Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, Influence of Neo-Platonism on Mystical Christianity

Today we will learn and reflect on the works of
Dionysius, known to the Medieval Church Fathers as
St Denis, and to modern scholars and theologians as
Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite.

Dionysius, although deprecated by many modern scholars,
was one of the most profoundly influential theologians of
both the ancient and medieval churches. Dionysius wrote
under a pseudonym; scholars have no clue about his
identity. This is a partial list of the:

Michelangelo, The Last Judgement, Sistine Chapel, 1541
Church Fathers Profoundly
Influenced by Dionysus:
Eastern Christianity
St Maximus the Confessor
Andrew of Crete
Western Christianity
St Thomas Aquinas,
John Scotus Eriugena
Pope Gregory the Great
Albert the Great
Mystical Theologians
Author, Cloud of Unknowing
Meister Eckhart

From this list, we know that Dionysius has deeply
influenced both Eastern and Western giants of the faith;
indeed, references to Dionysius in the works of St Thomas
Aquinas are only outnumbered by his references to
Aristotle, these references include a commentary of the
Divine Names of Dionysius in his Summa Theologica. In
contrast, Luther was antagonistic towards the works of
Dionysius, we will ponder what spiritual insight we can
glean from this opposition.

At the end of our talk, we will discuss the sources used for
this video. Please, we welcome interesting questions in the
comments. Let us learn and reflect together!

To find the source of any direct
quotes in this blog, please type in
the phrase to the search box in
my blog to see the referenced
footnote.
YouTube Description has links for:
• Script PDF file
• Blog
• Amazon Bookstore
© Copyright 2021
Blog and YouTube Description
include links for Amazon books
and lectures mentioned, please
support our channel with these
affiliate commissions.
Link to blog: https://wp.me/pachSU-FX

DISCUSSING DIONYSIUS
We were astounded not only by how many of the most influential ancient and
medieval theologians were deeply influenced by Dionysius, but also by the number
of modern theologians who are similarly eager to write about Dionysius.
There is a mix here, we quote from the Catholic theologians Balthasar, known for his
works written after Vatican II, and Copleston, a Jesuit priest who wrote a multi-
volume series on philosophy that is included in the curriculum of most Catholic
seminaries. We quote from several well-regarded Orthodox theologians, including
Andrew Louth, Andrew McGuckin, and Vladimir Lossky, and when he wrote these
works referencing Dionysius, Jaroslav Pelikan was one of the foremost Lutheran
theologians, though he converted in his retirement years.
As a reminder, my companion blog has the footnotes and book links referencing the
sources I used. The book links are also in my YouTube scripts I upload to SlideShare.

-
MODERN THEOLIGIANS
Introductions to Pseudo-Dionysius,
the Complete Works
Jaroslav Pelikan, plus the lesser-
known Jean Leclercq and Karlfried
Froelich.
Frederick Copleston, influential Jesuit
Professor, author of the series,
History of Philosophy.
Influential Orthodox Scholars:
Andrew Louth, Andrew McGuckin,
and Vladimir Lossky.
Jaroslav Pelikan, influential scholar,
mentions Dionysius in first three
volumes of The Christian Tradition,
History of Development of Doctrine
Hans Ur von Balthasar, influential
Catholic scholar in his work on St
Maximus the Confessor.
Michelangelo, The Last Judgement, Sistine Chapel, 1541

As a reminder, my companion blog has the footnotes and book links referencing the
sources I used. The book links are also in my YouTube scripts I upload to SlideShare.
Who was pseudo-Dionysus? St John of the Cross and St Thomas Aquinas refers to
him as St Denis, and several of his works are introduced as from “Dionysius the
Presbyter, to his fellow-presbyter Timothy,” which refers to Dionysius the
Areopagite, mentioned in Acts 17:34, which suggested that it had apostolic
pedigree. This work is first mentioned in 533 by Severus, the Patriarch of Alexandria,
and other scholars have noted that some of his language has been lifted from the
works of the last influential Neoplatonist philosopher, Proclus.
And you can see that St John of the Cross was writing about a millennium after the
late dating of the works written by Dionysius.

McGuckin states that though the early Byzantine
theological debates tolerated the “authorial subterfuge,”
that “within a generation or two their ‘apostolic origin’
was eventually believed, and with this dramatic label the
works came to have a profound influence for centuries
to come.” Copleston notes that Pope Martin I appealed
to St Denis as authoritative in the First Lateran Council
of 649. Dionysus deeply influenced the theology of St
Maximus the Confessor and St Thomas Aquinas.
Who was the author? Copleston states, “the author was
a theologian, without doubt an ecclesiastic also; but he
could not have been Severus himself, as one or two
writers have rashly supposed.”
Dionysius the Areopagite
at Cathedral of Athens

We will likely never learn who the author was; the
brilliance of his writing certainly enhanced its influence.
There were many Church Fathers whose theology was
profoundly influenced by the works of Dionysius, but Peter
Abelard was skeptical of his apostolic credentials, but as he
was controversial in his day, his opinion was not widely
shared. Abelard’s credibility was damaged by his affair with
his young student, Heloise, which was a famous romance.

Abaelardus and Heloïse surprised by
Master Fulbert, by Jean Vignaud, 1819
Héloïse and Abailard, by Jean-Baptiste Goyet, 1829

Are the teachings of Dionysius orthodox? Copleston offers
his opinion, “Personally I consider that the writings are
orthodox in regard to the rejection of monism; but on the
question of the Blessed Trinity, it is highly questionable at
least if they can be reconciled with orthodox Christian
dogma.” Monism is the Neoplatonic notion that everything
is derived from “The One,” from which everything flows.
Copleston does note that Dionysius does maintain the
doctrine of the Incarnation, though he thinks this is
underemphasized by Dionysius. Copleston points out that
you cannot condemn his teachings on the Incarnation,
taken as a whole, “unless you are prepared to reject as
unorthodox, for example, the mystical doctrine of St John
of the Cross, who is a Doctor of the Church.”

Was Dionysius a monophysite? This term refers to the great
Christological controversies decided in the early church
ecumenical councils. The First Council of Nicaea had decided that
Christ was both human and divine. Debate continued, the
orthodox position was that both human nature and divine nature
were both united in one person, while monophysites believed
that the human nature was absorbed into the divine nature. This
is the simplified Wikipedia explanation; we will study this
question later when we study the history of the church councils.

Council of Nicaea, 325, Fresco in Capella Sistina, Vatican, 1590

Council of Nicaea, 325, Fresco in Capella Sistina, Vatican, 1590
Andrew Louth states, “Scholars are still divided as to
whether the Christology of Dionysius is Monophysite.”

The Patriarch Severus was a monophysite, and the
works of Dionysius influenced both monophysite and
Nestorian theologians, according to Jaroslav Pelikan.
Scholars have noted that Dionysius has carefully
crafted the wording of his theology so it would be
seen as orthodox.
For example:

Pelikan quotes Dionysius
from his Ecclesiastical
Hierarchy, “out of love
for humanity, Christ
emerged from the
hiddenness of His
divinity to take on
human shape, to be
utterly incarnate among
us while yet remaining
unmixed,” a formulation
that grants the “Logos
after the union a full and
distinct human nature.” Baptism of Christ, by Andrea del Verrocchio and
Leonardo da Vinci, 1480

Pelikan explores whether Dionysius was guilty of
monenergism, the belief that Christ had one
energy, a rather technical debate, but Pelikan
notes that Dionysius could not have anticipated
this theological debate, valuing mysticism over
the logical points of theology. Andrew Louth has
an excellent summary of these Christological
controversies in his book on Dionysius.

Artistic rendition of
Second Council of
Constantinople at 553
AD, by Vasily Surikov,
circa 1876

PROTESTANTS AND DIONYSIUS
Protestants, Luther in particular, are quicker to
discard the teachings of Dionysius. Luther was
initially amenable to the theological poetry of
Dionysius.

Luther enters the monastery, Ferdinand Pauwels, painted late 1800’s

In an essay by Froelich, he
states that “during his years
at Wittenberg, Luther
became increasingly
negative, ending in total
rejection. The turning point
is often linked to the Leipzig
Disputation of 1519, where
John Eck used Dionysius’”
work on the Ecclesiastical
Hierarchy “as evidence for
the apostolic origin of papal
primacy.” Martin Luther as an Augustine Monk,
Lucas Cranach the Elder, after 1546

This was the disputation where Luther debated his
beliefs after the uproar caused by his 95 Theses,
preceding with his break with the Catholic Church.
Luther was wary of scholasticism and the intricate
teachings of St Thomas Aquinas, he thought he
relied too heavily on the works of Aristotle and the
Neoplatonism of Dionysius, though his apostolic
origins were not universally questioned at the time.

Luther Posting his 95 Theses in 1517, by Ferdinand Pauwels, painted 1872

In a disputation in 1537, Luther states
that Dionysius “taught that humans can
converse and deal with the inscrutable,
eternal majesty of God in this mortal,
corrupt flesh without mediation,” and
he warns his listeners to avoid reading
books like Mystical Theology. Luther’s
“alternative was the theology of the
Cross.” Luther also comments,
“Dionysius is most pernicious; he
Platonizes more than he Christianizes.”
Martin Luther Translating the Bible, Wartburg
Castle, 1521, by Eugène Siberdt, painted 1898

This criticism by Luther reminds us that it is a
spiritual trap that if our desire to focus on what we
think is the spiritual side of faith, our Love for God,
distracts us from our love for our neighbor, and to
wish our neighbor well, then it is a false spirituality,
and indeed St John of the Cross, a mystical
theologian influenced by Dionysius, warns us of this
danger, many times.

Although the many references in the New
Testament of praying in the Spirit is not the same
as apophatic or negative theology, these
references exhort us in prayer to ask the Spirit for
assistance in our prayer life to reach up and
ascend to the divine:
St Paul in Romans exhorts us, “Likewise, the Spirit
helps us in our weakness; for we do not know
how to pray as we ought, but that very Spirit
intercedes with sighs too deep for words. And
God, who searches the heart, knows what is the
mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes
for the saints according to the will of God.”

MODERN SCHOLARSHIP AND PSEUDO-DIONYSIUS THE AREOPOGITE
Scholars in the Renaissance questioned whether the works of Dionysius indeed
dated back to the Apostolic Age, and modern scholars have strong evidence that
his works were written in the late fifth or early sixth centuries. Thus, modern
scholars refer to him as Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, though Andrew Louth
titles his book about him as “Denys the Areopagite.” Like Andrew Louth, my
preference is to jettison the Pseudo label, as we can still learn much from a work
revered by so many ancient and medieval church fathers, my preference is to refer
to works by Dionysius.
Did Dionysius expect that his reading audience would see the joke? Personally, I
think that Dionysius would have been astounded that he “fooled” so many for so
long that he was truly a theologian from the Apostolic era.

Dionysius the Areopagite
with Thomas Aquinas,
Madonna and the Baby
Jesus, by Domenico
Ghirlandaio, 1486

Which leads us to another question, how did Renaissance scholars initially detect
that Dionysius was written by someone centuries after the Apostolic age? Simple,
the Renaissance scholars first examined the internal evidence in the works
themselves, using refined techniques of philology. Simply put, these scholars simply
read the breadcrumbs Dionysius laid out in the text revealing his background,
including the obvious influence of Neoplatonic philosophers like Plotinus and
Proclus.
In the century prior to Luther, philologists determined that the Donation of
Constantine, which purported to be a fourth century donation where the first
Christian Roman Emperor Constantine transferred authority over Rome to the Pope,
was actually a thirteenth century forgery, since the language in the document used
words and usage from that later century. The Catholic Church had been using this
donation to support its claims of papal authority, and by association, the discovery of
this forgery likely harmed the credibility of the works of Dionysius.

13th-century fresco
of Sylvester I and
Constantine the
Great, showing the
purported Donation,
Santi Quattro
Coronati, Rome, 1247

Donation of Constantine, by school of Raphael, 1524

Dionysius does lay it on thick, his short ten epistles include
epistles to Polycarp, a hierarch; Titus, the hierarch; and
John the Theologian, apostle and evangelist, an exile on the
island of Patmos; which are intended to confirm his
apostolic succession. But he also addresses several of these
short epistles to monks. Since monasticism arose after the
apostolic age, after Emperor Constantine ended the
persecution of Christians, could Dionysus be suggesting
that his apostolic succession is a literary device?

St Polycarp
St John the
Apostle and
St Francis, by
El Greco,
early 1600's

Andrew Louth explores
the symbolism,
“Dionysus was the first of
St Paul’s converts in
Athens, and Athens
means philosophy, and
more precisely, Plato.
Plato had commonly, if
not quite always, been
respected by Christians.”
Early Christians like St
Justin Martyr “had
greatly revered Plato, if
dissenting from some of
his doctrines.”

For much of the fifth century
the head of the Platonic
Academy in Athens was the
great pagan philosopher
Proclus. Louth suggests that
“the pseudonym expressed
the author’s belief that the
truths Plato grasped belong
to Christ and are not
abandoned by embracing
faith in Christ.”
Plato's Academy mosaic, Villa of Siminius Stephanus, Pompeii

Writing works in the name of a somewhat contemporary Christian saint
was common in the ancient world, often this was seen as a sign of
admiration and respect, though adding credibility to the work was also a
motivation. But it was unusual to credit your work to saints over four
centuries ago. Dionysius also unusually refers to his other works, for
example, he says, “In my Theological Representations, I have praised”
certain notions, but this and several other referenced works have either
been lost; or, as many scholars suspect, they are simply literary devices.
What a great literary device that would be: you quickly describe a brilliant
idea, which you credit to a much longer work you never actually wrote, or
which you intend to write it in a future that never arrives.
INTERESTING QUOTES BY MODERN SCHOLARS

Apotheosis of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite, by Guglielmo Bilancioni, 1890

Vladimir Lossky has one of the most
interesting quotes on the central theology of
Dionysius: “Dionysius distinguishes two
possible theological ways. One, that of
cataphatic or positive theology, proceeds by
affirmations,” what God is, and “the other
apophatic or negative theology, by
negations,” what God is not. “Positive
theology leads us to some knowledge of
God, but in an imperfect way. Negative
theology leads us to total ignorance,” which
acknowledges we can never truly know God.

Then Lossky compares these two ways of
understanding God. “All knowledge has as its object
that which is. Now God is beyond all that exists. In
order to approach Him, it is necessary to deny all
that is inferior to Him, that is to say, all that which
is.”
This is where the title of the famous theological
work, The Cloud of Unknowing, comes from. “If in
seeing God one can know what one sees, then one
has not seen God in Himself by something
intelligible, something which is inferior to Him. It is
by unknowing that one may know Him who is above
every possible object of knowledge.”

Although the idea of deification can be supported by
many verses in the New Testament, eastern Christian
theologians like St Maximus the Confessor formulated
the analogy that Christ condescends to descend to
take on flesh in his Incarnation to save our souls, so
Christ adopts us as sons of His Father so we may
ascend to salvation in our deification. St Maximus the
Confessor was influenced in his view of deification of
the faithful by the writings of Dionysius.

Heavenly and Earthly Trinities, by Murillo, 1677
Annunciation, by Ludovico Carracci, 1604

St Denis the Areopagite with an angel,
by Nicolas Poussin, circa 1621
Pelikan says this, “The principle of deification was
the beatitude of God Himself, that by which He
was God; his goodness conferred the gift of
salvation and deification on all rational and
intelligent beings.”
Pelikan references the Ecclesiastic Hierarchy by
Dionysius, where Dionysius teaches that the
incorporeal heavenly “hierarchy belongs to the
domain of the conceptual, something out of this
world. But we see our human hierarchy, as our
nature permits, multiplied in a multitude of
perceptible symbols lifting us upward hierarchically
until we are brought as far as we can be into the
unity of divination.”

John Anthony McGuckin has an interesting
discussion of how profoundly Dionysius “and the
religious metaphysics of the Neo-Platonists affected
the early Byzantine Christians. First,” in a time when
the works of Origen were severely criticized, he
promoted “Origen’s ancient principle that the
believer must go opou Logos agei,” “which means
that where reason leads the mind, so too is God the
Logos beckoning,” which is very close to our
Channel’s philosophy.
“Second, Christians found in the Neo-Platonists a
dialogue partner, not a series of texts to be
plagiarized,” useful when missionaries seek to
“translate the Semitic gospel to a Hellenized world.”

McGuckin continues, “Third, this dynamism” views
the metaphysics of Dionysius as a “descent from the
First Principle: the Sublime Ineffable.” Is McGuckin
here referring to Origen’s controversial work, On
First Principals, which guaranteed the Church would
not declare him a saint? McGuckin is referring to
how Christianity appropriates Neo-Platonic
concepts: “All being holds its coherence from the
One.” “The marks of the Logos are within all things.”
“Fourth, Dionysius was concerned with how to
speak about God: apophatically, using negation of
words and ideas, or kataphatically, using ideas taken
from the material world.” The apophatic path is
both more challenging and more rewarding.

McGuckin concludes, “Last, the stress
on order and dependent relationships
in the ascent to God, which Dionysius
emphasizes so much in his view of
angels and clerical ranks in his two
treatises on the Hierarchies, provided
immense intellectual stimulation to
the Christian Western world in the
Dark Ages,” and which inspired the
mystics with the concept of the
deification of the believer.

Medieval Catholics saw in these works on the Hierarchies divine
affirmation for respect for the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church, but even
if you are Protestant, you can nevertheless interpret Dionysius as teaching
the message that you should respect the hierarchy of the church you
attend, whether your church has a national hierarchy, or whether your
church is an individual, congregational church.
The work of Dionysius that is by far the shortest and is the most succinct
statement of his apophatic or negative theology is The Mystical Theology.
Next we will examine his Divine Names, which as attracted the most
commentary from Copleston, St Thomas Aquinas, and many other
theologians.

A procession of
Cardinals enters St.
Peter's in Rome,
opening the Second
Vatican Council.
Painting by Franklin
McMahon

We will close with a quote from Balthasar from his book, The
Cosmic Liturgy, The Universe according to St Maximus the
Confessor. “St Maximus entered the history of theology not
only as the victor in the dispute over the two wills in Christ,
His divine and mortal will, but also as the man who assured a
lasting home in the Church for the writings of Dionysius,
thanks to his orthodox interpretation of them. Whether
Dionysius in fact needed such justification, whether he really
was the half-Neoplatonic mystic that one likes to make him
today and was not rather one of the most powerful Christian
thinkers of all time, need not be decided here. It is certain
that he aroused a divided response very early: alongside
enthusiasm, skepticism, and cool diffidence.”

Balthasar notes that what is true is
that “St Maximus grasped the value,
the originality, and the fruitfulness
of the works of Dionysius and that
through his spirited championing of
their genuineness, as well as his
work of interpretation, he became
one of the heralds of the triumphal
march of Dionysius through the
Latin Middle Ages.”

DISCUSSING THE SOURCES
My copy of the complete works of Dionysius has been
sitting on my bookshelf for many years, but I had no idea
how influential it was until I ran across a direct reference
to the Mystical Theology of Dionysius by St John of the
Cross’ work, Dark Night of the Soul, and realized that
Dionysius painted the Dark Night of the soul a millennium
before.

This translation is good,
with excellent footnotes.
This compilation of his
complete works includes
valuable introductions
by Jaroslav Pelikan and
two other authors.
This is a good English
translation of the Dark
Night of the Soul, with
good footnotes.
Andrew Louth’s book on
Dionysius is quotable in its own
right, it includes both an
introductory discussion and
commentary on each of his
complete works, simply
outstanding.
Copleston’s History of
Philosophy is used by Catholic
seminaries, we like to consult his
history first, he covers Dionysius,
most of his commentary is on his
work, The Divine Names.
https://amzn.to/3m5sQ38
https://amzn.to/3zJj1iD https://amzn.to/3xBZbTY
Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite
https://amzn.to/3b830IU

The Orthodox scholar
McGuckin’s history of the
first millennium of the
church includes chapters on
how the church influenced
many aspects of daily life in
the ancient world, and
reviews both the history and
the literature of the early
church, including Dionysius.
These three volumes of
Pelikan include references to
Dionysius’ works.
Pelikan’s five volume set on the
History of Christian doctrine
includes many snippets from
the original works, and a
balanced discussion with no
polemic bias, always consulting
the original works in their
original languages whenever
possible. Pelikan assumes you
already have a basic knowledge
of church history. The other two
volumes are on the
Reformation and the Modern
Church through Vatican II.
https://amzn.to/2UB183E
https://amzn.to/2UHXMeW https://amzn.to/3ujwbPd
https://amzn.to/3HDoKsw

Balthasar’s commentary on
the works of St Maximus the
Confessor includes comments
on the works of Dionysius,
since they heavily influenced
St Maximus. Balthasar is one
of the prominent post Vatican
II theologians, quotable and
enlightening as a primary
source, like Louth.
La Noche Oscura is the
original Spanish of St John of
the Cross.
Eros and Allegory opens with
a discussion of Dionysius, and
it also studies the
commentaries on the Song of
Songs, a favorite of monastics,
who read this love poem as an
allegory of our Love for God.
This book by Lossky includes
references to Dionysius and is
on the Mystical Theology of
the Eastern Church, this book
has an excellent reputation.
https://amzn.to/3OmCvhd
https://amzn.to/3tKoAK4 https://amzn.to/3mXuL9I
https://amzn.to/3mVQQWl

Scholars say that Dionysius
was influenced by the
writings of St Gregory of
Nyssa, in particular his Life
of Moses, and his ascent up
the mountain. We have cut
videos on his commentary
on the Beatitudes, which
are referenced by the
Catholic Catechism, and this
work also describes an
ascent up the mountain
leaving behind the Platonic
Cave of ignorance.
St Thomas Aquinas has a
commentary on the Divine
Names by Dionysius in
Summa Theologica, used
copies of individual
volumes of the Great
Books are inexpensive.
Most of the Philokalia,
Volume 2, is works by St
Maximus the Confessor,
whose mystical theology
was heavily influenced by
Dionysius.
https://amzn.to/39AhL6R
https://amzn.to/3mXuL9I
https://amzn.to/3B6cgVh
https://amzn.to/3uNlLY5
Thomas Aquinas,
Summa Theologica,
Volume 1, Britannica
Great Books
St Maximus
the Confessor

https://www.oca.org/index.php/saints/lives/2022/10/03/102843-hieromartyr-dionysius-the-areopagite-bishop-of-athens

https://www.meetup.com/Reflections/

https://www.patreon.com/seekingvirtueandwisdom

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLqDkfFbWhXOnzdjp__YZtg/

Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, Influence of Neo-Platonism on Mystical Christianity

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, Influence of Neo-Platonism on Mystical Christianity

Similar to Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, Influence of Neo-Platonism on Mystical Christianity (20)

More from Reflections on Morality, Philosophy, and History

More from Reflections on Morality, Philosophy, and History (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, Influence of Neo-Platonism on Mystical Christianity