THE CHRIST AND THE TEMPTER CHRIST’S TEMPTATION BY THE DEVIL IN THE THOUGHT OF ST. MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR AND ST. THOMAS AQUINAS Dissertation Submitted to The College of Arts and Sciences of the UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology By Benjamin E. Heidgerken Dayton, OH May 2015 THE CHRIST AND THE TEMPTER CHRIST’S TEMPTATION BY THE DEVIL IN THE THOUGHT OF ST. MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR AND ST. THOMAS AQUINAS Name: Heidgerken, Benjamin E. APPROVED BY: ________________________________________ Matthew Levering, Ph.D. Faculty Advisor ________________________________________ Paul Blowers, Ph.D. Outside Faculty Reader ________________________________________ Gloria Dodd, Ph.D. Faculty Reader ________________________________________ Dennis Doyle, Ph.D. Faculty Reader ________________________________________ William Portier, Ph.D. Faculty Reader ________________________________________ Daniel S. Thompson, Ph.D. Department Chairperson ii © Copyright by Benjamin Edward Heidgerken All rights reserved 2015 iii ABSTRACT THE CHRIST AND THE TEMPTER CHRIST’S TEMPTATION BY THE DEVIL IN THE THOUGHT OF ST. MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR AND ST. THOMAS AQUINAS Name: Heidgerken, Benjamin E. University of Dayton Advisor: Matthew Levering, Ph.D. This dissertation considers two trajectories of Christian thought about human temptation after the first sin of Adam and Eve and about Christ’s confrontation with the devil in his own temptation, focusing on the embodiment of these trajectories in the thought of Maximus the Confessor and Thomas Aquinas. The first of these trajectories sees fallen human temptation in the framework of an ascetic confrontation with the devil on the battlefield of the human mind, in thoughts and desires. The second of these trajectories see this temptation in the framework of a purely internal division between the flesh and the spirit, expressed as disordered concupiscence (“desire”) or the fomes peccati (the “tinder of sin”). Structurally, the work is divided into two sets of three chapters with an introduction and a conclusion. The introduction reviews modern denials of the devil’s iv role in Christian theology, defends the place of the devil in Christian theology, considers recent work that relates to the dissertation’s subject matter, and provides a detailed outline of the following chapters. Each set of three chapters (first on Maximus, then on Thomas) is organized according to: (1) sources for the central figure; (2) the anthropological framework for temptation in the thought of the figure; and (3) the Christological application of this framework. The author shows that both Maximus and Thomas conceive of Christ in his temptation as an empowering exemplar who takes on something of the punishment for Adam’s sin in his own temptation by the devil. Though certain disjunctions appear between these thinkers in the course of the study, the conclusion offers constructive suggestions about ways in which the two trajectories might still be compatible. The conclusion also outlines areas for future historical and systematic research concerning Christian traditions of temptation and recommends a retrieval of the earlier trajectory of which Maximus forms a part. v For my wife, Christine On the First Sunday of Lent The Commemoration of Our Lord’s Temptation February 22, 2015 vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I first want to express my profound gratitude to Dr. Matthew Levering for directing this project. From the beginning of my time at the University of Dayton, Dr. Levering helped to guide me toward a topic that fruitfully builds up the Christian community. Although we have been in a “long-distance relationship” for the last two years, his incisive vision, deep and comprehensive knowledge of St. Thomas, and ecclesial heart have made this project possible. I also want to thank the members of my committee: Dr. Paul Blowers, Dr. Gloria Dodd, Dr. Dennis Doyle, and Dr. William Portier. I have benefited especially from occasional conversations with Dr. Dodd (when I could make it over to the Marian Library!) and from Dr. Portier’s ever-open door, whether for theological discussion or for mulling over practical minutiae of the process. Additionally, two other professors at UD were indispensable to the linguistic work in this project. Dr. Fred Jenkins (for help with Latin) and Dr. Silviu Bunta (for help with Greek) were incredibly welcoming and went far beyond the call of duty in their willingness to informally talk about particular passages from St. Maximus, St. Thomas, or other ecclesial documents. Dr. Bunta also read and gave wonderful feedback on early drafts of my Maximus chapters. Dr. Charlotte Kingston provided some very helpful feedback regarding some of the material on Gregory the Great. My conversations with Dr. Brad Kallenberg have kept alive my interest in scientific and biological questions vii about instincts and reflexes. Any errors in this project remain solely my own, but without these people, this dissertation would not be what it is. At an earlier stage of my research, I received support from a University of Dayton Graduate Student Summer Fellowship. Although that research on the dogmatic proclamation of Mary’s freedom from original sin cannot be found in the following pages, the final direction for my project was in many ways forged by that research. There are also professors from earlier in my formation that I would like to thank. From Princeton Theological Seminary, both Dr. George Hunsinger and Dr. Bruce McCormack shaped me as a reader of Karl Barth. More distantly still, without my formative years of study at St. Olaf College under Dr. Charles Wilson, Dr. Elizabeth Galbraith, and Dr. Gregory Walters (who introduced me to St. Maximus), I would not be where I am. Others at UD also deserve my thanks. Firstly, many thanks to all my classmates— the collegial atmosphere of our communal office is perhaps the greatest incubator of profound and diverse theological discussions that I have ever encountered. Josh Brown, Jason Heron, Alan Mostrom, and Robert Parks, in their friendship (as well as in their formation of various informal reading groups), have been an endless source of encouragement. Katherine Schmidt and Jason Hentschel have been constant companions through the program; Adam Sheridan’s work on the Fall and toil has enlivened many conversations; and Matt Archer, my fellow dissertation-student of Aquinas (and defense- date partner), has been alongside me through the last couple years of our research projects. My thanks also go to the staff at the Roesch Library, especially Chris Tangeman at ILL who bent rules to help feed my insatiable book addiction and found sources that I would have simply abandoned. viii Finally, I must thank those who have shaped my life in even more fundamental ways. First, to my parents, Bob and Peggy, who have supported me despite not knowing “what I’m going to turn into” (Mom: “What, like a sandwich?”). My father formed me as a Catholic, showed me what hard work is, and somehow sent my brother and me to Catholic school on a rancher’s income. My mother formed me as a human being, showed me what patience and humility are, and insisted on giving us a good college education. Finally, to my wife and son. Christine has supported me more and more as this project drew to its completion and never complained (well, almost never) when I fell behind in my household duties. Isaac has been a constant joy, a much-needed distraction, and an increasingly mobile motivator for me to complete the project quickly. Okay, Christine, now I can finally get back to the dishes! ix TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………... iv DEDICATION……………………………………………………………………... vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………... vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………… xii INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………. 1 I. Demonic Temptation?……………………………………………………. 3 II. ‘Evil’ Beings in the Ancient World……………………………………… 10 III. ‘Stages’ of Human Nature? …………………………………………… 17 IV. Scholarship on Christ’s Temptation…………………………………… 21 V. An Overview of this Study………………………………………………. 34 CHAPTER 1: MAXIMUS’S SOURCES FOR CHRIST’S TEMPTATION……… 42 I. Thomas and Maximus’s Scriptural Sources……………………………... 45 II. Anthropological Sources………………………………………………... 64 III. Christological Sources…………………………………………………. 98 CHAPTER 2: MAXIMUS’S ANTHROPOLOGY OF TEMPTATION…………... 117 I. Adam’s Created State and Fall………………………………………….. 120 II. Human Nature and Demonic Temptation after the Fall………………... 129 III. Providence and Affectivity in an Eschatological Perspective ………… 168 x CHAPTER 3: MAXIMUS ON CHRIST’S TEMPTATION………………………. 178 I. Christ’s Humanity, Human Fallenness, and the Devil…………………... 182 II. The Perfections of Christ’s Humanity and His Temptation…………….. 193 III. Salvation through Temptation: Christ’s Victory over the Devil……….. 210 CHAPTER 4: THOMAS’S SOURCES FOR CHRIST’S TEMPTATION………... 228 I. John of Damascus as the Historical Link between Maximus and Thomas 230 II. Human Passions prior to Aquinas……………………………………… 258 III. Western Patristic Thought on Christ’s Temptation by the Devil………. 263 IV. Medieval Sources on Christ’s Temptation by the Devil……………….. 285 CHAPTER 5: THOMAS’S ANTHROPOLOGY OF TEMPTATION……………. 325 I. The Created and Fallen States according to Thomas…………………… 328 II. Fleshly and Internal Demonic Temptation in Thomas’s Anthropology… 349 III. Demonic Temptation, Virtue, and Providence according to Thomas….. 397 CHAPTER 6: THOMAS ON CHRIST’S TEMPTATION………………………... 416 I. The General