ease, if
not enthusiasm, delighting in the prayers of the saints, the sacraments
of the Church, icons and the protection o f the M other of God, and others who are suspicious of all this and want to identify grace exclusively
with Christ, and Christ alone. (It is interesting to note how Florovsky
reaches for some of the slogans of the Reformation in his opposition
to Bulgakov.) I would suggest that one o f the strengths of Bulgakovs
sophiology is the way in which it seems to enable him to explore the
realm of the in-between - the doctrine of the Church, sacraments, the
Mother of God, icons, with a freedom which is impressive.
There is, however, one point of Er Florovskys I want to recall in
conclusion. 1 noted that his presentation o f the essence-energies distinction is focused on Christ in a way that is not always the case: the
233
ANDREW LOUTH
34
THEOLOGY O F TH EIN-BETWEEN
his whole Godhead; for the fullness of the Godhead dwells eorporeally
in him; how then should he not enlighten the souls of those who partake
worthily, surrounding them with light through the divine splendour of his
body which is in us, just as his light shone on the bodies of the disciples on
Thabor? It is true that then the body that possessed the source of the light
of grace was not yet mingled with our bodies; it enlightened from outside
those who approached worthily and caused the light to enter their souls
through the sight of their eyes. But today it is mingled with us, it dwells
in us and, naturally, it enlightens our souls from within... One alone can
see God; that is, Christ. We must be united with Christ - and how close
a union it is! - in order to see God.13
?,making
possible, as Bulgakov sees more clearly than Florovsky, the notion
/
an in-between, populated by Sophia, but also angel, the Mother /
, .
aims, sacraments, and other form s ofm ediation that do not con
c.
235
ANDREW LOUTH
236
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your resp ective ATT,AS subscriber agreem ent.
No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s) express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission
from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ajourna!
typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, tbe author o fth e article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use covered by the fair use provisions o f tbe copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initia funding from Liiiy Endowment !).
The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property o fthe American
Theological Library Association.