DOCSLIB.ORG

St. Maximus the Confessor's Dialectic of Logos, Mode

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
St. Maximus the Confessor's Dialectic of Logos, Mode Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 69(1-4), 249-280. doi: 10.2143/JECS.69.1.3214959 © 2017 by Journal of Eastern Christian Studies. All rights reserved. ST. MAXImUs THE CONFEssor’s DIALEcTIc OF LOGOS, mODE AND END IN A POsTmODERN cONTEXT ITS IMPORTANCE TO A THEOLOGiCAL EVALUATiON OF RACE AND NATiONALiSM DiONYSiOS SKLiRiS * The demand for a contextual theology coincides with a multiple crisis, when we experience a crisis of our self-understanding and of our traditional views in many Orthodox countries (such as Greece, to take one characteristic example), but also a crisis of global capitalism as it has evolved in late post- modernity. But it is exactly this dual character of the recent crisis that could prove theologically fertile if we achieve a dialogue from inside our impasses. In such a dialogue, theology would no longer propose ready-made answers with a lofty attitude, but it would share the common puzzlement. We shall therefore examine the question of race and nationalism in their contemporary fluidity in an encounter with the Orthodox patristic tradition. We will focus on two points of the latter. On the one hand, on the Chalce- donian theology of distinction and division.1 And, on the other, on a dialec- tic between logos, mode and end that is inspired by the theology of Maximus the Confessor (c. 580-662).2 Our choice is based mainly on two factors: i) Maximus incorporated elements of the previous tradition in his thought – for example, Cappadocian Trinitarian theology, Gregory of Nyssa’s anthropol- ogy, an Antiochian emphasis on historicity, and Alexandrian contemplative * Université Paris-Sorbonne. 1 For the theological significance of the terms diaphora or diakrisis (distinction) and diaire- sis (division), see John Zizioulas, Communion & Otherness: Further Studies in Personhood and the Church (London and New York, 2006), pp. 40f. 2 We have presented this dialectic in a general way in Dionysios Skliris, ‘To aitēma tēs istorikotētas kai ē dialektikē logu, tropu kai telus stē skepsē tu agiu Maximu tu Omologētē’ (The demand for historicity and the dialectic of logos, tropos and end in the thought of Saint Maximus the Confessor), Synaxi, 126 (2013), pp. 21-30. We are trying here to extend this problematic and apply it to the question of race and nationalism. 250 DiONYSiOS SKLiRiS philosophy, and ii) Maximus thematizes a crisis – namely, the collapse of Byzantine ecumene under Persian and finally Arab invasions. The concern for historicity takes the form of a peculiar dialectical thought on History and anthropology. We therefore think that Maximus’s thematization of crisis might be fertile in the context of the postmodern crisis of our times.3 This dialectic has three poles: logos, mode and end. Logos or reason is a will of God for the creature.4 It could therefore be considered as uncreated and as distinguished from the being itself of which it constitutes the reason.5 Inside time, natural beings in themselves have a nature that is not perfectly completed from the outset, but is quite fluid.6 The created nature in itself is 3 The importance of Maximus to a Theology of History is also highlighted by J. Kameron Carter, who considers him as an “anticolonialist intellectual” avant la lettre, see J. Kameron Carter, Race: A Theological Account (Oxford, 2008). 4 Maximus draws the identification of the divine logoi with the divine will from ps.- Dionysius the Areopagite. See Questions to Thalassius, Corpus Christianorum Series Graeca (from now on: Thal. and CCSG respectively) 7,95,8 and Ambigua to John (from now on: Amb.) 7,24; Nicholas Constas, ed., Maximos the Confessor, On Difficulties in the Church Fathers: The Ambigua Volume I, Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library, 28 (Cambridge/MA, and London, 2014), pp. 106-108, where he is also referring to the cycle of Pantaenus. Logos therefore constitutes the divine will for a created being. This also means that it is the reason for the latter’s existence, its raison d’être. But there is a clear distinction between a being itself and its logos. The logos is divine and can therefore be considered as uncreated. The being is created and in itself mutable. 5 For an interpretation of logoi as uncreated, see Vasilios Karayiannis, Maxime le Confesseur: Essence et Energies de Dieu, Théologie historique, 93 (Paris, 1993), pp. 113-114, 219-222. This interpretation is based mostly on Amb. 7,15-24, see Constas, Maximos the Confessor I, pp. 94-108. 6 We could have here a very interesting encounter between Maximus’s thought and some tendencies of postmodern thought on nature. There is a certain ‘antiessentialism’ in Maxi- mus, in the sense that nature is not completed in its origin, see Nikolaos Loudovikos, Ē Kleistē Pneymatikotēta kai to Noēma tu Eautu: O mystikismos tēs ischyos kai ē alētheia fyseōs kai prosōpu (Closed Spirituality and the Meaning of Self: The mysticism of power and the truth of person and nature) (Athens, 1999), pp. 191, 281. This reminds us more of a postmodern or post-structuralist type of antiessentialism than a modernist or existentialist one. We would define the two types (with a certain danger of oversimplifying) thus: in an existentialist or modernist type of antiessentialism, nature is considered as something given (either in a biological or a cultural way), which is then opposed or transcended by man (as a person or a consciousness or an ecstatic existence, etc). In contrast, in a postmodern or post-structuralist type of antiessentialism, there is no such given nature in the first place. Nature is considered as a linguistic, social or cultural construction. Therefore, there is no need for transcendence but simply for denunciation. Of course, this distinction is not as simple as that. The existentialist notion of facticity might include social and linguistic ST. MAXiMUS THE CONFESSOR’S DiALECTiC OF LOGOS, MODE AND END 251 therefore distinguished from its divine logos. Logos has a triple character: i) protological, because it exists ‘before’ or rather ‘outside’ creation in time as a divine will for one being. ii) teleological, because it constitutes the goal of its nature, and iii) eschatological, because this goal has a radical disconti- nuity in relation to nature and its potentialities, contrary to Aristotelian or other teleologies. Among the three, there is a contrast that is nonetheless sublated for the sake of eminent syntheses.7 The mode (tropos)8 consists in the historical activations of nature due to human personal hypostases. There constructions. Nonetheless, there is a shift of emphasis from transcendence of nature to its denunciation. We can observe this in feminism. In previous contexts, the emphasis was that a ‘woman’ should transcend her condition as ‘woman’, either biological or cultural. In a postmodern context, the emphasis is on the denunciation of linguistic and cultural constructions of ‘womanhood’ at the level of signifiers. Therefore, a subject that is defined as ‘woman’ could either engage in a deconstruction of the phallogocentric dualism of ‘manhood’ and ‘womanhood’, or negotiate ‘her’ identity inside a gender continuum, where arbitrary boundaries are no longer considered as definite. In such a postmodern context, it would be very fertile to engage in a new reading of Maximus’s antiessentialism, especially the distinction between nature and its logos. Created nature is not given in the beginning. It is very fluid and in itself is perishable and mortal. Only the logos is given and only as a ‘sign-post’ to the eschatological perspective. Besides, the logos is very cryptic inside His- tory, stirring man to find it through the chaos and the ambivalence of empirical data. Consequently, Maximus’s antiessentialism would no longer mean the transcendence of a given protological nature, but a dialectical relation with its logos. What is more, man has his own created logos as an image of God. But, inside History, it is possible that human- created logoi become independent in an idolatrous way. Then, antiessentialism would mean tropoi (novel modes) that would undermine the self-sufficiency of idolatrous created logoi or even of exeis (‘fallen’ modes that have turned into sinful habits of nature). This sort of antiessentialism is inspired by the dynamic divine logoi and their eschatological perspective. In such a sense, we consider that an actualization of Maximus in the context of postmodern antiessentialism is possible and indeed very fertile. 7 For the theological importance of the distinction between the logoi and the creatures that they determine see Nikolaos Loudovikos, Theopoiia: Ē metaneōterikē theologikē aporia, Theopoiia: The Postmodern Theological Quest (Athens, 2007), pp. 20-21. 8 In Trinitarian theology, the duality logos- tropos means a distinction between the logos of nature and the modes of existence. That is, logos refers to catholicity (which is nonethe- less ‘situated’ in the Son as the Logos par excellence) and tropos to a hypostatic mode of existence that is determined by the Inascibility of the Father, the Filiality of the Son, and the Ekporeusis of the Spirit. Nevertheless, when the concept of tropos is transferred to christology and anthropology, it acquires a broader meaning and can denote historical modalities that differ from the hypostatic mode of existence, but are usually its conse- quences, see Jean-Claude Larchet, La Divinisation de l’homme selon saint Maxime le Confes- seur, Cogitatio fidei, 194 (Paris, 1996), pp. 141-151. Maximus explains how he under- stands the notion of tropos mainly in Amb. 42, 26-29, see Nicholas Constas, ed., Maximos 252 DiONYSiOS SKLiRiS is a dialogue between God and man, where God proposes a logos for nature,9 man responds with his own created logos resulting in a mode of nature, and God can respond again with new miraculous modes.10 Maximus is using the duality logos-tropos as a conceptual tool to achieve a synthesis between a Hellenic and a Judaistic demand.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Materials of the Riga 3Rd International Conference on Hellenic Studies
    Materials of the Riga 3rd International Conference on Hellenic Studies Latvijas Universitāte Humanitāro zinātņu fakultāte Klasiskās filoloģijas katedra Hellēnistikas centrs HELLĒŅU DIMENSIJA Rīgas 3. starptautiskās hellēnistikas konferences materiāli Sastādītāji: Brigita Aleksejeva Ojārs Lāms Ilze Rūmniece Latvijas Universitāte University of Latvia Faculty of Humanities Chair of Classical Philology Centre for Hellenic Studies HELLENIC DIMENSION Materials of the Riga 3rd International Conference on Hellenic Studies Editors: Brigita Aleksejeva Ojārs Lāms Ilze Rūmniece University of Latvia UDK 930(063) He 396 The book is financially supported by the Hellenic Republic Ministry of Culture and Tourism and the University of Latvia Grāmata izdota ar Grieķijas Republikas Kultūras un tūrisma ministrijas un Latvijas Universitātes atbalstu Support for Conference Proceedings by ERAF Project Support for the international cooperation projects and other international cooperation activities in research and technology at the University of Latvia No. 2010/0202/2DP/2.1.1.2.0/10/APIA/VIAA/013 IEGULDĪJUMS TAVĀ NĀKOTNĒ Editorial board: Gunnar de Boel (Belgium) Igor Surikov (Russia) Thanassis Agathos (Greece) Kateřina Loudová (The Czech Republic) Valda Čakare (Latvia) Ojārs Lāms (Latvia) Ilze Rūmniece (Latvia) Nijolė Juchnevičienė (Lithuania) Tudor Dinu (Romania) Language editing Normunds Titāns Translating Rasma Mozere Cover design: Agris Dzilna Layout: Andra Liepiņa © Brigita Aleksejeva, Ojārs Lāms, Ilze Rūmniece, editors, 2012 © University of Latvia, 2012 ISBN 978-9984-45-469-6 CONTENTS / SATURS Introduction 8 Ievads 10 I ANCIENT TIMES SENLAIKI 11 Vassilis Patronis ECONOMIC IDEAS OF ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHERS: ASSESSING THEIR IMPACT ON THE FORMATION OF THE WORLD ECONOMIC THOUGHT 12 Sengrieķu filozofu idejas par ekonomiku: izvērtējot ietekmi uz pasaules ekonomiskās domas veidošanos Nijolė Juchnevičienė HISTORIOGRAPHIC SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSE AND THE TRADITION OF GEOGRAPHY 22 Zinātniski historiogrāfiskais diskurss un ģeogrāfijas tradīcija Igor E.
    [Show full text]
  • Gnomic Will’ (Θέλημα Γνωμικόν, Or Just Γνώμη)
    OUP UNCORRECTED PROOF – FIRSTPROOFS, Tue Nov 11 2014, NEWGEN chapter 26 The Theology of the Will ian A. mcfarland There are few things more valued in the modern world than freedom. Political dis- course is shaped by it, as shown by the degree to which political campaigns and pub- lic policy are framed in terms of the need to counter threats to freedom on both the national and international levels. Economic theory is also defined by it, as seen both in the resources devoted to securing ‘free trade’ agreements among nations and in the way that advertisements appeal to the consumer to exercise—and thereby confirm—her freedom in selecting one product over another. Within this increasingly globalized cul- tural matrix, to be a person is to be free, and to be free is to be able to choose—whether among actual items visible on a shelf or possible futures envisioned in the mind. Freedom is understood as a matter of radical self-determination, and on every side we are encouraged to think that exercising such freedom is our most fundamental calling— the proper fulfilment of our humanity. Freedom was also very important for early Christians. The Graeco-Roman cul- tural context within which Christianity emerged was deeply shaped by different types of fatalism. Human life was understood to be subject to an array of forces beyond the individual’s control, and a variety of means were used to cope with them, ranging from the popular use of amulets and spells to philosophers’ efforts to secure a spirit of indif- ference in the face of fortune’s slings and arrows.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Maximus the Confessor and His Defense of Papal Primacy
    Love that unites and vanishes: Saint Maximus the Confessor and his defense of papal primacy Author: Jason C. LaLonde Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/bc-ir:108614 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2019 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. Love that Unites and Vanishes: Saint Maximus the Confessor and his Defense of Papal Primacy Thesis for the Completion of the Licentiate in Sacred Theology Boston College School of Theology and Ministry Fr. Jason C. LaLonde, S.J. Readers: Fr. Brian Dunkle, S.J., BC-STM Dr. Adrian Walker, Catholic University of America May 3, 2019 2 Introduction 3 Chapter One: Maximus’s Palestinian Provenance: Overcoming the Myth of the Greek Life 10 Chapter Two: From Monoenergism to Monotheletism: The Role of Honorius 32 Chapter Three: Maximus on Roman Primacy and his Defense of Honorius 48 Conclusion 80 Appendix – Translation of Opusculum 20 85 Bibliography 100 3 Introduction The current research project stems from my work in the course “Latin West, Greek East,” taught by Fr. Brian Dunkle, S.J., at the Boston College School of Theology and Ministry in the fall semester of 2016. For that course, I translated a letter of Saint Maximus the Confessor (580- 662) that is found among his works known collectively as the Opuscula theologica et polemica.1 My immediate interest in the text was Maximus’s treatment of the twin heresies of monoenergism and monotheletism. As I made progress
    [Show full text]
  • Foundations for John Zizioulas' Approach To
    FOUNDATIONS FOR JOHN ZIZIOULAS’ APPROACH TO ECCLESIAL COMMUNION John Zizioulas’ work is appealing; he is a sourcier of fresh views on the Church as a communion1. The evaluation of his contributions is prob- lematic. Zizioulas has not presented a synthesis of his contributions2. The topics treated were usually prepared for conferences or theological com- missions. This prompted their publication rather than a clear personal ini- tiative by Zizioulas’ to engage the reader in the development of his ecclesiology and clarify for the reader the consistent theological founda- tions which guide the way he addresses questions. There is a risk of en- gaging the work of Zizioulas without attention to the foundations which shape a particular contribution. This article proposes three foundations which direct the construction of the ecclesiology of John Zizioulas: an ontological, eschatological and epistemological foundation. The ontological foundation is rooted in the difference between creator and creation resulting in the ontological im- portance of salvation. The foundation relative to the eschatological truth in history determines the way salvation is realized in historical and ecclesial events without implicating by this historicity a historical causal- ity. The epistemological foundation establishes the role of ecclesial life for the theological discourse, recognizes the limits of the theological dis- 1. A. DE HALLEUX, Personnalisme ou essentialisme trinitaire chez les pères cappado- ciens?, in RTL 17 (1986) 129-155 and 265-292; reprinted in A. DE HALLEUX, Patrologie et œcuménisme (BETL, 93), Leuven, Leuven University Press, 1990, pp. 215-268; G. BAILLARGEON, Perspectives orthodoxes sur l’Église communion. L’œuvre de Jean Zizioulas, Montréal, Éditions Paulines & Médiaspaul, 1989, 414 p.; J.
    [Show full text]
  • Select Bibliography
    Select Bibliography by the late F. Seymour-Smith Reference books and other standard sources of literary information; with a selection of national historical and critical surveys, excluding monographs on individual authors (other than series) and anthologies. Imprint: the place of publication other than London is stated, followed by the date of the last edition traced up to 1984. OUP- Oxford University Press, and includes depart­ mental Oxford imprints such as Clarendon Press and the London OUP. But Oxford books originating outside Britain, e.g. Australia, New York, are so indicated. CUP - Cambridge University Press. General and European (An enlarged and updated edition of Lexicon tkr WeltliU!-atur im 20 ]ahrhuntkrt. Infra.), rev. 1981. Baker, Ernest A: A Guilk to the B6st Fiction. Ford, Ford Madox: The March of LiU!-ature. Routledge, 1932, rev. 1940. Allen and Unwin, 1939. Beer, Johannes: Dn Romanfohrn. 14 vols. Frauwallner, E. and others (eds): Die Welt Stuttgart, Anton Hiersemann, 1950-69. LiU!-alur. 3 vols. Vienna, 1951-4. Supplement Benet, William Rose: The R6athr's Encyc/opludia. (A· F), 1968. Harrap, 1955. Freedman, Ralph: The Lyrical Novel: studies in Bompiani, Valentino: Di.cionario letU!-ario Hnmann Hesse, Andrl Gilk and Virginia Woolf Bompiani dille opn-e 6 tUi personaggi di tutti i Princeton; OUP, 1963. tnnpi 6 di tutu le let16ratur6. 9 vols (including Grigson, Geoffrey (ed.): The Concise Encyclopadia index vol.). Milan, Bompiani, 1947-50. Ap­ of Motkm World LiU!-ature. Hutchinson, 1970. pendic6. 2 vols. 1964-6. Hargreaves-Mawdsley, W .N .: Everyman's Dic­ Chambn's Biographical Dictionary. Chambers, tionary of European WriU!-s.
    [Show full text]
  • The One and Many: an Examination of John Zizioulas' Ecclesiology
    The Canadian Journal of Orthodox Christianity Volume IX, Number 3, Fall 2014 The One and Many: An Examination of John Zizioulas’ Ecclesiology Ambrose Ih-Ren Mong Introduction Concerned that the Eastern Church was influenced by the West, first by scholasticism after the fall of Byzantium in 1453, and later by secularism, John Zizioulas, following the footsteps of his teacher, Georges Florovsky, seeks to liberate Orthodox theology by returning to the Early Church Fathers through a patristic synthesis.1 Ironically, it is the western theologians who first called for a return to the ancient patristic source as a way to revive and reform the church. Zizioulas acknowledges his debt to these theologians, especially Henri de Lubac, in his effort to revive Orthodoxy. This paper attempts to examine the influence of Henri de Lubac on Zizioulas’ thought regarding the relation between the Eucharist and the church. It also seeks to understand Zizioulas’ position on the relation between the universal and the local churches, which is also a key issue in the Roman Catholic Church as demonstrated in the debate between Joseph Ratzinger and Walter Kasper. As we shall see, the metaphysical principle of the “one” and the “many” forms the basis of his theological investigation. 1 Zizioulas agrees with Florovsky that the main problem in Orthodox scholasticism was the separation of theology from its liturgical roots: “the lex orandi and the lex credendi no longer coincided.” See Paul McPartlan, The Eucharist Makes the Church: Henri de Lubac and Zizioulas in Dialogue (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993), 127 – 129. 44 The Canadian Journal of Orthodox Christianity Volume IX, Number 3, Fall 2014 Ontology This metaphysical principle, “the one and many,” sums up Zizioulas’ approach in his studies of ecclesiology.
    [Show full text]
  • GEORGII FLOROVSKII on DIGNITY and HUMAN RIGHTS Nicholas Sooy
    Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 71(3-4), 327-342. doi: 10.2143/JECS.71.3.3286904 © 2019 by Journal of Eastern Christian Studies. All rights reserved. GEORGII FLOROVSKII ON DIGNITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS NICHOLAS SOOY Georgii Florovskii (in alternative English transcription Georges Florovsky, 1893-1979) was a patristic scholar, historian, and theologian. He was not a lawyer, diplomat, or politician. Therefore, it is perhaps unsurprising that Florovskii said very little directly about human dignity and essentially nothing on the topic of human rights.1 Furthermore, while the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in 1948, contemporary human rights movements, and therefore most contemporary discourse around human rights, are shaped by events in the 1970s, 1990s, and beyond.2 Therefore, we should expect nothing from Florovskii on these specific contemporary concerns. Beyond this, Florovskii himself stated his aversion to anything remotely political. “I am an antipolitical being: politics is something I do not like. It does not mean I ignore the existence of politics, I know it does [exist], but I have not the slightest desire to be involved.”3 The prima facie ambiguities and difficulties of bringing Florovskii into dialogue with contemporary concerns about human dignity and Human Rights are only compounded by the larger ambiguities regarding the rela- tionship between Orthodox Christianity and human rights. The contempo- rary voice of Orthodox Christianity concerning the issue of Human Rights is anything but homogenous, beyond a certain level of critical adoption. The Ecumenical Patriarchate sees human rights advocacy as central to its global 1 While lack of evidence is not necessarily itself evidence of anything, the lack of discus- sion of human rights in Florovskii’s writings is more likely to be evidence of his implicit support rather than his implicit opposition.
    [Show full text]
  • Maximus the Confessor and John of Damascus on Gnomic Will (Γνώμη) in Christ: Clarity and Ambiguity Paul M
    44 Maximus the Confessor and John of Damascus on Gnomic Will (γνώμη) in Christ: Clarity and Ambiguity Paul M. Blowers Emmanuel Christian Seminary Johnson City, Tennessee For years I have been perplexed as to why Maximus the Confessor, in his articulate christological formulations in the seventh century, ultimately decided that Jesus Christ, as fully human, had only a natural human will (θέλημα φυσική), and so forcefully ruled against the possibility that he also had a “gnomic” (or “deliberative”) will (γνώμη) in the manner of fallen human beings. In the words of Maximus’ own beloved predecessor, Gregory Nazianzen, “what is not assumed is not healed.”1 Tough not alone in this concern, I’ve made a regular pest of myself broaching this issue in numerous patristics conferences (most recently the 2011 Oxford Patristics Conference) anytime an essay on Maximus would even remotely touch on the matter. Te answer I get represents a fairly hardened scholarly consensus. Accordingly, Maximus, in working out his understanding of the Chalcedonian defnition, still required a certain asymmetry in the composite hypostasis of Christ, since it is the divine hypostasis of the Son who united with and divinized the humanity of Jesus. In this case only a “natural” human will could be truly deifed, not a gnomic will prone to vacillation. I agree with this consensus in general, and it has been strengthened all the more in an excellent recent study by Ian McFarland comparing Maximus’ doctrine of the will with that of Augustine. McFarland has cogently argued the plausibility of Maximus’ denial of γνώμη in Christ as a function of his strong sense that “natural” human will, as modeled in Christ, is not antecedently “constrained” by the will of the divine Creator but a manifestation of the gracious stability of human will in concert with deifying divine grace.
    [Show full text]
  • Naturally and by Grace: Maximus the Confessor on the Operation of the Will
    C SJT 58(4): 410–433 (2005) Printed in the United Kingdom ⃝ 2005 Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd doi:10.1017/S0036930605001481 ‘Naturally and by grace’: Maximus the Confessor on the operation of the will Ian A. McFarland Candler School of Theology, 109B, Bishops Hall, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA [email protected] Abstract Although Maximus’ and Augustine’s theologies of the will were shaped by very different polemical contexts, it is arguable that the two thinkers were interested in securing the same theological ground. In response to positions that treated the will as a reserve of human autonomy over against God, both thinkers sought to see the freedom of the will as a function of its integration into the natural order through grace. Maximus’ concept of the natural will in particular functions as a means of challenging both divine determinism and human libertarianism as adequate accounts of the relationship between divine and human activity. In one of his early works, Maximus the Confessor offers a brief but im- passioned account of the final destiny of human beings: With the advent of Christ at the end of time, there will be a change and transformation of inclination and choice in human beings from faithlessness to faith, from wickedness to virtue, from ignorance to knowledge of God; because then, at the end of the ages, there will be through the same God, our Savior, a transformation and renewal of the whole human race that is all-encompassing, natural, and by grace, from death and corruption to immortal life and incorruption in the expected resurrection.1 Though Maximus quickly moves on to other matters in this treatise, much of his subsequent literary output can be read as an attempt to flesh out the meaning of this seemingly bizarre conflation of intentional, natural and divine activity in human life.
    [Show full text]
  • De La Pasión a La Revolución. Kazantzakis Reinterpretado Por Dassin1
    De la Pasión a la revolución. Kazantzakis reinterpretado por Dassin1 From Passion to Revolution. Kazantzakis Reinterpreted by Dassin AMOR LÓPEZ JIMENO Universidad de Valladolid [email protected] ORCID ID: 0000-0002-0136-9091 Resumen: Jules Dassin fue el Abstract: Jules Dassin was the first primero en llevar al cine una novela de filmmaker to adapt a novel by Kazantzakis, Cristo de nuevo crucificado. Kazantzakis, Christ Recrucified. This La autora realiza un análisis contrastivo paper presents an analysis that de ambas obras y la trayectoria artística contrasts both of these works and the de sus respectivos creadores. artistic careers of their respective creators. Palabras clave: novela griega, cine, Key Words: Greek novel, cinema, Nikos Kazantzakis, Jules Dassin. Nikos Kazantzakis, Jules Dassin. 1 Este trabajo ha sido realizado dentro del Proyecto de Innovación Docente (PID) la Universidad de Valladolid Materiales audiovisuales sobre el mundo griego: elaboración y análisis, y del Proyecto de Investigación subvencionado por la Junta de Castilla y León Materiales lúdicos para el aprendizaje pragmático de segundas lenguas (español, griego, italiano, inglés, alemán). Trasvases entre la literatura y el cine, 2, 2020, págs. 141-160 ISSN-e: 2695-639X DOI: 10.24310/Trasvasestlc.vi2.9471 Amor López Jimeno 1. CRISTO DE NUEVO CRUCIFICADO Kazantzakis era ya un autor consagrado internacionalmente cuando publica su segunda novela, Cristo de nuevo crucificado (O Jristós xanastavrónete), en 1948. Como la anterior, Vida y andanzas de Alexis Zorba (Bíos ke politía tu Alexi Zorbá), obtuvo un considerable éxito y fue inmediatamente traducida, primero al noruego y alemán (1951 como Pasión griega, título inicial de la obra), después al inglés (Nueva York, 1953), español (Buenos Aires), sueco, francés, y así hasta 52 lenguas en 1986.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses Union and distinction in the thought of St Maximus The Confessor To?? ro?? nen, Mika Kalevi How to cite: To?? ro?? nen, Mika Kalevi (2002) Union and distinction in the thought of St Maximus The Confessor, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/1087/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk Union and Distinction in the Thought of St Maximus the Confessor Mika Kalevi Tbr5nen The Graduate Society A copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. PhD Thesis University of Durham Department of Theology 2002 NOV2033, a-, -7 -- ý Abstract MIKA TORONEN UNION AND DISTINCTION IN THE THOUGHT OF ST MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR PhD, 2002 The present study examines the principle of simultaneous unity and differentiation in the thought of St Maximus the Confessor (580-662).
    [Show full text]
  • European Journal of Literature, Language and Linguistics Studies
    European Journal of Literature, Language and Linguistics Studies ISSN: 2559 - 7914 ISSN-L: 2559 - 7914 Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/lit doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3370556 Volume 3 │ Issue 2 │ 2019 NIKOS KAZANTZAKIS AND GEORGIA Tinatin Darakhvelidzei PhD. Candidate, The Saint Andrew The First Called Georgian University, Tbilisi, Georgia Abstract: Exactly a hundred years has passed since Nikos Kazantzakis,-a Greek writer, humanist and philosopher travelled in Georgia for the first time, but his impressions and emotions about travelling in Georgia three times, which are described in his creation, still remain as interesting things for the Greek researchers and historians. The journey of the writer coincided with the advent of the bold and historical hardship when Georgia gained three years of independence from the Russian Empire and subsequently became the victim of the annexation of Bolshevik Russia again. This is also the period when the history of Georgia and Greece coincided, because of historical cataclysms happened at that time in the region. This is the period when ethnic people of the Ponto origin who were expelled from Turkey gathered in Georgia, particularly in Batumi in anticipation of returning to their historical homeland,-Greece. Exactly Nikos Kazantzakis was turned out the first and the last, as a civil servant, head of the repatriation program of the Ponto Greeks and he was sent to Georgia by this mission. It was his first touch with Georgia and in spite of the two-week’s business trip which was full of responsibilities, the writer got fascinated by Georgia and had traveled twice for a long time in this country.
    [Show full text]