Dimitrios Pallis

The current study will not address the old but still unresolved question in modern scholarship of whether Philo was a mystic or interpreter of scripture or even a philosopher. An alternative reading could consider him to be all three together, depending on the definition given to each of these titles, but this issue will not be of primary concern here. Rather, the aim of this study is to focus on specific characteristics of the work of Philo that highlight the way in which his Jewish identity contributed to his critical assimilation of the education he received in accordance with the classical Greek model of learning. The ‘philosophical theology’ of Philo is defined in this study as the tendency he embodies to employ themes from Greek thought to lend philosophical depth to his religious beliefs. This tendency can also be identified in the work of his predecessors within the Jewish tradition, albeit to a lesser extent. Both Philo and his predecessors sought to present Judaism as a ‘philosophical school’, on a par with contemporary schools or trends. This practice must have been apologetically motivated, as was later the case with the Christian Apologists. Although this endeavour by the Jewish and Christian authors in question constitutes a form of theological thought that has a different basis from the purely philosophical currents of that period, it could justifiably be included in the context of the research on ancient philosophy and its history in that it engaged with similar questions. This study is divided into two parts. In the first part, following an outline of the historical facts that are known or can be conjectured about Philo and the theoretical principles of his thought, the types of work he wrote and the themes he addressed will be presented. The second part will examine selected aspects of his thought and it will also draw attention to examples from his work in which he developed the above-noted kind of ‘philosophical theology’. The aspects that will be analysed are his teachings on God and the world, as well as on man and ethics. This part will end with a discussion of the impact of Philo on early Christian thought and certain similarities between the two. A bibliographical guide with selected editions of the works of Philo and modern studies is provided as a supplement to this study.

This bipartite study is included to the bibl. project "Filón de Alejandría" of the National University La Pampa, Argentina, which is edited by P. Druille, M. Alesso et al, in: https://filonalejandria.com/2023-2/
It is included also to the bibl. project "Philonica et Neotestamentica", which is the blog edited by T. Seland, in: https://biblicalresources.wordpress.com/2023/06/24/the-philosophical-theology-of-philo/
It is included also to the bibl. cat. published in D. Runia, M. Alesso, E. Birnbaum et al., "Bibliographical Section: Supplement", Studia Philonica Annual 35 (2023), 328 and 333 (for pt. 1 and pt. 2 respectively).

The current bipartite study will not address the old but still unresolved question in modern scholarship of whether Philo was a mystic or interpreter of scripture or even a philosopher. An alternative reading could consider him to be all three together, depending on the definition given to each of these titles, but this issue will not be of primary concern here. Rather, the aim of this study is to focus on specific characteristics of the work of Philo that highlight the way in which his Jewish identity contributed to his critical assimilation of the education he received in accordance with the classical Greek model of learning. The ‘philosophical theology’ of Philo is defined in this study as the tendency he embodies to employ themes from Greek thought to lend philosophical depth to his religious beliefs. This tendency can also be identified in the work of his predecessors within the Jewish tradition, albeit to a lesser extent. Both Philo and his predecessors sought to present Judaism as a ‘philosophical school’, on a par with contemporary schools or trends. This practice must have been apologetically motivated, as was later the case with the Christian Apologists. Although this endeavour by the Jewish and Christian authors in question constitutes a form of theological thought that has a different basis from the purely philosophical currents of that period, it could justifiably be included in the context of the research on ancient philosophy and its history in that it engaged with similar questions. This study is divided into two parts. In the first part, following an outline of the historical facts that are known or can be conjectured about Philo and the theoretical principles of his thought, the types of work he wrote and the themes he addressed will be presented. The second part will examine selected aspects of his thought and it will also draw attention to examples from his work in which he developed the above-noted kind of ‘philosophical theology’. The aspects that will be analysed are his teachings on God and the world, as well as on man and ethics. This part will end with a discussion of the impact of Philo on early Christian thought and certain similarities between the two. A bibliographical guide with selected editions of the works of Philo and modern studies is provided as a supplement to this study.
Keywords: Ancient Alexandria, Apologetics, Early Judaism, Greek Philosophy, Hellenistic and Roman Culture, Hellenized Judaism, Intertestamental Jewish Literature, Jewish Diaspora, Jewish Philosophy, Middle Platonism, Modern Greek Scholarship, Moses, Philosophical Theology, Plato and Platonism, Stoicism, Pentateuch, Old Testament, Septuagint

This essay outlines the key stages in the study of Dionysius in twentieth-century Greek Orthodox theology and scholarship. After an introductory overview of this topic, the complexities of the Greek scene are presented since there is considerable diversity in the handling of this ancient author by Greek theologians. The section that follows focuses on specific political and social factors that have or could have affected the development of the engagement with patristic literature in the universities of Athens and Thessaloniki but also in the public sphere. It provides some specific examples of how that is reflected in the Greek scholarly and religious bibliography relating to this ancient Christian author. The fourth and longest section examines three readers of his writings from the interwar and postwar periods: Emmanouel Karpathios (1888–1972), Christos Yannaras (b. 1935), and John Zizioulas (b. 1931). It compares the approach of these three readers: the first followed a different method from the other two, who adopted a similar theological methodology but developed very different views on this subject of research or more accurately on this aspect of the Orthodox tradition.
Keywords: Christian mysticism, Orthodox hagiography, Western influences, twentieth century philosophy, Greek theology, Russian émigré religious thought, neopatristic synthesis, Emmanouel Karpathios, Christos Yannaras, John Zizioulas.

This essay considers John Damascene's use of Dionysius under the four headings of negative theology, Christology, angelology, and the defence of icons. Under the first heading Dionysius represents orthodoxy, yet Damascene tends to cite him only when his authority can be buttressed by that of accredited saints such as Gregory Nazianzen, and feels obliged to offer detailed glosses on propositions which Dionysius had been content to make in a generic form. The Christology of Dionysius was open to a miaphysitic (or, as Damascene would say, monophysitic) interpretation, and was therefore even more need of interpretation through the writings of others. In Damascene's discussion of the angelic hierarchy, on the other hand, Dionysius is an authority even where Nazianzen is silent. Similarly, when vindicating the use of holy images Damascene turns to Dionysius for suffrage of antiquity, which he cannot produce so readily from his usual authorities.
Keywords: Negative theology, Gregory Nazianzen, Christology, miaphysitism, monophysitism, angelology, images.

This essay outlines the key stages in the study of Dionysius in twentieth-century Greek Orthodox theology and scholarship. After an introductory overview of this topic, the complexities of the Greek scene are presented since there is considerable diversity in the handling of this ancient author by Greek theologians. The section that follows focuses on specific political and social factors that have or could have affected the development of the engagement with patristic literature in the universities of Athens and Thessaloniki but also in the public sphere. It provides some specific examples of how that is reflected in the Greek scholarly and religious bibliography relating to this ancient Christian author. The fourth and longest section examines three readers of his writings from the interwar and postwar periods: Emmanouel Karpathios (1888–1972), Christos Yannaras (b. 1935), and John Zizioulas (b. 1931). It compares the approach of these three readers: the first followed a different method from the other two, who adopted a similar theological methodology but developed very different views on this subject of research or more accurately on this aspect of the Orthodox tradition.
Keywords: Christian mysticism, Orthodox hagiography, Western influences, twentieth century philosophy, Greek theology, Russian émigré religious thought, neopatristic synthesis, Emmanouel Karpathios, Christos Yannaras, John Zizioulas.

This paper was delivered in the context of:
https://www.academia.edu/27395788/Corpus_Dionysiacum_Areopagiticum_Ancient_and_Modern_Readers_Final_Programme

If you are interested in reading this essay, feel free to contact me by e-mail for a digital copy of it.

Some modern researchers have identified the ‘Clement the philosopher’ mentioned in On the Divine Names V.9 of Dionysius the Areopagite with Clement of Alexandria or with a pagan philosopher who was a contemporary of Dionysius or from a more distant past. The present essay develops an interpretation of the above passage in the context of the attempt of the author to stage the structure and contents of his writings so as to persuade his readers of his apostolic identity. Thus, it argues that it would be proper to examine whether the identity of Clement the philosopher in this passage is compatible with the carefully constructed identity of Dionysius. It proposes that it is possible to understand Clement the philosopher as a reference to Clement of Rome because the information we have about him is consistent with Dionysius’ professed identity, and also because there were earlier Christian traditions that represented Clement of Rome as related to the apostle Paul, the purported teacher of Dionysius, and trained in Greek philosophy.
Keywords: Dionysius the Areopagite, Paul the Apostle, Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Principles of Beings, Scripture, Greek Patristics, Plato, Proclus, Platonism.

This is the official academic Journal of the Academia.edu digital forum or website. It is an open access Journal that publishes peer-reviewed research articles authored by scholars in English.

Over the past decades there has been a growing tendency among international and Greek scholars to examine the work of certain patristic authors through the lens of modern psychology and some monographs and short studies have adopted an interdisciplinary approach in their readings of particular authors from the Greek patristic tradition. Although a number of interesting elements of this kind can be found in the writings of the author who wrote under the pseudonym ‘Dionysius the Areopagite’, the quantity of the relevant bibliography to date is relatively limited. One of the reasons for this is that there is as yet no consensus in historical and theological research as to the kind of relationship that this late antique author posits between Christianity and Platonism, or the manner in which his Christian identity – if we view him (as most modern scholars do) as an authentic Christian author – determines his teaching on God and man. Another reason is that the work of Dionysius does not present a systematic account or self-contained analysis of the topic of the human soul; rather, he viewed that topic within a wider interpretive framework which assimilated elements from different schools of thought in a creative manner. The author in question incorporated these elements into a framework that could be described as his ‘theological anthropology’. He is primarily interested in this subject from the point of view of his teachings about Christian religion and the meaning this religion conveys to its rituals or sacraments. The current study is an attempt to offer a critical explanation of selected aspects from this writer’s thought, which can shed light on the intersection of philosophical theology and modern psychology. The reading that will follow is based on an ‘in situ’ approach to the author: it takes into account the contemporary historical period and the cultural outline of his thought and underlines elements from his work that can prove valuable for a discussion of a modern way of thinking and the study of the history of psychology.
Keywords: Dionysius the Areopagite, Christian Mysticism, Psychology of Religion, Epistemology, Scripture, Hermeneutics, Religious Identity and the Self, Deification, Angels, Liturgical Tradition, Theological Language, Ritual Symbols.

Κατά τις τελευταίες δεκαετίες παρατηρείται στη διεθνή και την εγχώρια βιβλιογραφία μία τάση προσέγγισης δεδομένων συγγραφέων από την περιοχή της πατερικής γραμματείας μέσα από το πρίσμα της νεότερης ψυχολογίας. Κάποιες μονογραφίες και σύντομες μελέτες προβαίνουν σε διεπιστημονικές προσεγγίσεις που εστιάζουν στην ελληνόφωνη παράδοση. Παρότι στα συγγράμματα του λεγόμενου «Διονυσίου του Αρεοπαγίτη» ανιχνεύονται αρκετά ενδιαφέροντα στοιχεία προς την κατεύθυνση αυτή, δεν είναι ανάλογη σε ποσότητα η μέχρι τώρα σχετική βιβλιογραφική συγκομιδή.  Ένας από τους λόγους είναι ότι στην ιστορική και θεολογική έρευνα δεν έχει ακόμη διαμορφωθεί κάποια συμφωνία ως προς το «τι είδους» σχέση εντοπίζεται ανάμεσα στον χριστιανισμό και τον πλατωνισμό του συγγραφέα αυτού της ύστερης αρχαιότητας καθώς και, αν γίνει δεκτή ως χριστιανική η ταυτότητά του, το «πώς» αυτή προσδιορίζει τη διδασκαλία του περί του Θεού και του ανθρώπου. Ένας άλλος λόγος είναι ότι τα όσα αυτός αναφέρει σχετικά με την ανθρώπινη ψυχή δεν έχουν «συστηματικό» χαρακτήρα, υπό την έννοια ότι προσέγγισε το προκείμενο θέμα μέσα από ένα ευρύτερο πλαίσιο ερμηνείας και με στοιχεία ειλημμένα από διαφορετικές «σχολές» σκέψης. Ο συγκεκριμένος αρχαίος συγγραφέας αφομοιώνει τα στοιχεία αυτά στο «πλαίσιο» που κάποιος θα μπορούσε να περιγράψει ως τη «θεολογική ανθρωπολογία» του. Το ενδιαφέρον του εστιάζεται στο θέμα αυτό μέσα από τη διδασκαλία του σχετικά με τη χριστιανική θρησκεία και το αφηγηματικό νόημα που εκείνη προσδίδει στις τελετές της. Στην ανά χείρας μελέτη επιχειρώ να επεξηγήσω κριτικά κάποια θέματα από τη σκέψη του συγγραφέα αυτού, τα οποία μπορούν να συνεισφέρουν στον χώρο αυτόν συνάντησης φιλοσοφικής θεολογίας και νεότερης ψυχολογίας. Η ανάγνωση που θα ακολουθήσει βασίζεται σε μία προσέγγιση του συγγραφέα αυτού «in situ». Λαμβάνει υπόψη της, δηλαδή, την περίοδο που έζησε και το πολιτιστικό περίγραμμα της σκέψης του με σκοπό να επισημάνει στοιχεία που θα μπορούσαν να φανούν χρήσιμα σε μία συζήτηση που αφορά στις προϋποθέσεις του νεότερου τρόπου σκέψης, καθώς και στη μελέτη της ιστορίας της ψυχολογίας.
Λέξεις-κλειδιά: Διονύσιος ο Αρεοπαγίτης, Χριστιανικός μυστικισμός, ψυχολογία της θρησκείας, γνωσιολογία, ερμηνευτική, θρησκευτική ταυτότητα και εαυτός, θέωση, άγγελοι, ανθρώπινη συμπεριφορά, θεολογική γλώσσα, τελετουργικά σύμβολα.

Τhis is one of the very few interdisciplinary studies on modern psychology and the Dionysian corpus and it is also the first ever study of this kind in Greek scholarship.

Over the past decades there has been a growing tendency among international and Greek scholars to examine the work of certain patristic authors through the lens of modern psychology and some monographs and short studies have adopted an interdisciplinary approach in their readings of particular authors from the Greek patristic tradition. Although a number of interesting elements of this kind can be found in the writings of the author who wrote under the pseudonym ‘Dionysius the Areopagite’, the quantity of the relevant bibliography to date is relatively limited. One of the reasons for this is that there is as yet no consensus in historical and theological research as to the kind of relationship that this late antique author posits between Christianity and Platonism, or the manner in which his Christian identity – if we view him (as most modern scholars do) as an authentic Christian author – determines his teaching on God and man. Another reason is that the work of Dionysius does not present a systematic account or self-contained analysis of the topic of the human soul; rather, he viewed that topic within a wider interpretive framework which assimilated elements from different schools of thought in a creative manner. The author in question incorporated these elements into a framework that could be described as his ‘theological anthropology’. He is primarily interested in this subject from the point of view of his teachings about Christian religion and the meaning this religion conveys to its rituals or sacraments. The current study is an attempt to offer a critical explanation of selected aspects from this writer’s thought, which can shed light on the intersection of philosophical theology and modern psychology. The reading that will follow is based on an “in situ” approach to the author: it takes into account the contemporary historical period and the cultural outline of his thought and underlines elements from his work that can prove valuable for a discussion of a modern way of thinking and the study of the history of psychology.
Keywords: Dionysius the Areopagite, Christian Mysticism, Psychology of Religion, Epistemology, Hermeneutics, Religious Identity and the Self, Deification, Angels, Human Behaviour, Theological Language, Ritual Symbols.

Τhis academic Journal is published by the Olympic Center for Philosophy and Culture (ΟΚΦΠ), Ancient Olympia and the broader regional unit of Ilia in the Peloponnese. The Center was established more than two decades ago by Prof. L. Bargeliotes and other Greek scholars specializing in philosophy. One of the reasons it is distinguished is its remarkable tradition of organizing international conferences, seminars for researchers and series of public lectures aiming at the development of the study of philosophy and interdisciplinary research. The Journal was founded more recently and has been edited, among others, by Profs G. Anagnostopoulos and C. Evangeliou, who have both served as eminent promoters of the study of ancient Greek philosophy in the Anglophone world but also in Greece.

Long Abstract: This bipartite study aims to examine specific aspects of the writings of the author who employed the pseudonym ‘Dionysius the Areopagite’ through the perspective of the Christian hagiographical thought of the early Byzantine period. It views his writings as part of a developing hagiographical tradition and examines them within the context of the trends of their time, rather than through the lens of their doctrinal and philosophical reception in the later Byzantine tradition. These writings are treated as a coherent corpus and their analysis here is grounded in the apologetics and exegesis of Origen and his readers. It also contextualizes elements from the liturgical renaissance of the fourth century to reinforce the unity of Dionysian thought in the proposed frame. Dionysius was a critical user of particular philosophical themes of Platonism that he borrowed from the late pagan tradition. He pretended to be both a bishop of the early church and a Christian thinker. The present study demonstrates that the author consciously attempted to cultivate this twofold identity through his use of scripture and the inclusion of two ‘biographical’ incidents, as well as through the Christian mysticism outlined in his writings, which is based on sacramental theory and practice.
    The first two parts of the study are intended to serve as a counterweight to the unfavourable portrayal of Dionysius in much of the existing research as a forger of apostolic authority and his thought as a fraud dependent on Proclus the successor. Part One employs a hagiographical perspective to show the compatible character of the corpus with Byzantine/post-Byzantine spirituality. Part Two stresses that just as the fathers and philosophers claimed faithfulness to their traditions, Dionysius followed this practice, using many elements from scripture to construct his assumed identity and mentioned two ‘biographical’ incidents that could have served the same purpose. The third part adds a number of arguments to those already proposed in existing research about the continuity of the structure and content of the Dionysian writings.
    There follows a critical analysis of the corpus. Part Four points out how Dionysius amends the love theory of late Platonism according to his Christian presuppositions in On the Divine Names and also extends earlier patristic thought. It also analyzes cataphatic/apophatic theologies as two modes by which humans praise God. Finally, it examines the popular passage regarding the gathering of the apostles, which was considered by Byzantine theology to refer to Mary’s dormition. While this possibility cannot be entirely dismissed, the current study reads this passage primarily (or perhaps exclusively) as Eucharistic, identifying within it an erotic theology paired with a Pauline liturgical frame. Part Five shows how On Mystical Theology complements the above treatise and highlights themes shared with the rest of the corpus. It proposes that mystical theology signifies an experience beyond intellectual affirmations and negations about God: a doxological attitude. It examines the ascent of Moses on Mt. Sinai as an allusion to the presider (priest or bishop) at the Eucharist to reinforce the liturgical perspective of the entire corpus and it demonstrates differences between this mystical ascent and some cases found in philosophical Platonism.
    The sixth part is dedicated to both celestial and earthly hierarchies as a single reality. It begins with arguments for the relevance of hierarchical thought within the corpus: the treatises and the epistles more or less clearly point to this conceptual context. It also proposes that, although the precise reason Dionysius coined this term is unclear, the ‘hierarchies’ may be seen to support his aim of launching a new paradigm in Christian theology which lies beyond the doctrinal debates of his time. The Dionysian definition of hierarchy could point to a cultic and Pauline way of reading that supports staged apostolicity while, as it seems, the patristic elements he employs to emphasize this twofold hierarchy could be in harmony with his assumed identity as a bishop of the early church.
    Following these introductory remarks, On the Celestial Hierarchy is revisited as a treatise primarily relating to hierarchy. This approach provides patristic evidence for the number and the names of the angelic ranks as Dionysius refers to them: there were liturgical and catechetical/theological works that could support this teaching. Some of them were thought to derive from the apostolic era while the same names of angels were also mentioned by Paul. In addition, it emphasizes that there is a shared structure with On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy: the intelligible world forms the theoretical model for the earthly hierarchies. Another aspect touched upon here is that Dionysius shares a few themes and vocabulary with the Platonists (especially Proclus) but he amends this backdrop as a Christian thinker. Finally, he grounds some principles of this thought in scriptural passages that were popular among Origen and his readers, which can perhaps point to a different perspective on this treatise.
    The study closes with an analysis of the treatise On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy and Epistle VIII. The present approach argues that the title of this treatise aimed to emphasize the concept of hierarchy and also provides a few linguistic elements and themes shared with the hierarchical work mentioned above. It shows that both earthly and celestial hierarchies follow the tenfold structure evident from the Dionysian epistles: a triad of triads and the throne of God. The intelligible orders provide the model for the earthly orders and their functions: a shared scheme is that of purification–illumination–perfection/union. Dionysius treats these hierarchies as a single hierarchy. The divine illuminations are transmitted to the human hierarchies by means of the sacraments of the church. Several examples are provided in which Dionysius applies his erotic theology to the religious context he describes in this treatise. Finally, the ways in which Dionysius differs from both Gnostic and Platonist traditions in his Christian mysticism, which is not esoteric or elitist, are underlined. The epistle selected here reinforces the same perspective: it provides a practical example from the life of the ecclesial hierarchy, namely, the improper behaviour of a monk in rebuking a priest thought to be in error. This approach considers Epistle VIII as a complement to hierarchical thought, offering a practical example that helps the author to analyze institutional/charismatic aspects of the earthly order in greater detail. This could be in line with the staged authority of the author so that a bishop guides a man of inferior rank. It could also indicate his conscious abstinence from the doctrinal debates of that time to develop a theology of the church. The study ends with conclusions along with some critical suggestions for future research.
    The overall argument of this study is that, if the corpus is approached through the perspective of Christian hagiographical thought, it is possible to trace the development of a dynamic synthesis by Dionysius. His use of scripture and earlier patristic thought manifests an intention to ‘construct’ himself and to adopt a consciously Christian identity. The latter is obvious from the amendments he makes to particular aspects of the philosophy of Platonism that he borrows from the gentile tradition. This dynamic vein is marked in comparison to his possible Christian sources in that he seems to have extended them and in some cases revised them to develop Christian thought further. The current approach is based on specific study-cases from each of the Dionysian writings which are analyzed through Origen and his readers and liturgical theology in the early Byzantine period. It complements older liturgical readings (especially of the 1980s) in that it provides further arguments highlighting Dionysius’ status as a Christian thinker and liturgical theorist. It also examines specific passages from the corpus, for example the account of the apostolic gathering and the eclipse in Heliopolis, in a novel way. The bibliography is also enhanced by additions from Greek hagiographical and scholarly literature.
    Keywords: Dionysius the Areopagite, Paul and the New Testament, Origen and his Readers, Liturgical Theology, Hagiographical Perspective, Byzantine/Post-Byzantine Orthodox Tradition

This brief study presents the life and thought of the Russian intellectual Myrrha Lot-Borodine (1882-1957), who lived and worked as a writer in Paris, examining some of the aspects of her writings on Greek patristics that are of theological interest. Like other prominent representatives from the Russian diaspora who contributed to the study of the Orthodox tradition, Lot-Borodine did not initially pursue studies in theology; however, she played a role in bringing to the fore and establishing Greek patristic thought in an inter-Christian context. She made a unique contribution to the field of patristics and Orthodox theology in general, because her work was connected to some intellectual trends of the contemporary theological thought of western Europe. This study presents the reasons for her interest in the sources of the eastern Christian tradition. Moreover, it highlights the key influences in this specific aspect of her work as a student of history and of Christian theology. In addition, her role in shaping the vision of an Orthodoxy as an ‘open proposal’ to European thought and culture is critically appraised. Two important contributions are her studies of the establishment of the dogma of deification in Greek patristics, and Byzantine liturgical theology and spirituality. Attention is drawn to some original aspects of her approach to these topics in comparison to some western Orthodox and non-Orthodox theological writers, as well as some Greek writers of about the same period. By way of conclusion, readings of Dionysius the Areopagite and Gregory Palamas by thinkers who either belonged to the Russian diaspora or were inspired by its renewalist tendencies are presented as examples of the backdrop against which Lot-Borodine’s work should be viewed.
Keywords: Myrrha Lot-Borodine, Georges Florovsky, Vladimir Lossky, Western theology, Russian diaspora, deification, ecumenism, feminism, neopatristic synthesis, French scholarship, medieval history, Greek Patristics, Dionysius the Areopagite, Nicholas Cabasilas, Gregory Palamas, modern Greek theology.

This bipartite paper engages with the early development of the Christian philosopher, Christos Yannaras (1935- ), as outlined in Heidegger and the Areopagite (1967, rev. ed. 1988), focusing on the question of whether Yannaras’ reading of the Byzantine thinker is consistent with the epistemological principles of the ancient author. Following evaluation of the book within the context of the French academic, Russian Orthodox émigré and Greek study of the author, I examine the compatibility of the book with Areopagitic liturgical epistemology, both as an academic contribution in the western European context and as means of developing a modern Christian philosophical line of argument. I conclude that, although Yannaras’ approach served as a useful point of departure in modern Greek Areopagitic and “neo-Patristic” studies, it cannot be deemed objective in the field of academic research given its ideological correlation of Dionysius with Patristic frameworks that the Areopagite does not clearly employ and were part of inter-confessional discussions of Yannaras’ time and Vladimir Lossky's influence on him. Moreover, Yannaras applies Dionysius’ work to the context of the Greek 1960s for apologetic purposes rather than to contribute to a fertile dialogue with other European studies or philosophical developments of his time. The term “neobyzantine” cannot be ascribed to this philosophical essay, as it is rather the product of modern Greek religious identity problem from the author’s early “existential anti-westernism” and is marked by a vein that seems to lack the epistemological dynamism of the Areopagite (e.g. Epp. 6-8) and Byzantine “political orthodoxy”.

Zusammenfassung: Die Vertrautheit mit der Reflexion eines Schriftstellers kann auf dreierlei Weisen erfolgen. Diese sind Übersetzung, Lektüre und Interpretation. Alle drei zeichnen sich durch mehr oder weniger subjektive Assimilationskriterien aus. Eingedenk der Tatsache, dass der theologische Inhalt der paränetischen Briefe des Autors, der sich selbst „Dionysius Areopagita“ nennt (Apg. 17, 34), bisher nicht die angemessene Aufmerksamkeit in der Forschung gefunden hat (mit einigen Ausnahmen, wie z.B. der Dissertation R. Hathaways und den mehr allgemeinen Stellungnahmen von P. Rorem, A. Golitzin, A. Louth etc.), versuche ich diese Methoden zu benutzen, um eine Anwendungsform des viel diskutierten „Apophatismus“ unseres byzantinischen Philosophen zu beschreiben. Diese ist die dialektische Korrelation mit dem Differenten und die liebevolle Versöhnung, welche den sechsten „Brief“ des Corpus Dionysiacum Areopagiticum (CD) zum Ausgangbasis haben, bereichert mit Elementen der anderen „Briefe“, als deren philosophischem Kontext, weil keine von den Briefen eine echte briefliche Kommunikation darstellt. Der sechste Brief entwickelt auf dem Fundament des Apophatismus eine universelle philosophische Theologie bezüglich der zwischenkirchlichen Beziehungen, welche die Lehre der Schriften des byzantinischen Schriftstellers erweitert. Im Anhang wird der Text und eine neugriechische Paraphrase des sechsten Briefes präsentiert.
Schlüsselwörter: areopagitische Schriften, Liebe, Hierarchie, Platonismus, Dialektik, patristische Theologie

This is the official scholarly Journal of the Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies (ΠΙΠΜ), Thessaloniki. The Journal began to be published in 1969. The present Institute has a long tradition of publishing monographs in Patristics, one of those being the now classic: A. Golitzin, Et Introibo ad Altare Dei: The Mystagogy of Dionysius Areopagita with Special Reference to Its Predecessors in the Eastern Christian Tradition, Thessaloniki, 1994.

The current study attempts to examine the theology of John of Damascus on images in the context of the Byzantine iconoclastic controversies and the encounter mostly with specific trends of Greek and Christian thought. Following an outline of possible parameters to the development of John’s thought on icon and of the redeemability of matter, some relevant Christological and liturgical dimensions of his theory of the icons are developed as an extension of the previous chapters of this volume. John’s iconological thought is Christ-centered and builds on the orthodox teaching on Christ’s person and two natures. Τhis theology of the icon serves as an alternative explanation for the Christian mystery of human deification in treating the material of the icon as the very same matter of the Eucharistic gifts. John formulates an iconological realism based on the event of the Incarnation. This study also analyzes the role of matter as a bearer of divine energy and grace, the function of the icon as symbol and the development of a cognitive theory in John’s treatises on images. Lastly, John’s theology regarding the sixth kind of image, namely the natural icon, is connected to the metaphysical/cosmological chain of images that he constructs. In this way he gives an ontological dimension to his theological discourse and stresses its fundamental importance for the Christian faith, which he considered to be threatened by the conflict in question and other parameters from his personal context.

The volume is endorsed in its back cover by R. Williams (2017) and in http://easternchristianbooks.blogspot.com/2016/09/images-of-deification.html by A. DeVille

My essay from this volume has been reviewed by A. Louth in Sobornost, 43:1 (2021), 108-111

This study examines the theology of St. John of Damascus on images in the context of the Byzantine iconoclastic controversies. Following a brief outline of the historical, political and theological difficulties relevant to this phenomenon, the Christological and ontological dimensions of John's iconology are presented. John's iconological thought is Christ-centered and develops the teaching of the Church on Christ's person and two natures. He formulates an iconological realism based on the Incarnation. This study also analyzes the role of matter as charged with divine energy and grace, the function of the icon as symbol, and the development of a cognitive theory in John's treatises on images. Lastly, John's theology regarding the sixth kind of image, namely the natural icon, is contextualized within the metaphysical/cosmological chain of images he constructs. This contributes an ontological dimension to his theological discourse and grounds its fundamental importance for Christian faith, which he viewed as threatened by the conflict under discussion.

This paper provides a preliminary assessment of the stages of development in modern Greek academic theology and the role of the Areopagitic writings in the construction of an orthodox "philosophical theology" within the modern Greek context. It considers the central role of the Greek 1960s and identifies specific points of originality and extensions of the intellectual progress inherited from Russian émigré religious thought in the 1960s, with the aim of complementing the recent approach by Paul Gavrilyuk (Modern Theology, 24:4, 2008). Unlike Gavrilyuk's important contribution, which focuses exclusively on Christos Yannaras and his well-known ‘anti-western’ stance, the current paper argues firstly that there exists a broader modern Greek hermeneutics within which Yannaras’ work can be understood and secondly, that there is an entire generation of Greek theologians in the 1960s, whose work and contribution to this fermentation of ideas needs to be taken into account. This study appraises the role of other philosophers and theologians, such as Spyridon Kyriazopoulos, Nikolaos Nissiotis, Evangelos Papanoutsos, Nikolaos Matsoukas, Panagiotis Christou and Fr. John Romanidis among others. It also analyzes the reasons for the 'silent absence' of John Zizioulas from these debates, as well as the clearly negative attitude of the scholars Panagiotis Trembelas, Megas Farantos and Stylianos Papadopoulos, who had a 'neo-protestant' polemical reception of the Areopagite and expressed reservations about apophaticim in their published work. Lastly, this paper highlights the relevance of the aforementioned 'national tradition' to the emergence of a generation of Dionysian scholars and 'neo-patristic' thinkers in both the 1980s and the 1990s.

Με αφορμή την πρόσφατη κυκλοφορία της μονογραφίας του Β. Κύρκου, το παρόν δοκίμιο επιχειρεί να αναλύσει κριτικά το εν λόγω βιβλίο μαζί με άλλα αντίστοιχα εγχειρήματα και να προτείνει μια διαφορετική ανάγνωση των φιλοσοφικών και παιδαγωγικών συγγραμμάτων του Ε.Π. Παπανούτσου. Η διαφορά έγκειται στο γεγονός ότι πρέπει να μελετηθεί περισσότερο το φιλοσοφικό ρεύμα του Νεοκαντιανισμού, το οποίο αποτελεί σε όλες τις συγγραφικές περιόδους του Ε.Π.Π. τη βασική ερμηνευτική αφετηρία του με παραλλαγές. Την πολυπλοκότητα και το βάθος αυτό δεν φαίνεται να λαμβάνουν υπόψη τους οι μελετητές της γενιάς του ’30 και ως προς το σημείο αυτό έγκειται η διαφωνία που εκφράζεται εδώ. Βασική θέση του Κύρκου είναι ότι τα κείμενα υποδηλώνουν ουσιαστική διαφοροποίηση και αλλαγή της φιλοσοφικής διάθεσης από περίοδο σε περίοδο κατά τις τέσσερις συγγραφικές φάσεις του Ε.Π.Π. Επομένως, ως προς το σημείο αυτό, δόθηκε το έρεισμα, ώστε το δοκίμιο αυτό να διαλεχθεί με τον συγγραφέα του βιβλίου και να αντιπροτείνει μια νέα ανάγνωση των πηγών υπό το πρίσμα των διαφορετικών τάσεων του ίδιου ρεύματος. Παράλληλα, προσπάθησε να αναδείξει και άλλες πλευρές του φιλοσοφικού και εκπαιδευτικού έργου του φιλοσόφου, οι οποίες θα διαφωτίσουν με νέα στοιχεία τη σχετική έρευνα, όπως λ.χ. η φιλοσοφική σημασία της θητείας του νεαρού Παπανούτσου στην Αλεξάνδρεια ή η σχέση του με την αμερικανική φιλοσοφική παράδοση. Αν μη τι άλλο, σε θέματα παιδείας και πολιτισμού είναι ευδιάκριτη η τάση του στοχαστή να εφαρμόζει την πρόταση του Διαφωτισμού στη βάση μίας αρμονικά συνεζευγμένης εκδοχής νεοκαντιανής γνωσιολογίας και της πλατωνικής διαλεκτικής φιλοσοφίας.

Information about the platform "Aristotelistes Forum" can be found in:  V. Kalfas, "Τά Άπαντα τού Άριστοτέλη καί ή ψηφιακή πλατφόρμα Aristotelistes [The Corpus Aristotelicum and the Digital Platform]", Philosophia, 51:1 (2021), 303-305
cf. also his article in Synchrona Themata, 134-135 (2016); republished in the issue 153-154 (2021)

Link to the dictionary: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-oxford-dictionary-of-the-christian-church-9780199642465?cc=gb&lang=en&#
The entry is available also online: https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199642465.001.0001/acref-9780199642465-e-3546?rskey=1MbaFQ&result=3545

The present encyclopedia entry provides an outline of the information about the life and work of the Jewish thinker Philo of Alexandria that is known to us and an introduction to his thought along with its early Christian reception. It includes the modern editions of his extant written work and an extensive bibliography that aims to highlight the main trends of the academic study of Philo since second half of the nineteenth century.

Link to the dictionary: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-oxford-dictionary-of-the-christian-church-9780199642465?cc=gb&lang=en&#
The entry is available also online: https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199642465.001.0001/acref-9780199642465-e-5630?rskey=Bf9Eyf&result=5633

This essay provides a critical approach to the corpus of writings of the late fifth or early sixth-century author who called himself "Dionysius the Areopagite" by emphasising various aspects that would be of interest to modern psychology and theology. One is that Dionysius carefully follows the notion of tradition and historical past developed by his possible readers to make his account more persuasive as a pseudonymous author. This practice is not merely a tendency to share in the identity of the ancient figure he pretended to be. It is also the result of his conscious affiliation with the Christian collective identity of his own time. Another aspect is that he employed several beliefs about angels of his time to educate his readers about God and to provide them with a model for their own life and social behavior as a Christian community. He also provided them with an important exposition of the sacraments and analyzed them in a way that clarifies their role for the spiritual growth of a human being within that religious framework. A further aspect of interest is the theory of knowledge that he outlines within the same framework. The community is responsible for both the initiation of those who wish to become members of it and the development of its initiates by making use of religious texts and hymns. They are used in a way that takes into account the individual needs of humans. The same is true of the sensible symbols which consider that humans are composed of both body and soul. These elements suggest a kind of theological pedagogy provided by the community. A final aspect is that the initiates to this body use the means provided by it to approach the transcendent God, before whom they become aware of their existential limits.

This essay points out the relevance of the psychological or theological interpretation of the pseudonym of the Dionysian author and examines selected elements from each of his works that are remarkable in the context of the history of psychology and also of the Christian religion.

Link to the encyclopedia: https://link.springer.com/referencework/10.1007/978-3-030-24348-7

Τhis encyclopedia article provides an overview of the philosophical and theological inheritance of Philo of Alexandria. It argues that Philo can be viewed as a Jewish thinker who made a critical use of his Hellenistic education according to the premises of the Jewish religious tradition. It is divided into six sections. The entry begins with biographical information about Philo that is known to us or can be inferred, followed by an outline of the characteristics of certain currents of Platonism and Judaism found in Alexandria during the Hellenistic and early Roman period. The author then offers a classification of the writings of Philo based on their form and content, and examines selected teachings, highlighting Philo’s contribution as a Jewish thinker in the areas of metaphysics and cosmology, and anthropology and ethics. Finally, the intellectual inheritance of Philo in the early Christian tradition is discussed.

The above summary of this essay by D. Runia is published in idem, M. Alesso, E. Birnbaum et al., "Philo of Alexanria: An Annotated Bibliography 2020", Studia Philonica Annual 35 (2023), 308
The essay is included also to the bibliographical project "Filón de Alejandría" of the National University La Pampa, Argentina, in: https://www.facebook.com/filonalejandria

"Aristoboulos, Jewish Philosopher", "Baker, Matthew", "Essence-Energies/Powers, Distinction", "Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius", "Hierarchy: Byzantine Ontology", "Holy Hierotheos: Mystic and First Bishop of Athens (?)", "Louth, Andrew", "Lot-Borodine, Myrrha", "Obolensky, Dimitri", "'New Rome': Political Theory Title", "Philo of Alexandria", "Terezis, Christos"

MA thesis in Philosophical Theology submitted to the Department of Philosophy, Religions and Liberal Arts of the University of Winchester

- A summary of the hypothesis and the table of contents of this MA thesis can be found attached below

- A critical presentation of these was first delivered in the context of:
https://www.academia.edu/39600175/The_Liturgical_Theology_of_Dionysios_the_Areopagite_A_Critical_Analysis_of_the_Dionysian_Synthesis_and_Aspects_of_its_Eastern_Orthodox_Reception

- Revised parts and elements from the above thesis can be found in:

(a) ''Constructed Self' and Christian Mysticism in Dionysius the Areopagite and his Place in the Orthodox Tradition', Dialogus (incorporating Scholarly Annals of the Postgraduate Program 'Orthodox Theology Studies'), Vols. 9 & 10, Hellenic Open University Press [School of Humanities], Patras, 2018/2019, 322-348 & 268-289 [in Greek; with a long abstract in English]

(b) "A Byzantine Model of Apophatic Christian Thought: Dionysius the Areopagite to Priest Sosipater, with Some Complementary Notes", Kleronomia, 39:1-2 (January 2016-December 2017), 393-434 [in Greek]

(c) "Hierarchy: Byzantine Ontology" and "Holy Hierotheos: Mystic and First Bishop of Athens (?)", Great Orthodox Christian Encyclopedia, eds: Georgios Filias, Konstantinos Belezos, et. al., Strategic Press, Athens, 2016 [in Greek] (both submitted in 2015 - forthcoming)

Lecture delivered at the Patristics seminar of Oxford University (24 May 2016)
https://weblearn.ox.ac.uk/access/content/group/theofac/Graduate%20Seminars/Trinity%20term%202013/Patristics%20Seminar%20TT%202016.pdf
https://oxfordbyzantinesociety.wordpress.com/2016/05/22/oxford-listings-38/

This report summarises the workshop of Dionysian studies that took place at Pusey House and St. Cross College, Oxford, from 18 to 20 July 2016. It was a collaboration between the University of Oxford and the University of Athens, headed by Prof. Mark Edwards, Prof. Georgios Steiris, and DPhil Cand. Dimitrios Pallis. It covered a large number of different perspectives and thematic areas in the reception of the Corpus Dionysiacum, ranging from the early reception of the corpus to modern and postmodern philosophy and theology.

An interview given to the philosophical and theological forum "Dionysius Circle" (14 July 2022) on the occasion of the publication of the Oxford Handbook of Dionysius the Areopagite (2022) and my overall published work on the place of the Dionysian writings in Orthodox theology and scholarship (2013 to date).

The present text is the same as the one published in the form of an entry essay in the Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion (ed. D. A. Leeming). Cf. the section "Encyclopedia and Dictionary Entries" of my academia.edu profile. It has been used as an introduction to the above author for teaching philosophical theology and history of Christian thought in 2019.

The present bibliography is the same as the one included to the entry essay from vol. 2 of the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (gen. ed.: A. Louth). Cf. the section "Encyclopedia and Dictionary Entries" of my academia.edu profile. It has been used as a supplementary document for teaching Philo of Alexandria and the philosophy of Hellenized Judaism in 2018.

The present introduction is the same text as the one published in the vol. 12 of the Great Orthodox Christian Encyclopedia (eds.: G. Filias, K. Belezos et al.). Cf. the section "Encyclopedia and Dictionary Entries" of my academia.edu profile. It has been used as a supplementary document for teaching Philo of Alexandria and the philosophy of Hellenized Judaism at a Greek academic institution (2016).

This series of invited lectures aims to explore the historical setting and the structural and intellectual principles of the Corpus Dionysiacum Areopagiticum (CD) as a philosophically constructed synthesis which includes a number of liturgical and theological themes. There is special focus on monotheist philosophical precedents, such as hellenized Jewish philosophy and the Christian traditions of Alexandria, as well as on the developments of the liturgical practice and theory in the course of the fourth-fifth centuries. It concludes with a lecture on the reception of the CD in modern Greek theology and scholarship. Suggested reading includes studies on the author’s thought in comparison to late pagan Neoplatonism as well as on the continuity between given intellectual motifs and further ideas from his writings and some of his notable patristic precedents.