~ Orthodox Theological Digital Library I.M.D. ~

Georges Florovsky, Byzantine Ascetic and Spiritual Fathers, transl. Panayiotis K. Pallis, Pournaras, Thessaloniki, 1992, pp. 419.

In the last volume of his patristic tetralogy, professor Fr. Georges Florovsky presents Byzantine ascetics and spiritual fathers. The Dessert and spiritual life constitute an extensive  chapter of Christian theology, which cannot be established beyond the assessment of philology and doctrinal history.

The ascetic ideal is at the centre of Christian thought and constitutes one of its basic ingredients as early as the time of the New Testament. This is why Fr. Georges begins this presentation from early Christianity and the experience of proto-christian societies. Perfection, philanthropy, prayer, fasting, purity, penitence, humiliation, and particularly love constitute fundamental priorities of New Testament thought. The shortcomings of N. NYGREN’s critique on love as “a re-capitulation of all ancient values” is located, according to Florovsky, in its weakness to comprehend the new, radical Christian love in the actual anthropological response to God’s call, which marks the beginning of spiritual and ascetic life.

In the substantiated historical and theological analysis of monasticism phenomenon which follows, the Orthodox researcher traces the development of Christian spirituality from Anthony the Great to anachoritic monasticism, the Cappadoceans Vassilios and Gregory of Nyssa, Pseudo-Makarius, Evagrius Ponticus, Isidorus Pilousiotes and Diadochos Fotikes, right up to the aeropagitic Corpus.

The observations and the designation of Gregory of Nyssa as one of the “most original thinkers to ever appear in the history of the Church” is not only aimed at Nygren’s weakness to comprehend the ecclesiastical Father’s Christian spirituality, but points out the Cappadoceans’ contribution as a store of knowledge for mystical ascension to Divination.

The development of Christian spirituality cannot be a timeless, idealised and hyper-historical unfolding of the state of the heavens. It wrestles in complex ways with a variety of historical villainy, which often attempts to transform the positive and remarkable aspects it contains. For Fr. Georges Florovsky this marks the case of Makarius’ Spiritual speeches, as well as the areopagitic corpus. Whatever messalianic and stoic colouring there is to be found in the first and neo-platonic slant in the latter are dissected with the scalpel of Orthodox theology to uncover their deep roots in the solid tradition of Christian spirituality.

Florovsky Georges: The Byzantine Fathers of the 5^th century, Pournaras, Thessaloniki, 1992.

This book constitutes the second part of a tetralogy, which starts with the Fathers of the 4^th century, to end, in the fourth part, with the Fathers of the eighth (century). This is a meaty piece of patristic research with concrete theological grounding and no lack of historical and philological references. Besides, this tetralogy emanates from the author’s conviction that patristic studies should not be exhausted simply to a grammatological and historical presentation of the persons and works of the Fathers, but should also extend to the “dialectic” of their ideas, the development of their problematic so as to both face the heretic challenges and theologically construct the body of the Church.

In Fr. Georges’ days there was a drive in this direction, not least due to the development of patristic theology with critique monographs gaining in publicity and the fully established by the 20^th century related academic discipline of Doctrinal History. Thus, Fr. Georges’ main concern, though not an original one, was to establish Patrology as something more than a sort of literature history. His goal was to create a fertile and creative imprint of the dialectic of theological ideas and the fermentations of Christianity in its history, as well as to construct a theology framework as live testimony of the Christian truth.

The book starts with the presentation of the New Testament heritage, which, according to the author, is a deep expression of early Christianity’s existential agony about the Person of the “Son of Man” and His relationship to the Father. He, then, moves on to the later experience of the above truth, as it was expressed in the works of the early Christian writers. He stands on crucial points of the process of the Christian Doctrine, such as Monarchianism, Tertyllian and Hippolytus, Origenis, to reach Nice and from there on to Ephesus.

Equipped with the above analyses, the author elaborates on the main persons and ideas, which marked the 5^th century Christological problematic.

He addresses the theological presence of Theodoros Mompsuestias with an analytical presentation of his work, the theologian’s relationship with John Chrysostomos, but also the concept of the “Antiochian Christology”, which stems from his work. He present Nestorios’ prevailing theological trend, but also the theology of Cyrill of Alexandria as the opposing theological trend.

The evolution of Christological ideas from Nestorios to Eutiches, offers an opportunity for the development and synthesis of the Chalcedon Christology. The role of Kyros Theodoritos and the “volume” of Pope Leon express the dialectic theological background that the Chalcedon Synod ought to clarify.

Fr. Georges Florovsky follows this course of the Christological problematic, equipped with the deepest historical-doctrinal knowledge and its simple, but complete methodological presentation. These virtues of his render the volume charming and easy to follow.

Florovsky Georges, The Byzantine Fathers of the 6^th, 7^th and 8^th century, Pournaras, Thessaloniki, 1993.  

          The volume begins with its first chapter devoted to the development of hymnography in the Christian Liturgy, as well as to the presentation of some dissenting authors and references to the formation and function of Anthologies of patristic opinions or texts.

In this pleasant, doctrinal break, the reader is initiated in, but also puzzled by the manner and rationale of the introduction of hymnology in the Christian worship. He traces, at crucial points, their evolutionary course, as well as the contribution of exquisite poets and hymnographers, mostly theologians, such as Saint Romanos the Melodist and Saint Andreas of Crete.

Then, he reverts to discussing doctrine in the theological processing of the “spirit”, as he characteristically writes, of the Monophysitic Christology. It is worth noting Fr. Georges’ observation that there is a “lack of feeling of human freedom in the Monophysitic theology”, in the difficulty of the Monophysites defining the human characteristics in the composition of God-Man. Thus, Christ’s human side is rendered a passive object of the divine influence. It is also noteworthy that he compares Monophysitism with Augustinianism, on the basis of the expulsion of the human aspect into obscurity and its suppression by God.

Afterwards follows an extensive, in spite of being inscribed as brief, reference to the history of Monophysitism. He mentions facts, persons and theological positions, imperial decisions and monastic movements. Justinian’s ecclesiastical-political initiatives, as well as his theological views are of particular interest. Also, the connection of the Monophysitic dispute with a sort of Origenistic renaissance among Palestinian and Egyptian monks is of great interest. The Byzantine Leontius’ decisive theological intervention has played a decisive role in the determination and clarification of the terms hypostasis, person and in particularly “Ενυπόστατον” (existing in hypostasis).

The evolution of Monophysitism into Monothelitism-Monoenergeticism was a, potentially, normal development of the heretic thought in the same spirit of understanding a docetic, passive and, finally, un-interpreted humanity in Christ. It was the delayed epilogue of the Monophysitic movement. The theological presence and contribution of Maximus the Confessor judges the way things evolved, but also testifies the broader and more coherent theological synthesis in the history of Christian thought.

The book concludes with the presentation and theological contribution of Saint John of Damascus and the seventh Ecumenical Council. The maturity of Saint John’s theological thought indicates the maturity of the Christian Theology in his days, but also the ceaseless temptation of man to raise issues and controversies. The Iconoclast problem is a characteristic example of the above and the seventh Ecumenical Council the symbolic conclusive act in the dialectics of theological ideas in the ancient world.