sign in sign up
<<
Home , Alcuin, Henosis, Martianus Capella, Meister Eckhart

This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 24 Sep 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK

Medieval of

Graham Oppy, N. N. Trakakis

Johannes Scottus Eriugena

Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 Dermot Moran Published online on: 31 Jul 2013

How to cite :- Dermot Moran. 31 Jul 2013, Johannes Scottus Eriugena from: of Religion Routledge Accessed on: 24 Sep 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315729626.ch3

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT

Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms

This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 corpus lated not only corpus the hitherto unknown inthe West (e.g. Maximus Confessor). Eriugena trans- language, which allowed himdirect accessto Greek Christian theologians, several West.in the He stands out of because hisconsiderable familiarity with Greek the Johannes ( tion. His dialogue naturethe of processions the within the and on nature the of resurrec- the and generally sidedwith Eastern on anumber of issues,including on treatises, heenthusiastically advocated Dionysius’ negative theological approach opifi human hominis nature De Augustine, Eriugena’s ). centres on notion the of an infi from aswell East, more the as the familiar authorities of Latin the West (e.g. West whom Gregory hehad read: of Basil, Nyssa, Dionysius, Maximus Confessor, single Neoplatonicthe framework underlying Christian the writers ofand East the , ), Eriugena hadenormous sympathy for what hethought was system that wasinfl and Latin Christian and promotes aconsistent Christian Neoplatonic Confessor’s Christianity that fl Irish heritage, there inhiswritings isnodirect of evidence form particular the of teachers on European the mainland. While Eriugena’s work shows tracesof his an eraknown for its scholars, many of whom, asEriugena himself did, became Anselm and mostsignifi the mostoutstandingis the and writing inLatin Boethius between notably through histranslation of Pseudo- Dionysius Areopagite. the Eriugena of great originality, and an infl script with ‘Eriugena’, wasaChristian Neoplatonist philosopher and theologian Eriugena madeanumber of important contributions of to history religion the Although lacking direct knowledge of classical (, c .800–c Ambigua Iohannem ad johannes eriugena scottus ourished inIreland at that . .877), known as‘the Irishman’ ( Periphyseon uential in later centuries. of Dionysius, but Gregory also of Nyssa’s treatise on cant intellectual from early Christian Ireland during (hereaft cio Dermot Moran uential transmitter of Greek , (On the creation (Onthe of man) aswell asMaximus (Diffi er 33 3 inresponse culties to John). In hisown Peri .) off ers amajor synthesis of Greek Scottus ), who signedone), who manu- nite, nite, Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 select few willeven undergoselect deifi theophania and receiving isthe (which of adivine self- manifestation, realm of sense. However, through intellectual ( appearances (phantasiai are bynature created, they distracted fl because asimage of orideas causes mindof Human inthe God. fail to understand true their retrieves back them into itself. Allthings, including human nature, are eternal allows to them proceed into genera their and inspaceand species timeand then and human Th beings. manifestations) alone canapprehended be by created intellects such asangels . Translations throughout are my 1. own. et idipsum immobile idipsum et incomprehensible, transcendent –“the God immovable self- identical one” ( oft actual places (loci heaven and Both poreal essence. hellare maintained states tobe of ,not to One, the involves resolved corporeal the body into its original incor- God (asinfi God back into divine the unity. Creation, isaprocess then, of divine self- articulation. as thebeginning, middleand endof allthings. Th Victorinus presented and Augustine) asGod, are together understood taken tobe Th being. eff the causesof (or :primary the the creative God, mindof inthe ideas God), defi to refer to whole the that consists and of created the God both order. essence, power,essence, operation ( of four ‘divisions’ ( notdoes simply rest inits Onenessbut divides or ‘externalizes’ itself into aset are not ( ofa outgoing and return, of affi human ( can beings God become German counterpart.German of human nature would subsequently infl divinethe self- manifestation and self- gathering. Eriugena’s elevated conception nature, image asthe of plays direct role God, avery cosmic process inthe of cosmic drama of expression and return Human place takes within Godhead. the en quotes Augustine to eff the Part of Eriugena’s uniqueness isthat heself- consciously adopts ‘nature’ term the ned as of causesects created those (the of individual entities), and non- ese four ese divisions of nature (adapted from similar divisions inMarius ea quae non sunt non quae ea universitas rerum, the‘totality of allthings’ that are ( ), human may beings achieve unifi nite or essence ). Paradise isnothing human other than perfect nature. Eriugena divisiones e One, as highest principle, eOne,ashighest engenders allthingstimelessly, ; Peri. ), which entrap theintellect intheclouded spatiotemporal ). For Eriugena, hiddentranscendent the divine nature I.476b) ousia ), ‘forms’ or ‘species’, make which up levels distinct ousia ect that God became man became that ( ect God dermot moran , deifi cation ( cation dynamis ) is understood ashaving) isunderstood structure: atriadic 1 –whose freely willed catio rmation and negation. 34 uence Renaissance and its deifi ). In cosmological this process, there is , energeia). So, inone entire the sense, cation ( catio, theosis catio, efour divisions somehow fold ). , or return inhumanatio ) with and God, the theophanies theoria ea quae sunt quae ea eeting temporal , intellectus Natura (divine ) so that) so unum unum ) and is ) Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 however, refers toEriugena’s “Irish eloquence” ( presence Frankish inthe court and were renowned for learning. their Prudentius, attesting to other Irish inhismilieu. Indeed, Irish scholars hadaconsiderable recondite Latin words, off biblical attributed glosses to Eriugena includes OldIrish several terms to explain (PL name ‘Eriugena’, meaning ‘Irish born’, to signhistranslation isused of Dionysius It reference isthis that hasgiven to appellation the rise ‘Johannes Scottus’. Th Latina Irishmancertain named ‘Joannes’ at palaceof the King the of ( ical record (around 850/851)isaletter by Bishop Pardulus of that Laon refers to a suggest that inIreland hewasborn around or before 800.Th are entirely unknown, but circumstantial and evidence some surviving Th fact thatfact this Vatican, improved who Eriugena’s translation of Dionysius, at could marvel the his orthodoxy. Th poraries regarded himasan master, arts erudite liberal although some challenged and Compiègne. It isnot known Eriugena whether wasclericor lay. His contem- Charles and inassociated ecclesiastical centres, such Soissons asRheims, Laon, in adisparaging manner. lasticus eteruditus partial commentaries ( except through philosophy” ( Marcianum in ition, including Isidore, and . inthe Onegloss to Eriugena’s testify glosses richand eclectic knowledge of arts trad- theliberal of handbook arts liberal , as well aforementioned asthe biblical students. recounted by William of Malmesbury, records that to death hewasstabbed by his churchnew inCompiègne on 1May 875. Aulae sidereae tions. specifi poems Some not only his erudition and fascination with Greek but hispolitical also connec- to reunion with divine. the Eriugena wrote also some interesting that poems show indeed, in hismature work, Eriugena continues ‘true to see philosophy’ asleading e exact place or eexact date of Eriugena’s and birth circumstances the of hisearly life Eriugena appears tohave spent hislife ambience inthe of of court the King It isprobable that Eriugena died some time around tale, 877.Anapocryphal 122:1236a),off [hereaft vir barbarus (Starry halls), which appears halls),which (Starry to celebrate dedication the of Charles’ er (Annotations on Martianus Capella) attests “no one enters heaven us, Bishop Florus callshim“academic and learned” ( PL ering further confi ering further ; ] 121:1052a), who was engaged] 121:1052a),who inatheological controversy. PL eriugena: lifeandwritings c 119:103a).Th .840–c johannes eriugena scottus cally praise King Charles, including an important poem, from remote the endsof world the Greek. knew Two ering more of Eriugena’s evidence provenance and .850) on Th nemo intrat in celum nisi per philosophiam per nisi celum intrat in nemo e learned Anastasius,Librarian the elearned at the rmation of hisIrish origin. Amanuscript of 35 eMarriage of Philology and Celtica eloquentia e fi rst certain histor-rst certain ; PL Annotationes 115:1194a) testimonia Patrologia e pen ); and, scho- , the

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 same time isattributed time same resolve hisclaims that properly both (9.6), terms that are transferred from created things (9.7).Eriugena not does fully tract for grace)and opposing the denied human (which free will). Eriugena’s of twinpredestination somewhere between (which deniedtheneed tione supporter,his erstwhile Bishop Prudentius of Troyes praedestina- hisown (see De tion from Gottschalk. of Eriugena ‘Origenism’ wasaccused and ‘Pelagianism’ by waydialectical of handling divine attribution. acts allatacts once ( knowledge ispredestination. Properly isoutside who God, timeand speaking, to foreknow isnot to cause what isforeknown (5.2).Furthermore, not allfore- cannot(3.3). God predestine isnon- sinceevil to evil Followingbeing. Augustine, death, unhappiness are not Th from God. cannot predestine and to both good to but evil, only to Furthermore, good. “sin, that contrary eff tion; human damn beings themselves through own their free choices. basis Onthe wants allhuman saved. to beings be not But does predestine God to damna- God” being (3.5).God, perfectly and good the“willing cause” of allcreatures (4.5), predestines: “Th tination. Th by showing counter- to them be sensical. God’s nature isone, and ishispredes- so of disputationthe rules dialectical followed be and counters Gottschalk’s claims philosophy and religion true are one and thesame ( reading. showed Eriugena’s of Augustine mastery whom hequotes against Gottschalk’s nation by an appeal to God’s unity, transcendence and infi argumentationdialectical that of rejected twofold thedoctrine divine predesti- analysisalistic, dialectical rather than scriptural citation, wasa tione heaven and of damned the tohell.Eriugena’s response, out a‘twin predestination’ ( and inQuierzy849)for interpreting Augustine asteaching carried that God diction. Gottschalk hadalreadycondemned (at been inMainz synods in848 predestination by Gottschalk of Orbais ( Archbishop of Rheims,and Pardulus, Bishop of to Laon, rebut atreatise on in atheological controversy. He wascommissioned by Hincmar, powerful the Eriugena came to notice the of hiscontemporaries of because hisintervention Eriugena’s wasthought tract by its sponsors to go far too opposite inthe direc- Eriugena by begins declaring (following Augustine; ; (Ondivine predestination; was condemned at councils the of Valence (855)and Langres (859),inpart PL 115:1010c).Ironically, Eriugena himself hadplaced Gottschalk’s heresy ere legitimate isaperfectly it inwhich sense cansaid that be God the controversy over predestination (851) ere isnodoubt that predestination ispredicated essentially of ects cannotects come from one the cause, Eriugena argues that God semel et simul et semel metaphorically gemina praedestinatio ), cannot said to be dermot moran c .851; hereaft . He not does yet have accesstoDionysius’ 36 erefore isnot cause the God of them” c .806–868), apriest inHincmar’s juris- er De Praed De Praed fore applies and to at God the ), namely, to of elect the see - know or to pre Vol. 1,Ch.18)that true De divina praedestina- divina De Itnite goodness. also .), employing ration- . 1.1).He insists that tour de force de tour - destine of of Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 (proprie biblicalCertain appellations of as‘King’, divine the (God ‘Life’) donot ‘literally’ found inhis affi apt’ than Dionysius’ writings fi Hellenistic philosophy (primarily Neoplatonic and Stoic), of and discovery the articulatinghad been Christian interms of theintellectual framework of centuriesSeveral of Christian apologists (from to Augustine) Letters of Paul interms of importance their asasource of Christian teaching. cannot overstated. be Dionysius’ and the only second Gospels works tothe stood Areopagite (Pseudo-Dionysius) ( Around 860,Charles invited Eriugena to translate writings the of Dionysius the but didnot aff Th which denials concerning God are denialsconcerningwhich God ‘more true’ ( created and Eriugena wasits propagator for Latin the world. into Christian theology. Christian Anew tradition of negative hadbeen theology complex vision of ahierarchically ordered integrated seamlessly ,hadbeen lations concerning non- the beyondbeing and being beyond One, the aswell asits Greek pagan Neoplatonism (from of school the Proclus), with its complex formu- philosophy and Christian faith wassanctioned by Scripture itself. In later fact, for its overuse of Th dialectic. had the benefi had the replaced by translation the of John Sarrazin,drew who on Eriugena’s version but attempt (832–5),hadawidecirculation through twelft the of -monastery Eriugena’sDenis! translation, drew on which ’s earlier but third- the also century bishop and martyr, St wasburied who inhis Denis, passion of St heclaimed Denis), that Dionysius wasnot only Bishop of Athens tity inhishagiographical issuewhen, life of Dionysius, Th on(based text’s the language formulas and of use doctrinal from that period). was more likely alate- fi Louis Pious, the by Byzantine the Emperor Michael in827.Its Second the author of Areopagus the …”). Th followersbecame of Paul and Among believed. wasDionysius, them amember convert of St Paul mentioned Acts inthe of Apostles the 17:34(“… a few men these offithese epredestination controversy madeEriugena unpopular with French the bishops eabbot of of monastery Saint- the iden- the Hilduin, confused Denis, further Th Eriugena enthusiastically adopted Dionysius’ negative theology, according to eimportance of Eriugena’s and discovery subsequent promotion of Dionysius cial denunciations, recalls ’s sneer against Pelagius. ) apply and to must God therefore analogically understood be or ‘through rmations. He embraced Dionysius’ analysis of divine the names as Peri theiōn onomatōn theiōn Peri t of other manuscripts. hisstandingect with King Charles, patronage whose continued. the encounterwithdionysius to nally provide seemed proof that synthesis the of Greek ft johannes eriugena scottus h- or early- sixth- century Christian follower of Proclus ismanuscript presented hadbeen to Charles’ father, e phrase ‘Irish ephrase porridge’ ( Corpus DionysiacumCorpus wassupposedly), who the ( De divinis nominibus divinis De 37 verior ), ‘better’ ( Passio sancti Dionysii sancti Passio pultes scottorum pultes ; On the divine; Onthe names). h century, it when was melior ) and ‘more ), used in ), used (Th e Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 one to each of book four the divisions: with divine 1deals the nature book and things); that isneither created which nor creates (i.e.non- nothingness).being, or Ideas); that iscreated which and not does create (i.e. temporal eff and isnot created that (i.e. creates which God); and iscreated causes (i.e. primary is divided into four ‘divisions’ or ‘species’ ( God are and that are not” (I.442b).Echoing similar divisions inAugustine ( Eriugena’s main philosophical treatise, ture”. Th theology. of John Scotigena).It isan extensive treatise on cosmology, anthropology and is entitled (“study of nature”; Peri written some timebetween 860and 867.Eriugena himself callsit a naturae Hierarchy ( Neoplatonic He themes). wrote also along commentary on Dionysius’ that off (Questions inresponse to Th Ambigua Ioannem ad Anchoratus: defi opifi late other Greek several Christian works, including ’s paradoxically nameless the transcendent divinity. aft ‘neither one nor oneness’, ‘beyond and assertion denial’ ( mystica theologia not andtruth, on. goodness so Following Dionysius’ priate toexpress ismore divine the transcendence. God properly not not being, and descriptions of divine the that involve negation. Negations are more appro- (1 Corinthians 3:2).So, metaphorical than these higher statements are names the but,structed, asSt Paul put it, to children milkisgiven and to adults solid food ( metaphor’ in Johannem in the of Gospel the ence of theGreek theological tradition. er Eriugena’s original intention (expressed at Nature, asdefi Having completed hisDionysius translation ( cio 5.9;PL PG] 3:1048a).Eriugena reproduces formulations these inLatin to express e fi De imagine underthetitle De (On the division (Onthe of nature), master adialoguebetween and pupil, was Liber phisiologiae Iohannis Scottigenae rst principle of nature infi isthe Expositiones in hierarchiam in coelestem Expositiones 41:151)and Marius Victorinus ( per metaforam, translative ) on Prologue the of John, to Gospel the allof show which infl the de ned at outset the by Eriugena, includes “God both and crea- the ; On ), God is‘beyond; Onmystical being’, God theology), ‘more than being’, ( Commentarius in evangelium Iohannis evangelium in Commentarius ered amore ‘Aristotelian’ version of prominent several (Th . IV.741c), and indeedone manuscript British inthe Library eanchorite: concerning faith) and Maximus Confessor’s (with commentary) periphyseon the periphyseon alassius), important both works of Greek Christian dermot moran (On the image), (Onthe and possiblyEpiphanius’ 38 ). Such terms are for useful unin- the Periphyseon Peri nite “the God, cause of allthings that Ad Candidum Quaestiones ad Th ad and hisQuaestiones Peri . I.441b–442a):that creates which ( c ), a fragmentary ), afragmentary c (Th .862), Eriugena went on to trans- .867) . III.619d–620b)wasto devote e book on study the ebook of nature Peri mystikēs theologiās mystikēs Peri , also called Homilia ) and asermon (Homilia Patrologia Graeca ; To Candidus), nature Commentary on on Commentary ects, ects, created De divisione divisione De De hominis hominis De physiologia alassium Celestial City of [here- ( u- De

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 concerning higher” the (I.444a). higher,the and anegation too so concerning lower the (order) isan affi affi an “For be: if one level of nature orders issaid to those be, above or below it are said not to “orders inthe isseen being and diff nature” ( and intellect the issaid to whereas be, whatever, “through excellence the of its (I.443c–446a).Accordingbe to fi the preting” interpretationis modi (quinque 5. to book devoting afourth to thistopic, book thus relegating thereturn of allthings to God of creation calledfor more extensive treatment, and Eriugena altered hisplan, and created 3their book eff including ects, the nature of processionthe or 3, heembarks on aHexaemeron. Th address issuesconnected with biblical the account of creation, and thus, inbook stagesofthe creation the of world. the Th through excellence” ( According hemay said because not is“nothingness be tobe, God, mode, tothis angelic order, and viceversa (affi of affi of way of combining thetraditional Neoplatonic hierarchy of being with adialectic affi hominis vero third mode (I.444c–45b) asserts that (I.444c–45b)asserts third mode (I.463d). He isnot ‘literally’ (proprie omnium claims. logical attributions must always borne inmindanalysing be histheological ‘nothing through privation’ (nihil per privationem). Th all created and being created of existence.Matter, modes on other hand, the is Th taken. be of or being non- isdependentbeing on of mode the approach and care needsto divine image are not. According tocomplex this and original account, attribution sanctifilogical: those and corruption, matter, place and timedonot exist.Th truly intellectu untur things contemplated by theintellect alone ( contained causes. intheir Thmode (I.445b–c)is e fourth broadly Platonic: those contrastsmode thingsthat have come into eff still caught up mostsecretfolds the “in of nature” (afavourite are phrase) not. Th According affi the mode, tothis Dialectic is still to the fore. At the outset Eriugena suggests “fi God, asuncreatedGod, and creating, created; transcends everything heisthe rmation and negation whereby one to level assert isto deny others. the Th (III.686d).Th per excellentiam suae naturae us, when Eriugena calls God ‘nothing’, Eriugena us,when callsGod hemeans that God rmation concerning lower the (order) isanegation concerning rmatio est angeli; I.444b).Th ) may considered be to whereas be, things caught up ingeneration exitus of allthings 2with from book theprimordial God; causes ed by graceare, whereas sinners have who renounced the nihil perexcellentiam eAristotelian categories donot properly apply toGod johannes eriugena scottus rmatio enim hominis negatio est angeli, negatio erences of created natures” (I.444a),whereby, rmation of humanity negation isthe of the ecreation of human nature on day sixth the rst mode, whatever rst mode, isaccessible senses tothe ) substance or nor in essence, describable ), transcends our faculties issaid not to be. actual ) the way) the or thingsmay saidnot to be to be 39 etopic of creation requires Eriugena to ). Th is mode illustrates ismode Eriugena’s original ea solummodo comprehend-ea quae solo things are, whereas potential e second mode of and mode being esecond non- ect with those things that are still e fl uidity of Eriugena’s onto- ex nihilo ex e fi ft ve ways of inter- h mode istheo- h mode creation and transcends rmation negatio negatio things is is e

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 from genus highest the to lowest the and species individuals ( ‘divine willings’ ( ‘outfl or to goodness, viceversa. isin its Each own way adivine theophany. Th in number and there isnohierarchy or precedence among isnot being them; (rationes aeternae Dionysius’ divine names and Stoic–Augustinian the notion of eternalreasons can identifi neverbe above allcreation. isboth form God of allthings and formless. also Th ‘whole’. Th ‘parts’. Only ‘genus’ isthe that view the God or ‘whole’ of creatures the which are ‘species’ or Although Eriugena theidentity asserts and of God creation, heexplicitly rejects logical terms, however, and creature the God are one and same: the (III.675c). Creatures, asfallen,donot yet know that reside In they inGod. cosmo- it itself isother, it because issuperessential, than what it creates within itself” itwhich hascreated and creates it contains within itself, but insuch away that nothingpermits outside itself outside because it nothing can yet be, everything butalready inGod inaway that “the otherness: their respects Creative nature since allthings are contained causes Word. inthe asprimary Allthings are always expression of Word, the isat which same creation the timethe of allother things, nies (I.446d).Th hidden transcendent manifests God Himself indivine outpourings or theopha- of infi nities’ beyondand hence allcomprehension and circumscription. Eriugena argues, God’s nature isunknown evento Himself, sinceHe ‘infi isthe unknown to allcreated beings, including alltheranks of angels (I.447c).Indeed, Peri of “superessential the and hiddendivinity” ( essentialitas simply EriugenaSometimes, speaks of “divine the superessentiality” ( divinitas esse saying, God’s divinity ( superbeing isthe (of) being His ‘being’ is‘beyond being’, or asEriugena puts it, inhisversion of aDionysian terms of quantity, quality, relation, place or time. He is‘ Periphyseon Periphyseon Eriugena defi . I.510b). God may called‘nothingness’ be . I.510b).God also ( owing’ (proodos owing’ creature. (III.678c) andhimself, inamarvellous ineff creature, the both by and by subsisting, God, isinGod; manifesting two from things distinct one another, but asone and same. the For It follows that we ought and not creature the tounderstand God as eimmanence increation of God isbalanced by God’s transcendence ; III.634b),or, quoting Dionysius’ Names Divine metaphorically ), or “the of being allthingsDivinity isthe above being” (I.443b). edivine self- manifestation isself- creation, that timeless is,the book 2 discusses the primary causes ( primary the 2discusses book nes creation asdivine self- manifestation (I.455b)whereby the theia thelemata ), aswell asMaximus’ divine willings. Th ed with God. ; processio ( metaforice , dermot moran exitus) of causes the creates whole the universe ), aconcept that combines Platonic the Forms, 40 ) can it said isa‘genus’ that be God or a able manner creates himself inthe superessentialis et occulta divinitas nihilum Esse enim omnium est super superessentialis causae primordiales causae ese causes ese are infi I.1–2( ), sinceHis is essence atoma PG 3:588b–c), divina super- divina e creature ’ (I.459d). ). In his nity nite ) or is ; Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 the corporeal transformed willbe body into thespiritual ( body isnotreal body essential to human nature, and return inthe of allthings to God wouldbeings fall, created and abody acorporeal world for But them. corpo- this isaconsequencebodies) of Fall. the For Eriugena, foreseeing God, that human of theFall. Indeed, theentire spatiotemporal world (including corporeal human Nyssa, Eriugena that thinks corporeality and division into sexesare aconsequence surroundwhich incorporeal, the Following eternalessence. on from Gregory of produced by qualities the or ‘circumstances’ of place, time, position and on, so mente ex nihilo ex (V.889d). as extension willreturn back into its cause or reason asadefi Th of ‘Paradise’ God. scriptural isthe name for human perfect this nature inthe less and intellectual. Human nature willreturn to its ‘Idea’ ( corporeal, temporal, material world willbecome essentially incorporeal, time- return, human the mindwillachieve reunifi to eternal, the fi the causes). things willreturn Corporeal to incorporeal their causes, temporal the causes aretheir (sincethey only eff Maximus Confessor and Gregory of Nyssa. It isnatural for eff and role the God of human nature cosmicprocess, inthe drawing heavily on himself (ase of God not mean creation from some principle outside rather, God; it means creation out nothing transcendent outside (the God nothingness), ‘creation from nothing’ does is ‘almost nihil nothing’ (prope per excellentiam privation’ (nihil perprivationem since defi a corrupting time. Since place and timeare defi time: an unchanging time(areason or ally but not yet inacorporeal Eriugena sense. to seems postulate two kindsof descent through thetree of Porphyry), become located they spatially and tempor- throughessences and genera, their species individuals (inakindof ontological are originally also timelessand incorruptible, but, proceed asthey from their eternal. Cause and eff lectual and eternal produce eff incorporeal causes produce incorporeal eff (drawn from tradition the of Proclus) concerning causation: like produces like; understanding of causal this procession, Eriugena accepts Neoplatonic principles ecorporeal world willreturn to its incorporeal and essence, place understood Book 3 discusses ingreat meaning 3discusses the detail ofBook ‘creation from nothing’ ( Books 4 and 5 discuss the return the 4and ( 5discuss Books Th e primary causes produce eprimary eff their ; I.485b).Th sensible, e corporeal, spatiotemporal appearances things of are ). Th nitions are mind, inthe place and timeare therefore mind( inthe eterm‘nothing’ hastwo meanings: it can mean ‘nothing through ). Th nite absorbed willbe intheinfi nite. As part of this general elowest hierarchy inthe rung of unformed being, matter, ). Allcreation comes and from remains God within him. ect areect mutually dependent, relative terms (V.910d–912b). johannes eriugena scottus ects that are equally immaterial, intellectual and ), or ‘nothing through privation’. Since there is ), or ‘nothing on account of excellence’ (nihil on their of because ects dependency their epistrophe 41 ects timelessly. ects Th ratio ects; causesects; that are immaterial, intel- cation with thedivine, and thenthe in the divine inthe mind;V.906a) and , reditus nitions that locate things, and , reversio e eff notion nition mind inthe ects, for ects, Eriugena, spirituale corpus ects to return to to return to ects ) of allthings to ) in the mind ) inthe creatio in in ). Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 De hominis opifi hominis De aswellGenesis), asAmbrose’s Deparadiso (Onparadise) dei of image madeinthe being and ( likeness of God omnia in omnibus in (omnia choir,in the asadroplet of water merges allin with shallbe stream. the God merging completely, with God aslights blend into one the light, asvoices blend there return isaspecial whereby achieve ‘deifi elect the ‘hell’ applies. Aside from general the return of Eriugena allthings to God, claims trapped own intheir fantasies, and it istomental this that scriptural the term mind of Human God. refuse to who beings abandon ‘circumstances’ their remain nature is“a certain intellectual concept formed eternally ( Nyssa, Eriugenadeniesthat also human nature isa‘microcosm’. Rather, human human nature may saidanimal to be be or not animal. Following Gregory of neither malenor female” (IV.795a). For Eriugena, human isneither being malenor female: there just Christ is as “in addition: “Man isbetter than sex” ( by voluptuousness the of sensibility (aesthesis result of the Fall. Th already sinned. Eriugena follows Gregory of Nyssa’s that view diff sexual entire account refers to what would have hadhuman case the been nature not claims that human nature didnot timeinparadise before spend Fall. the Th that of hadit itself else and not of sinned(IV.778c). everything Just knows asGod Perfect human nature would knowledge fullest have the of its possessed creator, imagethe and Not likeness of God. angels the even are accorded that honour. scendent divine nature. Only of human nature can it said that be it ismadein divinethe mind” (IV.768b). For Eriugena, human nature uniquely mirrors tran- nature isindefi other attributes enjoyed by Just God. isinfi asGod (IV.782c). Similarly, human perfect nature would have enjoyed and as of divine. the Human nature, without Fall, the would have universe the ruled ignorance and isamark of infi the knows theological that worry Eriugena downplays thesignifi must balanced be by therecognition of thedivine transcendence. Th transcendence of divine. the statement Every of divine increation of pantheist, being but hewants infact immanence the to both and preserve the human transcendence and immanence with regard to its world (IV.759a–b). perfectibility (V.919c). God’s transcendence and immanence are refl Eriugena’s theological anthropology isaradicalworking out of meaning the Just or may ( said not tobe tobe be asGod Eriugena’s account of nature asinclusive and of creation God accused hasbeen ). Interpreting Augustine’s heisbut not that it isbut not what nable and incomprehensible and opentoinfi cio what eFall isthefallfrom intellect into sense: ; V.935c). , Eriugena argues that paradise isentirely spiritual. He further he is, since he is uncircumscribable, so too human too heis,sinceisuncircumscribable, so nature it is.Human self- ignorance mirrors divine the self- De GenesiDe ad litteram dermot moran nite and transcendent nature of human the homo melior est quam sexus meliorest homo 42 ). Sexual diff ). Sexual est nite and unbounded, human in imaginem et similitudinem similitudinem et imaginem in (On the literal(On the meaning of cation’ ( cance of actual Jesus, the

and Gregory of Nyssa’s ; deusnot est too ), so erence isan external aeternaliter facta intellectus nite possibility and deifi ; ere the isalso catio Peri. erence isa distracted distracted II.534a). etd in ected , theosis ) in e ),

Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 Laon, AuxerreLaon, and Corbie. It popular twelft inthe wasvery Eriugena’s 880a), says that humankind isby grace( human nature. Eriugena, Sometimes quoting Maximus Confessor (e.g. V.879c– is self- manifestation, that amounts to saying manifests that God himself fully as aretime; both incorporeal and hencenumerical diff number’ or ‘subject’ (IV.778a). Neither divine nor human nature isinspaceor promise of salvation for Eriugena (II.545a). is actually what allhuman beings can and be and willbe, that isprecisely the human nature centrepiece isthe of entire the cosmicprocession and return. Christ ( human” cosmic plan. As Word, manifestation heisthe of “the divine; the heisalso perfect crucifi the comes aft can only have Neoplatonic the meaning that fi the humanism). and self- thattranscendence endless(atheme isalso willreappear inRenaissance able asthecolours inapeacock’s tail (IV.749c). Human capacity for infi interpretatio scripturae proceedsGodhead infi areso theophanies the may viewed. Human God underwhich be progress to and humanof God both nature. Th theophanies. mutually contemplating themselves and eachother, inan endless,eternalplay of boundaries of orthodoxy direction inthe of and that aview humanity hasGod viewed asorthodox from one point of view, but isalways which transgressing the understandinghas adialectical of therelation and of God humanity that can be nature already isone and with always God one Eriugena, hasbeen with God. then, state perfected the human istimeless,and there perfected inwhich so isasense here issomewhat of misleading,sincetimeitself isafunction our fallenstate and minated and merged with divine. the Furthermore, of use the future the tense angels, are who not image made inthe and likeness of God). nature. Human nature than any toGod stands closer other creature (including the free the outpouringboth of divine the willand self- the expression of divine the gift otherthe hand, allnature isatheophany; nature outpouring isthe of grace. Every ( For Eriugena, image isidentical atrue to its exemplar ‘except inallrespects Eriugena places extraordinary emphasis on infi the Humanity asawhole inits resurrected and perfectedstate illu- truly willbe donum er the fi er the xion and on. so But Eriugena makes central infact Christ to whole the vir autem perfectus est Christus Periphyseon Periphyseon ) isagiven ( rst. God iscreatorrst. God and humankind iscreated, but sincecreation had immediate infl nitely. Holy Scripture hasinfi too datum johannes eriugena scottus nita est nita eriugena’s influence ), and viceversa. Th ; II.560a),its interpretations are asinnumer- edivine causes are infi 43 uence inFrance, notably at of schools the per gratiam ; IV.743b). divine of asthe idea Christ rst willalways diff ecreation of human nature is erence, or diff ) what God isby) what nature. God On nity and boundlessness h century (amongh century Hugh nite ( richness nite innumber and erence insubject, er from what Sacrae Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 Cappuyns, M.1933. Brennan, M.1989.AGuide to Eriugenian Studies: ASurvey of Publications 1930–87 W.Beierwaltes, 1994.Eriugena: Grundzüge seines Denkens attributed to ). In century, thirteenth the the elevenththe and twelft Augustodunensis. Eriugena’s translations of Dionysius circulated widely during lated inthe‘edition’ of William of Malmsebury and theparaphrase of Honorius of Saint- Victor, Alan of Lille,and Suger of Saint- andDenis, others) circu- when Marenbon, J. 1981.From the Circle of to the School of Auxerre: Th Logic, Gersh, S.&D. Moran (eds)2006. Gersh, S.1978.From to Eriugena Eriugena, J. 1990.Th Carabine, D. 2000. Aquinas ( and and of Amaury wascondemned Bène, in1210and 1225.According to Th unfairly associated of with two thedoctrines Paris theologians, of Dinant is the “formis the of allthings” ( things, an accusation of , recalled which Eriugena’s statement that God wascondemnedof for Bène thatformal wasthe asserting principle God of all Moran, D. 1989.Th in himamong interested those inthetradition of negative theology. divine. New critical editions of Eriugena’s works have spurred arevival of interest andidealism, process theologians acknowledged also hisdynamic conception of the abolished. Hegel and hisfollowers revived Eriugena forefather asthe of German torum works fi in1687,it listedinthe wassoon Periphyseon and (1401–64)were sympathetic to Eriugena and familiar with his . In later the Meister both of Eckhart Hochheim ( unfairly, linkedon views with Eucharist the certain associated with Berengar of of and being non- contributedbeing toaccusation. this Eriugena wasalso, again as ‘nothing’ and astranscending and sense intellect according to fi the omnium materia the God other hand,the wassupposed tohave identifi Moran, D. 1990.“Pantheism from John Scottus Eriugena to Nicholas of Cusa”. Éditions du Cerf. du Éditions University of Notre Dame Press. C. Bamford (trans.). Hudson, NY: Press. César. Philosophy in the Catholic Philosophical Quarterly Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Index of prohibited and books), remained there until indexitself the was Summa theologiae . When Th ePhilosophy of John Scottus Eriugena: AStudy of in the Middle Ages John Scottus Eriugena. Oxford: Oxford University Press. e Voice of the Eagle: Homily on the Prologue to the Gospel of St John Jean Scot Erigène: son vie, oeuvre, Sa sapensée omas Galeproduced fi the Homily on the Prologue to John to h centuries, Prologue the asdidhisHomily on . It islikely that Eriugena’s and of matter discussion God forma omnium forma Eriugena, Berkeley, and the Idealist Tradition I.3.8;Summa contra Gentiles further reading 64:131–52. dermot moran . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. . Leiden: Brill.. Leiden: 44 rst edition of the ). David of Dinant ( with primeed God matter, calling rst printed edition of Eriugena’s . : Vittorio Klostermann. Periphyseon . Louvain: Abbaye deMont Index librorum prohibi- librorum Index I.17, I.26), Amaury I.17,I.26),Amaury fl oruit oruit was somewhat wassomewhat . Notre Dame, IN: c .1260–c eology eology and rst mode mode rst 1210), on American omas .1328) . Paris: (oft en , . Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 Otten, W. 1991.Th O’Meara, J. 1988.Eriugena. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Sheldon- Williams, I.- P. 1970.“Th Moran, D. 1999.“Idealism inMedieval Philosophy: Th 19. Ontheword Ch.9. also see Chs 19,20;Vol. 3,Ch.9;Vol. 4,Chs 4,9.Onsalvation Vol. also see 1,Chs 10,13;Vol. 4,Ch. Vol. also see On christology 1,Ch.10;Vol. 4,Ch.3.Onneoplatonism Ch.4;Vol. also see 1, Medieval Philosophy and Th Th to Maximus and Eriugena”. In ought , A.Armstrong (ed.), 425–533.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. eAnthropology of Johannes Scottus Eriugena johannes eriugena scottus eology eGreek Christian Platonist Tradition from Cappadocians the Th e Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Medieval Early and Greek Later of History Cambridge e 8:53–82. 45 e Case of Johannes eCase Scottus Eriugena”. . Leiden: Brill.. Leiden: Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:55 24 Sep 2021; For: 9781315729626, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315729626.ch3 This pageintentionallyleftblank