A new “Alexandrianism” appeared in the church after the condemnations of Origen.
“God is a super-essence and therefore can be identified with no being as object of knowledge. He is beyond any knowledge” (94). How, then, can we know God if he is “beyond-knowing?” False Dionysius’s answer: “the mind must go out of itself, for the knowledge of God is beyond the mind” (95).
In distinction from Greek polytheism, Dionysius claims we can’t know God through the natural processes of the senses (99). I agree to a point. I do wonder if this meshes with Romans 1:20.
Divine manifestations are God’s names and thus truly present in the world. No real problem, but one must ask: are these divine manifestations in a divine hierarchy? If so, have we really overcome neo-platonism? Meyendorff appears to answer the question: the procession is not a dimunition of the divine being but a presence of God in the fullness of his being (100-101). Fair enough, but why then the need for hierarchy at all?
Meyendorff gives a lucid summary of neo-platonic ontology:
All reality proceeds from the One, transcendent and unpartakeable, and is determined in a rigorous system of gradations, in proportion to the remoteness of each being in relation to its origin. Each superior order (taxis) serves, on the other hand, as an intermediary for the inferiors, and, on the other hand, is itself divided into three elements: the unpartakeble , the partakable, and the participating, and constitutes a triad (101, cf. Celestial Hierarchy, V, 6).
Triad of bishop, priest, deacon. Meyendorff notes (and disapproves!) of the intermediary structure.
- How coherent is it to speak of the mind knowing by going outside of itself? We are back to chain of being. Something is simply wrong with man qua man that we need something added to him (and they don’t mean wrong in the sense of sin, but of finitude).
- Meyendorff downplays the role of Ps.Dionysius in the East.