‘ exegesis [1]:
“the highest peak of the Scriptures [2].”
“Through all the words of Holy Scripture, God speaks only one Word,his unique Word in whom he speaks of himself entirely (cf. Heb 1: 1-3) : Remember that it is the same Word of God that extends throughout all the Scriptures, that it is the same Word that resounds in the mouths of all the sacred writers, he who, being in the beginning God with God, has no need of syllables because he is not subject to time (St. Augustine, Psal. 103, 4,1).” (CCC 102)
In his works, Dionysius sets out to do theology. He can speak of God for at least two reasons [3]. The first is that he was initiated into it. The second is that Scripture is offered to him, and it is in Scripture alone [4]that he finds all theology.
Note: The word “Scriptures” does not exist as such in Dionysius. He uses the term Logia (Eloquia).
It is true that Dionysius quotes Scripture extensively, but there is more to him; there is a method of exegesis. He himself explains this and sets out the different levels of his exegesis. This has hardly been studied in his work [5]; perhaps he is an author so shrouded in mystery that we do not dare venture into his writings?
However, it is worth examining his thoughts on exegesis because they have things in common with those of the rest of the Fathers, but they illuminate them with their originality and receive some clarifications from them.
Origen, for example, by considering that Scripture is a kind of being with a body, a soul and a spirit [6]– like the human being who reads it – helps us a little better to understand the progression of Dionysius’s exegesis towards the “spirit of Scripture” [7]as the summit of “reading” or more exactly the summit of mystical knowledge; because in fact it is a question for Dionysius and for the fathers in general of a mystical experience concomitant with the reading of Scripture. A reading of Scripture which only involves a work of the intellect is completely outside the perspective of the Fathers. Scripture is always there to nourish the believer, to guide him on his path, to illuminate him and to unite him with God.
Likewise, Clement of Alexandria will speak of “gnosis”, of knowledge within the path of faith and it seems that this “gnosis” receives a certain illumination from Dionysius (always in the context of Scripture).
After having briefly described the different exegeses of Dionysius, we will focus more particularly on one: the highest, the one which concerns precisely “the highest peak of the mystical Scriptures”.
I- General view of the exegesis of Dionysius
In his short treatise entitled “Mystical Theology” Dionysius explains once again his books which are so many levels of exegesis: “In our Theological Sketches , we have celebrated the principal affirmations of affirmative theology [8], showing in what sense the excellent nature of God is said to be one, […]. In the Treatise on Divine Names , we have shown why God is called Good, Being […]. In Symbolic Theology , we have dealt with the metonymies of the sensible to the divine, we have said what the forms, the figures, the parts, […] and all the forms with which we clothe divine holiness to give it a figure signify in God.” ( Mystical Theology III)
These three books that he composed and that he mentions here are as many levels of exegesis, of understanding the mystery of God or more precisely of penetrating into his mystery. It is a question of theology, of a word spoken about God from Scripture. These books therefore do not have the same method or the same content. Moreover, “the higher we rise, in fact, the more concise our words become, because the intelligibles present themselves in an increasingly synoptic way.” Therefore, they do not have the same volume. ” Symbolic Theology was necessarily much more voluminous than the Theological Sketches and the Divine Names .” ( cf. ibid.)
To these three books we must add that of Mystical Theology, which is like their crowning achievement. For here it is no longer a matter of a discourse on God or an extrinsic contemplation [9]of God, but of an entry into God, of a union with God. We will expand further on this work, but we can note that it is, in the logic of Dionysius, the shortest of all.
Let us take a closer look at the content and especially the exegetical methods of these four books:
a) Theological Sketches
We know little about this book. It is lost, but Dionysius mentions it several times—one of which we cited above. This book explains “that God cannot be reached either in words or in thoughts.” In it, he primarily studies the names that apply to the entire divinity, without distinction of Persons. But he also explains what the names of paternity, filiation, and Spirit correspond to in God. He also shows how Jesus assumed human nature, etc. This treatise seems to be a sort of general preamble to theology, where he clears the ground and prepares his three subsequent works. What we can assume as an exegetical method in this approach is that it will respect the literal meaning while attempting to organize the concepts and clarify the basic elements. Nothing more can be said on this subject. This is not the case for the other three that follow.
b) Divine Names
Dionysius is a teacher, he intends to gradually lead the intelligence of his reader from the realities closest to him to that of God himself. From the sensible to the intelligible (the intelligible figure) to the sensible figure and finally to the reality that surpasses all sense and intelligence. We can say that his first book takes the first step: to go from the sensible to the intelligible by organizing knowledge and elementary notions. This second book establishes itself in the domain of the intelligible and moves there. It is therefore already a symbolic meaning that we find in the Scriptures which invite us to elevate ourselves through these figures to the reality (which certainly transcends them) that they show . The allegory is rich in spiritual teachings.
c) Symbolic Theology
Here he points out that by using apparently “crude” images instead of shamefully outraging the divine powers or misleading our intelligence by forcing it to profane allegories, the Scriptures spare us the risks of excessive attachment to all that such symbols may have of base and vulgar. It is perfectly appropriate for the mystical passages of Scripture to hide the reality of God under unspeakable and sacred enigmas.
In fact, the revelation of the sacred is made in two ways. The first way is that described above in the Divine Names ; it proceeds by means of holy images adequate to their object . The second way, that explained in the Symbolic Theology , on the contrary pushes the inadequacy of the figures it models to the extreme improbability, to the point of absurdity. While all affirmation remains inadequate, it is better suited to the secret character of the One who remains in Himself inexpressible to reveal the invisible only by images without resemblance. Thus all materiality is excluded. Sacred figures of a more elevated nature would probably mislead more than one man because they would lead them to imagine. To spare such a peril to those whose intelligence has never gone beyond the plane of sensible beauty, Scripture uses metaphors without resemblance. It thus prevents our tendency towards materiality from lazily contenting itself with insufficient images, and at the same time it elevates the part of the soul which tends towards the heights and, by the very ugliness of these metaphors, it spurs it on in such a way that even beings too inclined to material desires cannot judge them either possible or true or ever believe that the supercelestial spectacles have the slightest resemblance to these trivial figures . There is nothing, moreover, which does not participate in some way in the beautiful.
Thus the divine secrets remain inaccessible to the profane while those who know how to interpret the holy images go beyond symbolic signs. ( cf. Celestial Hierarchy Ch. II in full)
Before moving on to Mystical Theology, let us draw up a summary table :
| Artwork | Exegesis: “Manipulated” Realities |
| a) Theological Sketches | sensitive —> intelligible |
| b) Divine Names | intelligible – figure of the contemplated reality ; (affirmation) the image is adequate. |
| c) Symbolic Theology | sensitive – referring to a higher aspect;( first negative) the image is inadequate |
| d) Mystical Theology | Total negation of the sensible and the intelligible and (yet accessible) union with God. |
II- “The highest peak of the Scriptures
We separate this fourth work ( Mystical Theology) from the other three because, by what it proposes, it places itself a little apart from everything we have seen, even the highest which constitutes Symbolic Theology . Here Dionysius asks us to go beyond not only the sensible but also the intelligible [10].
It is important first of all to point out what he means by going beyond the intelligible. For one might ask: – but where then does the conjunction between the human being and God take place, if intelligence is swept away. He does not in fact say that intelligence must be swept away but that the intelligible must be abandoned. More precisely, he means that all activity of the intelligence must be abandoned. For in fact, he invites it to rise by abandoning all divine light, all words and all celestial reasons, by renouncing all positive knowledge. There is nothing more to say from Scripture about God, no more book to compose, it is a question of a total cessation of speech and thought. He expresses this metaphorically: “closing one’s eyes.”
There he prays to God, saying to him:
“Lead us not only beyond all light, but even beyond unknowing to the highest peak of the mystical Scriptures, where the simple, absolute, and incorruptible mysteries of theology are revealed in the more luminous Darkness of Silence: it is in the Darkness of which it is too little to say that it shines with the most brilliant light in the midst of the blackest obscurity, and that, while remaining itself perfectly intangible and perfectly invisible, it fills with splendors more beautiful than beauty the intelligences that know how to close their eyes” (I.1)
Here the Scriptures seem to deliver God himself ! It is no longer a question of exegesis in the usual sense of the term – even patristic. Scripture, like a sublime sacrament, gives us God himself. At its summit we find the “dark Ray of the divine Superessence.” Elsewhere he speaks of the “very Ray of the holy thearchic words” ( Divine Names I.1). This superessential Ray contains from all eternity, in a way which it is too little to call ineffable, the terms of all knowledge. It can neither be conceived nor expressed nor grasped by any kind of vision because it is separate from all things (Cf. ibid. I.4). He therefore seems to say that this Ray comes out of Scripture as from a tabernacle.
Dionysius opens a new perspective for us by showing us that Scripture contains a Ray. He therefore invites us to go beyond our exegetical methods, even the most profound, to deliver ourselves to God himself and nothing less than him. This is a fact to which we are little accustomed and which perhaps reveals to us the deepest mystery of exegesis . It is true that his description is rather brief. But a good knowledge of mysticism [11]can help us better understand what he is saying.
Scripture is thus compared to a high mountain which must be climbed by these four steps which we have reviewed, the last of which plunges into God himself in a way which surpasses all understanding. It is there, at the summit of Scripture, that we receive the superessential Ray.
III-Conclusion
Such a short work only allows us to sketch a glimpse of Dionysius’s rich exegesis. Despite its brevity, it is the last point that most attracts our attention. Dionysius reveals to us, in his own way, what Origen calls the spirit of Scripture. But do we have the right to equate this last stage of Dionysian exegesis with this aspect of Origen’s? We would lean towards the affirmative. But we would have to prove it.
Can we also draw a parallel between this “unknowing” or “knowledge beyond all knowledge” of Dionysius and the “gnosis” of Clement of Alexandria?!
We are aware that the subject merits a more extensive and in-depth contribution—which goes beyond the scope of a short essay. Our intention was rather to point out a rich, and admittedly somewhat novel, avenue for patristic exegesis.
Bibliography
– The two articles “Dionysius the Areopagite” and “contemplation” from the dictionary of spirituality.
– The article “Dionysius the Areopagite” from the Encyclopaedia Universalis.
– H.-C. PUECH, Mystical Darkness in the Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and in the Patristic Tradition, in Et. Carmélitaines, 23, 2, 1938.
– Henry de Lubac, Spirit and History.
– Henry de Lubac, Medieval Exegesis.
– Henni de Lubac, Writing in Tradition.
– Vladimir LOSSKY, Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church , Paris, 1944.
[1]Dionysius manipulates the concept of exegesis and gives it this name: Anaptyxis (Explanation).
[2] Mystical Theology I.1.
[3]He gives us his method in theology at the beginning of his work The Divine Names . He used a method in his book Theological Sketches and he tells us that “here again our law is that which has already been defined according to the holy texts: not to demonstrate the truth of the divine words by probabilities drawn from human wisdom, but rather by a revelation of that power which comes to theologians from the Spirit and which makes us adhere without words and without knowledge to the realities which are neither said nor known, united to them in our own way beyond the powers and forces of reason and intelligence.” ( Divine Names I.1)
[4]“It is indeed a universal rule that we must avoid rashly applying any word, or even any thought, to the superessential and secret Deity, except what the holy Scriptures have divinely revealed to us” (ibid., Cf. also I.2).
[5]The article dedicated to him in the Dictionary of Spirituality addresses the subject very superficially!!
[6]Origen will speak about the bodily interpretation of the text, its moral meaning (the soul) and its spiritual meaning.
[7]Dionysius does not use this expression, but he does speak of the summit of the Scriptures, more precisely of “the highest summit of the mystical Scriptures” (TMI1 p.177).
[8]We should point out now that, in general, for Dionysius, theology ( Theologia Theologia) means the science of God drawn directly from the Scriptures. One could translate theology as exegesis or, more profoundly, as knowledge. We can already see how different the perspective of the fathers, and especially that of Dionysius, is from the modern perspective.
[9]“Those who have penetrated to his secret infinity” ( Divine Names I.2). “Let them (the holy souls) enter into communion with him and strive to resemble him” (ibid.).
[10]key passage : “For you, dear Timothy, exercise yourself constantly in mystical contemplations, abandon sensations, renounce intellectual operations, reject everything that belongs to the sensible and the intelligible.”
[11]His first and for that it would be necessary to read Mystical Theology in its entirety.