"Протоиерей Иоанн Мейендорф. Byzantine Theology " - читать интересную книгу автора

indeed, several elements of Dionysius' thought appear as successful
Christian counterparts both to Neo-Platonic and to Origenistic positions.
Dionysius specifically rejects Origen's notion of knowledge of God "by
essence" since there cannot be "knowledge" of God, for knowledge can apply
only to "beings," and God is above being and superior to all opposition
between being and non-being. With God, there can be a "union," however: the
supreme end of human existence; but this union is "ignorance" rather than
knowledge for it presupposes detachment from all activity of the senses or
of the intellect since the intellect is applicable only to created
existence. God therefore is absolutely transcendent and above existence
and - as long as one remains in the categories of existence - can be
described only in negative terms.14 God does however make Himself known
outside of His transcendent nature: "God is manifested by His 'powers' in
all beings, is multiplied without abandoning His unity." 15 Thus, the
concepts of beauty, being, goodness, and the like reflect God but not His
essence, only His "powers" and "energies,"16 which are not however a
diminished form of deity or mere emanations but themselves fully God in whom
created beings can participate in the proportion and analogy proper to each.
Thus, the God of Dionysius is again the living God of the Bible and not the
One of Plotinus; and in this respect, Dionysius will provide the basis for
further positive developments of Christian thought.
One must remember however that Dionysius' theology property - i.e. his
doctrine of God and of the relationship between God and the world - is not
wholly original (in fact, its essential elements appear in the writings of
the Cappadocian Fathers), and that, through his hierarchical view of the
universe, Dionysius exercised a highly ambiguous influence, especially in
the fields of ecclesiology and sacramental theology.
If for Origen, the hierarchy of created beings - angels, men, demons -
are the result of the Fall, for Dionysius it is an immovable and divine
order through which one reaches "assimilation and union with God."17 The
three "triads" - or nine orders - of the celestial hierarchy and the two
"triads" of the ecclesiastical hierarchy are essentiality a system of
mediations. Each order participates in God "according to its capacity," but
this participation is granted through the order immediately superior.18 The
most obvious consequences of that system occur in the field of ecclesiology;
for Dionysius, the ecclesiastical hierarchy, which includes the triads
"bishops (hierarchs)-priests-deacons" and "monks-laymen-catechumens
(sinners)," is nothing but an earthly reflection of the celestial orders;
each ecclesiastical order, therefore, is a personal state, not a function in
the community. "A hierarch," Dionysius writes, "is a deified and divine man,
instructed in holy knowledge."19 And since the hierarch is primarily a
gnostic, an initiator there is fundamentally no difference between his role
and that of a charismatic. The same applies of course to the other orders.20
And since Dionysius also holds very strictly to the Platonic divisions
between the intellectual and material orders, the material being only a
reflection and a symbol of the intellectual, his doctrine of the sacraments
is both purely symbolic and individualistic; the function of the Eucharist,
for example, is only to symbolize the union of the intellect with God and
Christ.21
Our conclusion to these brief comments on Dionysius must be therefore