Sacrament and Image: Essays in the Christian Understanding of Man

Citation preview

Essays in the Christian understanding of man

1

THE FELLOWSHIP OF ST ALBAN AND ST SERGIUS

Printed by flPflflfc Parchment (Oxford) Ltd., 60 Hurst Street, From originals supplied by Publisher

Oxford

Sacrament and Image ESSAYS IN THE CHRISTIAN UNDERSTANDING OF MAN

EDITED BY A.M.ALLCHIN

FELLOWSHIP OF SAINT ALBAN AND SAINT SERGIUS 52 LADBROKE GROVE LONDON W112PB

Copyright © Fellowship of St.Alban and St.Serglus London 1967 First Edition 1967 Second Edition 1987

CONTENTS INTRODUCTION A.M.Allchin

6

l.THE IMAGE AS SACRAMENTAL C.E.Putnam

14

2.THE TRANSFIGURATION OF THE BODY Bishop Kallistos of Diokleia

19

3. BODY AND MATTER IN SPIRITUAL LIFE Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh

36

4. CREATION, INCARNATION, INTERPRETATION A.M.Allchin

47

5. THE ART OF THE ICON Philip Sherrard

64

CONTRIBUTORS

Preface to the Second Edition

The contributors to this volume are: The Most Reverend Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh, Head of the Russian Patriarchal Church In Great Britain. Sister C.E. Putnam, R.S.C.J., formerly Head of Art at Newton College of the Sacred Heart, Newton, Massachussetts. Dr. Philip Sherrard, author of The Greek East and the Latin West, Constantinople Iconography of a Sacred City , and other works on Greek and Orthodox subjects. The Right Reverend Bishop Kallistos of Diokleia, S p a l d i n g Lecturer in Eastern Orthodox Studies in the University of Oxford; author of The Orthodox Church, Eustratios Argenti, and other works. The Reverend A.M.Allchin, Warden of St.Theosevia H o u s e , Oxford; author of The Kingdom of Love and Knowledge, The World is a Wedding and other works. The Fellowship of St.Alban and St.Sergius is an unofficial association of Christians of East and West, devoted to fostering increased understanding and unity between the s e p a r a t e d Christian traditions. Its centre is at St.Basil's House, 52 Ladbroke* Grove, London Wl 1 2PB, Great Britain.

In the twenty years since these talks were first published as a book, they have lost none of their immediacy. Indeed, as knowledge of the tradition of orthodox iconography grows in the Christian West, so the questions addressed here are raised all the more frequently. On the other hand, the danger of which Philip Sherrard speaks here— that of regarding icons as fascinating and moving examples of art, without being led to think about the theology of the image— grows no less. The republication of this volume therefore seems a fitting way to mark the 1200th anniversary of an event crucial to the Christian understanding of the image— the seventh Ecumenical Council (787), w h i c h proclaimed the making and veneration of images as a true expression of the faith of the Universal Church.

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION Four of the essays which go to make u p this book appeared originally in the pages of Sobornost, the journal of the Fellowship of St.Alban and St.Sergius. Two of them, Bishop Kallistos' and my own, were first read at conferences of the Fellowship, in England and Sweden respectively; Dr.Sherrard's was given as a lecture at a meeting at the British School in Athens, and Mother P u t n a m ' s at a Conference of Anglican and Roman Catholic religious, at Boston, M a s s a c h u s e t t s . The fifth, Metropolitan Anthony's, which h a s not a p p e a r e d in p r i n t before, w a s also given a t a Fellowship Conference in England. Their origins therefore are diverse, and they were in no way planned to b e p u t together. Of the writers, three are Orthodox, one Roman Catholic, a n d one Anglican. It is not remarkable t h a t differences of emphasis and even of view can be found a m o n g t h e m . W h a t Is r e m a r k a b l e is t h e d e p t h of unanimity which they reveal, and the way in which in all of them, t h e m e s t a k e n from Scripture and the F a t h e r s are seen a s having a n immediate application to t h e o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d p r o b l e m s which confront twentieth c e n t u r y m a n , a s creator, artist and technician. The restoration of a greater wholeness of vision which is one of the results of the meeting of Christian East and West can affect our attitude to the people whom we meet, a n d the things with which we live, and the whole context of the world we work in. All the essays in this book are speaking in different ways a b o u t t h e C h r i s t i a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of m a n , a n d h o w t h r o u g h coming to know himself in relationship with God, h e comes t o ' know himself in a new relationship to the world which God h a s m a d e . They s p e a k m u c h of image a n d s a c r a m e n t , for in t h e Christian tradition m a n is seen as m a d e in God's image, a n d Christ, in w h o m t h a t image is restored, is himself t h e great s a c r a m e n t , In whom t h e mystery of God's saving p u r p o s e is revealed. The word 'image' or 'icon' is u s e d in a variety of ways and at a variety of levels in these pages. Christ himself is the b r i g h t n e s s of the Father's glory, a n d 'the express image of his person'; m a n is made in God's image and likeness; all things t h a t are, since they are made by God, image his glory in some degree,

7

and Indeed are full of his glory. And m a n who shares in a measure in the n a t u r e of him who m a d e him, m a k e s images of m a n y kinds, even indeed images of the divine, and t h u s himself is also a creator. ' W h e n we s p e a k of t h e image a s s a c r a m e n t a l we are referring in the first place to the fact t h a t in itself no image is self-sufficient, b u t t h a t all images point beyond themselves to some greater whole, with which they are intimately related. A s a c r a m e n t always does this too, since it is a sign, or b e t t e r p e r h a p s it is a symbol which conveys and in some way contains w h a t it signifies, which m a k e s p r e s e n t the reality to which it points. Furthermore it is always a meeting place, a meeting place of two or more worlds, or p e r h a p s of two or more persons. This m e e t i n g place is here a n d now, for t h e sign, the image as s a c r a m e n t is always concrete a n d particular, never abstract and u n i v e r s a l i s e d - though its significance may be universal. It Is this icon in this place; this building in this setting. It will not be the same building if you p u t it down in a different place. It is these words s p o k e n by this m a n a t this time; not, strange t h o u g h it seems to u s , these same words spoken by any m a n at any time. It is s u c h things as these t h a t can become a door, a ship, a bridge, a w a y 1 into a larger world of m e a n i n g s a n d relationships, a way through, by which m a n can go from this world into the Kingdom of God, or better by which that Kingdom can come, here and now into our midst, here where we are in the midst of our everyday things. For all these reasons, as well a s for others, 'the specifically Christian image', t h a t is one which is turned towards Christ, 'will always be problematic, humble as well as glorious', for Christ h a s taken a form which h a s no outward form. It will be marked by the discretion a n d self-effacement of t h a t Spirit which does not force, b u t establishes a n d fulfils the freedom of the creature. It can easily be ignored or misunderstood, since it m a k e s present the infinite strength a n d richness of the divine, in the fragility and poverty of earthly things. For it is really in these particular things, in these particular persons t h a t the Kingdom is revealed. 1 For these Images which occur in Luther, see Regln Prenter's Splritus Creator, Studier i Luthers Theologi (Copenhagen, 1946), p. 160, no. 177. In the English translation (Muhlenberg Press, Philadelphia, 1953), p. 148.

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

INTRODUCTION

And outwardly they are often very ordinary things and persons. Again the writers in this book are concerned to speak of man as image, and man as sacrament; man as he is as created by God, who despite the obscurities of the fall, is still the work of God's hands and still shows that he is made in God's image; man as he is, redeemed in Christ, who is true man, the new Adam, in whom the fullness both of image and of likeness is restored. And all, but particularly Metropolitan Anthony, speak about the place of man's body. For it is precisely as a unity of soul and body that man is able most fully to reveal his character as created in God's image. It is this peculiar composite nature of man's being, uniting in himself as he does the different elements in creation, which made the Fathers speak of man as a little world, a microcosm, whose calling and task it is to act as a mediator, a reconciler drawing together into one the praises of all Creation, that through him all might rise in harmony to the Creator.2 This view of man as a microcosm, placed in the centre of the created order, as conceived by the Fathers of the Church, was doubtless to some extent moulded by the picture of the physical universe current in their time. In our own day it finds a new expression in the writings of a man like Pere Teilhard de Chardin, and again it is linked with an appreciation of man's bodily nature. It is worked out now in dynamic, evolutionary terms, in terms of the idea of man as the latest product of a process of evolution which is still continuing, and in which he has to take an ever more conscious and responsible part, since now he seems to bear within himself the destiny of at least this planet on which he lives at present. The Fathers spoke of man as placed by God in the world as a king' and a priest. At the present time man begins to become aware of how much power he wields, and at least begins to sense the necessity for wisdom and humility in the exercise of that power. But it is not only in relation to the world which we perceive with our senses that man, as a unity of body and soul, has this central and crucial role to play. As well as the world man knows outside himself, there is also the world he knows within, and this too is a world of which he has become aware in a new way during this

present century. Man as God's image is the meeting place for these two worlds, and here the symbol is of special importance, for it 'is not only a way of confronting what is outside ourselves; every symbol is two-edged, it opens up reality and it opens up the self.' It is a way by which we can see what is within, as well as what is round about us. These two realms in which man lives can be described in a variety of ways. In these pages, especially in Dr. Sherrard's essay, they are spoken of in terms of the classical patristic view of the matter, which owed something both to the Bible and to the heritage of Greek philosophy. In this way of seeing things, the worlds are spoken of as that of the mind or spirit (Νοθς) , and that of sense perception. Man is to unite the two and enable them to speak, by drawing both into a movement of adoration and love for God. In themselves, before the creation of man, according to Gregory Nazianzen, 'Mind and sense remain distinct within their boundaries, bearing within themselves the magnificence of the Creator Logos, but praising silently... Nor was there any mingling between them; nor yet were the riches of God's goodness manifested...till man was placed on earth as a kind of second world, a microcosm, a new angel, a mingled worshipper...visible and yet intelligible...to be the husbandman of immortal plants.' Commenting on these words Fr.Gervase Mathew says, 'This is perhaps as close as we shall ever get to the Byzantine conception of the essential function of all forms of religious art. Because man is body he shares in the material world around him, which passes within him through his sense perceptions. Because man is mind he belongs to the world of higher reality and pure spirit. Because he is both, he is in Cyril of Alexandria's phrase "God's crowned image"; he can mould and manipulate the material and make it articulate. The sound in a Byzantine hymn, the gestures in a liturgy, the bricks in a church, the cubes in a mosaic are matter made articulate in the divine praise. All become articulate through becoming part of a rhythm. In the world of matter they have become echoes of harmonies in the world of mind. This could explain the crucial importance of mathematics in Byzantine aesthetics.' 3

8

2 For a very full treatment of this subject as It is worked out by one of the greatest

of the Greek Fathers, see Lars Thunberg, Microcosm and Mediator: the theological anthropology ofMaxImus the Confessor (Uppsala, 1965).

3 See Gervase Mathew, Byzantine Aesthetics (London, 1964), p.23.

9

10

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

The praise of God is celebrated and the glory of God is revealed t h r o u g h the building of v a u l t s , the c o n s t r u c t i n g of m o s a i c s , the singing of h y m n s , t h e a c t i o n s of t h e liturgy; activities which if on the one side they touch dancing a n d song, on t h e other t o u c h m e c h a n i c a l engineering a n d m a t h e m a t i c s . And none of these things are done without the participation of m a n ' s body, which h a s to be t a k e n into this rhythm, in which sense and spirit are to be at one. This is to say t h a t God is made known to man , as he is, a body-soul unity, and not to his mind or spirit alone. We are not to think t h a t our minds can perceive God while our s e n s e s cannot. God as he is in himself goes utterly beyond t h e scope b o t h of mind a n d of s e n s e s . B u t by t h e transforming power of his grace, and the unbelievable n a t u r e of h i s generosity, the whole m a n can become fit to perceive the operations of his glory. 'So h u m b l e is his mercy, t h a t since we cannot raise our u n d e r s t a n d i n g s to the comprehension of divine mysteries, h e will bring down and submit those mysteries to the apprehension of our senses.' Because the Christian tradition h a s insisted t h a t the body is to be guided by the spirit, a n d exists for the spirit, r a t h e r t h a n the other way about, it h a s often been thought t h a t it denies any sort of reciprocity or m u t u a l respect between the two elements in m a n , or even t h a t it involves a denigration of the body as such, a s something intrinsically evil or worthless. It cannot be stressed enough t h a t this is a total misapprehension, though it is certainly one which h a s its roots in a great deal t h a t h a s p a s s e d for Christian teaching and thought in recent centuries and which h a s caused untold h a r m to our apprehension of the Christian faith' a n d life. Here Bishop Kallistos' p a p e r is of t h e g r e a t e s t importance. It shows how the Christian tradition, in its strictest a n d most monastic form, is totally opposed to t h e suggestion either t h a t the body is intrinsically evil, or t h a t it is irrelevant to the development of m a n ' s life in Christ. It is one thing to deny the body in the sense of controlling and curbing its d e m a n d s . It is another to deny it in the sense of pretending t h a t it does not exist. And it is this latter attitude which h a s characterised so m a n y forms of Western Christendom in the last four centuries, most notably of course a certain strain in Puritanism, b u t also some forms of Catholicism. Under the influence of a Cartesian

INTRODUCTION

11

way of thinking, which h a s exalted the discursive reason at the expense of m a n ' s other faculties, the Western world as a whole h a s been led into making a fatal divorce between body and soul, which h a s produced t h a t deep d i s t r u s t of the body a n d its instincts, t h a t suspicion of feeling and intuition, and of the whole realm of artistic creativity which h a s m a r k e d so m u c h of our civilisation. It is this t h a t h a s c a u s e d u s to starve 'the infrarational, the supra-rational, the subconscious, the pre-conscious, the whole g a m u t of body-soul relationships' which call out for the 'intuitive non-logical way of meeting reality' which is mediated by the sacramental image. To recognise this will not involve u s in a flight into irrationalism. It will mean t h a t we learn to pray again with Solomon 'Give u n t o thy servant an u n d e r s t a n d i n g heart.' We have to learn again how to relate to the body and its life. It is in the divorce between the two sides of our nature, and our consequent predicament, t h a t we can find the origin of the p r e s e n t movement towards a complete identification with the body, a total s u r r e n d e r to t h e p r o m p t i n g s of its n e e d s and i m p u l s e s . This reaction to t h e immediate p a s t is extremely natural, although ultimately wholly stultifying. For m a n is not his body, any more t h a n h e is simply his soul. But what then are we to do? How are we to u n d e r s t a n d our present situation? Here any diagnosis m u s t of necessity be personal and tentative. Can we say something like this? We find ourselves cut off from t h e roots of our own life, from its basis in our bodily functions; we can't move or dance or gesticulate freely. It is as if one h a s to learn again how to feel a n d to be free, how 'to respect a n d rejoice in the force of life, in life itself, and to be present in all that one does from the effort of loving to the breaking of bread'. It is a s if m a n h a d to learn again 'how to renew himself at the fountain of his own life'.4 It is n o t by c h a n c e t h a t at this point we White Anglo-Saxon P r o t e s t a n t s feel ourselves strongly a t t r a c t e d by m u s i c a n d dancing of African origin. For African people do not seem to have lost t h a t easiness, t h a t 'at-homeness' in their bodies which we know we lack. P e r h a p s h e r e we h a v e s o m e t h i n g to l e a r n from the experiment in c o m m u n i t y living m a d e in n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y America by the S h a k e r s . As T h o m a s Merton h a s remarked, their 4 James Baldwin, The Fire Next Time (Penguin Edition), p.43.

12

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

buildings and their handicrafts in their extreme simplicity reveal the quality of true sacred art. In contradistinction to much of the 'ecclesiastical' art of the time, with its artificially applied 'symbolism', a Shaker table or bed speaks of the very heart of things, discloses the logoi, sings. And there is something else that is noteworthy here. These communities of men and women living side by side in single life, 'lifting up their hands to work and their hearts to praise God' had discovered, to their own evident astonishment, that it was in the dances which came to have a central place in their worship, that they received 'The gift to be simple, the gift to be free'. The experience of dancing in church has become so foreign to us, that it is difficult to convey how entirely natural and reverent it can be in the very few places where the tradition is preserved, as it is in Luxemburg at Echternach. There every Whitsun Tuesday thousands of people, having danced through the streets, accompanied by a variety of bands, dance through the great basilica and past the shrine of St.Willibrord. This action liberates a dimension of joy, praise and childlike delight in God which seldom finds expression in our worship. In general we have excommunicated our brass bands, and all that side of our nature can never come to Church. No wonder those earnest, God-fearing men and women, the Shakers, found the release of energy and feeling which came in the dance, both humbling and 'mortifying'. But surely this acceptance of the whole of themselves in dancing is not unconnected with the purity of act and vision which is so evident in their work.5 That same clearness of vision is present, in a more highly developed form, in all that we recognise as true sacred art. And everywhere that art is marked by that transfigured humanism, that transfiguration of the body, which we see alike in the frescoes of Mistra, and in the writing of an Ailred of Rievaulx. In 5 In view of the total incomprehension of the times in which they lived and their own almost complete isolation from the great body of Christian tradition, it is not surprising that the Shaker communities should have exhibited many odd and eccentric features in their worship and belief. What is remarkable is that despite these things, they produced a whole harvest of dances and songs and rituals to express the realities of their life together, in which one has the impression that an element of the peasant culture of England, which was never able to develop fully in this country, burst into blossom when transplanted to America. For the Shakers in general, see E.D.Andrews, The People Called Shakers (O.U.P. New York, 1953); and also The Gift to be Simple by the same author. The new birth of sacred dancing among certain communities of African nuns is exteremely Interesting in this connection.

INTRODUCTION

13

many different ways we see how the restraint, the severity, the renunciation of the Christian, and of the monastic, way has not cut man off from the well springs of his life and being, but by purification has renewed and restored them. Or rather in the depth of his own being has enabled him to find and be quickened by the eternal life of the Spirit of God. In the men who create such works we may say 'that nature returns to the source from which it sprang', 6 and thus 'the source of all our seeing rinsed and cleansed...gives back to us the clear unfallen world'.7 The axiom that grace does not destroy nature but fulfils it, is not just a theological axiom. It refers to man's life, to the whole of his existence, bodily no less than spiritual. It is through the whole of man that God works and is present in this world of people and things; and it is only as restored to his true nature in God that man himself can be truly present where he is. 'For being with God, is being intensely present; present where we are, as God is present where we are; present to things round about us with that intense consciousness which belongs to God' (R.M.Benson). Such a presence to people round about us transforms our social relationships, makes them transparent to God's glory, and releases that of God in us and in those with whom we come in contact. Such a presence to things, whether we approach them by way of artistic perception and activity, or of scientific investigation and control, can release the divine in them too, that they too may sing to God's glory. And to the Christian this renewal of vision, which is also a renewal of relationships, is not only, as in Muir's great poem, a restoration of the one unfallen world. It is not only the brightness of the first day of creation which we see. It is the first dawning of the eighth, that day which shall know no night.

6 William of St.Thierry, Meditations and Prayers, pp. 94-5. The whole of this passage is an Interesting expression of the thought of the participation of man's body in the life of grace. 7 Edwin Muir, The Transfiguration', Collected Poems, p. 198.

THE IMAGE AS SACRAMENTAL THE IMAGE AS SACRAMENTAL Sister C.E.Putnam In all reality, there is no one who is more truly sign, image, and symbol t h a n Christ. It is fitting, then, to begin a discussion of sacred signs with him. Because h e 'placed himself in the order of s i g n s ' , 1 all images take on a new character. Even before his descent into humanity, the second person of the Trinity is the Word of the first: his image, his expression, his total π ο ί η σ ΐ ς , t h e form of God. It is for this reason t h a t Thomas Aquinas ascribes to h i m t h e t r a d i t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of b e a u t y ; for t h e Son p o s s e s s e s the integrity of t h e t r u e a n d perfect n a t u r e of the Father, perfectly representing its object, and the clarity of the Word, the light and splendour of the divine mind. 2 Taking h u m a n form (for him, the 'form of a servant', μορφτ\ δ ο υ λ ο υ as opposed to the μορφτ\ ΘεοΟ t h a t was his by right, Phil.2:5), he told the apostle Philip t h a t those who s a w him saw h i s F a t h e r , s a w God ( J o h n 14:9). T h i s is t h e challenge of Christianity, a cult whose image is irrevocable. The Christ of God, embodied, showing u s in his form the Father, prevents u s from conceiving of Christianity in a n abstract a n d formless way. Not only that, b u t because h e is in h u m a n form and tangible symbol, God is difficult, if one m a y p u t it so. For, while the symbol, unlike the mere sign, contains w h a t it points to, b y its very transfer into another sphere, it conceals at the same time t h a t it reveals. That is why Pascal felt God to be more easily recognisable when still invisible. 3 Perhaps the many-levelled symbolism of the Mass is / more easy to enter into, because Christ's h u m a n i t y is hidden with his divinity. He is, in any case, a t the centre of a theology All t h e q u a l i t i e s w h i c h Plato b e s t o w e d u p o n archetypes of his world of ideas can be attributed God. They not only have exemplary value, they also

of the image. the eternal to Christ as have effective

1 Maurice de la Taille, Mysterium Fidei , cited by David Jones in 'Art as Sacrament', The New Orpheus, ed. Nathan Scott, Jr. (Sheed and Ward, New York, 1964), p.58. 2 SummaTheologtae ,1, 39, 8. 3 Lettre a Mile de Roannez II (Paris, 1881). The material in this paragraph is amplified by Gerardus van der Leeuw in Sacred and Profane Beauty: The Holy fn Art, tr. D.E.Green (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1963), pp.304-27.

15

power, since they specify the shadowy things of sense and even produce t h e m . Fleeting p h e n o m e n a are either participations or imitations of the ideas. Unchanging and yet dynamic, they are the source of all levels of reality. 4 Christ is archetypal in this sense, as the early Fathers of the Church were able to see. The doctrine of the mediating image, m e a s u r e or parallel is common to Gregory of Nyssa a n d Denis the Pseudo-Areopagite. Starting from the text of Genesis (1:26) which describes m a n as made to the divine image and likeness, Gregory teaches that the chief aim of h u m a n existence is the fulfilment of this divine image. Looking towards its archetype, the soul is made one with it by a t r u e participation and connaturality. 5 Denis explains this process a s the realisation of a n analogy. The analogy h a s two facets: the creature's capacity to share the attributes of God, and the divine idea of the creature's perfection or fulfilment. These divine ideas are the measure of God's love for creatures and are s h o w n to t h e m in t h e o p h a n i e s . The u n i o n of the divine a n d created analogies is t h e work of Christ, t h r o u g h w h o m all creatures reach salvation. Each after its own fashion strives to become like him -- χ ρ ΐ σ τ ο ε ι δ τ \ $ . 6 J o h n of D a m a s c u s , writing at t h e time of t h e g r e a t controversy in Byzantium over the worship of m a n - m a d e images, m a k e s three studies of the problem and defends respect for the icon a s a reminder of its prototype. He also m a k e s a significant comment on Christ's r e m a r k a b o u t t h e coin of tribute, 'Whose image is this?' (Matt. 22: 16-21). We are to infer, says J o h n , that, as the image on the coin is Caesar's, the image which we show is Christ's and our aim m u s t be to restore it to him. 7 Alongside t h e s e more learned considerations, t h e texts of the early liturgy also m e n t i o n t h e divine image. The so-called a n a p h o r a of S t . J a m e s , dating chiefly from the fourth century, in its appeal to God the Father includes a quite literal picture which 4 Cf.Phaedo, 103B; Parm., 132D; Tim. , 51B. 5 De beatitudtnibus, P.G. 44, 1197B, 1280D. Cf. Roger Leys, S.J., L'tmage de Dieu chez Satnt Gregotre de Nysse (Desclee de Brouwer, Paris, 1951). 6 De divinis nominibus. II, 10; VII, 4, P.G. 1, 648C, 872C. Cf. V.Losski, 'La notion des "analogies" chez Denys le pseudo-Areopagite', Archives d'histoire doctrinale et litteraire du moyen-age , V (1930), pp. 279-309. 7 Pro sacris imagtnibus orationes, P.G., 94, 1231-1420. Cf.Gervase Mathew, Byzantine Aesthetics (Viking, New York 1963), pp. 38-47; 94-107, for a more tempered view towards the sacred presence within the ikon than the one generally held in the last seventy-five years.

16

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

some mosaicist might have evoked: 'From a clod of earth you fashioned man; you made him an image of yourself, made him like yourself...Then (after the fall) you sent into the world your only Son, our Lord Jesus Christ: his coming meant the restoration of the image—the pieces were put together again.' 8 The anaphora of St.Basil and the Alexandrian liturgy of St.Mark use similar expressions. Following Hebrews 1:2, Christ is called the 'radiance of [God's] splendor and the full expression of [his] being'. Finally, we can turn to the last phrases of the hymn to Christ by Synesius of Cyrene (d.414): Hail Father, Source of the Son, Son, the Father's Image, Father, the Ground where the Son stands, Son, the Father's Seal, Father the Power of the Son, Son, the Father's Beauty, spotless Spirit, bond between the Father and the Son. Send, O Christ, the Spirit, send the Father to my soul; steep my dry heart in this dew, the best of all your gifts.9 This personal plea leads to a further question. From a psychological standpoint, what is implied by Christ's entry into the realm of signs? The obvious reply is that man needs symbols. Gerald Vann, in The Heart of Man, says we shall go mad without them. Part of the human personality lives in real need of them and is often starved. The infra-rational, the supra-rational; the , subconscious, the preconscious; the whole gamut of body-soul relationships calls for this intuitive, non-logical way of meeting reality. 10 According to Paul Tillich, the symbol is not only a way of confronting what is outside ourselves; every symbol is two-edged:

8

Early Christian Prayers , ed. A.Hamman, O.F.M., tr. W.Mitchell (H.Regnery, Chicago, 1961), p. 216. 9 Ibid., p. 174. 10 Gerald Vann, O.P., The Heart of Man (Longmans, Green, London 1945), Image Books edition, p. 103. Cf. also Father Vann's chapters on The Recovery of the Symbol' In The Water and the Fire ( Sheed and Ward, New York 1953), pp. 63116.

THE IMAGE AS SACRAMENTAL

17

it opens up reality and it opens up the self. 11 In an art work, it provides a 'calculated trap for meditation.'12 Such a trap is necessary, for even though it is possible to see externals and also 'essences' without passing from them to deeper relationships, if there were no externals, we could not come to the 'dimension of depth' (Tillich's definition of religion) at all.13 This is precisely the sacramentality of form. All things possess this revelatory power insofar as they lead to 'ultimate meaning', to the presence of God, to communication with him, to communion with him. Wherever this realisation comes, the sacramental is present. If art does this, it is sacramental as opposed to instructional or emotional or a mere palliative to the senses. Guardini describes the function of sacred art as just this: its scope includes neither the imparting of knowledge, nor the formation of character, but only the preparation of the way for the Epiphany, the manifestation of God which pierces through the sign. 14 In a true sense, then, the sacramental image makes present the reality; not just re-presenting it, but actually bodying it forth as it has never been and as it has been waiting to be. Karl Rahner, speaking of the urworte, the great, primal or root words, says that they are not merely signs; they bring here the reality they express. In his view, they are more than the concept and even prior to the concept. Their very materiality gives them a fuller being; and when they are really primal, they are generative as well. They may be called forth by the poet 'pregnantly', in the way that Rilke used them: Are we here perhaps to say: 'House, Bridge, Fountain, Gate, Jug, Fruit-Tree, Window.' at the most: 'Columns, Tower...' but to say, do you understand? llTteoiogy of Culture (Oxford University Press, New York 1959) p. 57. 12 This Is Denis de Rougemont's definition of art in 'Religion and the Mission of the Artist', The New Orpheus , p. 63 . 13 Theology of Culture , p. 5. He also defines religion as 'ultimate reality' or 'ultimate meaning.' Cf. 'Art and Ultimate Reality', Cross Currents , 10 (1960), pp. 1-14. This essay was originally a lecture given at the Museum of Modern Art, New York, February 1959. 14 Romano Guardini, 'Sacred Images and the Invisible God', Cross Currents 10 (1960), p. 215. This essay was originally published in The Furrow, J u n e 1957.

18

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

oh to say these things in s u c h a way way as the things themselves never wanted to be intimately. i5 Similar in power to the creative word is the creative image. As Paul Klee p u t s it, the p u r p o s e of art is not 'to r e n d e r the visible, b u t to make visible'. 16 The ancient Egyptian worshipper, for instance, felt he had to compress what was intangibly present; to localise it somewhere and give it a form. Without this active deed on his part, it would not be available to him, it would not exist. At least it would not exist for him; it would be inaccessible. 'Only w h a t is represented as a n image in a second reality h a s existence... If m a n wants to achieve a real relationship with what is, it m u s t first "take place".Ί7 Man makes the image and at the same time is made by it. The two-edged quality which reveals the self of the perceiver, reveals the maker to himself a s well. To represent is often a form of despoiling in which reality is destroyed in order to be reborn to a fuller life. The new sprout from the dry wheat grain and the distorted cubist form are both reawakenings, while the great symbols linked to incarnation and fruition are also s i g n s of m e d i a t i o n a n d a t o n e m e n t . The specifically Christian image will always be 'problematic'; humble as well as glorious. 18 The real challenge is to be clean of heart, for we shall have access to things only when they become for u s symbols of the holy. When the springs of charity r u n clear 19 , t h e n all reality is sacramental and one sees God.

15 Ninth Elegy, cited by Karl Rahner In 'Priest and Poet', The Word : Readings in Theology , compiled at Canisium, Innsbruck (P.J.Kenedy and Sons, New York 1964), p.7. 16 'Creative Credo' quoted by Will Grohman, Paul Klee ( N.H. Abrams, New York 1954), p.90. 17 Van der Leeuw, op. cit. , p.305. He refers here to H.G.Evers, Staat aus dew. Stein, I (Munich 1929). Cf. also Hans Jaeger, 'Heidegger and the Work of Art', Aesthetics Today , ed. Morris Philipson (World Publishing Company, Meridian Books, New York 1961), pp. 414-31. 18 Van der Leeuw, op. cit., p. 327 and John W. Dixon, Jr., Nature and Grace in Art (University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill 1964), p.55. 19 Jacques Maritain, The Responsibility of the Artist (Charles Scribner's Sons, New York 1960), p.61.

THE TRANSFIGURATION OFTHE BODY1 Bishop Kallistos Expectandum

nobis etiam et corporis ver est

(Minucius Felix)

SERAPHIM AND MOTOVILOV Among the s a i n t s of Russia there is p e r h a p s none more immediately attractive to western Christians t h a n St.Seraphim of Sarov (1759-1833); a n d in the life of St.Seraphim there is no incident more i m p o r t a n t t h a n his famous conversation with Nicholas Motovilov. One winter day the two of them were talking together in the forest. They were discussing the true aim of the Christian life, which Seraphim defined as 'the acquisition of the Holy Spirit of God.' 'But', Motovilov enquired, 'how can I be sure t h a t I am in the Spirit of God?' What followed can best be related in Motovilov's own words: 'Then F a t h e r S e r a p h i m took m e very firmly b y the shoulders and said: "My son, we are both at this moment in the Spirit of God. Why don't you look at me?" "I c a n n o t look, Father," I replied, "because your eyes are flashing like lightning. Your face h a s become brighter t h a n the sun, and it h u r t s my eyes to look at you." "Don't be afraid," he said. "At this very moment you yourself have become a s bright as I a m . You yourself are now in t h e fullness of the Spirit of God; otherwise you would not be able to see me a s you do." Then, bending his head towards me, he whispered softly in my ear: "Thank the Lord God for his infinite goodness towards us... But why, my son, do you not look me in the eyes? J u s t look, and don't be afraid; the Lord is with us." After these words I glanced a t his face a n d there came over me a n even greater reverent awe. Imagine in the centre of t h e 1 A paper read at the Summer Conference of the Fellowship of Saint Alban and Saint Sergius, Broadstairs, September, 1962. I am particularly indebted to three essays, one by an Orthodox, one by an Anglican, and one by a Roman Catholic: J. Meyendorff, S.Gregotre Palamas et la mystique orthodoxe (Paris 1959); A.M.Ramsay, The Glory of God and the Transfiguration Of Christ (London 1949); and Denys Gorce 'Corps', in Dictionnatre de Sptritualite , vol. II , (Paris 1953), columns 2338-78. Dr.Philip Sherrard has kindly helped me with certain suggestions and corrections.

20

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

THE TRANSFIGURATION OF THE BODY

s u n , in the dazzling light of its midday rays, the face of a m a n talking to you. You see the movement of his lips and the changing expression of his eyes, you h e a r his voice, you feel someone holding your shoulders; yet you do not see his h a n d s , you do not even see yourself or his body, b u t only a blinding light spreading far around for several yards and lighting u p with its brilliance the snow-blanket which covered the forest glade and the snowflakes which continued to fall unceasingly.'2

Seraphim's case there is not merely a vision beheld inwardly with the eyes of the soul, b u t a light t h a t is physically manifested and seen outwardly through the eyes of the body. Can the case of St. Seraphim be set aside as a n isolated instance—as something abnormal, p i c t u r e s q u e and exotic? It would be d a n g e r o u s to do this; for examples of outward a n d bodily transfiguration recur constantly in Christian history. It is recorded of a n o t h e r great R u s s i a n saint, Sergius of Radonezh (?1314-92): 'After his death a strong fragrance flowed from his body....The saint's face gleamed like snow, not a s the face of a dead m a n , b u t with a living radiance, or a s the face of an angel, t h u s making manifest the purity of his soul.'3 Once more there is a parallel with t h e story of the Transfiguration: 'His clothes became dazzling white a s snow' (Mark 9:3).

The conversation continues: Seraphim questions Motovilov a b o u t w h a t h e feels within him, Motovilov replies, S e r a p h i m comments on what he says. Evidently neither of them is in a state of ecstasy, for they r e m a i n conscious of the outside world— Motovilov is still aware of the snow and the forest—and they both talk in a coherent way; yet they are s u r r o u n d e d by a blinding light. What h a s happened to them? Ά blinding light': b u t the mystical theology of the Orthodox C h u r c h is more specific t h a n t h i s . The b r i g h t n e s s w h i c h illuminates the faces of Seraphim and Motovilov— so Orthodox believe— is nothing less t h a n the uncreated energies of God; the light which spreads round them is identical with the divine light which shone a r o u n d our Lord a t h i s Transfiguration on Mount Thabor. 'Your eyes are flashing like lightning and your face h a s become brighter t h a n the sun.' Motovilov's words recall those of the Gospel: 'Six days later J e s u s took Peter and J a m e s and J o h n his brother, a n d led them u p into a high m o u n t a i n where they were alone. And in their presence h e was transfigured: h i s face s h o n e a s the s u n a n d his clothes became white a s t h e light' (Matthew 17: 1-2). J u s t a s Christ w a s transfigured on Mount Thabor, so the servant of Christ Seraphim was transfigured in the forest near Sarov. To use the language of St.Paul, Seraphim and Motovilov 'with unveiled faces reflected like mirrors the glory of t h e Lord', being 'transfigured into h i s image from glory to glory' (2 Corinthians 3:18). Writers of the Hesychast tradition—most notably St.Symeon the New Theologian and St.Gregory Palamas— s p e a k repeatedly of an experience of divine light, a n d this they r e g a r d a s t h e climax a n d crown of t h e life of p r a y e r . In 2

'Conversation of Saint Seraphim on the Aim of the Christian Life', in A Wonderful Revelation to the World (Holy Trinity Russian Orthodox Monastery, Jordanville, New York, 1953), pp. 23-4. See also Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (London 1957), pp. 227-9.

'

21

Similar instances can be found still further back in time, among the Desert F a t h e r s of Egypt during the fourth and fifth centuries. In the Apophthegmata it is related how, when Abba Sisoes lay dying s u r r o u n d e d by his disciples, 'his face shone as the sun'. The brightness increased ever more and more until the actual m o m e n t of his death, when 'he became a s lightning, and t h e whole dwelling w a s filled with a sweet f r a g r a n c e ' . 4 Of another Desert Father, St.Pambo, it is said: 'God so glorified him that no one could look at his face, because of the glory which his face h a d . . . . J u s t as Moses received the image of the glory of Adam, when his face was glorified, so t h e face of Abba Pambo shone like lightning, and he was as a king seated on his throne.'5 Sometimes the Apopthegmata speak in terms of fire rather t h a n light. When St.Arsenius t h e Great w a s praying, one of his disciples, coming upon him u n a w a r e s , 'saw the old m a n entirely as fire'.6 A similar story is told concerning J o s e p h of Panepho: 'The old m a n stood u p and opened his h a n d s to the heaven; and his fingers became as ten torches of fire, and h e said: "If you wish, you can become entirely a s fire". 7 Here the parallel with 3 Saint Epiphanius, The Life of Saint Sergius', in G.P.Fedotov, A Treasury of Russian Spirituality (London 1950), p.83. 4 Apophthegmata (P.G. Ixv), Sisoes 14. 5 Apophthegmata (P.G. lxv), Pambo 1 and 12. Compare Silvanus 12. 6 Apophthegmata, Arsenius 27. 7 Apophthegmata , Joseph of Panepho 7. Compare Apophthegmata , Joseph of Panepho 6; Macarius of Egypt 33; Mark of Egypt; Sisoes 9; Theodore of Pherme 25.

22

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

THE TRANSFIGURATION OF THE BODY

the Transfiguration of Christ is not so immediately apparent, b u t the basic idea remains unchanged. The uncreated energies of God s h o w t h e m s e l v e s s o m e t i m e s u n d e r the form of Fire, a s a t Pentecost, and sometimes u n d e r the form of light, as on Mount Thabor or to Paul on the D a m a s c u s road: whether we s p e a k in terms of light or in terms of fire, the reality which we describe is one and the same. Nor is this bodily glorification something limited to E a s t e r n C h r i s t e n d o m . There have b e e n similar c a s e s in t h e west, in which an intense communion of the soul with God h a s conferred u p o n the body a s u p e r n a t u r a l radiance. I n s t a n c e s of outward t r a n s f i g u r a t i o n o c c u r in t h e lives of S t . T e r e s a of Avila, St. Catherine of Bologna and St. Catherine of Genoa. Once when the companions of Blessed J a n van Ruysbroeck went to look for him in the forest, they saw a tree 'all in a flame of light', and seated b e n e a t h it they found Ruysbroeck himself. 8 A more recent example can be given-- one who was a member of the Fellowship of St.Alban a n d St.Sergius, Evelyn Underhill (1875-1941). A friend relates:

the glorification of Evelyn Underhill or of S t . S e r a p h i m is an extension of Christ's Transfiguration: 'We reflect like mirrors the glory of the Lord', being 'transfigured into his image'. 10 What, t h e n , is t h e theological m e a n i n g of this bodily glorification which saints in East and West have undergone, and which (as we have seen) is not something restricted to a few isolated c a s e s , b u t more or less c o n s t a n t in the Christian tradition? Behind these incidents of transfiguration, there lie two points of fundamental importance: First, the Transfiguration— whether of Christ or of Christ's s a i n t s - - u n d e r l i n e s the significance of the h u m a n body for Christian theology. When Christ w a s transfigured on Mount Thabor, h i s divine glory was manifested in a n d t h r o u g h his h u m a n body: through their physical eyes the disciples saw that 'in him all the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily ' (Colossians 2:9). And j u s t as Christ's glory is not only inward b u t physical and bodily, so it is with t h a t of t h e s a i n t s : their transfiguration e m p h a s i s e s t h a t m a n ' s sanctification— h i s 'deification' as the Greek Fathers called it-- is not something t h a t concerns the soul alone, b u t something t h a t involves the body. 'The body is deified at the s a m e time a s the soul,' said Maximus the Confessor. 11 In the words of Tertullian, 'the flesh is the hinge of salvation': caro salutis est carcLo.iZ Secondly, t h e Transfiguration—whether of Christ or of C h r i s t ' s saints—is a n eschatological event, a foretaste a n d anticipation of the Parousia. The bodily glorification of the saints illustrates the position of the Christian, 'in the world b u t not of it'--placed at a point of intersection between this present age and

'It was in October 1937 t h a t I met her first—invited to tea with her in her Campden Hill Square house. She had j u s t h a d one of her bad illnesses. The door of the room into which I w a s shown was directly behind the big armchair in which s h e w a s sitting facing a glowing fire. As I entered she got u p and turned round, looking so fragile as though "a puff or wind might blow her away" might be literally t r u e in h e r case, but light simply streamed from her face illuminated with a radiant smile.... One could not b u t feel consciously there and then (not on s u b s e q u e n t * recognition or reflection) t h a t one w a s in the presence of the extension of the mystery of our Lord's Transfiguration in one of the members of his Mystical Body.'9 The last sentence exactly expresses the m e a n i n g of the incident. J u s t as the stigmata received by St.Francis of Assisi on Mount Alverna are a n extension of Christ's Crucifixion in one of the m e m b e r s of his Mystical Body--'In my flesh I m a k e u p t h a t which is lacking in the sufferings of Christ' (Colossians l:24)--so 8 See Jan van Ruysbroeck, The Seven Steps of the Ladder of Spiritual Love, edited by F.Sherwood Taylor (London 1943), p. 13. 9 The Letters of Evelyn Underhill, edited by Charles Williams (London 1943), p.37.

23

10 It Is usual to regard the receiving of the stigmata as something characteristically western, and the transfiguration of the body by divine light as characteristic of the Christian east. Doubtless there is considerable truth In this, but it Is misleading to draw an absolute contrast. Just as cases of bodily glorification are found among western saints, so the idea of stlgmatlzatlon is not unknown in the east. According to a legend recorded in the Coptic Life of Saint Macarius of Egypt, a cherub appeared to the saint, took the measure of his chest, and 'crucified him on the earth': surely as close a parallel to Mount Alverna as any could wish. (Virtues of Saint Macarius', edited by E.Amelineau, Histotre des monasteres de la Basse-Egypte [ Annales du Musee Guimet, vol. XXV] , [Paris 1894], pp. 118-19. Compare Archimandrite Lev In Sobornost, 1953, series 3, no. 13, p.25.) 11 Gnostic Centuries , II. 88 (P.G. xc. 1168A). 12 De resurrectione carnis , 8 (P.L. ii. 852A).

24

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

the age to come, a n d living in both ages at once. The last times are not merely an event in the future, b u t have already begun. Let u s consider these two points in greater detail, looking first at the doctrine of m a n which underlies the mystery of the Transfiguration. GLORIFY GOD WITH YOUR BODY Palladius (?363-?430), the a u t h o r of the Lausiac History, on h i s first arrival in Egypt, went to live with a n old monk, Dorotheus, whose custom it was to work all day in the blazing s u n , collecting s t o n e s a n d b u i l d i n g cells. W h e n P a l l a d i u s protested, 'What do you mean, Father, at your great age by trying to kill your poor body in these heats?' Dorotheus briefly replied, 'It kills me, I kill it'. 13 C o n t r a s t with this the s t a t e m e n t of another Desert Father, Poemen: 'We were taught, not to kill the body b u t to kill the passions'. 1 4 Behind these two short sayings there lie in the last resort two different ways of thinking about m a n , the first not so m u c h Christian a s Platonic (though it h a s a long history in Christian theology), the second truly Christian and biblical; and behind the two ways of thinking about m a n there lie two different doctrines of creation. The Platonist doctrine of creation r e g a r d s t h e material order, not as the handiwork of God, created by divine power out of nothing, b u t r a t h e r as something fundamentally u n r e a l a n d illusory. Holy Scripture, on the other h a n d , firmly repudiates any s u c h dualism: matter according to the biblical view is as m u c h God's creation as things immaterial. God created the / heaven and the earth, and he looked upon all t h a t he h a d made and saw t h a t it was very good. Hand in h a n d with t h e s e two ideas of creation go two anthropologies. The Platonist (and for t h a t m a t t e r m o s t Greek philosophers), looking at m a n from a dualist standpoint, regards the soul a s divine, b u t the body a s a prison a n d s o u r c e of defilement. Man is a n intelligence (vo0$) s h u t u p in a material body and aspiring to freedom; the body is a tomb ( σ ώ μ α - σ ή μ α ) . The aim of the philosopher is therefore to sever himself, so far as 13 Lausiac History, 2. 14 Apopthegmata (P.G. Ixv), Poemenl84.

THE TRANSFIGURATION OF THE BODY

25

possible, from all contact with material things. At best the body is viewed in n e u t r a l t e r m s a s a piece of clothing, with which we shall eventually dispense: in the words of a Pythagorean epitaph, 'The body is the tunic of the soul' (σώμα χ ι τ ώ ν ψυχής). Often it is regarded with far greater severity: 'You are a poor soul carrying a corpse', wrote M a r c u s A u r e l i u s , i 5 while of Plotinus it is recorded t h a t 'he was ashamed of being in a body'. 16 The Bible by contrast upholds not a dualist b u t a monist conception of man. He is not a soul imprisoned in a body, b u t a unity of body and soul, a 'psycho-physiological totality'. 'The soul is man', said Plato; 1 7 to which the Church rejoins in the words of Thomas Aquinas, 'The soul is not the whole m a n and my soul is not me'. 18 When God the Holy Trinity created a m a n in his own image, he created a single reality, body a n d soul together; a n d when God came to earth to redeem m a n , he took n o t only a h u m a n soul b u t h u m a n flesh, for it is his will to save the whole man, body as well as soul. It is t r u e t h a t the body a s we now know it is a b u r d e n , something t h a t brings on u s tiredness, suffering, the p a i n s of child-birth. It is t r u e t h a t the body as we now know it is a n i n s t r u m e n t of evil d e s i r e s . B u t all t h i s is specifically t h e consequence of the Fall; a n d since the time of the Fall the h u m a n body h a s existed not in its n a t u r a l condition b u t in a state that is contrary to n a t u r e . It is also t r u e t h a t body a n d soul will be separated a t death, b u t this once again is an effect of the Fall; furthermore the separation is only temporary, since Christians look for t h e Resurrection of t h e Body w h e n t h e two will be reunited once more. The body, therefore, on the biblical view is not a prison or a tomb b u t a n essential and integral part of man. St.Paul in his Epistles admits a dualism and enmity betwen J l e s h and spint; b u t for Paul 'flesh' is by no m e a n s equivalent to the body, a n d 'spirit' by no m e a n s restricted to the soul. T h u s when h e lists the 'works of the flesh' in Galatians 5:19-21, he m e n t i o n s s u c h things a s 'seditions', 'heresies', a n d 'envyings', which have no special connection with the body. 'Flesh' in the 15 Meditations, IV, 41. 16 Porphyry, Vita Plotini, 1. See also Plato, Phaedo, especially 64e-66a and 82e. 17 First Alcibiades, 130c. 18 In 1 Cor. 15, lect. 2: Anima... non est totus homo, et anima mea non est ego.

26

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

Epistles denotes the whole m a n q u a fallen, while 'spirit' denotes the whole m a n qua redeemed: the soul, therefore, as well a s the body can become fleshly and carnal, a n d the body as well as the soul can become spiritual. Paul does not tell the Galatians to crucify the body, b u t to crucify the flesh with its p a s s i o n s and l u s t s (Galatians 5:24). W h e n later C h r i s t i a n w r i t e r s incline towards a Platonic dualism, it is u s u a l l y b e c a u s e they fail to observe this vital distinction between body and flesh; and so they s p e a k of the body as a n e n e m y w h e n in fact they m e a n the flesh. 19 In Paul's eyes, then, the body is not a n enemy to be fought a n d trodden down, b u t a m e a n s whereby m a n can glorify his Creator. 'Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit', he writes. 'Glorify God in your body' (1 Corinthians 6: 19-20). 'Therefore, my brothers, I beseech you to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice to God' (Romans 12:1). St.Maximus the Confessor expresses the same teaching in terms of deification: 'By n a t u r e m a n r e m a i n s entirely m a n in his soul and in his body, b u t by grace he becomes entirely God in his soul and in his body '.20 T h e spiritual joy', s t a t e s St.Gregory Palamas, 'which p a s s e s from the soul into the body, r e m a i n s a spiritual reality even t h o u g h it is active in the body.... It is not at all corrupted by its communion with the body, b u t transforms the body and makes it spiritual. The body, once it h a s rejected the evil appetites of the flesh, no longer drags the soul downwards b u t is raised together with it, so t h a t the whole m a n b e c o m e s s p i r i t . ' 2 ! P a l a m a s , as this p a s s a g e shows, is throughly biblical in his anthropology. This idea of the essential i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e of soul a n d ·/ body, of their common r e d e m p t i o n a n d deification, is clearly evident in St.Irenaeus: Through the h a n d s of the Father, t h a t is, t h r o u g h the Son a n d the Spirit, m a n is m a d e according to the likeness of God. I say t h a t man is made according to God's likeness— not j u s t a part of m a n . The soul and spirit constitute a part of man, b u t not m a n as s u c h . For the complete m a n is a mixture and union of the soul (which receives the Spirit of the Father) a n d of the flesh (which 19 Examples of this unfortunate failure to distinguish are of course very common. 20 Ambigua (P.G. xci. 1088C) 21 Triads, II.ii.9.

THE TRANSFIGURATION OF THE BODY is formed according to the image of God).

27

22

The image of God in m a n , so Irenaeus m a i n t a i n s in this passage, is not something exclusively intellectual, b u t embraces man's body.23 A similar view is developed in the D e resurrectione of Pseudo-Justin: 'It is clear, t h e n , t h a t the m a n who w a s formed in the image of God possessed flesh. T h u s it is ridiculous to say that the flesh which was formed by God in his image is without honour a n d w o r t h l e s s . . . . F o r w h a t is m a n b u t a r a t i o n a l c r e a t u r e constituted from a soul and a body? So, then, the soul by itself is not a m a n ? No; it is the m a n ' s soul. And the body is not termed m a n ? No; b u t j u s t m a n ' s body. Neither of these two things by itself is a m a n , b u t only what is formed from the combination of both.' 2 4 In the words of Gregory Palamas, 'When God is said to have m a d e m a n according to his image , the word "man" m e a n s n e i t h e r t h e soul by itself nor the body by itself, b u t b o t h together'. 25 Many Chrisitan writers, however, instead of stressing the physical implications of the divine image, have deviated into a kind of 'angelism'. The body they dismiss a s little more t h a n a h i n d r a n c e a n d a n o b s t r u c t i o n - - s o m e t h i n g irrelevant to t h e spiritual life a n d external to m a n ' s t r u e n a t u r e ; they seem to think t h a t our aim as h u m a n beings is to make ourselves as m u c h like the angels as possible. But this is to overlook a n essential difference between m e n and angels: God created the angels a s pure intellect, b u t h e gave m a n a material body a s well as a soul, a n d t h e s e two things form an essential unity. God m a d e m a n i n c a r n a t e , a n d it is p r e s u m p t i o n a n d folly on m a n ' s p a r t to attempt to disincarnate and 'angelize' himself: as Pascal observed, 'I'homme n'est ni ange ni bete, et qui veutfaire I'ange fait la bete'. Man m u s t not seek to ignore or t r a n s c e n d his material n a t u r e , b u t m u s t glory in his body and use it as the gift of God. Many people a s s u m e t h a t m a n is inferior to the angels because he h a s a body; they are 'pure' spirit, b u t h e is 'mixed'. Gregory Palamas, on the contrary, went so far as to argue that the fact m a n h a s a body 22 AdaHaer. V. 6.1 (P.G. vii. 1137A). 23 There are many writers, both Jewish and Christian, who deny this. 2 4 De resurrectione, 7 and 8 (P.G. vi. 1584C, 1585B). 25 p.G. cl. 1361C.

28

SACRAMENT AND IMAGE

makes him not lower b u t higher t h a n the angels. H u m a n n a t u r e , being more complicated, p o s s e s s e s greater potentialities t h a n the angelic. Balanced as he is between the physical and the nonmaterial realms, participating at the same time in b o t h worlds, m a n is a microcosm and mediator, forming a bridge and point of meeting for the whole of God's creation. All this, and m u c h else besides, lies behind the mystery of the Transfiguration and the extension of t h a t mystery in the m e m b e r s of t h e C h u r c h . The Transfiguration, said Bishop Westcott, is 'the m e a s u r e of the capacity of humanity'; it is 'the revelation of the potential spirituality of the earthly life in the highest outward form'.26 The Transfiguration of Christ and of the s a i n t s shows u s 'the m e a s u r e of the capacity of humanity': it shows u s the h u m a n body as God originally made it and as he i n t e n d s it once more to b e . At the Transfiguration we see revealed the 'potential spirituality' of our material n a t u r e : we see the h u m a n body made spiritual. As the Transfiguration so vividly emphasizes, 'spiritual' does not simply signify 'immaterial': the body a s well as the soul can become a vehicle of the Spirit. The phenomenon of bodily transfiguration is unintelligible, save on a doctrine of m a n which allows for the spiritual potentialities of the h u m a n body and which firmly rejects Platonic dualism in all its forms. The Transfiguration justifies Poemen against Dorotheus, a n d proves t h a t the C h r i s t i a n theologian is of n e c e s s i t y a materialist--albeit a materialist of a different s t a m p from the Marxist. At the Transfiguration, we have said, we see the h u m a n body as God originally made it. The glory of Christ on Thabor is > not only a n eschatological event, b u t also looks b a c k to the condition of m a n in t h e beginning, before h i s n a t u r e w a s distorted by the Fall. Pambo, according to the Apophthegmata , received the 'image of the glory of Adam'. What does this p h r a s e imply? It means, surely, t h a t Parnbo h a s regained the status ante peccatum, the state of Adam in Paradise; and so his body is transfigured, becoming—like Adam's before the Fall--radiant and glorious. The same teaching is found in the liturgical texts for 6 August: 26

Quoted in Ramsey, The Glory of God and the Transfiguration of Christ , p.141.

THE TRANSFIGURATION OF THE BODY

29

'Transfigured today on Mount Thabor in h i s disciples' presence, Christ revealed the original b e a u t y of the image (το α ρ χ έ τ υ τ ι ο ν κάλλο