Tuesday, December 3, 2013

Soul destroyers


Ἐκ τῶν Πατέρων. -- Διά τεσσάρων πραγμάτων ἡ ψυχή μιαίνεται·  τῷ περιπατεῖν ἐν πόλει καί μή φυλάσσειν τούς ὀφθαλμούς, καί τῷ ὅλως ἔχειν γνῶσιν μετά γυναικῶν, καί τῷ ἔχειν φιλίαν μετά τῶν ἐνδόξων τοῦ κόσμου, καί τῷ ἀγαπῆσαι τάς σαρκικάς ὁμιλίας καί ματαιολογίας

From the Fathers,”The soul is defiled by four things: by walking in the city and not guarding your eyes, by having intimate knowledge with women, by having affection  for the celebrities of the world, and to love sensual speech  and empty talk.” 

Monday, December 2, 2013

Maximus the Confessor on Vice and Virtue


Περί βίου ἀρετῆς καί κακίας.
Concerning a life of virtue and Vice

Σολομῶντος-- Ἀρετῆς μέν σημεῖον οὐδέν ἔχομεν δεῖξαι· ἐν δέ τῇ κακίᾳ ἡμῶν κατεδαπανήθημεν.
By Solomon, “ we possess nothing to proffer a proof of virtue, but in our vice we are consumed.”

Τοῦ αὐτοῦ.- Μή σε πλανήσωσιν ἄνδρες ἀσεβεῖς, μηδέ πορευθῇς ἐν ὁδῷ μετ᾿ αὐτῶν· ἔκκλινον δέ τόν πόδα σου ἀπό τῶν τρίβων αὐτῶν· οἱ γάρ πόδες αὐτῶν εἰς κακίαν τρέχουσιν.

From the same “Do not let irreverent men deceive you, neither go in the way with them. Turn your feet from their paths, for their feet run to vice (mischief)”

Τοῦ αὐτοῦ- Ὅς καταφρονεῖ πράγματος, καταφρονηθήσεται ὑπ᾿ αὐτοῦ.

From the same (Prov.13:13),”He that despises the word shall be despised”

Τοῦ αὐτοῦ.-- Ὥσπερ ὄμφαξ ὁδοῦσι βλαβερόν καί καπνός ὄμμασιν, οὕτω παρανομία τοῖς χρωμένοις αὐτῇ. 
From the same (Prov.10:26),”As vinegar to the teeth, and as smoke to the eyes, so is the sluggard to them that send him.”

Σιράχ. -- Ὁ ποιῶν πανηρά, εἰς αὐτόν κυλισθήσεται, καί οὐ μή ἐπιγνῷ πόθεν ἤκει αὐτῷ.
Sirach (27:30),” A mischievous counsel shall be rolled back upon the author, and he shall not know from whence it comes to him.”

Βασιλείου.- Μόνη κτημάτων ἡ ἀρετή ἀναφαίρετον.
Ἀρετῆς ἄσκησις, τίμιον μέν κτῆμα τῷ ἔχοντι· ἤδιστον δέ θέαμα τοῖς ἐντυγχάνουσιν.
Ὥσπερ γάρ τῷ πυρί αὐτομάτως ἕπεται τό φωτίζειν, καί τῷ μύρῳ τό εὐωδεῖν·  οὕτω καί ταῖς ἀγαθαῖς πράξεσιν ἀναγκαίως ἀκολουθεῖ τό ὠφέλιμον.

Basil the Great, “Virtue is the only inalienable possession. The labor of virtue, indeed for one not having precious possessions, is a pleasant sight for those who happen to see it.
For just like fire automatically follows starting a light, and the smell from  perfuming,  even so of necessity profit  follows good works.”

Ἀρχή πρός τήν ἀνάληψιν τῶν καλῶν ἡ ἀναχώρησις τῶν κακῶν. Ἔκκλινον γάρ, φησίν, ἀπό κακοῦ, καί ποίησον ἀγαθόν.
“withdrawing from vices  is the beginning toward the ascent toward the good. For incline, they  say, from  evil and do good.”
Θεολόγου. -- Φύσει πρόχειρον ἡ κακία, καί πολύς ἐπί τό χεῖρον ὁ δρόμος, ἤ ῥοῦς κατά πρανοῦς ῥέων, ἤ καλάμη (≡15Ε_014≡> τις πρός σπινθῆρα καί ἄνεμον ῥαδίως ἐξαπτομένη καί γινομένη φλόξ, καί συνδαπανωμένη τῷ οἰκείῳ γεννήματι. Οὐ πάνυ τι ῥάδιόν ἐστι τῶν ἀρετῶν τήν νικῶσαν εὑρεῖν, καί ταύτῃ δοῦναι τά πρεσβεῖα καί τά νικητήρια·  ὥσπερ οὐδέν ἐν λειμῶνι πολυανθεῖ καί εὐώδει τῶν ἀνθέων τό κάλλιστον καί εὐωδέστατον, ἄλλοτε ἄλλου τήν ὄσφρησιν καί τήν ὄψιν πρός ἑαυτό μεθέλκοντος, καί πρῶτον δρέπεσθαι πείθοντος.
 Gregory the Theologian,” Vice is naturally easy, and the road very easily trod, running against the flow it runs, or as a reed with a spark and wind easily ignited  becomes a flame, and are consumed together in the common nature.” 
For it is not something very easy, to have found victory  in the virtues, and so also to give the honor and victory trophies.  It is just like not one of the most beautiful and aromatic flowers in a well flowered and pleasantly smelling meadow at anytime, except at this time, draws us to itself to it’s pleasant smell and appearance, except it first is plucked up.”

Χρυσοστ.-- Σπάνιον ἡ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ κτῆσις καί πρόσαντες, κἄν εἰ πολύ τό μεθέλκον εἴη καί προκαλούμενον. 
Chrysostom, “The acquisition of the good is rare even for those who  progress although  it may be very enticing and provocative.”

GREGORY PALAMAS ON THE NATURE OF PERSONAL COMMUNION



GREGORY PALAMAS ON THE NATURE OF PERSONAL  COMMUNION

I. The Promise; eternal  life or knowledge of God.

The doctrine of the Holy Spirit is a deep topic enlightening  the mind and warming the heart. He is the Person  who reveals Christ’s presence to us and makes us partakers of His eternal life (2 Pe.1.4). Throughout Christian  history,  Christians have speculated on how we practically may become aware of His presence and foster that grace.  Gregory Palamas (1296-1354), archbishop of Constantinople, articulated a Byzantine expression  of what is now a days, in a very broad way, quietism, or hesychasm, inner stillness. Since eternal  life is knowledge of God (Jn.17.3), this occupied a great place in his thought. Building on  his patristic devotional  tradition, he answered obliquely what is knowledge of God,  how we attain  this, and what are it’s limits. Having outlined this in the main, I also  point out the potential perils of his position. 

II. Paradisiacal paradigm; contemplating God.
The best way to understand the paradigm Palamas employed is to start with his scholia on Genesis.  What was Adam’s state?  Spiritually, Adam was in communion with God.  Union with God is life, separation from Him is death.
 For, “death, properly speaking, is this: for the soul to be unharnessed from divine grace and to be yoked to sin.  Bodily, he was clothed with God’s glory, possessing the glory of the resurrection. The inner man  was stripped of divine grace, dead separated from  the life giving Spirit, and bodily subject to a living death.

The mind/ spirit  stripped of divine grace joins itself to sensual  pleasure and preoccupation with the outward world. In fact,  Adam  became of one mind/ spirit with the evil one by his transgression.  Repentance, μετανοια, is the inward change, turn of the mind, of the νους, when it seeks to follow Christ, the Light who illumines the heart. The mind/spirit then communicates the spiritual light it has seen to the body, and in this way the body as well participates in salvation and glorification.

III. What is knowledge?
Let’s start apophatically; what is not knowledge of God? In the first place, it is not proof derived from syllogistic reasoning. Nor is it the knowledge furnished from analytic reasoning, or from synthetic judgments.  Gregory directly attacked the Medieval Scholasticism and it’s conception of the intellectual acts of divisio, division, compositio, synthesis, or the act of judgment itself.   These forms of knowledge afford, at best, knowledge about God, not knowing Him personally.  
Knowledge of God is also specifically not philosophizing about God. Philosophy, despite it’s assertions to be a love of wisdom, for Gregory, is neither wise, nor leads to the knowledge of God. In fact, it is demonic.  For if it led to Christ what would the purpose of Christ’s coming be? To rephrase Paul, “If righteousness (saving knowledge) comes through the philosophers, Christ is dead in vain.”
  Knowledge of God is, properly speaking, not knowledge in the sense of an idea (form, eidos).  We are not to rest content with a concept of God, that would be idolatry. Rather, knowledge for him is more a spiritual perception.  To explain this, he notes that humans possess a twofold character of knowledge.  One is rational, in accord with our sensitive nature.  We share this in common with the beasts. Like St. Jude alluded (Jd.10), people can know things naturally, as brute beasts.  This is what James calls “soulish” (Natural, KJV) Or, as Paul says, “the soulish man receives not the things of the spirit of God.” (1 Co.2.14).
     Knowledge, or spiritual  perception, is above rational activity. The light of our intellect does not impart the presence of God. Rather Christ enlightens the mind with the presence of His love (cf. 2 Co.4.4-11),  which  is called knowledge, though it is not the result of mental speculation.  It is direct apprehension. This is in the exact same tenor as Paul who prayed that they might (Eph.3.19a) “γνωωαι τε την υπερβαλλουσαν της γνωσεως αγαπην του Χριστου,” that they may “know  the love of Christ which supasses  all knowledge.”  Knowledge then is a term  he loosely used, but means perception  of union with the divine  love of Christ.   It is above thought according to Paul, being given to us.  
This distinction  between thought and intellectual  perception  is an idea he borrowed from the Old Testament Septuagint. He noted that Solomon spoke of two  distinct intellectual realities,  αισθησις, or perception,  and  νοησις, or thought.  Since we are told to acquire both,  feeling, αισθησις,  and making sense then out of the feeling- νοησις, noesis-  are distinct.
Mental speculation then must cease.  This does not mean the mind is vain.  It means rather the mind knows it’s limits, not being able to manufacture the presence of God.  Instead, it means that we seek to be aware of His presence and trust it is incomprehensible so we stop laboring for an explanation.  We simply rest the intellect in faith at God’s presence. 
Gregory connects this ceasing of mental operation to the Sabbath rest of the Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews.
“For those who spiritually sabbatize are these who also resting from all their servile works, as much as it is attainable, they completely strip away everything discursive and produced by discursive reasoning and which has been elaborately reasoned about knowledge of the powers of the soul, namely, the work and all the aesthetic helps, and quite simply every bodily activity,  as much is in our power, but even what is not in our power-the end exactly as respiration, so long as it is in our power.” (Triads 1.2).
So knowledge of God’s light, for Gregory, is not the product of discursive reasoning, analysis, or concept.  It is more properly an experience of God’s glory, of His light which is the love of Christ communed with in the heart.  

IV. What we know

Adam knew God by being joined to His Spirit (cf.1 Co.6.17). The restoration to communion is the reversal of the Fall.  This communion is specifically communion with the energies of God.  The glory of God, with which Adam was clothed, is God’s grace and activity, or energies, in the world.  This is merely a biblical designation, to be differentiated from the results of these energies which are called energimata, or created effects of God’s manifested eternal uncreated power.  Jesus said “the glory which you gave me I have given them.” (Jn.17.22).  It is the glory Ηe “had with God before the foundation of the world.” (Jn.17.5) And therefore it is uncreated.  It is the glory manifested to the disciples of Thabor. (Mt.17.1-13). 
This energy of God is not God’s essence.  The Christian cannot see the essence of God.  Just like Moses could not see, so “no man has seen God at any time,” for “God dwells in light unapproachable, whom no man can see.” (1 Ti.6.16).  The Christian then properly sees the parousia of God, the presence of Christ, not His ousia, His essence.  We see the glory around Him, not He Himself, though we will see Christ in His fullness.

V. How we know; attention and stillness and a life undefiled

The glory of God placed in the Christian’s heart is only perceived when we are conscious of it by directing all our attention to Him.  The normal condition of our consciousness teaches us this; we are only aware of what things we direct our attention to.  So to bring a Christian into a state of one pointed devotion to the Lord, Gregory enjoins an intense practice of spiritual stillness, ησηχια.  Quite simply, the mind is stopped, quieted from rushing for the world and is forced to place it’s attention where the throne of grace is, namely, the heart. The Christian invokes God’s Name (His glory) on each inhalation and respiration and so we become imbued with His presence.
Gregory is not thinking metaphorically, but also not strictly literal, when  he says we are to look within.  Being fully convinced of the unity and pysychosomatic/spiritual  nature of our existence, he holds, contrary to Neoplatonists,  that we must not escape the body but confine our minds to seek the presence of God in the heart.  His understanding is that the law of sin dwells in our members and placing the law of prayer and our attention on the heart, which is the throne of God, then we are released from the law of sin and the law of the Spirit takes root in our life Gregory was not advocating a blind form of natural mysticism, divorced from praxis.  Awareness of God’s presence presupposes repentance and a life of obedience to the commandments.  Why the commandments? They purify the heart and make it capable of receiving the grace of God, as David said, they enlighten  the soul (Ps.19.8). The commandments themselves are the tree of life and possess God’s presence, for where His Word is, there is His Spirit.
  Stillness is also called απαθεια, dispasssion.  A sinful desire is a movement of the mind away from God. In modern terms, we would say an attachment. It is the metaphysical  way of expressing “the flesh lusts against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh.” It is the abscence of affection, of love for things forbidden of God. Dispassion is another way of expressing the biblical truth that “charity seeks not her own.

VI. Scriptural  metaphors appropriated by Palamas for communion

The mystery of communion with God  is better understood through the biblical  text and the tropes it uses to convey these truths.  Gregory’s favorite figure is the figure of light.  His usage of this biblical illustration is what really initiated his doctrinal conflicts. Approximately 1330, a controversy arose about his teaching on the light at the Mount of Transfiguration, Mount Thabor.  He taught  the disciples saw the light of Christ which was not a created light, as the humanist theologians were contending, but the glory of God itself, though not His essence.  Through a series of 9 dialogues with a humanist monk, he explains that the light of Thabor is the glory of God which will be revealed at the parousia.  After all,  Jesus said the disciples present there would see the kingdom of God come with power (Cf.Mt.16.28).  Gregory was not advocating anything different than what is normally accepted in contemporary theology.  Who God justifies, He glorifies.  A taste of this glorification is had even  now, realized in the spirit; and as we are not Platonists, it is participated in the body as well.

The other trope from Scripture which he employs is the face to face nature of communion.  Gregory wrote several  sermons on Moses’ ascent to Mount Sinai, and how Moses saw God face to face.  We are προσωπον προς προσωπον, face to face.  Christ is face to face with  God (Jn1.3), through His mediation  in  His person, we can  see the glory of God in the face of Jesus, not by ourselves,  for no flesh  can see the essence of God (as Christ sees) and live.  This latter point, I believe, is the resolution of the created/ uncreated dispute between East and West .

Gregory draws on the Lord’s parable of the prodigal and relates it to his mystical  theology.  Understanding that the kingdom of God is within us (Lk.17.20), and that the heart is the abode of the Father, His house,  then we ask, what does it mean to leave the house?  Gregory sees the wandering of the mind, πλανη, in this parable. Not centered on the presence of God, it is a prodigal.  Granted, this is clearly Alexandrian exegesis at it’s extreme, but I would say  it is coherent.  Prayer then is the restoration of the mind (the prodigal son) to the heart and brings us face to face with the Lord.

      Another analogy he draws from the Scripture is the treasurehouse of the heart.  The Lord commands the disciples to close door and enter into the closet and pray (Mt.6.8-13).  For Gregory, this is a call to  shut the world out and lock ourselves in God’s presence, in the heart, which elsewhere is compared to a treasure store. The five senses are shut and the door to the world is shut and we hide the mind in God’s treasury.

Saturday, October 26, 2013

The Father's house part 3: when you get out of orbit

Saint Palamas exposits the heart as the Father's house  and the wandering mind  as a prodigal son (see part 2).  We are returned to the Father's house when we enter into the chamber of the heart and meet His embrace.  We close the door and lock up the mind in the celli (Mt.6).  This is one of many images he appropriates from the Scripture to illustrate the nature of communion with the Lord.  This relates to  another image the Scripture uses, which I want to look at.


The Scripture says that fallen angels are wandering stars.  They πλανουσι planousi, wander like a planet out of trajectory.  Noetic beings have a circular  motion-  they orbit around the Sun of righteousness Jesus Christ (Mal.4.2)  This is the natural state of a noetic being. And us how so?

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy whereunto ye do well that you take heed until the day dawn  and the day  star  arise in your hearts." (2 Pe.1.18)

The mind is to  be simply attentive in it's movements toward the presence of the Lord who  resides within  the heart  illuminating us.


LEX ORANDI  LEX CREDENDI

Many times the prayers of the Church are omitted in discussing doctrinal  matters.  Howbeit they  provide the actual interpretation  for many matters, and so we have understood traditionally that the rule of prayer is the rule of faith.

Morning priestly prayers

Third Prayer
In the night season our soul awaketh early unto thee, O God, for thy precepts are a light. Teach us thy righteousness, thy commandments and thy statutes, O God. Enlighten the eyes of our understanding, lest at any time we sleep unto death in sins. Dispel all darkness from our hearts. Graciously give unto us the Sun of Righteousness, and preserve our life unassailed, by the seal of thy Holy Spirit. Guide our steps into the way of peace. Grant us to behold the dawn and the day with joy, that we may raise our morning prayers unto thee. For thine is the dominion, and thine is the majesty and the power and the glory: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.


Ninth Prayer
Illumine our hearts, O Sovereign Master, who lovest man-kind, with the pure light of thy wisdom, and open the eyes of our understanding to the comprehension of the proclamation of thy Gospel. Implant in us, also, the fear of thy blessed commandments; that trampling down all carnal appetites, we may lead a godly life, both thinking and doing always such things as are well pleasing in thy sight. For thou art our sanctification, and unto thee we ascribe glory: to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit: now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.


Twelfth Prayer
We praise thee, we hymn thee, we bless thee, we give thanks unto thee, O God of our fathers, that thou hast brought us in safety through the shades of night, and hast shown unto us once again the light of day. And we entreat of thy goodness: Be gracious unto our sins, and accept our prayer in thy great tenderness of heart. For we flee unto thee, the merciful and almighty God. Shine in our hearts with the true Sun of thy Righteousness; enlighten our mind and guard all our senses; that walking uprightly as in the day, in the way of thy statutes, we may attain unto life eternal (for with thee is the source of life) : and graciously be permitted to come unto the fruition of the light unapproachable. For thou art our God, and unto thee we ascribe glory: to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit: now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.
When we get out of orbit 
When  we stop turning  inward to the Lord for help  then we have become like a planet out of orbit,  headed for destruction.  Let's always strive to  follow His pull.



Monday, March 4, 2013




THE WAY BACK TO THE FATHER’S HOUSE, PRODIGAL SON PART 2. FINDING THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE HEART ACCORDING TO SAINT GREGORY PALAMAS.


Previously, I posted his understanding of the prodigal son,  stating that we can draw parallels to the spiritual life and indeed refer to a, “prodigal  mind.”  The mind  has wandered out of the Father’s house,  the heart.  The movement of the mind to the heart is circular per Saint Dionysios.  That is to say,  the mind reflexes,  returns back, to the essence, which is the heart. To use orthodox metaphysics,  the heart is the essence and the mind is the energy.
The way back to the heart is difficult. How does Saint Gregory advise us to find the heart?
I want to give an except from the second discourse.  This is the apophatic way,  the way of denial.  What is it not.

1.  There must be a ceasing of intellectual operations which do not seek after God.

For they assert no one is able to participate in perfection and holiness, not having found the true glory concerning created existences, further, it is not possible for this (i.e.  holiness trans.) to exist or have it without disjunctive thought and syllogism and analysis. Triads.1.3.84
This is not obscurantism.  Rather,  the true  telos,  or end,  of the intellect’s motion  is to  see God.  If we are not directed to that, then  we have failed.  Mental  operations are such that the intellect perceives an idea – joins or divides from it – then  makes a syllogism.  In other words, proposition A is true,  proposition B, therefore C. The syllogism has reached it’s συμπερασμα, or conclusion.
These mental acts do not give αισθεσις or perception, of spiritual  truth.  These acts pertain  to νους, or intellect.  The knowledge of God  is beyond mind.  The mind  must cease to rationalize and simply seek  the feeling of God’s presence , an αισθεσις.  This  feeling or perception comes only by the illumination  of God’s grace. As Saint Gregory is fond to  quote,
καρδία ὀρθὴ ζητεῖ αἴσθησιν στόμα δὲ ἀπαιδεύτων γνώσεται κακά Prov.15:15  A right heart seeks perception, but the mouth of the untaught seeks mischief.
The ceasing of the intellect is called keeping the Sabbath  by Saint Gregory. To celebrate the rest, the Israelites had to stop working.  It is also  the same as Golgotha. At Golgotha,  the place of a skull, the Logos was slain.  At our own  personal Golgotha before our personal  descent to Hades (see St.  Silouan  on this), the depths of our inner sin, we must have our logos slain.  Reason must stop  to arrive at the Truth beyond reason.

2.  The attention  is actually directed toward the heart.

This is not metaphorical.  The attention  is actually directed to the interior, to the heart. Having directed our mind there, we still do not see the Light according to Saint Gregory. There is a veil over the heart, impeding the light from being perceived. So the veil on the heart then we must cast aside, by self examination, the open and hidden sins of the heart. This veil, καλλυμα, according to Saint Paul (2 Cor.4:1-6)  is the covering of νοηματα, thoughts.  The thoughts cast aside, the veil  is in effect removed and we are then δεχτικος, capable to receive the grace of God.  The actual process of removing the veil,  the painful process of repentance,  is what permits us to see the Lord.  However,  seemingly contradictory, It is a pure gift to perceive God’s grace.  Some saints struggled for years, so how should we expect an instant renewal?  God does grant it at a moment many times- He did to Cornelius in Acts 10.

3. Practically,  Saint Gregory enjoins  repeating the Name of the Lord  upon every breath, while sending the intellect to the heart.

For there is quietude by this entering in and going out, the spirit upon every ingoing thought, but especially in the case of those practicing stillness in body and reasoning.
For those who spiritually sabbatize are these who also  resting from all their proper works, because it is attainable, on the one hand, everything discursive and produced by discursive reasoning and which has been elaborately reasoned about knowledge of the powers of the soul they completely strip away, namely,  work and all the aesthetic helps, and quite simply every bodily activity,  which is in our power, yet on the other hand,   what is not in our power -the end just as respiration, so long as it is in our power, this does not cease.
But all these identical things follow painlessly and without much care for those who make progress hesychastically, for by the same entrance of the soul to itself, of necessity, perfectly automatically all things occur. Triads 1.2.51-53
Now,  why is it that this is commanded, and why might this take so long?  Because the practice engenders love within the soul. And love is ultimately what tethers us to the Lord, as it alone will exist in the eschaton. This will not come easy.  The practice should be enjoined at the very least until  we have entered into communion with Him.
 But for those who are beginners, not one of what things said would you know without hard word accompanying.
And as it follows then with love being patient (“for love bears all things,”  we then instruct in order to establish patience in life, as through this we arrive at love).
And what further is necessary to say about these things?
Since nothing more can be said,  I trust the Saint.  The next section describes how the invocation  of the Lord’s Name removes the seven  evil  thoughts, spirits,  and replaces them with the Seven Spirits of God. I invite the reader to  look at how the tree of knowledge of good and evil relates to this.




The way back to the Father

http://easternfathers.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/the-way-back-to-the-fathers-house-prodigal-son-part-2-finding-the-presence-of-christ-in-the-heart-according-to-saint-gregory-palamas/



DON’T LEAVE HOME! ST. GREGORY ON THE FATHER’S HOUSE, PART 1.

Image
Texts are layered,  meaning within meaning, depending on the aim of the teacher.  The prodigal son, prima facie,  describes our journey away  from God and our return back.
We leave the Father, no longer living in obedience to Him, are drown  in the disease of desire and debauchery,  disgusted we,”come to ourselves.” We, on the other hand,  can be as the elder brother,  ostensibly following God, oblivious  to our pride in our performance. Then, at the sight of God’s grace and forgiveness,  we object and cry disparity, unfairness.
Saint Gregory takes a mystical approach to this as well. The real  description of our apostasy,  leaving the Father’s house,  is a failure to live in the heart.  Here is an excerpt from  his discourse to a monk, in what is known as the Triads.
” The Father ever desiring the same wandering man then to return again, and the wanderers to go to His home, as there is no place else possessing peace, at least as far as we know, through kind words, He found the spiritual struggler, to draw him back  to this same home.” Triads 1.2.40
God wants us in His house.  But how? Let’s  go back  in the discourse.
“… when the mind instead acts upon  the other things, looking around for what it would need,” this Dionysios the Great says is straight movement of the nous, but returning again to itself and energizes by itself, whenever the nous beholds itself; the same Dionysios says concerning it, this is  a cyclical motion.” Triads 1.2.40
Gregory says, in accordance with the Great Dionysios, that the mind,  nous, has two  movements. One is to the outside, it’s attention is dispersed upon the sensible world, which is called a straight movement.  The other is to the interior, which is called a circular movement.  The Father’s house,  connecting the thoughts, is the heart.  This is really what repentance is- the change of the direction of the mind.  We turn to God from  the world.  Hence, John says, “love not the world…if any man love the world  the love of the Father is not in Him.” (IJn.2:15-16)
“In My Father’s  house are many mansions,  if it were not so I would have told you so.  I go and prepare a place for you, that where I am there you may be also.”
There are degrees of proximity to God, as there are, “many mansions.”  I have retained this translation because it is regal, but literally they are μοναι, dwelling places.  St Gregory calls the Father’s house a χορος, a space.  The idea is the same.  We can  have as big a heart for God- a house-  as we want.  However, knowing the nature of our love,  we tend to grow cold in our love,  and the χορος, the space, shrinks.  Hence David noted, “you have enlarged my heart when I was in distress.”  The mansion,  the space of the heart, becomes expanded when  God stretches it through tribulation, until  we know, “the length, breadth, depth and height…of the love of Christ.”

Friday, February 8, 2013

Authenticity of Dionysios the Areopagite

Are the Writings of Dionysius the Areopagite Genuine? 


original  source http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2012/10/are-writings-of-dionysius-areopagite.html who quotes from  Dionysius The Areopagite And The Alexandrine School



Dionysios  is regarded by St. Gregory Palamas as an authentic teacher of the Church.  This article explains why this position is true,  and explains the debate concerning his authenticity.  If the internal allusions are accepted at face value,  then the text really ranks just below Scripture, of which it quotes 500 times.

By Rev. John Parker (1895)

Introductory

From a Christian and theological point of view momentous issues depend upon the answer to this question. The author of these writings quotes Holy Scripture about five hundred times - always as the supreme authority - most frequently as the oracles of God. (Logia). Except the two small letters of John Presbyter, the author quotes from every book of the New Testament, as known and existing before ad 98. If then these writings are the genuine works of Dionysius the Areopagite - the convert of St. Paul - we have historic proof that the books of the New Testament were quoted and known in the first century. If these writings are genuine, we have historic proof that in the first century there was 1st, episcopal consecration of Bishop, Priest, and Deacon; 2nd, that Baptism was administered by trine immersion, - and to children - and that it was accompanied with unction of Holy Oil; 3rd, that Holy Communion was administered with Liturgical prayers and formula, as well as with personal prayers and exhortations; and 4th, that "Incense was offered to God's Holy Name, and a pure offering" (Malachi 1:2).

These writings abound in surprises. Greeks will be content - Latins will exult - Anglicans will rejoice - Agnostics will smile - Baptists will triumph - Plymouth Brethren will know the reason why - Theosophists will be delighted. We may all be put right because we shall all be proved wrong in some particular. After five years' continuous research I have a strong conviction of their genuineness. I stake my judgment upon the fact, and am rather glad to stand alone - for a time. My appeal is to historical criticism, and to common sense. But I wish to state the case, not to decide the question, and with such restrained impartiality that the case shall not be weakened by an apparent bias in favor of what I deem the truth.

Personal Affirmations of the Author

The author of these writings expressly affirms that he was brought from paganism to the Christian Faith by the divine Paul. He speaks of Timothy as his friend, and declares that they were both disciples of Paul. He incidentally reminds Timothy that they both were once present with James the Lord's brother, and Peter, the foremost and most honored pinnacle of the Theologians. He writes to "John Theologus, Apostle, Evangelist, imprisoned in the isle of Patmos," and expresses a confident hope that they will soon meet to speak face to face. In a letter to Polycarp, he describes a sudden unexpected darkness, which Apollophanes and he had witnessed in Egypt. He declares that Paul had taught him that that darkness was contemporaneous with the Crucifixion. He writes to Titus as mutual friends of Timothy. He describes Himself as friend, and relative of Apollophanes, who was tutor of Polemon, whose pupil Aristides presented the "Apology" to the Emperor Hadrian.

Are these allusions natural and true, or feigned and cunningly devised?

The Treatise on the "Divine Names" explains the various epithets applied in Holy Scripture to the whole Godhead alike, - Father, Son and Holy Ghost, the ever Being - the good - the beautiful - the powerful - the wise - the great - the small. The author discusses the nature and origin of evil, - the difficulties attendant upon its existence under the Omnipotent Providence of God. In the "Celestial Hierarchy" the author claims to give instruction on the holy Angels, derived from Paul. In the "Ecclesiastical Hierarchy" he describes the administration of Holy Communion, Baptism, Chrism, and the spiritual instruction taught and implied in the various ceremonial acts performed. He also discusses the reason for prayers in the funeral rites of the departed, and the conditions under which such prayers may be used. He argues the question of the Baptism of Infants, and describes the conditions under which it may be done. In the "Mystic Theology" he describes how we may best attain the knowledge of God, and gives a list of the works written by himself. In the "Letters" he answers inquiries addressed to him by Gaius, Dorotheus and Titus respecting certain deep questions discussed in his writings. The purpose of the whole is the elevation of man to God. Union with God is the vestibule of truth, and the unique way to attain the highest truth.

Have we here a genuine truthful book written by Dionysius the Areopagite, the convert of Paul, the personal friend of Timothy and John the Evangelist?

The question is to be answered from the testimony of history, and upon the principles of true historic criticism. Having translated the whole collected works of Dionysius the Areopagite, and read and studied a literature upon the subject, I affirm that we have here writings penned by Dionysius the Areopagite, the convert of St. Paul, in which there is not a personal or local allusion which was intended to mislead or deceive, and that the author lived and moved amongst Apostles and Apostolic men, even as the writings imply and affirm. To prove this I call four witnesses - Lucius Flavius Dexter, the Statesman; Dionysius, the Great Bishop of Alexandria; Maximus, the Confessor; and Photius, the Patriarch. I shall first show their qualifications as witnesses, then produce their testimony, then appeal to the reader.

Lucius Flavius Dexter, late 4th century

Lucius Flavius Dexter was a friend of Jerome. Jerome even addresses him as filius amicus and describes him as clarus apud seculum et Christi fidei deditus.

Dexter became Prefect of the Oriental Praetorians, and was one of the most distinguished statesmen of his time. He visited the East, and there met Jerome. Like Lord Dufferin, he was chosen to arrange the most difficult negotiations. He undertook to appease the jealousy between the provinces of Barcelona and Toledo. Political affairs compelled him to reside two years in Toledo. Like Mr. Speaker Denison, he combined a love of truth with ability in affairs of state. Whilst residing at Toledo, he examined the "Tabularia", or ancient records of that Apostolic See, in which he says, "I confess to have found many things worthy to be known". In the cathedral of Toledo there is a tablet giving the succession of Bishops from St. Paul, A.D. 62 to the present day. From the records of Toledo and other churches in Spain, Dexter compiled a chronicle from A.D. 1 to 430, containing a brief summary of events, chiefly in reference to the Church of Spain. That chronicle he dedicated to Jerome, who enrolled both author and chronicle in his book of "Illustrious Men". It was at the request of Dexter that Jerome wrote his book of "Illustrious Men", which he dedicated to Dexter, and which was deemed so valuable by antiquity that Sophronius, Bishop of Jerusalem, translated it into Greek.

Amongst the earliest Bishops of Toledo, Dexter describes a remarkable man, named Marcellus, surnamed Eugenius, on account of his noble birth. Bivarius says "he was of the family and house of Caesar, being uncle to the Emperor Hadrian". This Marcellus was consecrated Bishop by Dionysius the Areopagite, at Aries, and sent to Toledo. Respecting him, Dexter records that Dionysius the Areopagite dedicates to him, u.c. 851 (A.D. 98), the "books of the Divine Names", as wishing to have still a Timothy on earth - "in vivis". Dexter further records that Dionysius surnamed Marcellus, Timothy, on account of his excellent disposition.

Now Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, an author in the 2nd century, relates that Timothy, Bishop of Ephesus, was martyred during the reign of Nerva (96-97). Upon the return of Dionysius to Gaul, after his visit to St. John liberated from Patmos, we find him surnaming his friend Marcellus, Timothy, and presenting to him a copy of the "Divine Names" (A.D. 98)1, in order that he might still have a Timothy on earth, although his first Timothy, to whom his works were originally written, migravit ad ChristumA.D. 97.

This touch of nature recorded to have taken place nearly 1,800 years ago, and whose record is preserved in a chronicle2 written more than 1,400 years ago, by an illustrious statesman who was also son of a Bishop, celebrated for learning and sanctity, may perhaps be deemed by some minds reasonable proof that the Treatise of the "Divine Names" was written by Dionysius the Areopagite previous to A.D. 98.

Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, A.D. 250

Dionysius gained the title of "Great," even amongst the teachers of the Didaskaleion, which was a rival of the Serapeum of Alexandria. He was successor of Clement and Origen.

About ten years ago, L'Abbd Martin discovered in the British Museum (Nos. 12151-2) a letter written by Dionysius of Alexandria to Pope Sixtus the 2nd, in which he affirms positively that no one can doubt that Dionysius the Areopagite is the author of the writings which are circulated in his name. In the first Codex we find portions of that Epistle in the conclusion of the work written by John Scholasticus (605), entitled "A New Apology", written by George, Priest of the great Church of Constantinople, and native of the City of Bozra, with reference to the "Divine Writings," which are rejected by some ignorant persons, as though they were not the production of that great doctor, but only writings of some heretic, such as Appollinaris or some recent and unknown heretic. Now, that Priest George of Constantinople, after recounting that these Books of the Areopagite had several times been rejected by foolish people, affirms that he is going to produce an argument that will close the mouth of all gainsayers; and that argument is the letter of Dionysius of Alexandria, from which the following is an extract:

"The God Unknown, Jesus, the Word, whom the Greeks worthily honor, although they do not know Him, was crucified by the Jews, when they ought to have adored Him. But they did not know Him (I say that it was the Word that they ought to have adored, the Word of the Father — because I do not wish anyone to believe that I am the advocate of idolators; and I speak only of those Greeks who recognize the God Unknown as the Author of the Universe). Now, having known Him according to the Scriptures, the great Dionysius wished to be baptized by the Apostle, with all his house. He was an eloquent and illustrious man, who became afterwards Bishop of Athens, and made himself celebrated by the Works which he composed on the Divine Theology. He was disciple of St. Paul, by whom the Messiah made known the Gospel to the Gentiles, by speaking Himself through his mouth. Now the Book of that distinguished man shows clearly the brilliancy of his talent, for he is the author of the theological work of which we are now speaking. Further, no one disputes his paternity of it, for, when some people of the contrary opinion have read, with attention and intelligence, that work, at once philosophic and divine, and have been enlightened by the very testimony of the holy Doctor that we have under our eyes, they will easily comprehend that these Divine Writings could only be the work of the great Dionysius, who, with the Divine help and inspiration, piously governed the Church of Athens.

"Now, after Hierotheus, who was his master, what other doctor was there more powerful in word than he who has written, in a manner so sublime, upon Theology and Sciences?

"No one penetrated more profoundly than Dionysius into the mysterious depths of the Holy Scriptures. This is easily proved by reading attentively, and with love of the truth, the works that we have from him. For he is worthy of credit even when he testifies of himself, as he does in his letter to the holy Bishop of Smyrna, Polycarp — that valiant defender of the Faith, — that disciple of John the Evangelist, the Beloved Apostle of our Lord."

That reference is to Section 1 of the Letter to Polycarp,3 which concludes with these beautiful words, "Having then, as I think, well understood this, I have not been over zealous to speak in reply to Greeks, or to others; but it is sufficient for me (and may God grant this) first, to know about truth, then having known, to speak as it is fitting to speak." Bear in mind that since the letter of Dionysius of Alexandria was disentombed by L'Abbe Martin, Professor Frothingham, an American scholar, has found the "Book of Hierotheus" in the British Museum. The Archbishop of Athens gave me, some time ago, this catalogue of the first five Bishops of Athens: 1st, Hierotheus, A.D. 52; 2nd, Dionysius; 3rd, Narcissus; 4th, Publius, 118—124; 5th, Quadratus, who presented the "Apology" to the Emperor Hadrian. Yet, twenty-five years ago, Hierotheus was thought to be a mythical personage, — just as King Lucius of Britain is now, by some, deemed to be a myth — by those who presumably have never read Archbishop Parker's magnificent book, "De antiquitate Britannicae Ecclesiae", nor Alford's two volumes of the "Fides Regia Anglicana". Would some learned foreigner disentomb those two works in the British Museum, for the instruction of our "Historical Society," which knows more of the See of Rome than of its own ancient Metropolitan See of London.

Glastonbury is the Cradle of the Christian Church in Great Britain — not the modern graft of Canterbury. It is a curious method of historical criticism to prove the continuity of the Church in Britain from A.D. 33 to 1897, by dating its episcopal succession from St. Augustine, A.D. 597, when that succession died out A.D. 669. Some members of our "Historical Society" wish to impose upon us the "being English" as a third Sacrament, which they seem to regard "as generally necessary to salvation." Joseph of Arimathea, invited to Britain by a Druid Priest, for greater security from the Jews, says of himself, "After I had buried Christ, I came to the Britons, I taught, I fell asleep."

Some of our "English" Divines disdain to believe that testimony, apparently because they were not there to see him buried. Even Latin Councils4 are disregarded, when their testimony is in favor of our own Church and Nation.

We affirm, then, that the letter of Dionysius of Alexandria is proof that the Writings of Dionysius were known and regarded as genuine previous to A.D. 250.

Maximus The Confessor, A.D. 630

Maximus the Confessor was a learned and luminous writer. His writings have come down to us in two volumes. They discuss the most difficult passages of Holy Writ, and contain treatises upon the soul, the blessed Trinity, and the Hypostatic Union. He was a towering figure in the Monophysite Controversy. His famous discussion with Pyrrhus, Patriarch of Constantinople, is contained in his works. He suffered banishment, persecution and ignominy rather than betray his convictions; and his death was probably hastened by his sufferings. Neither fear nor favor could make him swerve from his convictions. Amongst other writings, with which his learning and piety have enriched the Church, are Scholia upon the writings of Dionysius the Areopagite. When commenting upon the fifth chapter of the "Celestial Hierarchy", he alludes to the expression, "ousias", applied by Dionysius the Areopagite to the holy angels, and writes thus, "the great Dionysius," the Bishop of Alexandria; — he, who had been an orator, — in the Scholia which he made upon the blessed Dionysius his namesake, speaks thus: "The external philosophy (pagan Greek) was accustomed to call all invisible nature ungenerated, and likewise personalities 'beings' (ousias), and from this he says, such phrases are used by the holy Dionysius, after the manner of the external philosophers." Maximus is commenting upon a word which is used by Dionysius the Areopagite. To explain its use and presence in the text, he quotes verbatim from the Scholiawritten by the Bishop of Alexandria, A.D. 250. How then can we escape the conclusion that the works of the Areopagite were known in A.D. 250, when Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, wrote his Scholia explaining the unusual use of that word by the Areopagite. Be it remembered that Maximus was a determined opponent of the so-called Monophysites, who claimed the writings of Dionysius as their chief authority. They produced them at Constantinople, A.D. 532, and they were regarded as their great champions. Are we then to believe that Maximus did not scan, with a critical eye, the writings which were the alleged stronghold of his opponents, as well as the Scholia of the great Bishop of Alexandria, which treated those writings as genuine, in A.D. 250.

We affirm then that the Scholia of Maximus, written upon the writings of Dionysius the Areopagite, are a reasonable historic proof that those writings are genuine, and that Dionysius of Alexandria wrote his Scholiaupon the same writings previous to A.D. 250.

Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, ninth century

Photius was a Prince of Patriarchs and a landmark in history. His letter to Michael, Prince of Bulgaria, marks the cleavage between Greeks and Latins, which subsequent events widened into a great gulf, which will not be closed until Christian learning and good sense are in the ascendant. Mr. Gladstone would have found Photius a glad competitor in working, in reading, in writing, whether in "felling" I don't know!

"He was accounted," says Nicetas David — the panegyrist of his great rival Ignatius— "to be of all men the most eminent for his secular acquirements, and his understanding of political affairs. For so superior were his attainments in grammar5 and poetry, in rhetoric and philosophy, yea even in medicine, and almost all branches of knowledge beyond the limits of theology, that he not only excelled all the men of his own day, but seemed even to bear comparison with the Ancients. For all things combined in his favor — natural aptitude, diligence, wealth — which enabled him to form an all comprehensive library, and more than all these, the lust of glory, which induced him to pass whole nights without sleep, that he might have time for reading."

Photius was sent on an embassy to the Assyrians. During that embassy he read the works described in his "Bibliotheca", and wrote the critical notes on the books read contained in that book. He thus continued the work of Jerome and Eusebius as historian of Church literature.

Now, it is a proof of the importance of our theme, that the very first book described by Photius, in his "Bibliotheca", is one which treats of the genuineness of the writings of Dionysius the Areopagite. We gladly concede that the genuineness of those writings had to be maintained, A.D. 420. The primitive Church was not so uncritical as some affirm. The first book which Photius describes was written by Theodore, a presbyter of the Church of Antioch. What was the date of Theodore? Gennadius, in his book of "Illustrious Men", describes Theodore as "presbyter of the Church of Antioch, a man distinguished by the caution of science, and brilliancy of expression, who wrote against the Apollinarians, and whose books Photius says he had read." Sixtus Fenensis affirms that Theodore lived under Honorius Augustus (420). Photius not only read Theodore's book, but records his opinion that Theodore establishes the genuineness of the Areopagite's writings.

Happily Photius gives the four objections alleged against the writings of Dionysius. Bishop Westcott, as happily, describes the objections recorded, as a summary of all that has since been written on the controversy. The general argument against the genuineness is composed of three principal ingredients — "If," "therefore," and "spurious." "If" Dionysius was martyred under Domitian, how could he have quoted a letter written by Ignatius under Trajan? But Dionysius was not martyred under Domitian, but under Hadrian. Dionysius does not quote the letter of Ignatius immediately before his martyrdom. Again, the works of Dionysius were undoubtedly produced at Constantinople, A.D. 532 — "therefore" they were never known before. Bar Sudaili, a Syrian Monk, says he had found the "Erotic hymns" of Hierotheus — extracts from which are given by Dionysius — "therefore" Bar Sudaili, a Syrian monk in the 5th century, wrote the works attributed to Dionysius, which are written in Greek. Professor Stiglmayr has filled ninety-six pages with passages occurring between the 2nd and 7th century referring to Dionysius and his own notes thereon. By the omnipotent "spurious" it is proved that the writings were unknown till 532.

The first objection given by Photius from Theodore's book is this: "If the Book is genuine, why have none of the Fathers who succeeded him copied his sentences and proofs?" But they have so copied — Clement and Origen of Alexandria teem with parallel sentences and illustrations.

Another objection — "Why when Eusebius is enumerating the writings of the holy Fathers does he not enumerate the writings of Dionysius?" Read Photius, "Bibliotheca" Codex 127, to learn how Eusebius concealed everything prejudicial to Arius. Eusebius would have convicted himself by making known Dionysius. Jerome followed Dionysius on the Holy Angels.

Objection three. "How does this book weave a minute narrative of those traditions which grew up in the Church by growth and long intervals of time? For the great Dionysius, as is evident from the Acts of the Apostles, was a contemporary of the Apostles. This book, then, contains chiefly a description of those traditions which afterwards by degrees established themselves in the Church." The objector then says, "that it does not seem like the truth, yea that it is falsely feigned, that Dionysius should have had those ceremonies to describe which sprung up in the Church and prevailed, long after the death of the great Dionysius." Certainly Dionysius never wrote a statement more involved than that, yet the objector would have alleged that the writings could not belong to the Apostolic age, because they are not written with the simplicity of St. Paul, who, although St. Peter says, "there are some things in his Epistles hard to be understood," yet we all know that "St. Paul at any rate wrote plain English!" The objection is not true. There is no mere ritual in the "Ecclesiastical Hierarchy". Dionysius explains that in the administration of the Holy Communion, the Bishop comes forth from the Sanctuary, and makes a circuit of the whole enclosure, in order to signify that Almighty God, in His Word and in the Incarnation of the Word, came forth from the Hidden, and that He distributes His gifts to all His faithful people. He further explains that the trine immersion for Baptism, in which we are buried with Christ, symbolizes the trihemeria, three days and nights, during which Christ remained in the tomb. The placing of the Christian dead amongst those of the same rank signifies that according to our rank and holiness so will be the place prepared for us in the "many mansions."

Fourth objection. Why does this book quote from the Epistle of Ignatius? For as we have said, Dionysius flourished in the time of the Apostles, but Ignatius suffered martyrdon under Trajan, and a little before his death wrote that Epistle which this book "quotes". The objection has no logical meaning. Ignatius also lived in the time of the Apostles, and in fact was martyred eleven years before the martyrdom of Dionysius. The word "Love," in that letter of Ignatius, signifies human passion or fire. In the passage quoted from Ignatius by Dionysius, "Love" is used as signifying our blessed Lord, and is quoted to show the exalted use of the word "Love" by Christian theologians.

Well might Photius remark, that "Theodore zealously answers the objection in these four arguments," and that "he establishes, to the best of his ability," that the book is the legitimate offspring of the great Dionysius.

In Codex 194, writing on Maximus the Confessor, who wrote Scholia on Dionysius, Photius says that Maximus explains that phrase of the divine6 Dionysius, "In what way you say is Jesus, who is beyond all, ranked essentially with all men." The sentence is found in the 4th letter to Gaius7. The question was evidently asked by Gaius in reference to the "Divine Names," Caput II., Section vi., page 20.

I will add, that in Codex 231, "Bibliotheca", Photius in speaking of the synodical letter of Sophronius describes it as "containing the testimony of those who lived before and after the Fourth Synod (Council), the chief of whom were Leo Pontiff of old Rome; Peter, the most holy Bishop of Myra — Gennadius of Constantinople — Diadochus of Photica — and Euphramius of Antioch, and Dionysius, abounding in words, no doubt, but more abounding in speculation — disciple of St. Paul, Martyr of Christ, Bishop of Athens; and Justin, who consecrated his philosophy by the blood of martyrdom."

We affirm then that the testimony of Theodore and Photius is reasonable evidence that the writings attributed to Dionysius the Areopagite are genuine.

Further, Germany has spoken. Within the last decade Dr. Schneider has written a Treatise, in which he refutes objections and produces positive evidence in favor of their genuineness. He tells me that scarcely a month passes without his receiving the name of some scholar who wishes to be considered an adherent to their genuineness. The celebrated Professor Schwarz of Liege writes in the "Revue Hollandaise", "that after a profound study of the reasons which Dr. Schneider has produced in his 'Areopagatica', the genuineness of the works of St. Denis cannot be doubted." The Professor Schmid affirms in the "Linger quartal Schreift", "that the historic proof is complete." Dexter, Dionysius, Maximus, Photius, amongst the Ancients, Schneider, Schwarz and Schmid amongst the Moderns, maintain the genuineness of these writings.

We have produced the evidence and leave the reader to adopt that conclusion which appears to him most agreeable to historical criticism and common sense.

We claim to have verified that famous dictum of the profound Pearson, who, speaking of the writings of Dionysius, wrote: "No one is so ignorant as not to know that these writings were regarded as genuine by the best judges in the 6th, the 5th, the 4th, and the 3rd centuries."

Notes:

1. Migne. Ser. Lat. torn. 31, p. 275.

2. The first copy of Dexter's Chronicle sent to Jerome miscarried. An augmented copy was sent, but arrived after Jerome's death. Dexter then dedicated his Chronicle to his friend Paul Orosius, then living. Marcus Maximus, who died 616, continued Dexter's Chronicle. Heleca (860) continued Dexter and Maximus. Euthrandus (960) found Chronicle at Fulda. In 1594 copy sent to Spain.

3. P. 146.

4. History of Council of Constance, Book v, section 15. See The Footsteps of St Paul by Russell Forbes (Nelson and Sons); St Paul in Britain, by the Rev. RW Morgan (Parker and Co.).

5. Grammar included the question of the genuineness of Books.

6. "Divus ille Dionysius qui fecit tres Hierarchias". - Erasmus

7. P. 143.