Transcript
Speaker: Welcome back to the Dinosaur Circle podcast. This is Dr. Sam Bennett. In this episode, I talk with theologian Andreas Bergman about a puzzle in St. Maximus the Confessor. So the puzzle has to do with baptism. On the one hand, Maximus holds that every human being already participates in Christ. Christ is the source, the ordering principle, and final end of human nature, okay? Moreover, Maximus also says that the virtues are in some sense natural to us. And that these virtues kind of lead to deification. So the question, the puzzle is, why would we need baptism at all? You know, why does Maximus say that baptism is necessary for salvation and deification if every human being already in some sense participates in Christ and already possesses by nature
Speaker: the potential for a deifying virtue. so So anyway, that's the puzzle and Andreas helps ah helps us work through it in this episode. I hope you enjoy the conversation. So today we are going to talk about the necessity of baptism and St. Maximus the Confessor. Before we get to baptism, though, maybe we can start with the idea that Maximus has a Christocentric cosmology because that's going to kind of play into our discussion of baptism.
Speaker: the question of baptism but basically yeah you say in your in your work that maximus has a christocentric cosmology what is a christocentric cosmology and maybe what would be a non-christocentric cosmology I believe that the term Christocentric cosmology was coined by Thorstein Tolefsson, who was one of the great Maximus scholars.
Speaker: And if I remember correctly, his doctoral dissertation, was which was later published as a monograph, was titled The Christocentric Cosmology of St. Maximus the Confessor.
Speaker: um christocentric cosmology means that christ isn't just involved in creation um but he's like the origin um the thing that gives it gives it order and the goal the creation is moving towards like all this at once and and um In Maximus' thoughts, this always related to his notion of the logi or logoi.
Speaker: So he believes that there is the divine logos with capital letter L who contains the logoi, like these principles that determine what each thing is, how it's supposed to move, like what is nature and what it's for.
Speaker: um And all these countless logis that define the created world are in some sense one with the single logos who is the son of a God. Maximus, I think he quite often rep repeats in this kind of phrase that the many logi are the one logos.
Speaker: So perhaps we could say that Christocentric cosmology, um and in a Christocentric cosmology, the origin of creation, its order and its telos, like its final rest and end, are all in Christ.
Speaker: and So these are not like the There are not three different principles, origin, order and end, but all are Christ, basically. and And if we think then like non-Christocentric cosmology, perhaps we could have even a theistic cosmology, even a Trinitarian one, without having such a Christ-centered emphasis.
Speaker: We could say that christ God creates world and sustains it, um and that perhaps God gives the world some sort of general order with some general principles, but not with the incarnate Son specifically.
Speaker: And even even we could say that the the end of the world is some sort the the the bliss in the end is some sort of general blessedness rather than union with Christ.
Speaker: but But with Maximus, everything centers around the Son of God incarnate. And add and ah this is why he' his um cosmology, I think, is is um it is accurate to be called like a Christocentric cosmology. I guess one thing I was wondering was what would a Christian but non-Christocentric cosmology look like? I mean, I guess it would have it could affirm that God created everything.
Speaker: It could affirm that the sun or logos is involved in creation. But maybe it would say that Christ becomes central after the fall as redeemer. like maybe so maybe it's like, yeah, when it comes to origin, God creates through divine wisdom.
Speaker: When it comes to order, creatures have natural forms and purposes and laws built into them. When it comes to end, you know creatures attain the fulfillment proper to their natures.
Speaker: And then Christ is really like, he's entering primarily to repair sin, restore fallen humanity. He's not really...
Speaker: Well, ah I don't know. Anyway, i'm just I guess I'm just trying to think about, yeah, what would't what would a Christian but non-Christocentric cosmology look like? I think you you just said some of the, I think, the key issues. ah Okay. And what and what where you were referring to is one example of, I think, of of Maximus Christ-centeredness is, maybe we'll come back to the issue later, is that He believes that like the incarnate Christ is the archetype, ah like even of of Adam.
Speaker: So Adam is a type of Christ and not the other ah other way around. So when when God creates the world, he has Christ in the mind from the beginning. So Christ is not the only way a solution to the problem of sin, but he's something that's there that's there already.
Speaker: and and And he shapes the way the whole cosmos is. So it's beginning, it's it's in intelligible form, and then then it's end.
Speaker: So it's there all the way. I was thinking it's useful to think about the beginning of the Gospel of John with, you know, there's that's obviously the famous statement that through him, the word, all things were made.
Speaker: um So that seems to be saying that creation in terms of the origin of everything is through the logos. So everything is kind of made through Christ. So Christ is involved in the origin of everything.
Speaker: So any, any Christian will have to, you know, assuming they are following a scripture, you know, they're going to have to affirm that. So they, lead so it seems like every Christian, know,
Speaker: you know, should at least affirm that, um, Christ was involved in everything's origin from John one, three, um, though, though as in car. Yeah. But, but that, I mean, that's not really like, that's not in contradistinction to, the claim that, you know, the incarnation only was a, you know, um,
Speaker: kind of a a plan hatched later due to due to fallen humanity because because of course it could be the case that christ as second person of the trinity was involved in creation but jesus christ as incarnate word was a uh secondary plan hatched i don't know if that's the right way of putting it but a plan hatched in virtue of us falling rather than something that would have occurred regardless
Speaker: Anyway, I just thought John 1-3 is related to this whole Christocentric cosmology, but it doesn't get you the whole way probably because it's just talking about origin rather than the other stuff you mentioned of order and end.
Speaker: Yeah, I think it definitely gives you the origin that that um yeah if he's the cause of the world. but But of course, the Christocentric cosmology, I think it needs a bit more. So Christ has the ordering principle and the goal as well. And I don't think John...
Speaker: 1.3 gives you this explicitly at least. Right. Whereas Colossians 1.16, all things were created by him and for him.
Speaker: The for him part seems to get you more of the end end i dimension that you're talking about. Yeah, definitely. i think because yeah I think like that closes the circle, that Christ is the beginning and the end. But but one one of my like favorite, and well, I think nowadays it probably is one of my favorite biblical passages because it seems So deep is is from Colossians as well, from Colossians 2, chapter 2, verse 3.
Speaker: And there, Apostle Paul says that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in Christ. Because this is not about Christ being on the cause or the goal, but but it seems like he's the one who gives the world intelligible, that or ah who makes the world intelligible in the first place. So ah if if the very wisdom by which the world holds together and makes sense is hidden in Christ, then the world's order and not just its origin or or destination is grounded in him too. So I think if like if we put these three verses together, i think we actually get the the whole shape of this Christocentric cosmology from the biblical text before like Maximus' distinctions distinctions of logos and logi.
Speaker: This apparatus even enters the picture. So like John 1, 3 says, Christ is the cause. Colossians 1, 16, that is the end. And then Colossians 2, 3 gives you Christ as the ground of world's intelligible order.
Speaker: Yeah, that's interesting. it It reminds me of, it makes me think of um what the Samaritan woman says in response to, um well, basically after after he has a after Christ has a conversation with the Samaritan woman, um she says something like, you know, I know that...
Speaker: ah that Messiah is coming when he comes, he will explain, explain everything to us. So that element of Christ, the connection between Christ and truth revealing, explaining everything to us, revealing all truth um is interesting. and and And, and, and it's interesting to think about, you know, maybe the reason why he can explain all truth.
Speaker: I mean, I guess normally you would just think, well, it's because he's, you know, equal with the father and therefore he's omniscient. But it's in Maximus, you know the logos contains the logi, I guess, the principles according to which, like you said, each creature exists, moves properly and reaches its end.
Speaker: So when the Samaritan woman says Christ will explain everything, you could kind of think of that as, you know, Christ is not merely the teacher, but it's, yeah, like you said, he's kind of like the source of all intelligibility. And and that's why he's able to reveal and explain everything. Anyway, just just a thought there. um So, um okay, so anyway, we kind of...
Speaker: Like I said, the the kind of goal of this conversation is to talk about the necessity of baptism in St. Maximus the Confessor. And but we we're going to connect that to the issue of Christocentric cosmology. And the reason, the way I guess we want to connect it is basically, if you have a Christocentric cosmology, it might appear that you are going to be led into a radically inclusivist soteriology or doctrine of salvation.
Speaker: Um, so basically what we want to do in a second is kind of like explain why Christocentric cosmology might seem to lead to a radically inclusive soteriology. That's what we're going to do in a second, but maybe first we should just explain what a radically inclusive soteriology is or doctrine of salvation or whatever.
Speaker: Yeah. I think that's my term, but ah I, I mean that the deification is like genuinely open, uh, to people outside of any explicit relationship to Christ or, or, or the church. So, uh, so deification, uh, even i think like more exclusivistic positions, positions can grant that there may be exceptions to the general rule, but this kind of radical inclusivism claims that, that, um,
Speaker: That is completely normal way salvation works, that that people basically that people can save outside the church and without any knowledge of Christ. So you just have to be belong to those people of goodwill and but but by your sincere pursuit of virtue, ah no matter matter matter what you believe, you can be deified.
Speaker: And I say this is radical because such a position would make the church and its sacraments unnecessary in principle for deification.
Speaker: huh Yeah. Okay, good. Yeah. um So yeah, it's the idea is that deification outside the church is ah is a completely, yeah, normal thing.
Speaker: um And I mean, I guess it connects to the Christocentric cosmology because it's like the Christocentric cosmology is very inclusive itself in the sense of it's saying, um well, I don't know if, I don't, we didn't necessarily bring up the whole participation issue so much.
Speaker: But basically, if you think about what krista the Christocentric cosmology is saying, you know, it's saying something like every human being already participates in Christ just by being created, you know, according to the Logi in the Logos. um That's kind of what you explain in your work.
Speaker: So um if you have that, um it might seem like, all right, well, you know, everybody's everybody's participating in Christ just by... Being created, you know, maybe that means we're we're on the way to deification just by being created. um And if, you know, just by being created, we're on the the way to deification, then obviously it looks like all like the sacramental means of the church.
Speaker: are not necessary um and then i guess ah another and then i guess you know we also want to add this other issue of like maximus's theory of virtues where he says that um as you explain in your work that you know virtues are natural to human beings that's kind of a position of maximus so um if virtues are natural to human beings and virtue is like a key feature of deification or virtues are deifying Um, well, yeah, people can connect the dots. It's pretty straightforward. Virtues are natural.
Speaker: If virtues are deifying, then we can naturally get deified and we wouldn't need to attach ourselves to this like historically contingent church. Um, Anyway, that is that um do you feel like that kind of captures the way you've thought about it in your work? Is that roughly accurate? Yeah, I think that's right that's it. Yeah, because so that there's this participation in Christ just because you're existing, then you have like virtues.
Speaker: and that virtues deify. so so and that that the Maximus even says that Christ becomes embodied in a virtuous person. So this kind of ah incarnation in Christ, true virtues in ascetic, someone who struggling for virtue. so So if we can become deified by living a virtuous life, it's it it could seem like that that um Anyone, anywhere who becomes genuine genuinely virtuous is already participating in Christ and is being deified.
Speaker: and And if this is the case, ah it seems like there's no need for the sacraments or the church. and and And yeah, that deification is open to everyone through moral effort alone.
Speaker: And so before we kind of get deeper into Yeah, all the the niceties here. ah Maybe we could just kind of get your basic position on the table. you know um My understanding is that, yeah, you would say that trying to extract... you Basically, you would say Maximus rejects erratically inclusivist soteriology. Instead, he does think that the church, especially you know in particular, it's it's a the sacrament of baptism...
Speaker: he does think that that's essential. He doesn't think that um so even though he affirms Christocentric cosmology, which might seem to lead to radically inclusive soteriology, you don't think um it actually leads in that direction, at least in Maximus or yeah.
Speaker: Anyway, is that that kind of capture your basic thought here that like, no, Maximus does not endorse a radically inclusive soteriology?
Speaker: Yeah, that's my pace yeah basic point. then done and um There are two texts. I think I forgot to say that I think our discussion is based on a presentation I gave in the Oxford Patristic conference a few years ago.
Speaker: I think it's published this year in the Studio Patristica series. but But there I use in the presentation, I use Arthalassium 6 and 15 to make the argument that although Maximus has this Christocentric cosmology,
Speaker: um in those two chapters in Athalassium, he makes certain distinctions between the modes of the spirit and not the all these modes of the spirit's presence. and not not The spirit isn't present the same way in each person. This is the first point.
Speaker: And then the second point is that that a specific deifying mode of the spirit's presence is provided by baptism. And because baptism has such a role in Maximus theological thoughts, we cannot infer infer from his Christocentric cosmology that everyone will in fact be deified. That that although virtues are deifying, we need the spirit to live a stable life of virtue.
Speaker: And that is what baptism provides. This is basically the argument I'm making making the paper. Yeah, and so the four modes of the Spirit's presence that you present in your work, um like you said, in that Thelassium 6, I think, do we get two modes?
Speaker: I can't remember how many modes <unk> exactly come up in that particular passage. um But at any rate, in your work, you kind of extract overall, it seems like there are three or four modes depending on how you want to like...
Speaker: um Anyway, basically, there's kind of ah two alternative ways of schematizing it. but But in the end, it's not a big deal whether you count three or four. But I mean, I think for the purposes of our discussion, maybe, you know, it might be simpler to talk about it in terms of four. But basically, yeah, you identify like four modes of the spirit's presence.
Speaker: And while some of those modes are very inclusive. So, for example, the first mode of the spirit's presence that you talk about is like There's basically just like a providential presence of the spirit of the Holy Spirit in everyone.
Speaker: Um, and so that's very inclusive. It's everyone has no like outside. So that's as inclusive as you can get. Um, So yeah, there is that mode of the Spirit's presence. However, ah there is another mode of the Spirit's presence which has to do with adoption through faith and butpt baptism.
Speaker: And that mode of the Spirit's presence clearly depends on the church. And moreover, to achieve the deifying virtues, you need that mode.
Speaker: And yeah know so the conclusion, you do need the church to achieve deifying virtue. um Anyway, that that that that's kind of how i've and I understood yeah the talk that you that that you wrote and and delivered and published, like you said, recently.
Speaker: Good that it's understandable. is it to understanding is that yeah I think you summarized the basic argument very well. you you You write very clearly. That's one of the reasons I love love your your writings. um But anyway... um Well, let's get into, um so the thing is that I guess the the thing that makes this tricky is is ah Maximus' his claim that the virtues are natural, right? that's um
Speaker: that That's why i think, I guess ah that's what makes this a little bit of a puzzle. I mean, I guess a part of what makes it a puzzle Sorry. Okay. I guess there's like two things that make it a puzzle. On the one hand, the idea that we're dependent on the church is ah is puzzling.
Speaker: Sorry. The idea that we're dependent on the church for salvation is puzzling. If you have a Christocentric cosmology, that sort of seems to make it puzzling, at least in appearance I'm talking about. And, but then there's the other layer of like Maximus having this idea that the virtues in some sense are natural.
Speaker: That might also seem to make, um, the necessity of the church for salvation puzzling as well. Um, so I guess it's like, we kind of have these two things that are creating,
Speaker: tension and in which your paper kind of sorts out and explains and solves kind of thing um but do you think that's that's the right way of putting it that we have like these two two factors in maximus that kind of create some tension
Speaker: Yeah, I think so. and very so out yeah And I think it's so interesting that in the presentation, like when, yeah, because it's Christocentric Cosmology, so it's all about Christ, but I think ah the Spirit's work brings this kind of complementary perspective to the grand vision of Maximus.
Speaker: And so so so we so at the same time, we can have this guy focus and stress on Christ and how he's present everywhere in every detail of of the world. and and how he's present in those virtues and becomes embodied through them. And having said that this, then we have the Spirit's work connected to it, and and only through this the work of the Spirit, this happens ah concretely. So in some sense, you can have these grand visions, ah Christological visions, but but for the Christ to become infleshed in us, it needs the work of the Spirit and these different modes of the Spirit's presence. and And well, I don't know when we go to the question of the naturalness of virtue in detail, but but and I think that's quite a tricky issue. And I studied quite a lot of different
Speaker: scholars on that topic when I was preparing in the presentation. because Maximus seems to say quite a contradictory contradictory of things concerning virtues because um on the one hand, he says that they are natural to us and he describes them as like potentialities inherent in our nature in disputation with Pyrrhus.
Speaker: And okay, so if we think that virtues are deifying and we have like and we have potentiality for virtue in our nature, it seems like we have this natural potential potentiality to be deified.
Speaker: But at the same time, like Maximus explicitly denies that we have this potency to be deified naturally. So it seems he says a contradictory stuff, and then it's like maybe the task of the student of Maximus to try to figure out what he exactly means and how to harmonize these various statements that seem to contradict each other. Amen. I feel like that's kind of the job of thinking, is you find puzzles that seem to be contradictory, and then you solve them. um
Speaker: So yeah, that's great. So like, yeah, the... um ah We have the Christocentric vision, you know, Christ present in and through the whole cosmos down to the individual, ah down to the Logi of individual beings. um But then, like you said, there's there's this further concreteness of Christ that occurs thanks to the Holy Spirit, you know, the enfleshment of Christ in us.
Speaker: ah We need the work of the Holy Spirit and we need it in different modes. And, you know, And then, yeah, would and then to emphasize like what you just said about the this apparent contradiction. um So virtues, um he says, are natural potentialities inherent in us. Okay.
Speaker: Yet, he also says we we don't have a natural potentiality for deification, yet virtues are deifying. So that just looks like a contradiction. If I naturally have the potency for deifying virtue, why don't I naturally have the potency for deification? So...
Speaker: Um, so yeah, that's like maybe a pretty, pretty good way of describing that. if I feel like that's, yeah, that's, that describes pretty well, like kind of the tension that you're, ah you're working on in the, in the, um, in the paper.
Speaker: And, you know, I, I kind of wanted to, so I want to kind of flesh this out a little bit with you. i was curious what you thought. So I was just kind of thinking to myself about like, The idea of virtue is natural.
Speaker: um there's ah there's um There's numerous things that one could mean by that. And therefore, there's various things that one could think in terms of like, how do we need the spirit? Or how do we need Christ? Or how do we need participation in the church?
Speaker: Because there's different kind of... Well, i mean let me just kind of flesh this out. So like one thing I was thinking was like, so... and this this is kind of based on distinctions that you make in your paper, but you know if someone is actually walking around living a life of charity, hope, justice, prudence, and so forth, they are actively embodying numerous virtues.
Speaker: So one thought is that, you know, someone might think that just humans automatically by nature. Yeah, we're just that's us. That's we're just walking around. We're just we're prudent, we're charitable. So that would be like the maximum maximal level of like virtues being natural. We just actively display and manifest the virtues just by nature.
Speaker: And then another idea is like, well, maybe by nature we are fit to, we have a fitness to be virtuous. So this would be like, you know, when a a violin is well-tuned.
Speaker: um If it's just sitting there, it's not actively making music, but it's fit to make the music because it's not only does it have strings and whatever, but it's like actually like well-tuned. So that would be a kind of natural fitness.
Speaker: Or that would be a type of fitness that the violin has if it's tuned well. And so when virtue is natural, maybe someone someone could mean, oh, what what I mean by that is that the human being just automatically by nature is like a well-tuned violin, ready to actively like go around and be prudent and so forth.
Speaker: i' Sorry, this is going on a while, but but but let me just do the two more. like Then the other one would be like, well, you could say the human by nature has a potency for virtue just in the sense of like, you know, if you have a aunt you have an untuned violin, it has the potential to make music still.
Speaker: even though it's untuned, it's just like first you have to tune it. In other words, you have to give it the fitness and then you actually have to actively play it. But then there's even another more basic way in which virtue could be natural, which is like it could be our end. So like you could have like if you have just a bunch of woods lying around, wood lying around, it's not as though it's – its purpose is to make music.
Speaker: It's only once you construct the violin does it even have the the function or the – you could say it's like the end or the standard ah to to make music. and so there So anyway, I guess I was just thinking to myself, there's different ways you could mean by saying virtue is natural. You could mean that virtue is our end.
Speaker: You could mean that it's we have a natural potency for virtue. You could mean that we have a natural fitness for virtue. Or finally, you could mean like, yeah, we just full-blown – We full blow. We just attain virtue just automatically. We're like, we're walking around and we're already charitable and blah, blah, blah. And and so anyway, with those different things, you can also think about what what would the role of baptism be?
Speaker: And it seems like, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you're based on your investigation of Maximus. When he means virtue is natural, he means, yeah, virtue is our end by nature.
Speaker: That's like, that's the, our purpose and goal. And so maybe that's different than let's say like, anyway, I was going to say Karl Barth, but I don't really know if that's correct. But, um, But Maximus would affirm that virtue is our end.
Speaker: He would affirm that we have a natural potency for virtue. It's just that he doesn't think we're fit. So it's like we're like a untuned violin who needs to get tuned up before we even play the music and maybe baptism what it does is it it tunes the violin um sorry that was a i didn't mean for that to be such a long monologue andreas but anyway i just i had time to think like anyway yeah so don't know what to say yeah because uh yeah i would think like maybe i'm just confusing confusing you and the listeners
Speaker: I've been um been thinking about Aristotle's position, like this kind of a... Well, maybe my understanding of aristo thought Aristotle is not precise, but anyways, there you have that.
Speaker: We have this kind of a in inherent potencies, capacities that need to be actualized and and often we need others for their actualization like a teacher or a parents or whatever so so there's this idea that there's something inherent and in us we're directed to some end like being rational beings then with others in this process to to reach our end which is like for example to be rational uh but then what thing i think what distinguishes maximus from our aristotle thought is that he
Speaker: Well, yeah, well, irish I think Aristotle, if I'm not mistaken, he believes that, OK, we need others to be fully actualized in our cap capacity capacities.
Speaker: But if I'm not mistaken, he believes that once a potency is actualized, it like becomes an agent's own settled possession. So there's this kind of a stable disposition ah exercised by our our own like in inherent inherent resources once we get there.
Speaker: So when when an acorn becomes an oak tree, then it's an oak tree and it it has been fully actualized. But in Maximus, I think there is this ongoing participation in Christ and and also that you need the Spirit constantly strengthening you and stabilizing you so that you become and remain fully actualized.
Speaker: so So I think that's the difference. ah But now I'm starting to forget your example about the violin. yeah. But up yeah but well maybe the example, this is to your example, maybe in that sense, that even in the example that there's the violin that needs needs to be tuned, there's also the idea that once it's tuned, then it's like, then it sounds very nice. and but But in Maximus, you must have this kind ongoing work of the spirit in the Christian for the Christian to remain in tune and and reach this state of deification.
Speaker: Yeah. Yeah. I like that. I mean, yeah, it seems like, yeah, the Aristotelian picture, i guess, like you, I don't think I have a precise understanding either, but it sounds right that, yeah, like the other, some cause might help me acquire perfection, but then that perfection becomes mine as a sort of settled actuality.
Speaker: But, but in Maximus, it's not just the spirit getting the process started. The spirit is also strengthening, and sustaining and stabilizing the virtue.
Speaker: um So, yeah, like, so, I mean, it seems like the spirit with this speaker, I mean, I don't know. Yeah, I don't want you. Obviously, you know, we're just talking off the top of our heads about this, this analogy.
Speaker: But like, it seems like one, the spirit, give you know, the one first, the spirit. Well, this isn't the first thing the spirit does, but one of the things the spirit does is it.
Speaker: um makes the violin fit for music in the sense of it tunes the violin in the first place. Then maybe the spirit is also involved in, in a way, playing the violin. I mean, it's not as though us actively being virtuous is separate from the ongoing participation in Christ and the spirit. So anyway, there's an element of the spirit being involved in making the violin fit fit to play, AKA ah tuning it.
Speaker: the spirit's also involved in the actual playing of the violin. But then, like you said, you know, with a violin, it's it's it's liable to kind of always be going out of tune. it's It's getting out of tune as you play it in a way. And so, you know, the ongoing tuning is also a work of the spirit, um, in this analogy.
Speaker: Um, well, anyway, yeah. So, and then, yeah, I guess to be clear, it's like when Maximus says that, um, what was the quote, the inherent, but we you know, these inherent potentialities, we have that inherent potentiality for virtue,
Speaker: You know, that's to say not only is it our, the standard by which we determine if if a human has lived well, you know, it's not, not only is it our end, like to to be a human, you know, one ought, in being a human, one ought to live virtuously. So it's our end, it's our standard by which you evaluate the success of human life.
Speaker: But if we have inherent potentialities, it also means, potentiality for virtue, it also means like, In some sense, the power to be virtuous is in us. But just as the power to see is in the eye, but if an eye becomes damaged, it's no longer fit.
Speaker: And that's kind of I guess that's kind of what happened to us post-fall. The eye became yeah it's still that i saw has the potential to see. It's just like now that it has some disease, it's no longer fit to see.
Speaker: And thus it doesn't see either. It doesn't have actual seeing. um Anyway, yeah, maybe you can comment on like the post-fall situation. and yeah Yeah, because I think Maximus does say that like in baptism, Edenic of para the state in paradise is like restored.
Speaker: So I think that implies that Well, I don't know, can we reason back that Adam had this kind of a special mode of the spirit's presence in the garden and then due to fall into sin, he lost that and now that presence is restored in in baptism and without that presence we are unfit to reach the state of deification maybe some something like this but of of course then one one one further the difference from aristotle i think is that maximus think that even we have our potentialities even even then then we have a participation in in christ so so we don't have this kind of ah enclosed nature that has certain potentialities and we are these individuals that's
Speaker: possess certain things like apart from christ but there's this ongoing going participation but but still i think you're right that that this certain kind of fitness for deification is restored in baptism because the spirit is uh gives himself to the christian there yeah that yeah right that's that's a really important point that um baptism is not ah like we've said earlier it's not the first point it's not the first moment at which the human being participates in christ participation in christ is already built into nature itself the logi of things are in the logos ah so my logos determines what i am and simply existing as a human nature
Speaker: is already a kind of participation in christ um and then it's also built into our end the fact that you know christ is not merely our cause but he is the rest and end of our natural movement um so so you get you know christ's origin crisis form order of our nature crisis end so and then baptism gets inserted into this already like christo center structure.
Speaker: And it does not give us a whole entirely new destination, right? Because I mean, that's the thing is that you can think about different theories of baptism based upon what it provides, what its effect is, right? And so one person might think baptism gives you everything. It's like you don't even have the end of deification. It's not even your death. The human is not the human nature is not even intrinsically ordered toward deification prior to baptism, you know? And I don't know who would hold that theory, but maybe...
Speaker: I don't know maybe like Karl Barth, but I don't really know. just That's just like a question. But um anyway, you that that could be one theory of baptism. is It gives the whole suite. It gives it gives being ordered to deification.
Speaker: um But anyway, it seems like the Maximus theory is is not like that. it was It would be more like um baptism restores the fitness for deification.
Speaker: And then, well, I guess it doesn't give the actuality. of virtue, right? Because that's kind of an important point, is that you can be, bad because that that that would be an important distinction between like Maximus' position and some other like maybe Protestant positions where it's like you can be a baptized person and still sin.
Speaker: So what that means is that baptism does not give the actuality of the virtue. Yeah, I think right in Ephesians 15, he said, I think he presents like three modes of the presence of the spirit.
Speaker: So the first one is like that spirit is providential, present everywhere, like staring at these good impulses or good thoughts. I think he says something like these stirrings of the spirit make some barbarians barbarians reject their like Barber's Laws or something like that.
Speaker: So that's the general presence. Then there's the second presence, which is about the spirit's presence in the Old Covenant and then in the law, he was there showing the the Jews their sins and preparing for the coming Christ.
Speaker: But then the third mode, I think Maximus splits that into two. So there's first ah the mode that is given to every Christian in baptism, that the Spirit becomes presence in the Christian, like maybe in a hidden way, like the treasures of baptism are probiotic commit provided it. They're like irrespective of our life of of virtue but for the grace of baptism to be actualized then we need those virtues and i think like there is this kind of intensity in all those these modes that maximus presents there is this this kind of intensification like their first mode some barbarians reject these laws that are against god's will then we have this kind of jews know a bit more they they know that they are sinners and they are
Speaker: they realize their need for the messiah and then come comes the spirit in in the in the modes that are peculiar to the church and there you can have this kind of um that that there there a person is enabled to follow strictly the divine commandments And by doing so reach deification.
Speaker: But of course, if one doesn't live such a life, there is no, like the the the potentiality for deification that's there. It won't be actualized without your your cooperation.
Speaker: Yeah, so four just reviewing those, the four modes or three modes, and then you can kind of divide the third into two. But if we do it as four, the first is kind of providential, natural mode of ah of of the spirit's presence. And that's everyone, but especially, I guess, rational creatures, creatures.
Speaker: Yeah. and it's and what the result of that mode is a genuine kind of like yeah we recognize violations of the natural order the natural law i guess and it leads us to kind of moral awakening and a desire for moral improvement, a desire for virtue.
Speaker: But then the second mode of the spirit, that's I guess that's more like connected to divine law, um where people, if you receive the second mode... Well, actually, let me ask you about this mode. Is this mode connected specifically to Israel? like Are we talking...
Speaker: um the Israelites living under God's revealed law, like Old Testament Israel, or when we're talking about the second mode of the spirit, which pertains to God's commandments and exposing transgression of God's commandments, we're we're talking about this second mode.
Speaker: Is this something everyone must go through in order to attain the third mode of the spirit of adoption? um Or is this just like ah sort of historical mode that,
Speaker: the Israelites, the Old Testament Israelites possessed? Well, I think in Arthagassian 15, Maximus portrays this on chronological order from creation through the old covenant to the its fulfillment in the new covenant.
Speaker: But but But and but it i think if if we like ah I think we can like apply this framework more broadly. that it's kind of a if If the Spirit's presence in the Old Covenant is about showing people their sins, then it seems like that's part of the work of the Spirit still.
Speaker: and Even Maximus believes that. this kind of ongoing life of repentance and contrition and turning away from sins is part of the Christian struggle. So it seems like the Spirit is doing similar work even during the New new Covenant, the New Testament times.
Speaker: So yeah, I'm not sure, maybe in Athalassim 15, the focus, I think Maximus speaks only about the law. He doesn't specify whether it's the mosaic law there or the legislation. I think he enumerates quite many of these different laws in the Old Testament.
Speaker: But I think the focus is on the written written law and the people of Israel. But I don't think that what's said there is like ah applicable only to them. and And even in some sense, I think it maybe each Christian in some sense it lives through the whole salvation history.
Speaker: Because then you have the idea, for example, it's it's predates Maximus but it's also Maximus that about the how God rewards Christians like what are the correct motives of good works like what counts as a good work and there there you have the three motives like the fear of punishment hope for reward and then the love of virtue love for God So I think this kind of the the idea that there is this kind of ah the threat of punishment motivates you to do good. that's In a Maximus, to that's an Old Testament motive for obedience. And then then there's this progression from this kind of outward threats and of
Speaker: outward obedience towards inner righteousness and fulfillment of the law. So so in some sense, we can say that each Christian lives through this narrative of salvation history personally.
Speaker: And so so and and in in this sense, also this specific mode of the spirit presence, which per which which Maximus connects to the Old Covenant is also applicable to the Christians.
Speaker: to christians Do you think anyone who genuinely, don't know how to put this. Yeah, genuinely who, any Old Testament Israelite who generally genuinely experienced the second mode of the Spirit's presence, do you think all of them would have had ah personal faith in Christ.
Speaker: um Like, I guess what I'm wondering is like, will, so I understand that there's the the issue of um faith being implanted in baptism.
Speaker: But I guess what I'm thinking about is someone can be, we can imagine a situation where someone is baptized, but they never actually believe that Jesus Christ is Lord.
Speaker: They never actually believe that salvation is found in Christ. They never like genuinely entrust themselves to Christ. Okay. And so i so the first thought I had was like, is that another mode of the spirit's presence? Like to actually believe Jesus Christ is Lord Is that another mode that we haven't talked about? But then I thought, well, maybe it's included in the second mode and thus anyone who would, or it's like at least it included sort of as a disposition so that if you're in the second mode, then when you come across Christ, you know, you will actually believe Jesus Christ is Lord or believe your salvation is found in him.
Speaker: Anyway, I guess my question, what is my question? My question is basically, first off, yeah what do you think about like when someone um ah goes through a profound profound personal conversion to Christ where they actually you know believe genuinely that Christ is Lord? Yeah.
Speaker: This is obviously distinct from baptism in some sense because plenty of people get baptized and don't think that. So is there is this another mode of the Spirit's presence or is that just like maybe the initial stages of the fourth mode, which has to do with wisdom? Anyway, just kind of curious.
Speaker: No, it's hard to say. That's not a question Maxim treats explicitly. Because of course this kind of confession of Christ as the Lord, it's it's well and and in the case of adult baptism, is its ah it's required.
Speaker: so But with the infants, it's a different case, of course. But I would situate it somewhere in the third or fourth mode mode part of this ongoing life of ah of the Christian, like confessing Christ, whether it's in baptism, like truly confessing him, like whether it's in in in the single event of being baptized or or more broadly as an ongoing confession of Christ. It's there.
Speaker: and but Then one point, of course, is that does Maximus, yeah, yeah. This is more a question I don't have an answer personally. that And I don't have a threshold in my mind, like, how does Maximus portray some of these Old Testament saints? Does think that they have this kind of explicit explicit faith in Christ?
Speaker: Or is it more like that they were virtuous and participated in Christ in that way without without like this explicit knowledge? I don't think maybe he doesn't even ask good questions. I assume that he just portrays them as good Christians.
Speaker: Well, yeah, it seems like there are a few possibilities with respect to certain Old Testament figures. It's like one possibility is, yeah, that, you know, in addition to being virtuous, let's say they explicitly have knowledge of the second person of the Trinity and believe that.
Speaker: Another possibility is they have a kind of implicit disposition um because it would be very hard. I mean, right. I mean, it's unthinkable, right? If Abraham were to be, you know, at the manger, he would, of course he would worship Christ. Like he would have worshiped Christ while he was alive, right? He would have defended Right. So, so in some sense, like we it seems like we have to say that these great figures, um,
Speaker: at the very least would have been disposed, right? Like, it's not thinkable for for King David to be among those who did not receive Christ if he had been there, right?
Speaker: Well, yeah, maybe maybe it's about also this kind of theological ah question of theological epistemology in the sense that, I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud. Yeah. that let's say that if the highest form ah of knowledge is this kind of noetic knowledge, a contemplative knowledge where you basically have the noose, the highest part of the soul is a contemplative faculty. So you can like spiritually see these noetic realities.
Speaker: and And beneath this kind of knowledge is this kind of a discursive, propositional knowledge and discursive thinking and these modes of human cognition. So I would tend to think that like,
Speaker: in this kind of maximum framework, Abraham or David could no ethically see the Son of a God incarnate. And maybe as a result of that experience, gain this kind of a more discursive or propositional knowledge.
Speaker: But I think like when we approach these issues, our are approach may be a bit like, maybe our presuppositions are a bit different. that we We think this kind of this kind of rational understanding is the highest highest form of knowledge, but I'm not sure that's that's the case with Maximus.
Speaker: Yeah, that's interesting. Yeah. And then I think, you know, it makes me think about how David is a little bit trickier than Abraham because, um, cause he already prophesies Christ in words and images. Right. So, um, or at least that's, that's what I would think.
Speaker: Um, But yeah, like with Abraham, maybe that like that's that's a better one where it's thinking about him where it's like, yeah, it seems like potentially there was a direct noetic apprehension of Christ.
Speaker: It's some kind of direct spiritual wisdom or vision or sort spiritual vision maybe connected to um the mystery of Christ. Yeah. And then David, it seems like that through, well, that that kind of brings up your your discursive distinction. It seems like David actually managed to break through to the level of like a discursive prophetic expression.
Speaker: um But yeah, that's interesting to think about how that knowledge occurred. It's like, yeah, potentially it's first through noetic apprehension. and and And it was through that noetic apprehension that he was able to come to the explicit prophetic expression of Christ in like Psalm 22 and stuff. um Now, ah why just to go back, why are we talking about this? Because basically, basically I think, yeah, it seems it seems like probably the right thing to say is that you know when it comes to wisdom, it comes in a variety of forms.
Speaker: and And wisdom, which you know has to do with the fourth mode, you know through the divine, divinizing indwelling of the Holy Spirit, there's a type of wisdom that occurs.
Speaker: And this wisdom is connected to the full actuality of the grace of baptism where like you are living a deified life.
Speaker: But when it comes to like the initial moments of living that deified life, I mean, it's going to have to include the wisdom of of of seeing that Christ is Lord and that your so ah salvation is found in him.
Speaker: and that And then I guess like this goes beyond propositional knowledge, but entrusting yourself to Christ, that is also a um kind of moral commitment, I think. But anyway, yeah, it just seems like those kind of features will be connected to to the fourth mode of the spirit.
Speaker: and I think in Maximus, especially wisdom, I think it it relates to contemplation or these these those is it the fruit of contemplation and some sense. You're truly wise when you look at the creation of the scripture. yeah you You see Christ everywhere.
Speaker: ah The whole world is quoted in him. And you see how how the divine wisdom structures the world and and everything in it. And you can race from the plurality of forms and the from the created world to the source of it, who is the wisdom itself.
Speaker: I think this this is like in the state of deification, Maximus says that ah a Christian who has reached this state is unable to sin. If I understand this correctly, the point is that a wise one will no longer get attached to the essential matters, but he sees Christ everywhere.
Speaker: He sees a the divine wisdom who has formed ah all around him or her. And and that that's why like thehood in when one has that got reached that kind of state, one no longer seeks essential pleasures, like vanities of this world, but what has fixed in a stable way to Christ.
Speaker: So everything's about Christ. and And yeah, and this is, Maximus says that one who has reached this state no longer since, I believe. in And I can't remember whatever whether it's in Athanasius 6 or 15, either of those.
Speaker: But ah for me, at least this is how I understand the vision. because And thank goodness is like the culmination of this life of a practical struggle. that you have labored in ascetical life and love of neighbor. Of course, Maximus enumerates in his other works all these practices that the Christians suit should take up, like fasting, giving alms, sleeping on the ground, sexual continence, and other such practices.
Speaker: And all these are practiced so that one becomes, well, good and that Christ, the source of goodness, becomes embodied in such a struggle, a struggler. So yeah, a good yeah because that yeah, ah how how I see this, Maximus describes three
Speaker: spiritual stages they're often presented in this kind of chronological order that you start with the practical life of practically this kind of practical struggle and then you move on towards this uh natural contemplation where you relate everything to Christ and then then the height is this kind of mystical theology which is about union with God but so by this practical struggle you reach goodness and by by natural contemplation and the the fruit or outcome of that is wisdom when you see Christ everywhere and and this this and with through these two you become deified and can be united to Christ and reach this kind of a state of stable sinlessness
Speaker: ah reification Yeah, this this theory of the yeah three stages of the spiritual path. um And then, yeah, it's interesting that the thecetic practical the practical life of the ascetic struggle precedes contemplation.
Speaker: um I'd have to think about that. I think that that's, it well, I think that's easy to understand standing in some sense. If, it were yeah, I often think about it, maybe maybe this was, I had this revelation once I got a lot of cho chocolate during Christmas. And then when you have eaten all your chocolates and you have this kind of ah addiction to sugar after that, of course, it's difficult to concentrate on anything else except i it's chocolate. So I think if if you want to look at the
Speaker: Yeah, let's say I have some sort of addiction I go to. Well, we're finished like to spend time in the forest. I think that's that's a traditional place for Finns to encounter God or something holy. So if if you have some sort of addiction and you think of only thinking about that that that craving you have, you're not really present where you are.
Speaker: So in some sense to be present, like to have this kind of inner stillness and be open towards encountering god or or open towards seeing the presence of christ in creation you have to need to have this certain kind of detachment to sense sensual pleasures because if you're occupied only to those you're not like open towards anything higher And I think that's the point why why this kind of ascetical struggle stands in the beginning of the process, that you first must acquire some sort of detachment in order to be even able to practice natural contemplation.
Speaker: Yeah, I guess what I was thinking was that, yeah, contemplation in the strong sense of attentive and prolonged meditation does require a certain probably advanced...
Speaker: Some, yeah, some, I don't know about advance, but some, yeah, some degree of presupposes some degree of purification of the passions um for sure. um You know, but practical struggle does also seem to require already some kind of discernment in terms of knowledge of good and evil in terms of what you ought to do.
Speaker: um if it's a, in and if it's a godly struggle in the sense of like a God word struggle or a the, a lot in the sense of you, if you're doing it for God, you would need like some kind of knowledge of commandments or, um that there is a God.
Speaker: If that's why you're struggling, if you're struggling for God or in fear of God, but at any rate, if it's either for God or in fear of God, you need to have like that knowledge of god So there's knowledge built into contemplation.
Speaker: Sorry, built into the the practical struggle. but ah but i But definitely makes sense to think that, you know, if we're talking about contemplation in ah in a more robust sense, for sure you need ah purification of the passions. I mean, i i I just remember that too in high school where I was like,
Speaker: for some reason I want started, you know, wanting to read more and just like what ah what a battle it was with myself to like be able, like be able to read these books for a longer period of time. It was, I remember it being quite like a struggle where I was like, damn, I really have to like, I don't know, I guess i have to go on a run first or something. Anyway, I had to like figure things out and like purify my passions to some degree. Like I now look back and realize like, I had to go through that. And I feel bad for so many people who, I mean, I, you know, started in a bad position and to some degree, you know like, like many people, like I was, you know, used to playing video games and immediate, um, um, pleasure and all that. But I think it's even worse now. So it's like the level of purification they have to do before they can, And I'm not even talking about it like heavy contemplation. I'm just saying like read a damn book, you know? So ah anyway, okay God bless us all. so
Speaker: um Oh, you know, so I was thinking, Andreas, maybe like I know we're kind of close close on time here. So let me know if you have to stop at any moment. But I was thinking like I should try to like come up with like some kind of tough objection ah for you. So correct just as like,
Speaker: Just ah to to give ourselves some fun here. um So I guess the best thing that I could think of was like, you know, it seems like, um well, basically you make you make the distinction between like three gifts.
Speaker: You know, there's the gift of being, the gift of well-being, the gift of eternal being. And those three gifts are all a type of participation in Christ, right? That's kind of, that that's like the Maximus picture, right?
Speaker: Okay, so, and the idea is that the gift of being is given to everyone, and then the gift of eternal being is also given to everyone. It's just that if anyone's damned, they do have eternal being, it's just, it's not a good one.
Speaker: Okay, so... The thing that that brings up is like, wait a second, if having being an eternal being is participating in Christ, and if there's people that are damned, then we would have people who are damned, but also participating in Christ, right? Because they they have being an eternal being in in hell.
Speaker: Anyway, so the ah I guess the question is like, how could someone have participation in Christ yet be in hell, damned in hell, especially if it's eternal? um Anyway, so I just thought that, okay, that that would that's my attempt at a tough question for you. so Well, I think the probably the maximum answer is that there are these various various kinds of participations in Christ. so So those in hell participate in Christ even there, because in the in in eternal, they participate in Him as the source of their eternal being, and then then it's the... the
Speaker: the existence according to well-being, like the logos of well-being. Anae Maxima says that being an eternal being are given to our essence, but the the logos of well-being is given giving it to our will. And so it depends on the use of our free will um whether our whether we actualize this kind of a a way of being this way of well-being and whether we actualize it or not that determines whether our eternal destin destiny is that one of like well-being or eternal ill-being which maximus says but like oh oh
Speaker: All people in the end participate in Christ. It's just a matter what kind of participation that is. Those who who experience eternal bliss will have actualized this potentiality for well-being, for spending eternal, eternity bliss. But those who haven't done so, they only experience eternal being.
Speaker: And because their way of existing existence doesn't align with their nature, with the logos of their nature, with Christ himself, like in the end, they they experience this eternal suffering.
Speaker: If we take Maximus literally, that he he does teach some sort of doctrine of eternal hell, I think that's a debated issue among Maximus scholars. Some believe that it's kind of a general restoration and eternal bliss for it all is the position he he really takes but he does speak about eternal ill being as well so so it's it's literally there
Speaker: I don't know if I answered your question but but but the simple point is that even those who experience the punishment of hell, they do participate in Christ, but not not not with the same intensity and not not the same way as those who inherit eternal life and bliss.
Speaker: Yeah, I think the objector is going to want to say, oh, but you know how could someone be participating in Christ in any way and not have well-being? How could they still persist in ill-being?
Speaker: um But you know one thing that makes me think of is just how um yeah everyone would receive eternal being as a gift by grace, and thus hell would not be an absolute separation from Christ, but maybe it's like a kind of disordered you know form of participation in Christ.
Speaker: And i just think about, i find interesting, um I don't know if you've... People call it, ah I think, what do they people call it? Something like the divine presence model of hell where, you know, basically, and you can kind of appeal to 1 John for this where he talks about some people, you know, when Christ comes, it will be for their shame or that they will kind of recoil in shame from Christ. But anyway, the idea is, look, Christ...
Speaker: what is what hell is is that what god christ appearing in presence to all but for some given who they are and so on and so forth that presence is profoundly negative because god is light and he brings to light who you are and so you know um it's kind of like you know Well, anyway, I don't need to go further into that analogy, but but anyway, I don't know. Yeah, I think so. I've been thinking about that too. I think I've used to call that the river of fire understanding of hell or God in some sense floods the creation with his love in the end and some experience it does. The joy of paradise and others as a great torment.
Speaker: And in Maximus' framework, I think then the... the one thing and that differentiates that you were used to that is your mode of does your mode of existence which is up to you what kind of ah how you live basically what is your mode of like existence does it align with your logos which which is found in Christ that does your mode of existence i align with Christ and and that's that's ah the key and of course you need the spirit you need baptism but also in Maximus framework you need to exercise your free choice and and that's what determines your mode mode of existence and and the way you will experience this divine indwelling in the end.
Speaker: Great. Well, um on that note, we can close out. And I mean, do you what what are you up to now? are you What have you been working on recently? uh it's kind of an entry to a finnish series this patristic series that has short introductions to various church fathers so i have entries on maximus and even ironies of lyon to that series but it's in finnish so so oh cool And that's probably problem for the audience. next next Next up, I'm planning to write an article about different kinds of apophatic predication in Eastern Orthodoxy.
Speaker: But I'm just beginning to work on it. So that's my that's my next next next little project. i I think oftentimes it's the Orthodoxy is presented it so that it's just this kind of apophatic form of Christianity and it's completely completely completely opposed to this kind of Western scholasticism but I think there's more to it and and even if we've take this kind of a stance that orthodox is about apophaticism i think there are various kinds of apophatic don't know how to say like this kind of tiers of apophaticism or there are various ways of speaking about the god and very various flavors of apophaticism and they are not all the same and i think this kind of um
Speaker: Well, I want to write that article basically because i I'm a bit tired of this kind of overemphasis or one- side and this one-sided approach to this kind orthodoxy and apaphatti apophaticism.
Speaker: So see if I have something useful useful to say about that topic. No, that sounds great. Yeah, looking forward to it. and Well, thanks again for coming on. um Thank you. It was my great pleasure. Yeah, yeah i really I really enjoy our conversation. So thanks again.
Speaker: Thank you.
