Louth on Science and Mystery I

 … do we perhaps lose something in relinquishing the idea of theology as a science? Cannot perhaps the revision in the understanding of science that came about with the growth of experimental science give us a truer insight into the nature of theology as a science? Is there not something to be said for restoring theology to the realm of the sciences, if not to her erstwhile pre-eminent position as the ‘queen of the sciences’? And, given the enormous respect in which the sciences are held nowadays, would it not be of considerable apologetic value if theology could be regarded as being genuinely ‘scientific’? And is there not a further consideration, taking us back to the concerns of chapter I? There I spoke of a divide, a ‘dissociation of sensibility’, in our culture, and suggested that one of the elements in this dissociation is the way in which the claim of the scientific method to be the sole route to truth, with its consequences that truth is limited to the form of impersonal objectivity, has been too easily conceded by the humanities. But if we argue, as I have done, that the humanities are concerned with truth and that their way to this truth is radically different to the experimental method of the sciences, are we not promoting just such a divide in our understanding of the world, and therefore in our culture, that we have deplored in chapter I? May not the rediscovery of ‘theological science’ be the way to help us heal this breach?

Andrew Louth, Discerning the Mystery. An Essay on the Nature of Theology, (Oxford: Clarendon, 1983) 47-48.

Louth begins his chapter on “Science and Mystery” by outlining the fundamental shift that has taken place in the relationship between theology and science. Within an Aristotelian perspective theology was the “queen of the sciences” because, being concerned with the study of the highest reality, its subject matter made it the highest of the speculative or theoretical sciences. Such a perspective was deductive, drawing conclusions from indubitable principles and resulting in a hierarchy of knowledge at whose pinnacle was natural theology. This understanding was undermined by two factors. The first was the change in the notion of science brought about by the experimental sciences whose methodology was inductive and worked from hypothesis and experiment. The second was that the historical consciousness inherent in the Judaeo-Christian tradition itself had always fitted rather awkwardly into the Aristotelian perspective.

It is against this background that Louth considers some attempts to rethink the relationship between theology and science, and focuses in particular on the work of T.F. Torrance. Torrance discusses Barth’s distinction between philosophy and theology and of the necessity of revelation and faith for the latter.

… what is interesting, and what concerns us most closely here, is Torrance’s final comment in this discussion: ‘As it has turned out, does not theology bear a closer comparison with an exact science, such as physics, which restricts its activities to the limits laid down by the nature of its concrete object, and develops a method in accordance with the nature of its object, bracketing it off from every world-view (either as an a priori condition or as an a posteriori product), and involving an open mind about what may lay beyond the limits of its own area of knowledge?’ (50-51)

Thus Torrance attempts to find illumination for the theological task from the way in which modern science, and especially physics, has had to grapple with problems of epistemology. However, Louth argues that such commonalities as there are between theology and science come precisely from the fact that, as a human activity, knowing in the sciences “is much less unlike understanding in the humane disciplines than the early protagonists of the scientific method seem to have thought.” (52) Moreover, the experimental method is not only inappropriate for theology because of its concern with grace, but also because it is concerned with men and women, with persons. Thus Louth considers the illumination that Torrance brings to the theological task as “mainly oblique” - while not fundamental to the identity of theology it can nevertheless be helpful to it - and insufficient for identifying theology as a science, although he continues to problematise the absolute divide between the humanities as the sciences as becomes apparent in the rest of this chapter.

 

Witness to God’s mercy: Conference of Br. Sabino Chialà on Isaac of Nineveh

Here is the third conference from the colloquium in Ghent. Please see my previous disclaimer concering the accuracy of my reporting and translations!

Brother Sabino Chialà is a monk of Bose monastery in Italy, the ecumenically orientated monastic community founded by Enzo Bianchi. He is responsible for the Italian translation of the third series (and parts of the first two series) of Saint Isaac’s homilies.

After Ephraim, Isaac of Nineveh, also known as Isaac the Syrian, is the most well known and best loved of the Syrian writers and his works have been translated into many languages. He has been known principally through his writings and his own history has remained rather vague, although there have been speculations that have identified him as a Coptic monk in Scetis, a Byzantine monk in Syria and a hermit in Italy! The vagueness was perhaps not entirely accidental, for it remains a paradox that such an influential spiritual writer, whose orthodoxy and holiness have been universally recognised, was in fact a member (and for a short time even a bishop) of a Church that the rest of the Christian world considered heretical.

Critical studies into Isaac’s work and background began towards the end of the nineteenth century with the work of J.B. Chabot. From such studies, it has become clear that Isaac was an East Syrian monk (and for some months a bishop) who was born in Bet Qatraye (present day Qatar) in the first half of the seventh century where he probably began his monastic life. The catholikos named him as bishop of Nineveh in the north of Mesopotamia, close to present day Mosul, between 676 and 680. After only some months he resigned as bishop and returned to his life as a hermit, this time in Bet Hazaye in what is today southwest Iran in or near the monastery of Rabban Shabur where he composed a number of homilies for his disciples. The date of his death is unknown but we are told that he died blind as a result of all his reading.

 

Conference by Dom André Louf on Simeon of Taibouthèh

This is my report of the second conference from the colloquium on the Syrian Fathers in Ghent last weekend. Please see my earlier disclaimer regarding the accuracy of my reporting and translations!

Dom André Louf, ocso is abbot emeritus of the abbey of Mont des Cats in France and author of several books, including Teach us to Pray, The Cistercian Way and Grace can do more. He is now a hermit and translates Syrian texts. He was responsible for the French translation of the second series of St Isaac’s homilies.

Our information concerning the life of Simeon comes from two Syrian chroniclers who lived several centuries later: Bar Hebraeus (+1286) and Abdisho Bar Brika (+1318). From these we learn that he had been a doctor before becoming a monk, that he lived during the episcopacy of Catholicus Henanisho (685-699), and that he wrote works on medicine, on monastic life and on the mystery of the cell. From these works we can also gather that he lived in the southeast of what is now Iraq, a region that at that time was undergoing a monastic growth and which was home to well known spiritual writers such as Dadisho Qatraya and Isaac of Nineveh. The latter was somewhat older than Simeon.

The designation “of Taibouthèh” refers not to a place, but means “of grace” and refers to one of his writings. Many manuscripts contain such a “Book of Grace” which had previously been ascribed to Isaac of Nineveh, but which recent critical scholarship believes to originate with Simeon. Simeon also refers to the crucial role of grace in his other works and is particularly concerned with the relationship between asceticism and grace.

 

Introductory conference on the Syrian Fathers by Joris van Ael

Joris van Ael is an iconographer and author whose work I have mentioned before (here, here and here). He is one of the leading figures behind the Leerhuis van de Kerkvaders, and was one of the organisers of this colloquium.

This conference served as an introduction to the more specific papers that would follow and sought to provide an overview of important themes in the seventh and eighth century East Syrian Fathers, and a sort of framework in which to place the texts that we would be encountering.

Joris began by asking what the relevance is of these three seventh and eighth century Syrian hermit monks for us today. One of the goals of the Leerhuis van de Kerkvaders is to help us become more conscious of the true dimensions of what it means to be Christian. One of the gifts of our time is that the writings of the Syrian Fathers are now becoming available, for which we owe a debt of gratitude to the translators. These Fathers can help to break open our own Christian consciousness and to help us connect with a broader Christian tradition. They thus have an important ecumenical impact. They can help us in the discernment of our own traditions and in the return to the sources that the conciliar renewal encouraged.

 

The Syrian Fathers in Ghent II

I have returned from the colloquium on the Syrian Fathers in Ghent and will try and write up my notes for a series of posts, although it will probably take a few days before I have them all. It was a very good experience despite being very intense. The speakers were excellent and two of them were leading authorities on the subject who were also responsible for important translation work. The colloquium was jointly organised by the Leerhuis voor de kerkvaders which I mentioned before, the vicariate for formation of the Catholic diocese of Ghent, the Orthodox parish of St Andrew in Ghent and the Catholic National Council for Ecumenism. There were over 90 participants from all sorts of backgrounds. Despite the high scholarly qualtity of the content there was a pastoral concern and an emphasis on what the Syrian Fathers can mean for us today. On the Friday evening we all went to the Orthodox parish for a short prayer service followed by a public lecture by Dom André Louf on “The liturgy of the heart” followed by a reception.

The conferences that were given, and which I will try and post on, were:
  * An introduction to the Syrian Fathers by Joris van Ael
  * Simon of Taibouthèh by Dom André Louf
  * Isaac the Syrian by Br Sabino Chialà
  * The Liturgy of the Heart by Dom André Louf
  * John of Dalyatha by Br Benoît Standaert

There were also two sessions devoted to reading texts.

Please note that what I am posting here is based on my rather hurriedly scribbled notes and, while I have tried to accurately reflect what the speakers said, errors are always possible. Also note that, except in cases where I indicate otherwise (i.e. where I have access to English translations) quotations from the Fathers are my English translations from the Dutch, which are themselves usually translations from the French … thus a translation of a translation of a translation. This is hardly ideal, but I’m posting them nevertheless, partly because doing so provides me with a stimulus to further process what I heard, and also because I believe that the content is worth sharing with others.

The papers that were presented will be published in the next edition of the journal Heiliging, published by the Benedictines of Zevenkerken.

Update: in case anyone is interested, there are photos available here.

 

The Syrian Fathers in Ghent

I leave early tomorrow for a two day colloquium on the Syrian Fathers in Ghent organised by the Leerhuis van de Kerkvaders, a very hopeful ecumenical initiative to make the Fathers of the Church better known. The speakers include Dom André Louf (abbot emeritus of Mont des Cats and responsible for the French translation of the second series of St Isaac’s homilies), Brother Sabino Chialà (of Bose monastery in Italy) and Brother Benoît Standaert (of the abbey of Zevenkerken in Brugge, Belgium). They are providing presentations on  St Simon of Taiboutheh, St Isaac the Syrian and John of Dalyatha respectively.

It looks like a very promising line-up and I’ll try and write up as much as I can to share here when I get back.

 

New edition of Discerning the Mystery

Kevin Edgecomb of Biblicalia has a post drawing our attention to a  new edition of Andrew Louth’s Discerning the Mystery, which at US $ 25 is considerably cheaper than previous editions.

I can only agree with Kevin when he says: “Hopefully with this text being available at such a low price, it will be more widely read and discussed, as it deserves much more attention than it has received.”

And I really do regret that I have got so behind in posting on this book - it is certainly not for lack of enthusiasm and I do hope to return to it soon.

 

An utterance which burns in fire and spirit

You who are hidden and concealed within me,
reveal within me
your hidden mystery;
manifest to me
your beauty that is within me,
O you who have built me
as a temple for you to dwell in,
cause the cloud of your glory
to overshadow inside your temple,
so that the ministers of your sanctuary
may cry out, in love for you,
‘holy’
as an utterance which burns in fire and spirit,
in a sharp stirring which is commingled with wonder
and astonishment,
activated as a living movement
by the power of your being.

 

Prayer of John the Elder (John of Dalyatha)

 

The Syriac Fathers on Prayer and the Spiritual Life, Introduced and Translated by Sebastian Brock (Kalamazoo, Cistercian Publications, 1987) 362.

 

Zizioulas on Truth and Communion II

I am afraid that life has continued to be rather disrupted, which has made any serious writing rather difficult, and this will probably continue for a couple of weeks as I’m still catching up on other things. Anyway, I’m posting this rather long summary of part of chapter two of Being as Communion…

John D. Zizioulas. Being as Communion. Studies in Personhood and the Church. London, DLT, 1985 (2004).

Chapter 2. Truth and Communion (67-122)

II. Truth, Being and History: The Greek Patristic Synthesis (72-101)

In this rather substantial section, Zizioulas traces the varying approaches to truth in the Patristic era, focusing particularly on its relationship to history. The challenge for the Fathers was to find a way of expressing the ontological character of truth in a way that did justice to the specific revelation of God in Christ.

1. The “Logos” Approach

This approach, which originated with the apologists and especially with Justin, found “its most audacious representatives” in Clement of Alexandria and Origen. Justin’s view of truth was similar if not identical to that of Platonism, and sees it as “something fixed which establishes its links with the world in and through the mind.” (73) For Justin, “Christ as the logos of God, becomes this very link between truth and the mind, and the truth of philosophy is nothing less than part of this logos.” (74) There is a danger here of a dualism between the senses and the intellect and also, more importantly, of an ontological necessity and monism, but this did not become apparent in Justin.

 

A sanctuary for your hiddenness

I give praise to your holy nature, Lord,
for you have made my nature
a sanctuary for your hiddenness
and a tabernacle for your Mysteries,
a place where you can dwell,
and a holy temple for your divinity.

Prayer of Isaac of Nineveh

(from a collection of thirty prayers)

The Syriac Fathers on Prayer and the Spiritual Life, Introduced and Translated by Sebastian Brock (Kalamazoo, Cistercian Publications, 1987) 350.