Nicolai Berdyaev and Byzantine philosophy: On the metaphysical importance of Patristic theology

  1. Lemma
  2. Nikolaj Berdjajew und die byzantinische Philosophie: Zur metaphysischen Tragweite der patristischen Theologie
  3. German
  4. Koutalis, Vangelis
  5. Orthodox Anthropology - Orthodox theological tradition and practice - Concepts of knowledge and modes of reasoning
  6. 27-02-2017
  7. Begzos, Marios [Author]. Nicolai Berdyaev and Byzantine philosophy: On the metaphysical importance of Patristic theology
  8. Θεολογία
  9. Patristic theology - Berdyaev
    1. <p>Begzos, M. (1993). Nikolaj Berdjajew und die byzantinische Philosophie: Zur metaphysischen Tragweite der patristischen Theologie. <em>Θεολογία</em>,<em> 64</em>, 200-208.</p>
    1. In assessing the weight exerted by Byzantine philosophy on the thought of Nicolai Berdyaev, Marios Begzos underlines the fact that for the renowned Russian philosopher the relationship between theology and philosophy should be properly understood not in the sense of a subordination of the one to the other, or of an independence from each other, but in terms of a reciprocal recognition of the different territories covered by each, evincing readiness for dialogue and collaboration. In Byzantine philosophy, theological concerns found their expression in metaphysical articulations to such an extent that is difficult to distinguish in any given case what does pertain to theology from what does pertain to philosophy. Berdyaev is a philosophical figure which tried to transcend three, at least, established distinctions: the pair theology-philosophy, the duality between the Middle Ages and the modernity, and the polarization between East and West.

      Berdyaev studied the Patristic literature and was particularly influenced by the work of three Church Fathers: Origen, Athanasius the Great, and Gregory of Nyssa. The yardstick that he used for making his own evaluation was the philosophical question on which he principally focused his intellectual energy and passion, i.e. the existential dialectics between man and God, or between immanence and transcendence.

      The doctrinal interpretations of the Fathers, and the controversies that erupt concerning their verity, for Berdyaev, are indicative of the way in which experience and reason interact inside Christian communal life. By insisting, against Arius, on the thesis that God became man in order that man might become God, Athanasius did not defend only a doctrine, but also and mainly a way of life, an actual reality, since, as Begzos notes, the doctrine of the Church mediates a variety of personal religious experiences lived by single members of the Church. The same holds true for Gregory of Nyssa, in the writings of which Berdyaev found the best starting point, in Patristic literature, for the development of a Christian anthropology, a philosophical task that yet remains unaccomplished.

      Begzos concludes his account by highlighting two points:

      a) Patristic theology had definite philosophical presuppositions stemming from ancient Greek metaphysics, and this shows that, whereas it is only the Church as experience and event that renders theology possible, philosophy, in its own turn, renders theology thinkable, and

      b) Patristic theology, as exemplified in Berdyaev’s appeal for a Christian anthropology, has philosophical implications for modern problems too. Metaphysics are to be found both at the beginning and at the end of theology: where theology ends, there philosophy starts, and where philosophy finds its limits there theology is to be waited for.