The Soul of the World

 

“Into that heaven, all at rest, let the great soul be conceived to roll inward at every point, penetrating, permeating, from all sides pouring in its light. As the rays of the sun throwing their brilliance upon a lowering cloud make it gleam all gold, so the soul entering the material expanse of the heavens has given life, has given immortality: what was abject it has lifted up; and the heavenly system, moved now in endless motion by the soul that leads it in wisdom, has become a living and a blessed thing; the soul domiciled within, it takes worth where, before the soul, it was stark body- clay and water- or, rather, the blankness of Matter, the absence of Being, and, as an author says, "the execration of the Gods" (Plotinus, The Enneads, V.I).

So much for Plotinus hating the material world… This is quite a different thinker than the popular caricature.

One of these days I am going to write in more detail about the Plotinian view of the world and of his cosmology in general, since I have found that this is a highly misunderstood topic, but at the same time an accessible one - especially when compared to the purer metaphysical thought of the tradition. Let this then serve as an introduction.

The above passage encapsulates Plotinus’ view fairly well: matter, being so low in the hierarchy of being spirals headlong into non-being and causes souls to forget their divine nature and origin, it is in this sense that it is considered evil. But this is not the only condition that material manifestation can partake in, as what was abject has been lifted up by the Soul who mysteriously dwells even here: “it envelops the heavenly system and guides all to its purposes: for it has bestowed itself upon all that huge expanse so that every interval, small and great alike, all has been ensouled.”

The material world can only be called good because it has been rescued by Soul; the presence of God in the world doesn’t proclaim matter's goodness, but its emptiness.

Some Thoughts on Divine Simplicity

God’s simplicity as formulated by theologians and philosophers is not something that can be readily inferred from Scriptural revelation (although I wouldn’t discount the idea that it is contained in the unwritten tradition), but this does not mean that it is contrary to it, or among the topics that St. John of Damascus says that we should not pry into. I think the key idea that determines God’s simplicity is that his essence and existence are not distinct: the fact that he does not have existence, but is existence; Absolute Being is then one and unity itself without duality. This is the domain of pure metaphysics. The confusion then arises when we try to apply this view to the realm of particulars and contingency, for metaphysical statements like God’s act is singular or God has no relation to creatures don’t line up with our experience of God, but this is due to our limited point of view which is conditioned by multiplicity.

I believe these sorts of difficulties are why Orthodox apologists and polemicists so often fail to understand Catholicism. They cannot accept the place of a purely metaphysical view, and then they curiously neglect that in Catholicism God resides in the heart of man.

To compensate for this inability, the modern Orthodox will then try to qualify the simplicity of God with further distinctions, all this really does is lower the view of God from pure metaphysics down a few notches on the chain of contingency.  

This all leads me to think that God’s simplicity should probably be left as an esoteric teaching, as it is something that is nearly impossible to sufficiently grasp without proper training, and can easily lead to error and misconceptions. I certainly do not understand this doctrine (noone completely can), but I’m not going to jump to the conclusion that this renders God inert and inaccessible to man, neither will I try to qualify the Divine Essence to make it fit more easily into my rational mind. These are the faults of Orthodox apologists who try to dismantle the doctrine of simplicity, a doctrine which is regarded as a metaphysical axiom in the traditions of both East and West. In contrast, Catholicism preserves the mystery.

At the Feet

 

The feast of Candlemas: a throng of faithful gathered together before the Holy Mysteries in the unassuming confines of a simple basement. Here I had the privilege of sitting on the ground before the feet of the priest when he turned from the altar to expound upon the Holy Word.

Now despite my romantic portrayal of this rather routine event – a sermon – it did prompt some reflection on the transmission of the philosophical/religious doctrine, and why we have far the most part lost this transmission. My experience of receiving the Christian teaching at the feet of a man instilled reverence in my soul not only for the Word but for the man who was teaching it to me. I remembered the importance the Hindus place on having a real human being as a spiritual/intellectual guide. It is safe to say that in the Indian traditions you can’t get anywhere without an authentic teacher, the guru is the one who dispels the darkness in his disciples, and for this reason is given a high degree of veneration. I read recently that Ramakrishna said that a disciple would get absolutely no where if he viewed his guru as merely a man.