The Three Hierarchs and the Identity of Hellenism (Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos)

The Three Hierarchs and the Identity of Hellenism

By Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and Agiou Vlasiou

(A panygeric speech from 2015 by His Eminence at the University of Patras on the feast of the Three Hierarchs)

The Course and Development of Greek Thought

Studying ancient Greek philosophy, we feel a sense of wonder at how it was able to study "being" and the world through different perspectives, yet having a unified infrastructure, how it developed and became a great movement of philosophy, religion and politics.

Two main points should be emphasized in this unity.

The first is that we have a continuous evolution of the way in which the ancient Greeks philosophized and practiced religion, but within the framework of the Greek consciousness. One observes with great astonishment how the ancient Greek spirit avoided stagnation and was distinguished by a dynamic course. One can delimit, despite the danger of the matter, some phases of the development of the Greek spirit.

At the beginning one observes the prevalence of magical religions, nature is worshipped, which constitutes an inferior religion. Then anthropomorphism develops, the worship of the gods of Olympus, as described in Homer and Hesiod. This anthropomorphism in reality embodies human desires for immortality, health, merriment, and power. Then appear the Ionian naturalists, who turn to nature, rejecting the religious view of the interpretation of the world. The original cause of the world is considered by Thales of Miletus to be water, by Anaximander to be the infinite, by Anaximenes to be air. Then appears the mystical way of life, the orgiastic phase of religion, as expressed by Dionysus, the Orphics and Pythagoras, who bring god within man and are mainly interested in dealing with pain. The ontological interpretation of nature, as expressed by the Eleatics (Parmenides) and Heraclitus, deals with the relationship and difference between "being" and "becoming". Also, the appearance of rationalism, as expressed by the Sophists, first of all Protagoras, who are considered precursors of the Enlightenment of the 18th century AD, who perceive truth not as an object, but as a subject connected to human thought. Subsequently, the idealistic, classical metaphysics of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle fought the anthropomorphism of God and made God an idea. Then the postclassical period of Hellenism expressed by the Stoic and Epicurean philosophers, who identified the nature of man with reason, spoke of the necrosis of the passive part of the soul and of course gave priority to eudaimonia, as they understood it. Finally, Neoplatonism with Plotinus, Porphyry, Iamblichus and Proclus, which was the last glimmer of ancient Greek philosophy and especially of metaphysics, connected Platonism with Gnosticism.

Also, what can be noted is that there are many scholars who connect this development through political interpretations. For example, in Greek city-states, sometimes democracy prevails, that is, the prevalence of democratic principles with the gods of the people, and sometimes aristocratic idealism prevails, as expressed by mysticism and metaphysics.

The second point that expresses the unity, but also the entire evolution of the Greek spirit, is the "gradual evolution from mythical perception to rational thought" and in metaphysical philosophy it is not a random phenomenon, but there are many factors that determined it. In the following, I will quote some of the elements that Constantine Vamvacas uses in his important book titled "The Founders of Western Thought".

Karl Jaspers has argued that in the spiritual evolution that took place between 800 and 200 BC, around 500 BC is located what he characterized as the "axial age of human history."

It is observed that from the 7th century BC onwards in various geographical areas, China (Lao-Tzu, Confucius), India (Mahavira, Buddha), Israel (Prophets Jeremiah, Ezekiel), Iran (Zoroastrians), Greece (Pre-Socratics, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle) various fundamental cultural changes take place.

However, the starting points of each place and culture are different. In China, practical concern for the good relationship of people in society prevails, in India the religious anguish of man for the meaning of life prevails, and in Greece philosophy predominates.

It is a fact that during this period, a communication of the Greeks with other peoples is also observed. The Greeks, because of the sea, come into contact with many peoples and cultures, receiving from them what was necessary for their way of life. At the same time, the temperate climate and their place of residence, which connected land and sea, gave them the opportunity to philosophize about "being", "time", "nature", "man", the meaning of life and death. Thus, the Greeks adopted the best that existed in other cultures and transformed it into philosophy, dealing with "god", the "beginning", the "word", "justice", the "infinite", "nature", the "world", "being".

As Constantine Vamvacas notes, "the rational spirit of the Greeks undoubtedly laid the foundations of philosophy and science, something that was decisive for the development of European civilization... The Greeks founded Western civilization, while at the same time setting it apart from Eastern civilizations."

As noted earlier, there were many factors for the development of philosophy in ancient Greece. I will mention some of them.

One factor was the surrounding nature. The temperate climate, the clear atmosphere and sunshine, the "continuous penetration and coexistence of land and sea", such as "the perpetual roar and undulation of the sea surface, in contrast to its silent, invisible and immovable bottom" will create the suspicion of the opposition between "appearing" and "being", "becoming" and "being". Also, the sea will help in communication with many cultures.

Another factor is the social structures. From the 8th century BC onwards, city-states are created. The regime of these city-states has various variations, starting from the aristocratic one, the oligarchic or timocratic regimes are created, after the class of craftsmen, merchants and shipowners develops, it progresses to tyrannical regimes and will reach the establishment of democracy. Nevertheless, the common Greek consciousness is created in all these city-states, as well as, after the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization with Linear B script, the new Greek alphabet is created. The Greeks used the Phoenician script as a prototype, but they added vowels, which the Phoenician alphabet (which consisted of consonants and semivowels) did not have, thus creating an elegant phonetic alphabet.

Religion, too, was an important factor in the development of the Greek spirit. In the beginning "the gods of the Greeks are powers and secondarily persons. For this reason the divine persons are often confused." Subsequently, belief in the gods weakens, resulting in the creation of two spiritual paths: "the rational philosophy of the Ionians and the mysticism of the Orphic teaching, which will also respond to the deepest religious needs of the Greeks." This mystery religion is completely different from "the Greek spirit of the Homeric era" and certainly has an Eastern influence.

Also, the relationship between myth and epic poetry, the path from myth to reason, played an important role in the development of philosophy. Through this dimension, the Greeks saw the unity and order that exists in nature.

All these prerequisites existed in the ancient Greek "spirit", so their communication with the Eastern peoples helped to develop it even more with those they encountered.

For example, Thales of Miletus received astronomy from Egypt and Babylonia through the travels he had made, but he reduced it to philosophy. The same with Pythagoras. The Greeks also received arithmetic and geometry from Egypt and made it philosophy. Even the Orphics and Pythagoreans received elements from the Eastern peoples, but they took this knowledge further. The Eastern peoples developed various mythological systems and accumulated a large body of material that served "purely utilitarian purposes," while the Greeks reduced them to another sphere, they made them philosophy. Their motivation "has nothing to do with the practical problems of the Eastern peoples, but is a search for truth through a broader view of the world."

Of course, George James developed the theory of "Stolen Legacy", that is, it is the so-called "Afrocentric theory", but it was not accepted by the global scientific community for its arbitrary conclusions and because it ignored the fact that the ancient Greeks adopted some elements from foreign cultures, but they processed them even more and raised the practical-utilitarian level to the ontological, philosophical, theological level. "The essence is – and this is what Afrocentrists insist on not understanding – that the Greeks transformed the practical geometric, arithmetical, astronomical knowledge of the neighboring great civilizations into generalized, coherent, philosophical systems."

Therefore, when one observes ancient Greek civilization, one will find that it constantly fertilizes and is fertilized, absorbs and is absorbed, one phase is born and then dies so that another can be reborn, it has a constant movement and course, it is distinguished by an entelechy, it has a dynamic movement towards completion. It begins with magical religion, progresses to anthropocentrism, evolves to rationalism, reaches mysticism, develops into metaphysics.

At the same time, the new phase that is created does not completely abolish the previous one, so there are many parallel traditions. Greek civilization has within it a potentiality, an indomitable freedom, a movement towards integration. All these movements move together, in parallel, unified, and in some points isolated, and with all these forms it meets Christianity.

The first Apostolic Fathers, the Apologists and the great Fathers of the 4th century encounter this entire movement, divided into many parts, but internally unified by the law of Heraclitus’s opposites, and it is natural that they should be influenced by it. It is not only the common Hellenistic language that the Fathers encountered in their time and used, but also the entire ontological subconscious that exists in Hellenism. We will see this issue further below.

What must be noted regarding this unity is that the identity of Hellenism is characterized by a continuous evolution, fertilization and maturation. No one can place Hellenism in a temporal phase of its development and no one can absolutize a single phase in this evolution.


The Encounter of Hellenism with Christianity

As we have seen previously, the last phase of Greek philosophy, which is characterized as Neoplatonism, had been influenced by Gnosticism and some aspects of Christianity, mainly heretical offshoots.

The fact is that until the 4th century AD there were many phases of the encounter of Hellenism with Christianity. Christianity was born in Jewish environments, but when it left the territory of Palestine it necessarily encountered Hellenism, with positive and negative consequences. However, mainly in the 4th century AD, when great intellectual figures of Christianity studied ancient Greek education, studying Greek philosophy and Greek tradition in general, then the conditions were born for a meeting between these two spiritual greats, Christianity and Hellenism.

This meeting of Hellenism and Christianity was characterized by two phrases. One was used by the great Protestant theologian and historian Adolf von Harnack, according to which the meeting of Christianity and Hellenism created "the Hellenization of Christianity," as he called Gnosticism. The other phrase was used by the great Russian Theologian of the 20th century, who taught at Harvard in the United States of America, Fr. George Florovsky, according to which the meeting of Christianity and Hellenism created "the Christianization of Hellenism."

The "Hellenization of Christianity" consists in the fact that Christianity was Hellenized, that is, it rejected the revelatory truth and came closer to ancient Greek philosophy. Also, the "Christianization of Hellenism" consists in the fact that Hellenism was Christianized, that is, Christianity used Hellenism to express its truth.

While it seems that one of the two happened, both of these movements nevertheless took place. Metropolitan John Zizioulas of Pergamon supported the view that the "Hellenization of Christianity" was carried out by the philosophizing theologians, who ended up being considered heretics of the Church, such as in Gnosticism, Docetism, Montanism and later other heretics, while the "Christianization of Hellenism" was carried out by the Fathers of the Church, especially the Three Hierarchs and Saint Gregory of Nyssa, as well as later ones, namely Saint Maximus the Confessor, Saint John of Damascus, Saint Gregory Palamas, etc.

The crucial issue that preoccupied the early Fathers is the so-called cosmological, which leads to theological. The cosmological problem is what the world is, who created it, what is the cause of the evil that exists in the world. The Jewish interpretation of the world always saw God behind the world. The Greek-philosophical interpretation of the world considered God always connected to the world. Even Plato, who spoke of the archetypes of beings, said that the world was created from pre-existing matter and thus creator means designer.

The Fathers of the Church, having a Biblical-Hebraic mindset, had to pass on the Christian revelation through the Greek mentality. The issue was primarily raised in the question of what Christ is, who is the center of history, and what it would mean for Christ to have become human. For the Jew there was no problem, because he interpreted it as an intervention of God in the world. For the Greek, however, there was a serious problem, because he had to change his entire mentality. That is, he had to change his cosmology, which means that he had to answer the question of what Christ is with cosmological categories, but without accepting the Greek mentality.

This means that the view that the world was created from pre-existing matter had to be rejected and the teaching that the world was made from nothing had to be accepted. The view also needed to be rejected that the fall was a punishment and the teaching that the fall was a free choice of man had to be accepted. That matter is inherently evil also had to be rejected and the possibility of the incarnation of the Word and the resurrection of Christ, as well as the resurrection and incorruption of human bodies, had to be accepted. That is, he had to reject the view of ancient Greek philosophy on the nature of the mortal body and the nature of the immortal soul.

Also, another issue that the early Fathers had to face was the issue of what is the method of interpreting the world and man. Therefore, the crucial point that shows the difference between the philosophizing theologians and the Orthodox Fathers is the relationship between the mind and reason in relation to the knowledge of God. Philosophical theologians exalted human reason, making it the center of inquiry, even of God, while the Fathers of the Church gave greater importance to the nous and the heart, in order to acquire an experiential knowledge of God.

We see this in the Three Hierarchs, who spoke of noetic silence, purity of heart, in order for one to acquire the knowledge of God. And when one acquires the knowledge of God, then, using reason as a tool, he formulates his experience.

At this point, the difference between the Three Hierarchs and the philosophizing theologians of their time, who deviated from the Orthodox truth, is evident. While the philosophizing theologians had a single methodology for research and knowledge of God, the Three Hierarchs had developed the dual methodology for the knowledge of the world and God – since reason researches the world and the nous acquires experiences of God – with the result that they did not confuse nous and reason and did not identify science and theology.

As we have identified above, Hellenism is a very large magnitude, which began many centuries before the coming of Christ, fertilized all the elements it found in its path, even Eastern traditions, and constantly grew in experience and knowledge. All the scientific and practical knowledge of that era it received from Eastern peoples, it turned into philosophy.

Studying these issues carefully, I found that the theology of the Church Fathers, especially of the Three Hierarchs, can be considered a creative evolution of Hellenism, an expression of Christianized Hellenism, since the Three Hierarchs absorbed all the positive elements of Hellenism that they encountered and raised it to great heights. Just as Hellenism fertilized the elements of the past, so Christianity fertilized the elements of Hellenism that it encountered in its time. For example, the Three Hierarchs made the best use of many views of pre-Socratic philosophy (Eleatic School and School of Heraclitus), many theories of classical philosophy (Plato and Aristotle), many expressions of the mystical phase of Hellenism (Pythagoras and the Orphics), etc., without, of course, altering the Orthodox revelatory truth.

I would like to mention a characteristic example, namely the case of Heraclitus* and how the views of Heraclitus passed creatively into the Orthodox tradition.

It is known that Heraclitus (535-475 BC) was a luminous spirit in the course of the development of the ancient Greek tradition. Of course, his complete work has not survived, only 139 excerpts in various authors have survived. It is characteristic that the views of Heraclitus became the subject of attention and research by all the ancient classical philosophers, such as Plato, Aristotle, etc., the ancient Christian writers, such as Hippolytus, Clement of Alexandria, and the modern philosophers, such as Hegel, Bergson, Marx, Goethe, Nietzsche.

His surviving excerpts are interpreted in various ways, precisely because Heraclitus was characterized as a "dark philosopher", that is, he is difficult to interpret, he is aphoristic and elliptical and, as Diogenes Laertius said, "it needs a Delian diver to get to the bottom of it," for someone to comprehend him.

From Heraclitus' views, we can note three of his basic theses.

One refers to the concept of logos, which is the universal law that governs everything, it is found within beings, in becoming, in the being of the world, in the soul of man. Logos is the principle from which becoming originates, and man must unite with logos. However, in order to be able to reach and unite with logos, he must be freed from his senses and the barriers of his subjectivity. Heraclitus speaks of the common logos, which means the identification of common logos with common wisdom. This logos is eternal and people cannot understand it, neither before they hear it, nor when they hear it. When they are awake they do not know what they are doing and when they sleep they forget what they are doing. While the word is common, many people live as if they have their own truth. Heraclitus writes: "Though the logos is common, the many live as if they had a wisdom of their own" (fragment 2).

The second basic truth of Heraclitus is about becoming, since he supports the well-known view that "everything flows". Becoming, according to Heraclitus, knows neither beginning nor end, but everywhere has its beginning and end. It is a perpetual conflict of opposites, which is why he spoke of "war being the father of all things." Within becoming there is logos, which is why every eternity cannot go beyond its limits. Thus, despite becoming, the perpetual movement of beings, there is an inner balance.

The third basic principle is that Heraclitus identifies logos with fire, since fire symbolizes the eternal logos. Heraclitus writes that the entire world was not created by any god or man, "but it always was, is, and will be: an ever-living fire, with measures of it kindling, and measures going out" (fragment 30).

Therefore, according to Heraclitus, there is a relationship between logos, becoming, and fire. A consequence of this relationship is that truth is connected with logos and not with sensation, and for this reason man must participate in logos. Within this perspective, Heraclitus exercises a critique of his contemporary idolatry, since people, while seeking to purify themselves with purifications, nevertheless became defiled with other blood from the bloody sacrifices and thus resembled someone who has stepped into the mud and is then trying to wash himself off with the mud (fragment 5). Also within this perspective he criticizes those people who identify eudaimonia with physical pleasures, because if eudaimonia were to be found in such pleasures, then the happiest beings would be oxen (fragment 4).

The Church Fathers used or responded to these views of Heraclitus, as they did with the views of other philosophers. Specifically:

The logos of Heraclitus, which is the universal law of the world, recalls the Logos – Christ, Who, however, is a person and through Whom the world was created, since "by the logos of the Lord the heavens were established."

The becoming of Heraclitus recalls the teaching of the Fathers about the uncreated energy of God in all creation, since according to the word of Christ "my Father is working until now, and I am working" (John 5:17) and within all creation there are "the logoi of beings", that is, the uncreated energies of God. Despite the constant becoming, there is unity, since the logoi of beings create a balance. And for this reason the father of all is not war, but the God of peace.

The ever-living fire of Heraclitus recalls the fire of Pentecost, the energy of the Holy Spirit, which reveals the Logos – Christ and activates the charismatic gifts and of course constitutes the entire institution of the Church, which is the Body of Christ. It is characteristic that the passage of Heraclitus “always was, is, and will be an ever-living fire” was used by Saint Gregory the Theologian and the hymnography of the Church, to declare the Holy Spirit, who “always was, is, and will be, neither beginning nor ceasing.”

Of course, there are differences between the philosophy of Heraclitus and the revelatory truth of the Orthodox Church, as expressed by the Fathers of the Church, but the example we mentioned shows how some of the basic teachings of Heraclitus creatively passed into Christian truth, or to be even more precise, it shows how Christian revelation was formulated by the Fathers of the Church, and especially by the Three Hierarchs, through the teachings of the ancient philosophers or even Heraclitus, as we saw earlier.

Notes:

* See Ἡράκλειτος ἅπαντα, Τάσου Φάλκου - Ἀρβανιτάκη, ἐκδ. Ζῆτρος; Κωνσταντίνου Βαμβακά: Οἱ θεμελιωτὲς τῆς δυτικῆς σκέψης, Πανεπιστημιακὲς ἐκδόσεις Κρήτης; Ἰωάννου Θεοδωρακόπουλου: εἰς Ἱστορία τοῦ Ἑλληνικοῦ Ἔθνους, Ἐκδοτικῆς Ἀθηνῶν, τόμ. Β΄, 432 κ. ἐξ.; Γρηγορίου Κωσταρά: Φιλοσοφικὴ προπαίδεια, Ἀθῆναι 1991; Χαραλάμπους Θεοδωρίδου: Ἐπίκουρος, ἡ ἀληθινὴ ὄψη τοῦ ἀρχαίου κόσμου, Κολλάρου.

Source 1 and 2: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.