Here, parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98.

***

3. 2. The Mystical Theology and its Receptation by the Orthodox Professor Vladimir Lossky

In the introductive study at romanian edition of archiknown book of Professor Vladimir Lossky, Essai sur la Théologie Mystique de l’Eglise d’Orient, Father Professor Vasile Răducă notes the fact, that Vladimir Lossky has demonstrated through this book, „that Theology cannot be separated of Mystica. The theology is the rational representation of mystical experience, of the intimate living of the truth and of the divine mystery”[1].

Appeared in 1944, this little mystical orthodox dogmatic wanted to restore the truth, how that the theology, in the measure in which „makes the showing of the divine mystery, so the data of Revelation, is a mystical theology[2].

Professor Vladimir Lossky observes very correct, that the Church, naming its Theologians the triad of the Saints John the Theologian, Gregory of Nazianzus and Symeon the New Theologian, showed that cannot do theology without mystica[3] and that the mystica is „the peak of all theology…[or] the theology through excellency[4].

Therefore, the scope of theology is the deification[5], which does not mean the stopping at a certain stage of knowledge, but the continuous advancement towards God, towards the One who „is beyond of [all] what exists”[6].

Emphasizing the role of mystical experience, our theologian shows, that Saint Dionysius the Areopagite has presented the ascension towards sight as on a road made through the cleansing of passions[7].

Putting the equal sign between apophatism and mystical experience[8], Professor Lossky speaks about a personal experiencing of God, Which is not living as an object[9].

But our author, we believe, is situated outside of the truth of experience as such, then when conceives the mystical sight right a union with God, which does not mean and His knowledge in the same time[10].

As we have seen anterior, the union with the light, the sight of light, means of fact the filling of divine knowledge, of mystical theology.

Evaluating the reality of ecstasy at Saint Dionysius, he says that this divine experience presupposes „an exit from the being as such”[11] and that Dionysius, in comparison with Plotinus, has a kindred theology with the scriptural[12].

The theological cataphatism of the names of God speaks us about His energies, which descends to us[13] but „they do not approach us to His inaccessible being ”[14].

„The conscience of the inability of to touch on God”[15], says Professor Vladimir Lossky, evaluating a fragment from the Stromata of Saint Clement of Alexandria, would not be an appanage of our mind, if we would not be comforted by grace[16].

The conscience of the uncognoscibility of being of God means a real meeting, he says, with „the personal God of Revelation”[17].

But the uncognoscibility of divine being does not temper the fervent seeking of believers to see God, of to see His glory. The sight of His glory means the abyssal conscientization of the uncognoscibility of His being, but and of the infinity of knowledge, on which presupposes it the sight of divine light.


[1] Rev.Vasile Răducă, Introductive study, in TMBR, p. 25.

[2] TMBR, p. 35.

[3] Idem, p. 37.

[4] Ibidem.

[5] Ibidem.

[6] Idem, p. 54.

[7] Idem, p. 56.

[8] Idem, p. 57.

[9] Ibidem.

[10] Ibidem. He says, literal: „God no longer appears as object [in ecstasy], whereas is no longer the word about knowledge, but of union”.

[11] Idem, p. 60.

[12] Ibidem.

[13] Idem, p. 62.

[14] Ibidem.

[15] Idem, p. 63.

[16] Ibidem.

[17] Ibidem.

Did you like this? Share it: