lundi 3 octobre 2016

Saint DENYS l'Aréopagite, évêque

Raphael  (1483–1520). Saint Paul prêchant à Athènes, 1515, 390 x 440, Victoria and Albert Museum  


Saint Denys l’aréopagite

Évêque d'Athènes (1er s.)

Les Églises d'Orient, byzantines et syriaque, qui le fêtent aujourd'hui, en font le premier évêque d'Athènes, converti par saint Paul

(Le Moyen Âge voulut donner une origine très apostolique à l'évêché de Paris. On savait qu'un des premiers évangélisateurs de cette région s'appelait saint Denys. Alors, tout simplement, on l'identifia avec Denys de l'Aréopage d'Athènes,  et les parisiens en firent le premier évêque de Paris. Un mystique mit ses propres écrits sous son patronyme, avec beaucoup d'humilité. Et c'est ainsi que saint Denys connut une immense popularité aussi bien dans le petit peuple que parmi les théologiens qui reconnurent dans le pseudo-Denys un des plus grands auteurs mystiques. Saint Denys, celui qui fut évêque de Paris, est fêté le 9 octobre.)

Denys l’aréopagite fut converti à la foi de Jésus-Christ par l’apôtre saint Paul. 

On l’appelle aréopagite du quartier de la ville où il habitait. L'aréopage était le quartier de Mars, parce qu'il y avait un temple dédié à ce dieu. Les Athéniens donnaient aux différentes parties de la ville le nom du dieu qui était honoré; ainsi celle-ci était appelée Aréopage parce que Ares est un des noms de Mars.

Source: La légende dorée de Jacques de Voragine (site de l'abbaye Saint Benoît, Suisse)

Le 3 octobre, commémoraison de saint Denys l’Aréopagite, qui donna son adhésion au Christ après le discours de l’Apôtre saint Paul devant l’Aréopage et fut établi premier évêque des Athéniens.

Martyrologe romain

SOURCE : https://nominis.cef.fr/contenus/saint/8401/Saint-Denys-l-areopagite.html

Portrait de Denys l'Aréopagite dans un manuscrit byzantin offert à l'abbaye de Saint-Denis par Manuel II PaléologueŒuvres complètes de saint Denys l'Aréopagitemusée du Louvre, vers 1403-1405.


BENOÎT XVI

AUDIENCE GÉNÉRALE

Mercredi 14 mai 2008 

Pseudo-Denys l'Aréopagite

 

Chers frères et sœurs,

Je voudrais aujourd'hui, au cours des catéchèses sur les Pères de l'Eglise, parler d'une figure très mystérieuse:  un théologien du sixième siècle, dont le nom est inconnu, qui a écrit sous le pseudonyme de Denys l'Aréopagite. Avec ce pseudonyme, il fait allusion au passage de l'Ecriture que nous venons d'entendre, c'est-à-dire à l'histoire racontée par saint Luc dans le chapitre XVII des Actes des Apôtres, où il est rapporté que Paul prêcha à Athènes sur l'Aréopage, pour une élite du grand monde intellectuel grec, mais à la fin la plupart des auditeurs montrèrent leur désintérêt et s'éloignèrent en se moquant de lui; pourtant certains, un petit nombre nous dit saint Luc, s'approchèrent de Paul en s'ouvrant à la foi. L'évangéliste nous donne deux noms:  Denys, membre de l'Aréopage, et une certaine femme, Damaris.

Si l'auteur de ces livres a choisi cinq siècles plus tard le pseudonyme de Denys l'Aréopagite, cela veut dire que son intention était de mettre la sagesse grecque au service de l'Evangile, d'aider la rencontre entre la culture et l'intelligence grecque et l'annonce du Christ; il voulait faire ce qu'entendait ce Denys, c'est-à-dire que la pensée grecque rencontre l'annonce de saint Paul; en étant grec, devenir le disciple de saint Paul et ainsi le disciple du Christ.

Pourquoi a-t-il caché son nom et choisi ce pseudonyme? Une partie de la réponse a déjà été donnée:  il voulait précisément exprimer cette intention fondamentale de sa pensée. Mais il existe deux hypothèses à propos de cet anonymat et de ce pseudonyme. Une première hypothèse dit:  c'était une falsification voulue, avec laquelle, en antidatant ses œuvres au premier siècle, au temps de saint Paul, il voulait donner à sa production littéraire une autorité presque apostolique. Mais mieux que cette hypothèse - qui me semble peu crédible - il y a l'autre:  c'est-à-dire qu'il voulait précisément faire un acte d'humilité. Ne pas rendre gloire à son propre nom, ne pas créer un monument pour lui-même avec ses œuvres, mais réellement servir l'Evangile, créer une théologie ecclésiale, non individuelle, basée sur lui-même. En réalité, il réussit à construire une théologie que nous pouvons certainement dater du VI siècle, mais pas attribuer à l'une des figures de cette époque:  c'est une théologie un peu désindividualisée, c'est-à-dire une théologie qui exprime une pensée et un langage commun. C'était une époque de dures polémiques après le Concile de Chalcédoine; lui, en revanche, dans sa Septième Epître dit:  "Je ne voudrais pas faire de polémiques; je parle simplement de la vérité, je cherche la vérité". Et la lumière de la vérité fait d'elle-même disparaître les erreurs et fait resplendir ce qui est bon. Et avec ce principe, il purifia la pensée grecque et la mit en rapport avec l'Evangile. Ce principe, qu'il affirme dans sa septième lettre, est également l'expression d'un véritable esprit de dialogue:  ne pas chercher les choses qui séparent, chercher la vérité dans la Vérité elle-même, qu'ensuite celle-ci resplendisse et fasse disparaître les erreurs.

La théologie de cet auteur, tout en étant donc pour ainsi dire "suprapersonnelle", réellement ecclésiale, peut être située au VI siècle. Pourquoi? Il rencontra dans les livres d'un certain Proclus, mort à Athènes en 485, l'esprit grec qu'il plaça au service de l'Evangile:  cet auteur appartenait au platonisme tardif, un courant de pensée qui avait transformé la philosophie de Platon en une sorte de religion, dont le but à la fin était de créer une grande apologie du polythéisme grec et de retourner, après le succès du christianisme, à l'antique religion grecque. Il voulait démontrer que, en réalité, les divinités étaient les forces en œuvre dans le cosmos. La conséquence était que l'on devait considérer le polythéisme plus vrai que le monothéisme, avec un unique Dieu créateur. C'était un grand système cosmique de divinités, de forces mystérieuses, celui que nous montre Proclus, pour qui dans ce cosmos déifié l'homme pouvait trouver l'accès à la divinité. Il distinguait cependant les voies pour les simples, qui n'étaient pas en mesure de s'élever aux sommets de la vérité - pour eux certains rites même superstitieux pouvaient suffire - et les voies pour les sages, qui en revanche devaient se purifier pour arriver à la pure lumière.

Cette pensée, comme on le voit, est profondément antichrétienne. C'est une réaction tardive contre la victoire du christianisme. Un usage antichrétien de Platon, alors qu'était déjà en cours un usage chrétien du grand philosophe. Il est intéressant que ce Pseudo-Denys ait osé se servir précisément de cette pensée pour montrer la vérité du Christ; transformer cet univers polythéiste en un cosmos créé par Dieu, dans l'harmonie du cosmos de Dieu où toutes les forces sont une louange à Dieu, et montrer cette grand harmonie, cette symphonie du cosmos qui va des séraphins, aux anges et aux archanges, à l'homme et à toutes les créatures qui ensemble reflètent la beauté de Dieu et sont une louange à Dieu. Il transformait ainsi l'image polythéiste en un éloge du Créateur et de sa créature. Nous pouvons de cette manière découvrir les caractéristiques essentielles de sa pensée:  elle est tout d'abord une louange cosmique. Toute la création parle de Dieu et est un éloge de Dieu. La créature étant une louange de Dieu, la théologie de Pseudo-Denys devient une théologie liturgique:  Dieu se trouve surtout en le louant, pas seulement en réfléchissant; et la liturgie n'est pas quelque chose que nous avons construit, quelque chose d'inventé pour faire une expérience religieuse au cours d'une certaine période de temps; elle est un chant avec le chœur des créatures et l'entrée dans la réalité cosmique elle-même. Et c'est précisément ainsi que la liturgie n'apparaît plus seulement ecclésiastique mais devient vaste et grande, devient notre union avec le langage de toutes les créatures. Il dit:  on ne peut pas parler de Dieu de manière abstraite; parler de Dieu est toujours - dit-il avec un mot grec - un "hymnein", un chant pour Dieu avec le grand chant des créatures, qui se reflète et se concrétise dans la louange liturgique. Toutefois, bien que sa théologie soit cosmique, ecclésiale et liturgique, elle est également profondément personnelle. Il créa la première grande théologie mystique. Le mot "mystique" acquiert même avec lui une nouvelle signification. Jusqu'à cette époque, pour les chrétiens ce mot était équivalent au mot "sacramentel", c'est-à-dire ce qui appartient au "mysterion", au sacrement. La parole "mystique" devient avec lui plus personnelle, plus intime:  elle exprime le chemin de l'âme vers Dieu. Et comment trouver Dieu? Nous observons de nouveau ici un élément important dans son dialogue entre la philosophie grecque et le christianisme, en particulier la foi biblique. Apparemment, ce que dit Platon et ce que dit la grande philosophie sur Dieu est beaucoup plus élevé, est beaucoup plus vrai; la Bible apparaît assez "barbare", simple, précritique dirait-on aujourd'hui; mais lui remarque que c'est justement ce qui est nécessaire parce qu'ainsi nous pouvons comprendre que les concepts les plus élevés sur Dieu n'arrivent jamais jusqu'à sa vraie grandeur; ils sont toujours inappropriés. En réalité, ces images nous font comprendre que Dieu est au delà de tous les concepts; dans la simplicité des images, nous trouvons plus de vérité que dans les grands concepts. Le visage de Dieu est notre incapacité d'exprimer réellement ce qu'Il est. Aussi parle-t-on - comme le fait Pseudo-Denys - d'une "théologie négative". Nous pouvons plus facilement dire ce que Dieu n'est pas, plutôt que d'exprimer ce qu'Il est véritablement. Ce n'est qu'à travers ces images que nous pouvons deviner son vrai visage, et de l'autre côté ce visage de Dieu est très concret:  c'est Jésus Christ. Et bien que Denys nous montre, en suivant en cela Proclus, l'harmonie des chœurs célestes, de telle façon qu'il nous semble que tous dépendent de tous, il reste vrai que notre chemin vers Dieu demeure fort éloigné de Lui; Pseudo-Denys nous montre que, finalement, la route vers Dieu est Dieu lui-même, Lequel se rapproche de nous en Jésus Christ.

C'est ainsi qu'une théologie tellement grande et mystérieuse devient également très concrète autant dans l'interprétation de la liturgie que dans le discours tenu sur Jésus Christ:  avec tout cela, Denys l'Aréopagite eut une grande influence sur toute la théologie médiévale, sur toute la théologie mystique autant en Orient qu'en Occident, il fut presque redécouvert au treizième siècle notamment par saint Bonaventure, le grand théologien franciscain qui dans cette  théologie  mystique  trouva  le moyen conceptuel d'interpréter l'héritage tellement simple et profond de saint François:  le "poverello", avec Denys, nous dit finalement que l'amour voit plus que la raison. Là où se trouve la lumière de l'amour on ne souffre plus des ténèbres de la raison; l'amour voit, l'amour est un œil et l'expérience nous donne plus que la réflexion. Quelle que soit cette expérience, Bonaventure le vit en saint François:  c'est l'expérience d'un cheminement très humble, très réaliste, jour après jour, c'est cela aller avec le Christ, en acceptant sa croix. Dans cette pauvreté et dans cette humilité, dans l'humilité que l'on éprouve également dans la vie ecclésiale, on fait une expérience de Dieu qui est plus élevée que celle que l'on atteint par la réflexion:  à travers elle, nous touchons réellement le cœur de Dieu.

Il existe aujourd'hui une nouvelle actualité de Denys l'Aréopagite:  il apparaît comme un grand médiateur dans le dialogue moderne entre le christianisme et les théologies mystiques de l'Asie, dont la caractéristique la plus connue est la conviction selon laquelle on ne peut pas dire qui est Dieu; on ne peut parler de Lui que sous forme négative; on ne peut parler de Dieu qu'avec le "ne pas", et ce n'est qu'en entrant dans cette expérience du "ne pas" qu'on Le rejoint. On voit ici une proximité entre la pensée de l'Aréopagite et celle des religions asiatiques:  il peut être aujourd'hui un médiateur comme le il fut entre l'esprit grec et l'Evangile. On voit ainsi que le dialogue n'accepte pas la superficialité. C'est justement quand quelqu'un entre dans la profondeur de la rencontre avec le Christ que s'ouvre également le vaste espace pour le dialogue. Quand quelqu'un rencontre la lumière de la vérité, on s'aperçoit qu'il est une lumière pour tous; les polémiques disparaissent et il devient possible de se comprendre l'un l'autre ou au moins de parler l'un avec l'autre, de se rapprocher. Le chemin du dialogue est justement la proximité dans le Christ à Dieu dans la profondeur de la rencontre avec Lui, dans l'expérience de la vérité qui nous ouvre à la lumière et nous aide à aller à la rencontre des autres:  la lumière de la vérité, la lumière de l'amour. Et il nous dit en fin de compte:  empruntez la voie de l'expérience, de l'expérience humble de la foi, chaque jour. Le cœur devient alors grand et peut voir et illuminer également la raison pour qu'elle voie la beauté de Dieu. Prions le Seigneur pour qu'il nous aide aujourd'hui aussi à mettre au service de l'Evangile la sagesse de notre époque, en découvrant à nouveau la beauté de la foi, la rencontre avec Dieu dans le Christ.

* * *

Je suis heureux de vous accueillir chers pèlerins francophones, en particulier les jeunes des collèges du Vésinet et de Sallanches, du Lycée de Chateauneuf de Galaure et de l’École d’évangélisation de Paray-le-Monial. Que le don de l’Esprit Saint fasse de vous les messagers, pleins de joie, de la Bonne Nouvelle du salut. Avec ma Bénédiction apostolique.


APPEL

En cet instant, ma pensée va aux populations du Sichuan et des provinces limitrophes en Chine, durement frappées par le tremblement de terre, qui a causé de très nombreuses pertes humaines, de très nombreux disparus et des dégats incalculables. Je vous invite à vous unir à moi dans la prière fervente pour tous ceux qui ont perdu la vie. Je suis spirituellement proche des personnes frappées par une catastrophe si dévastatrice:  nous implorons pour elles de Dieu le réconfort dans la souffrance. Que le Seigneur accorde son soutien à tous ceux qui sont engagés dans le service pour apporter les premiers secours.

© Copyright 2008 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

SOURCE : http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/fr/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20080514.html

SAINT DENYS

J’ai déjà remarqué que chaque élu reçoit l’attrait surnaturel suivant une forme qui s’adapte à son caractère propre. Saint Augustin est appelé par un livre ; saint Paul par la foudre, les Rois Mages par une étoile. Saint Denys, lui, fut appelé par une éclipse de soleil.

Le Docteur de la négation transcendante, celui qui devait épuiser, pour nommer Dieu, la parole humaine et déclarer ensuite qu’aucun nom ne suffirait, et faire mourir la parole dans le silence supérieur, celui-là fut appelé par une éclipse de soleil. Il était loin du Golgotha ; il était sur les bords du Nil, le jour du crucifiement, quand il reçut en Égypte la visite de l’obscurité.

Il comprit qu’une commotion agitait le ciel et la terre. Se souvenant de la leçon solennelle que l’ombre lui avait donnée, le Vendredi-Saint, il se réfugia dans l’ombre sacrée pour y vivre au-dessus des pensées humaines.

Après avoir écouté les paroles de la nuit, il entendit les paroles de saint Paul ; il entendit les paroles de Hierothée ! Quel homme ! Disciple de saint Paul et Maitre de saint Denys ! Maître de saint Denys ! quel titre ! Quel homme devait être celui après lequel saint Denys n’osait plus parler ? Quel homme que celui qui rendit saint Denys timide et qui l’inclina vers le silence énorme dont il ne sortait que par un effort, dont il s’accusait de sortir, disant à ses contemporains et à la postérité qu’après la parole d’Hiérothée il avait honte de la sienne ! Ce fut un jour solennel dans l’histoire intellectuelle et morale du monde que celui où saint Denys comparut devant l’Aréopage d’Athènes. Athènes ! Quels souvenirs parfaitement païens ce nom réveille ! Et cependant, voici le Foudroyé du chemin de Damas qui arrive là un jour, entre le Parthénon et le temple de Thésée, avec son bâton et sa parole. Mais entre le Parthénon et le temple de Thésée, il y avait un autel dressé au Dieu inconnu : l’invincible espérance avait l’air de s’être réfugiée là. Dans cette patrie de l’erreur et de l’erreur systématique, dans cette Athènes subtile, railleuse et médiocre, dans cette capitale du paganisme, le Dieu inconnu s’était réservé une place inconnue. Et saint Paul en profita. Saint Paul et Athènes ! Quel contraste immense ! Si saint Jérôme avait parlé devant l’Aréopage, à la bonne heure, cela se comprendrait ! Mais saint Paul ! le grand contemplateur de la rhétorique, l’ennemi juré des phrases, des subtilités, des querelles de mots, qui ne veut rien invoquer des choses de la sagesse humaine, le voilà devant cette Athènes qui imposa la finesse et la petitesse même au génie grandiose et oriental de Platon. C’est devant cette assemblée que saint Paul porte la parole. Mais, au nom du Dieu inconnu, quelqu’un se lève pour le suivre. C’est Denys, qui sera saint Denys. C’est celui qui se promenait en Égypte le Vendredi-Saint, pendant l’éclipse de soleil ; c’est celui qui dit alors : « Il se fait en ce moment une révolution dans les choses divines. » C’est celui qui plus tard écrira le Traité des noms divins ; et peut-être qu’au nom du Dieu inconnu il sentit frémir en lui l’Esprit qui allait l’emporter.

Denys, le dépositaire de la science grecque et de la science égyptienne, qui portait en lui la métaphysique occidentale et la métaphysique orientale ; Denys, qui va devenir saint Denys, se fait le disciple d’Hiérothée, et quand, devenu saint Denys, il ose ouvrir la bouche, c’est pour s’excuser en tremblant, car Hiérothée a parlé.

« Il convient, dit le grand saint Denys, de repousser un reproche qu’on pourrait me faire. Puisque mon illustre maître Hiérothée a fait un admirable recueil des éléments de théologie, devais-je écrire après lui ? Certainement, s’il eût développé la somme entière de la théologie, nous ne serions jamais tombés dans cet excès de folie et de témérité d’imaginer que nous parlerions des mêmes choses d’une façon plus profonde et plus divine que lui ; nous n’aurions pas commis cette lâcheté envers notre ami et maître, auquel, après saint Paul, nous devons l’initiation à la science divine, nous n'eussions pas essayé de prendre sa place et de lui dérober la gloire de ses sublimes enseignements. Mais comme il exposait sa doctrine d’une façon vraiment élevée, comme il cachait sous un seul mot beaucoup de choses, destinées aux grandes intelligences, nous avons reçu l’ordre de développer, à l’usage des petits et des faibles, les pensées que nous a transmises cet immense génie. Je vous ai envoyé son livre ; vous me l’avez renvoyé, déclarant qu’il surpasse la portée ordinaire. En effet, je le regarde comme le guide des esprits avancés dans la perfection, qui vient à la suite des oracles des apôtres, et je crois qu’il faut le réserver aux hommes supérieurs. »

Quel était donc cet homme, quel était donc ce philosophe auprès de qui saint Denys n’est qu’un maître élémentaire, un vulgarisateur qui met les choses sublimes à la portée des foules, lui, saint Denys ! Et s’il fallait compter sur la terre combien d’esprits sont capables de comprendre, même de loin ce vulgarisateur, le dénombrement de cette partie de la population du globe serait bientôt fait. Saint Denys a eu raison de parler. Au lieu de diminuer la gloire de son maître, c’est lui qui en a perpétué le souvenir. Les oeuvres d’Hiérothée sont en partie perdues ! Il paraît que la terre n’était pas digne de les garder. Mais nous en connaissons par saint Denys la substance. La doctrine d’Hiérothée a été étudiée, analysée, développée par son sublime élève. Dans cet aperçu rapide, plus historique que métaphysique, je n’essayerai pas de la commenter. Je l’ai fait dans deux ouvrages (1).

J’indique seulement ici quelques faits peu connus, et je ferai quelques citations aussi sublimes qu’ignorées.

Jésus-Christ avait quitté la terre, laissant sa mère à saint Jean.

Saint Denys voulut voir la Vierge. Il fallait une lettre de recommandation. Il parait que saint Paul la lui donna. Saint Denys fut reçu.

C’était à Éphèse probablement. Quand il rendit compte de son entrevue :

« J’ai fait un effort, dit-il, pour me souvenir qu’il n’y a qu’un Dieu. J’ai fait un effort pour ne pas tomber à genoux et adorer la créature. »

Quelque temps après Marie, mère de Dieu, mourait en présence des apôtres. Cette réunion extraordinaire des douze hommes dispersés dans le monde offre un caractère frappant qui n’a peut-être jamais été suffisamment remarqué. Quelle singulière solennité ! Ces pêcheurs galiléens, devenus tout à coup orateurs et thaumaturges, se dispersent aux quatre vents du ciel. Le souffle qui les emporte touche à la fois l’Orient et l’Occident. Ils vont à Rome ; ils vont en Perse; ils vont dans l’Inde. Celui qui avait peur des plaisanteries d’une servante va mourir tout à l’heure crucifié la tête en bas. Ils sont partis ; les voilà qui reviennent pour un moment. Ils suspendent un moment leurs gigantesques travaux. Caligula régnait probablement, à moins que ce ne fût Claude, ou déjà Néron; car l’année est inconnue. Cette femme obscure, dont les peuples ni les rois n’ont entendu parler, va mourir à Éphèse. Le bruit s'en répand mystérieusement; porté sur l’aile de je ne sais quel oiseau, il va aux extrémités de la terre.

Marie va mourir. Les apôtres reviennent, avec eux Hiérothée et Denys.

Le souvenir de la mort de Marie et des paroles prononcées autour d’elle par les apôtres réunis réveille chez saint Denys cette admiration fidèle, éternelle, enthousiaste du disciple pour le maître; admiration touchante et presque naïve, qui fait éprouver à l’Aréopagite, toutes les fois que le nom glorieux de son maître tombe sous sa plume, le besoin de s’excuser, de lui rendre hommage et de s’effacer devant lui.

« Je me suis abstenu scrupuleusement, dit-il, de toucher aucunement à tous ces points que notre glorieux maître a expliqués clairement, pour ne pas toucher à ce qu’il a dit. Toute parole vient mal après la sienne. (Quel enthousiasme dans ce mot ! « Toute parole vient mal après la sienne, car il brillait même entre nos pontifes inspirés, comme vous avez pu le constater vous-même, quand vous et moi nous vînmes contempler le corps sacré qui avait produit la Vie et porté Dieu. Là se trouvaient Jacques et Pierre, chefs suprêmes des théologiens. Alors il sembla bon que tous les pontifes, chacun à sa manière, célébrassent la toute-puissante bonté du Dieu qui s’était revêtu de notre infirmité. Or, après les apôtres, Híérothée surpassa les autres orateurs, ravi et transporté hors de lui-même, profondément ému des merveilles qu’il publiait, et admiré par tous les assistants, amis ou étrangers, comme un homme inspiré du ciel. « J’ose dire que Hiérothée fut le panégyriste de la divinité ! Mais à quoi bon vous redire ce qui fut prononcé en cette glorieuse assemblée ? Car, si ma mémoire ne me trompe pas, j’ai entendu répéter par votre bouche, Timothée, quelques fragments de ces louanges divines. »

Si, descendant de là-haut, nous nous souvenons de la nature humaine, si prompte à dénigrer, même quand elle estime, même quand elle admire, si prompte à rabaisser, fût-ce par un petit mot presque imperceptible, celui qui vient de s’élever au-dessus de vous, nous serons plus profondément pénétrés de cet enthousiasme humble et brûlant en vertu duquel saint Denys se cache et s’efface derrière son maître. Plus il se cache, plus il se montre. Plus il s’abaisse, plus il s’élève. Le lecteur ne sait trop qui admirer le plus et confond dans une louange commune le maître qui a su faire un tel disciple, et le disciple qui a su porter de cette façon le poids d un tel maître. Car c’est une charge, c’est une responsabilité, c’est un fardeau, qu’un tel dépôt, le dépôt qu’Hiérothée avait confié à Denys, et la simplicité qui ne se regarde pas était aussi nécessaire, pour le garder fidèlement, que l’intelligence qui regarde la lumière.

Si Hiérothée fut le métaphysicien des choses supérieures, il est évident qu’il ne s’en tint pas à la théorie. Denys le caractérise par ce mot superbe : Erat patiens divina. « Il était le patient des choses divines. » Patient signifie expérimentateur. Il était le sujet des opérations divines. Nous trouvons dans ses hymnes sur l’amour divin un passage, cité par saint Denys, qui nous ouvre quelque horizon sur la nature des pensées de son maître.

« Par l’amour, dit Hiérothée, par l’amour, quel qu’il soit, divin, angélique, rationnel, animal ou instinctif, nous entendons cette puissance qui établit et maintient l’harmonie parmi les êtres, qui incline les plus élevés vers ceux qui le sont moins, dispose les égaux à une fraternelle alliance, et prépare les inférieurs à l’action providentielle des supérieurs… Rassemblons et résumons tous ces amours divisés en un seul et universel amour, père fécond de tous les autres. A une certaine hauteur apparaîtra le double amour des âmes humaines et des esprits angéliques, et bien loin, bien loin par delà brille et domine la cause incompréhensible et infiniment supérieure de tout amour, vers laquelle aspire unanimement l’amour de tous les êtres, en vertu de leur nature propre… Ramenant donc tous ces ruisseaux divers à la source unique, disons qu’il existe une force simple, spontanée, qui établit l’union et l’harmonie entre toutes choses, depuis le souverain bien jusqu’à la dernière des créatures, et de là remonte par la même route, à son point de départ, accomplissant d’elle-même, en elle-même et sur elle-même, sa révolution invariable. »

Ces considérations générales nous indiquent à peu près la nature du regard qu’il jetait sur la création. La page que je vais citer nous donnera une idée de la hauteur de ses vues théologiques et du coup-d’oeil qu’il jetait sur l’incarnation du Verbe.

« La divinité du Seigneur Jésus-Christ, dit Hiérothée, est la cause et le complément de tout ; elle maintient les choses dans un harmonieux ensemble sans être ni tout ni partie; et cependant elle dit tout et partie, parce qu’elle comprend en elle et qu’elle possède par excellence le tout et les parties. Comme principe de perfection, elle est parfaite dans les choses qui ne le sont pas ; et, en ce sens qu’elle brille d’une perfection supérieure et antécédente, elle n’est pas parfaite dans les choses qui le sont. Forme suprême et originale, elle donne une forme à ce qui n’en a pas, et dans ce qui a une forme elle en semble dépourvue, précisément à cause de l’excellence de la sienne propre. Substance auguste, elle peut s’incliner vers les autres substances sans souiller sa pureté, sans descendre de sa suprême élévation. Elle détermine et classe entre eux les principes des choses et reste éminemment au-dessus de tout principe et de toute classification. Elle fixe l’essence des êtres. Sa plénitude apparaît en ce qui manque aux créatures. Sa surabondance éclate en ce que ces créatures possèdent. Indicible, ineffable, supérieure à tout entendement, á toute vie, à toute substance, elle a surnaturellement ce qui est surnaturel et suréminemment ce qui est suréminent. De là vient (et puissent nous concilier miséricorde les louanges que nous donnons à ces merveilles qui surpassent l’intelligence et la parole) ; de là vient qu’en s’abaissant jusqu’à notre nature et s’unissant à elle, le Verbe divin fut au-dessus de notre nature, non-seulement parce qu’il s’est uni à l’humanité, sans altération ni confusion de sa Divinité, et que sa plénitude infinie n’a pas souffert de cet ineffable anéantissement, mais encore, ce qui est admirable, parce qu’il se montra supérieur à notre nature dans les choses mêmes qui sont propres à elle, et qu’il posséda d’une façon transcendante ce qui est à nous, ce qui est de nous. »

C’est ainsi que saint Hiérothée parlait de l’Incarnation. Les ouvrages d’Hiérothée sont perdus pour la plupart. Perte incalculable dont personne ne mesure la dimension. J’ai voulu demander à l’histoire ses trop rares documents, et reconstruire un peu la grande figure d’Hiérothée, et offrir au lecteur la gloire presque oubliée de cet illustre inconnu.

(1) L’Homme, par Ernest Hello, Chap. Saint Denis l’Aréopagite. M. Renan, l’Allemagne et l’athéisme au dix-neuvième siècle par Ernest Hello (Douniol).

SOURCE : https://archive.org/stream/PhysionomiesDeSaintsParErnestHello/physionomies%20de%20saints_djvu.txt

Saint Denis l'Aréopagite, évêque d'Athènes, vitrail de l'église Saint-Roch de Paris



SAINT DENYS

Denys veut dire qui fuit avec force. Il peut venir de dyo, deux, et nisus, élévation, élevé en deux choses, savoir quant au corps et quant à l’âme. Ou bien il vient de Dyana, Vénus, déesse de la beauté, et de syos, Dieu, beau devant Dieu. Selon d'autres il viendrait de Dyonisia, qui est, d'après Isidore, une pierre précieuse de couleur noire servant contre l’ivresse. En effet saint Denys s'est empressé de fuir le monde avec une parfaite abnégation ; il a été élevé à la contemplation des choses spirituelles, beau aux yeux de Dieu par l’éclat de ses vertus, fort contre l’ivresse du vice à l’égard des pécheurs. Avant sa conversion il eut plusieurs prénoms: On l’appela l’Aréopagite, du lieu de sa demeure; Théosophe, qui veut dire instruit dans les sciences divines. Jusqu'à ce jour les sages de la Grèce l’appellent pterugion tou ouranou, qui veut dire aile du ciel, pour avoir pris son vol vers le ciel sur l’aile de l’intelligence spirituelle. On l’appela encore Macarius, qui signifie heureux; Ionique du nom de sa patrie. L'Ionique, dit Papios, est un dialecte grec, ou bien encore c'est un genre de colonnes. Ionique, d'après le même auteur, est une mesure d'un pied qui contient deux brèves et deux longues. On voit par là que saint Denys fut instruit dans la connaissance de Dieu en se livrant à l’investigation des choses cachées ; il fut l’aile du ciel en contemplant les choses célestes, et bienheureux par la possession des biens éternels. Par le reste, on voit qu'il fut un rhéteur merveilleux en éloquence, le soutien de l’Eglise par sa doctrine, bref par son humilité et long par sa charité envers les autres. Cependant saint Augustin dit au VIIIe Livre de la Cité de Dieu que l’Ionien est une école philosophique Il distingue deux écoles savoir l’Italique qui doit son nom à l’Italie et l’Ionienne qui le doit à la Grèce. Or, parce que saint Denys était un philosophe éminent, il est appelé Ionien par antonomase (Figure de rhétorique, qui substitue un nom commun à un nom propre). Sa vie et son martyre ont été écrits en grec par Méthode de Constantinople, et traduits en latin par Anastase, bibliothécaire du siège apostolique, d'après ce que dit Hincmar, évoque de Reims. (Ep. XXIII, à Charles, empereur.)

Denys l’aréopagite fut converti à la foi de J.-C. par l’apôtre saint Paul. On l’appelle aréopagite du quartier de la ville où il habitait. L'aréopage était le quartier de Mars, parce qu'il y avait un temple dédié à ce Dieu. Les Athéniens donnaient aux différentes parties de la ville le nom du dieu qui était honoré; ainsi celle-ci était appelée Aréopage parce que Ares est un des noms de Mars : ainsi le quartier où Pan était adoré se nommait Panopage, et ainsi des autres.. Or, l’Aréopage était le quartier le plus remarquable, puisque c'était celui de la noblesse et des écoles des arts libéraux. C'était donc là que demeurait Denys très grand philosophe, qui, à raison de sa science et de la connaissance parfaite qu'il avait des noms divins, était surnommé Théosophe, ami de Dieu. Il y avait avec lui Apollophane, philosophe gtii partageait ses idées. Là se trouvaient aussi les Epicuriens qui faisaient consister le bonheur de l’homme dans les seules voluptés du corps, et les stoïciens qui le plaçaient dans les vertus de l’esprit. Or, le jour de la passion de Notre-Seigneur, au moment que les ténèbres couvrirent la terre entière, les philosophes d'Athènes ne purent trouver la raison de ce prodige dans les causes naturelles. En effet cette éclipse ne fut pas naturelle, parce que la lune n'était pas alors dans la région du soleil, tandis qu'il n'y a d'éclipse que quand il y a interposition de la lune et du soleil. Or, c'était le quinzième jour de la lune, et par conséquent elle était tout à fait éloignée du soleil; en outre l’éclipse ne prive pas de lumière toutes les contrées du monde, et elle ne peut durer trois heures. Or, cette éclipse priva de lumière toutes les parties de la terre, ce qui est positif par ce que dit saint Luc, et parce que c'était le Seigneur de l’univers qui souffrait, enfin parce qu'elle fut visible à Héliopolis en Egypte, à Rome, en Grèce et dans l’Asie-Mineure. Elle eut lieu à Rome ; Orose l’atteste quand il dit * : « Lorsque le Seigneur fat attaché au gibet, il se fit dans l’univers un très grand tremblement de terre ; les rochers se fendirent, et plusieurs des quartiers des plus grandes villes s'écroulèrent par cette commotion extraordinaire. Le même jour, depuis la sixième heure, le soleil fut entièrement obscurci, une nuit noire couvrit subitement la terre, en sorte que l’on put voir les étoiles dans tout le ciel en plein jour ou plutôt pendant cette affreuse nuit. » Elle eut lieu en Egypte, et saint Denys en fait mention dans une lettre à Apollophane : « Les astres furent obscurcis par les ténèbres qui répandirent un brouillard épais; ensuite le disque solaire dégagé repartit. Nous avons pris la règle de Philippe d'Arridée, et après avoir trouvé, comme du reste c'était chose fort connue, que le soleil ne devait pas être éclipsé, je vous dis : et Sanctuaire de science profonde, voici encore un mystère que vous ne connaissez pas. O vous qui êtes le miroir de science, Apollophane, qu'attribuez-vous à ces secrets?» A quoi vous m’avez répondu plutôt comme un dieu que comme un homme : « Mon bon Denys, la perturbation est dans les choses divines.» Et quand saint Paul, aux lèvres duquel nous étions suspendus, nous fit connaître le jour et l’année du fait que nous avions noté, ces signes, qui étaient manifestes, nous en firent ressouvenir ; alors j'ai rendu les armes à la vérité, et je me suis débarrassé des liens de l’erreur. » Il fait encore mention de cet événement dans l’épître à Polycarpe où il dit ce qui suit en parlant de soi et d'Apollophane (Voyez saint Thomas, IIIe part., quest. XLIV, art. 2, où ce passage de saint Denys est expliqué avec beaucoup de soin) : « Tous deux nous étions à Héliopolis, quand à mon grand étonnement, nous vîmes la lune se placer en avant du soleil (ce n'était point l’époque de la conjonction). Nous l’avons vue de nouveau à la neuvième heure, elle s'éloigna du soleil et vint surnatureltement se remettre de manière qu'elle se trouvât diamétralement opposée à cet astre.

Vous avons vu l’éclipse commencer à l’orient, atteindre jusqu'au bord occidental du disque du soleil, pour revenir ensuite; nous avons vu la décroissance et la réapparition de la lumière, non dans la mème partie du soleil, mais dans un sens diamétralement opposé. » C'était l’époque où saint Denys avec Apollophane était allé à Héliopolis en Egypte, dans le but d'étudier l’astrologie. Il en revint dans la suite. Cette éclipse eut lieu aussi en Asie, comme l’atteste Eusèbe dans sa chronique, où il assure avoir lu dans les écrits des païens, qu'à cette époque, il se fit en Bithynie, province de l’Asie-Mineure, un grand tremblement de terre, et la plus grande éclipse de soleil qu'il y ait jamais eu, et qu'à la sixième heure, le jour s'obscurcit au point qu'on vit les étoiles du ciel ; et qu'à Nicée; ville de la Bithynie, le tremblement de terre renversa tous les édifices. Enfin, d'après ce qu'on lit dans l’Histoire scholastique, les philosophes furent amenés à dire que le Dieu de la Nature souffrait. On lit encore ailleurs qu'ils s'écrièrent : « Ou bien l’ordre de la nature est bouleversé, ou les éléments nous trompent, ou le Dieu de la nature souffre, et les éléments compatissent à sa douleur. » On lit aussi en un autre endroit que Denys s'écria : « Cette nuit, que nous admirons comme une nouveauté, nous indique la venue de la lumière véritable qui éclairera le monde entier. » Ce fut alors que les Athéniens érigèrent a ce Dieu un autel où fut placée cette inscription. «Au Dieu inconnu », car à chacun des autels, on mettait une inscription indiquant à qui il était dédié. Quand on voulut lui offrir des holocaustes et des victimes, les philosophes dirent : « Il n'a pas besoin de nos biens, mais vous fléchirez le genou devant son autel, et vous lui adresserez vos supplications, il ne réclame pas qu'on lui offre des animaux, mais la dévotion de l’âme. » Or, quand saint Paul fut venu à Athènes, les philosophes épicuriens et les stoïciens discutaient avec lui. Quelques-uns disaient : « One veut dire ce discoureur ? » Les autres : « Il semble 'qu'il prêche de nouveaux dieux. » Alors ils le menèrent au quartier des philosophes afin d'y examiner cette nouvelle doctrine, et on lui dit : « Vous nous dites certaines choses dont nous n'avons pas encore entendu parler; nous voudrions donc bien savoir quelles elles sont. » Or, les Athéniens passaient tout leur temps à dire et à entendre dire quelque chose de nouveau. Mais quand saint Paul eut vu, en passant, les autels des dieux, et entre autres celui du Dieu. inconnu, il dit à ces philosophes : « Ce Dieu que vous adorez sans le connaître, je viens vous l’annoncer comme le vrai Dieu qui a créé le ciel et la terre. » Ensuite il dit à saint Denys qu'il voyait être le plus instruit dans les choses divines : « Denys, quel est ce Dieu inconnu? » « C'est lui, répondit Denys, le vrai Dieu, dont l’existence n'a pas encore été démontrée comme celle des autres divinités; il nous est inconnu et caché; c'est celui qui doit venir dans le siècle futur et qui doit régner éternellement. » Paul lui dit : « Est-il homme ou seulement esprit? » « Il est Dieu et homme, répondit Denys, mais il n'est inconnu que parce qu'il vit dans les cieux. » Saint Paul reprit : « C'est lui que je prêche ; (85) il est descendu des cieux, a pris une chair, a souffert la mort et est ressuscité le troisième jour. » Denys discutait encore avec Paul quand vint à passer devant eux un aveugle ; aussitôt l’Aréopagite dit à Paul : « Si tu dis à cet aveugle au nom de ton Dieu : « Vois », et qu'il voie, aussitôt je croirai; mais ne te sers pas de paroles magiques ; car tu pourrais bien en savoir qui eussent cette puissance. Je vais te prescrire moi-même les paroles dont tu te serviras. Tu lui diras donc en cette teneur : « Au nom de J.-C. né d'une vierge, crucifié, mort, qui est ressuscité et est monté au ciel, vois. » Alors pour écarter tout soupçon, saint Paul dit à Denys de proférer lui-même ces paroles. Et quand Denys eut dit en cette formule à l’aveugle de voir, aussitôt cet homme recouvra la vue. De suite Denys avec sa femme Damarie et toute sa famille reçut le baptême et la foi. Il fut pendant trois ans instruit par saint Paul et ordonné évêque d'Athènes, où il se livra à la prédication et convertit à la foi en J.-C. la ville et une grande partie du pays.

On dit que saint Paul lui révéla ce qu'il avait vu quand il fut ravi au troisième ciel; saint Denys lui-même semble l’insinuer dans plusieurs endroits : Aussi en traitant des hiérarchies des Anges, de leurs chœurs, de leur emploi et de leur ministère, il s'exprime avec tant de sagesse et de clarté que vous croiriez qu'il n'a pas appris ces choses d'un autre, mais plutôt qu'il a été ravi lui-même jusqu'au troisième ciel pet qu'il y a vu tout ce qu'il en écrit. Il fut honoré du don de prophétie, comme on peut s'en assurer par l’épître qu'il adressa à saint Jean l’évangéliste relégué en exil dans l’île de Pathmos : il prédit à l’apôtre qu'il en sortira, quand il s'exprime ainsi : « Réjouissez-vous, le plus fidèle et le plus tendre des amis, vous serez relâché de la prison de Pathmos, et vous reviendrez en Asie ; vous y imiterez le Dieu bon, et vous ferez part de vos mérites à ceux qui- viendront après vous. » Il assista à la dormition (C'est le mot dont on s'est servi longtemps. pour exprimer la mort de la Sainte Vierge. Voyez la légende de l’Assomption) de la sainte Vierge Marie; ce qu'il paraît insinuer dans son livre des Noms divins (chap. III). Quand il apprit que saint Pierre et saint Paul étaient emprisonnés à Rome par l’ordre de Néron,, il mit un évêque à sa place et vint les visiter. Après leur martyre consommé, saint Clément, qui fut le chef de l’Église, le fit partir quelque temps après pour la France, en lui associant Rustique et Eleuthère. Il fut envoyé à Paris où il convertit beaucoup de personnes à la foi, y éleva plusieurs églises et y plaça des clercs de différents ordres.

Telle était la grâce céleste qui brillait en lui que souvent les prêtres des idoles soulevèrent contre lui le peuple qui, plus d'une fois, accourait en armes pour le perdre ; mais, dès qu'il l’avait va, il perdait sa férocité, et se jetait à ses pieds, ou bien encore la frayeur s'emparait de lui et il prenait la fuite dès que le saint paraissait. Cependant le diable jaloux, voyant que tous les jours son champ se rétrécissait et que l’Église triomphait par de nombreuses conversions, excita Domitien à une cruauté telle que cet empereur porta un ordre de forcer à sacrifier ou de faire mourir dans les supplices chaque chrétien qu'on trouverait. Le préfet Fescennius envoyé de Rome à Paris contre les chrétiens, trouva saint Denys qui prêchait au peuple; aussitôt il le fit saisir, souffleter, conspuer, moquer et lier avec des courroies très rudes et comparaître par devant lui avec saint Rustique et saint Eleuthère. Or, comme les saints persistaient à confesser Dieu devant le préfet, voici qu'arriva une daine noble prétendant que son mari Lisbius avait été honteusement trompé par ces magiciens. On envoie chercher cet homme au plus vite et il, est mis à mort en confessant Dieu avec persévérance ; quant aux saints ils sont- flagellés par douze soldats : après quoi on les charge de lourdes chaînes et on les jette en prison. Le lendemain saint Denys est étendu nu, sur un gril de fer, sous lequel brûlait un feu violent, et là il chantait ainsi les louanges du Seigneur : « Votre parole est éprouvée très parfaitement par le feu, et votre serviteur l’aime uniquement. (Ps. CXVIII.) » On le retire pour. le jeter en pâture à des bêtes d'autant plus féroces qu'on les avait laissées plusieurs jours sans manger. Mais quand elles coururent pour se précipiter sur lui, il leur opposa le signe de la croix et les rendit très douces. On le jeta ensuite dans une fournaise; mais, au lieu de lui nuire, le feu s'éteignit. On l’en fit sortir et on le renferma en prison avec ses compagnons ainsi qu'un grand nombre de fidèles. Comme il y célébrait la messe, au moment de la communion du peuple, Notre-Seigneur J.-C. lui apparut environné d'une immense lumière ; puis il prit le pain et lui dit : « Prenez ceci, mon cher, parce que votre plus grande récompense est d'être avec moi. » Après quoi ils furent amenés au juge qui les livra à de nouveaux supplices;. on trancha à coups de hache, devant l’idole de Mercure, la tête des trois confesseurs de la Trinité. Aussitôt le corps de saint Denys se leva, et sous la conduite d'un ange, et précédé par une lumière céleste, il porta sa tête entre les bras, l’espace de deux milles, depuis l’endroit qu'on appelle le Mont des Martyrs jusqu'à celui que, par là providence de Dieu, il choisit pour'), reposer. Or, les Anges firent entendre là des, accords si mélodieux, que, parmi le grand nombre de ceux qui entendirent et crurent en J.-C., Laërtia, femme de Lisbius, dont il a été parlé plus haut, cria qu'elle était chrétienne. Elle fut décapitée à l’instant et mourut baptisée dans son sang. Son fils Vibius, resta au service militaire à Rome sous trois empereurs; ensuite il revint à Paris où il reçut le baptême et fut admis au nombre des religieux. Comme les infidèles craignaient que les chrétiens n'ensevelissent les corps de saint Rustique et de saint Eleuthère, ils les firent jeter dans la Seine.

Mais une dame noble invita les porteurs à un repas, et, pendant qu'ils mangeaient, elle déroba furtivement les corps des saints, et les fit ensevelir en secret dans un champ qui lui appartenait. Plus tard, quand la persécution eut cessé, elle les en retira, et les réunit avec honneur au corps de saint Denys. Ils souffrirent sous Domitien, l’an du Seigneur 96. Saint Denys était âgé de 90 ans. — Vers l’an du Seigneur 815, du temps du roi Louis, des ambassadeurs de Michel, empereur de Constantinople apportèrent, entre autres présents, à Louis, fils de Charlemagne, les livres de saint Denys, sur la hiérarchie, traduits du grec en latin : ils furent reçus avec joie et dix-neuf malades furent guéris cette nuit-là même dans l’église du saint (Hilduin; Vie de saint Denys, c. IV). — Comme saint Rieul célébrait la messe à Arles, il ajouta après les noms des apôtres ces mots : « Les martyrs saints Denys, Rustique et Eleuthère. » Il fut bien étonné, d'avoir, sans y penser, prononcé leurs noms dans le Canon, car il croyait que les serviteurs de Dieu vivaient encore: mais pendant qu'il en était dans l’admiration, il vit trois colombes posées sur la croix de l’autel, et portant sur leur poitrine les noms des saints martyrs écrits en lettres de sang. Quand il les eut regardées avec attention, il comprit que les saints avaient quitté leur corps (Un médaillon. d'une ancienne verrière de l’église de Saint-Denys reproduit ce miracle). — Vers l’an du Seigneur 614, Dagobert, roi des Francs (d'après une chronique : Hélinand, même année) qui régna longtemps après Pépin,, eut dès l’enfance une grande vénération pour saint Denys; et chaque fois qu'il avait à redouter la colère de Clotaire, son père, il s'enfuyait à l’église du saint. Il monta sur le trône et après sa mort, un saint homme eut une, vision dans laquelle il lui fut montré que l’âme de Dagobert ayant été conduite au jugement, beaucoup de saints lui reprochèrent d'avoir dépouillé leurs églises. Déjà les mauvais anges voulaient la traîner en enfer, quand se présenta saint Denys qui intervint en sa faveur, la délivra et lui épargna le châtiment. Peut-être se fit-il que son âme revint animer son corps, et qu'il fit pénitence*. — Le roi Clovis découvrit, avec trop peu de respect, le corps de saint Denys, lui cassa l’os du bras et s'en empara; mais bientôt après il fut pris de folie. — Hincmar, évêque de Reims, dit dans une lettre adressée à Charles, que ce Denys qui fut envoyé en France fut Denys l’Aréopagite, comme il a été rapporté ci-dessus. Jean Scot assure la même chose dans une épître à Charles il se pourrait bien que le calcul que l’on ferait des années ne le contredise en ce point, comme quelques-uns ont voulu en faire un sujet d'objection.

* Voici sur ce fait étrange une note de Ciaconius sur la vie du pape Donus, par Anastase le Bibliothécaire : « Sous le pontificat du pape Donus, mourut Dagobert, 18e roi des Francs. On vit l’âme de ce prince conduite par des démons dans l’île de Liparca, qui renferme un volcan. Comme son âme était condamnée à y subir des expiations, elle fut arrachée des mains des esprits malins, par l’entremise de saint Denys, de saint Martin et de saint Maurice, que Dagobert pendant sa vie avait regardés comme ses patrons, et en l’honneur desquels il avait construit des églises. On a pour garants de cette croyance les témoignages de Platina, Vie du pape Donus; de Robert Gaguin, au livre III de la Vie de Dagobert, et de l’abbé Boniface Simoneta. »

SOURCE : La Légende dorée de Jacques de Voragine nouvellement traduite en français avec introduction, notices, notes et recherches sur les sources par l'Abbé J.-B. M. Roze, Chanoine Honoraire de la cathédrale d'Amiens, Édouard Rouveyre, Éditeur, 76, Rue de Seine, 76, Paris
MDCCCCII

SOURCE : http://www.abbaye-saint-benoit.ch/voragine/tome03/154.htm


BENEDICT XVI

GENERAL AUDIENCE

St Peter's Square
Wednesday, 14 May 2008

Pseudo-Dionysius, the Areopagite


Dear Brothers and Sisters,

In the course of the Catechesis on the Fathers of the Church, today I would like to speak of a rather mysterious figure: a sixth-century theologian whose name is unknown and who wrote under the pseudonym of Dionysius the Areopagite. With this pseudonym he was alluding to the passage of Scripture we have just heard, the event recounted by St Luke in chapter 17 of the Acts of the Apostles where he tells how Paul preached in Athens at the Areopagus to an elite group of the important Greek intellectual world. In the end, the majority of his listeners proved not to be interested and went away jeering at him. Yet some, St Luke says a few, approached Paul and opened themselves to the faith. The Evangelist gives us two names: Dionysius a member of the Areopagus and a woman named Damaris.

If five centuries later the author of these books chose the pseudonym "Dionysius the Areopagite", it means that his intention was to put Greek wisdom at the service of the Gospel, to foster the encounter of Greek culture and intelligence with the proclamation of Christ; he wanted to do what this Dionysius had intended, that is, to make Greek thought converge with St Paul's proclamation; being a Greek, he wanted to become a disciple of St Paul, hence a disciple of Christ.

Why did he hide his name and choose this pseudonym? One part of the answer I have already given: he wanted, precisely, to express this fundamental intention of his thought. But there are two hypotheses concerning this anonymity and pseudonym. The first hypothesis says that it was a deliberate falsification by which, in dating his works back to the first century, to the time of St Paul, he wished to give his literary opus, a quasi apostolic authority. But there is another better hypothesis than this, which seems to me barely credible: namely that he himself desired to make an act of humility; he did not want to glorify his own name, he did not want to build a monument to himself with his work but rather truly to serve the Gospel, to create an ecclesial theology, neither individual nor based on himself. Actually, he succeeded in elaborating a theology which, of course, we can date to the sixth century but cannot attribute to any of the figures of that period: it is a somewhat "de-individualized" theology, that is, a theology which expresses a common thought and language. It was a period of fierce polemics following the Council of Chalcedon; indeed he said in his Seventh Epistle: "I do not wish to spark polemics; I simply speak of the truth, I seek the truth". And the light of truth by itself causes errors to fall away and makes what is good shine forth. And with this principle he purified Greek thought and related it to the Gospel. This principle, which he affirms in his seventh letter, is also the expression of a true spirit of dialogue: it is not about seeking the things that separate, but seeking the truth in Truth itself. This then radiates and causes errors to fade away.

Therefore, although this author's theology is, so to speak, "supra-personal", truly ecclesial, we can place it in the sixth century. Why? The Greek spirit, which he placed at the service of the Gospel, he encountered in the books of Proclus, who died in Athens in 485. This author belonged to late Platonism, a current of thought which had transformed Plato's philosophy into a sort of religion, whose ultimate purpose was to create a great apologetic for Greek polytheism and return, following Christianity's success, to the ancient Greek religion. He wanted to demonstrate that in reality, the divinities were the active forces in the cosmos. The consequence to be drawn from this was that polytheism must be considered truer than monotheism with its single Creator God. What Proclus was demonstrating was a great cosmic system of divinity, of mysterious forces, through which, in this deified cosmos, man could find access to the divinity. However, he made a distinction between paths for the simple, who were incapable of rising to the heights of truth - certain rites could suffice for them - and paths for the wise who were to purify themselves to arrive at the pure light.

As can be seen, this thought is profoundly anti-Christian. It is a late reaction to the triumph of Christianity, an anti-Christian use of Plato, whereas a Christian interpretation of the great philosopher was already in course. It is interesting that this Pseudo-Dionysius dared to avail himself of this very thought to demonstrate the truth of Christ; to transform this polytheistic universe into a cosmos created by God, into the harmony of God's cosmos, where every force is praise of God, and to show this great harmony, this symphony of the cosmos that goes from the Seraphim to the Angels and Archangels, to man and to all the creatures which, together, reflect God's beauty and are praise of God. He thus transformed the polytheistic image into a praise of the Creator and his creature. In this way we can discover the essential characteristics of his thought: first and foremost, it is cosmic praise. All Creation speaks of God and is praise of God. Since the creature is praise of God, Pseudo-Dionysius' theology became a liturgical theology: God is found above all in praising him, not only in reflection; and the liturgy is not something made by us, something invented in order to have a religious experience for a certain period of time; it is singing with the choir of creatures and entering into cosmic reality itself. And in this very way the liturgy, apparently only ecclesiastical, becomes expansive and great, it becomes our union with the language of all creatures. He says: God cannot be spoken of in an abstract way; speaking of God is always - he says using a Greek word - a "hymnein", singing for God with the great hymn of the creatures which is reflected and made concrete in liturgical praise. Yet, although his theology is cosmic, ecclesial and liturgical, it is also profoundly personal. He created the first great mystical theology. Indeed, with him the word "mystic" acquires a new meaning. Until then for Christians such a word was equivalent to the word "sacramental", that is, what pertains to the "mysterion", to the sacrament. With him the word "mystic" becomes more personal, more intimate: it expresses the soul's journey toward God. And how can God be found? Here we note once again an important element in his dialogue between Greek philosophy and Christianity, and, in particular biblical faith. Apparently what Plato says and what the great philosophy on God says is far loftier, far truer; the Bible appears somewhat "barbaric", simple or pre-critical one might say today; but he remarks that precisely this is necessary, so that in this way we can understand that the loftiest concepts on God never reach his true grandeur: they always fall short of it. In fact these images enable us to understand that God is above every concept; in the simplicity of the images we find more truth than in great concepts. The Face of God is our inability to express truly what he is. In this way one speaks - and Pseudo-Dionysius himself speaks - of a "negative theology". It is easier for us to say what God is not rather than to say what he truly is. Only through these images can we intuit his true Face, moreover this Face of God is very concrete: it is Jesus Christ.

And although Dionysius shows us, following Proclus, the harmony of the heavenly choirs in such a way that it seems that they all depend on one another, it is true that on our journey toward God we are still very far from him. Pseudo-Dionysius shows that in the end the journey to God is God himself, who makes himself close to us in Jesus Christ. Thus, a great and mysterious theology also becomes very concrete, both in the interpretation of the liturgy and in the discourse on Jesus Christ: with all this, Dionysius the Areopagite exerted a strong influence on all medieval theology and on all mystical theology, both in the East and in the West. He was virtually rediscovered in the 13th century, especially by St Bonaventure, the great Franciscan theologian who in this mystical theology found the conceptual instrument for reinterpreting the heritage - so simple and profound - of St Francis. Together with Dionysius, the "Poverello" tells us that in the end love sees more than reason. Where the light of love shines the shadows of reason are dispelled; love sees, love is an eye and experience gives us more than reflection. Bonaventure saw in St Francis what this experience is: it is the experience of a very humble, very realistic journey, day by day, it is walking with Christ, accepting his Cross. In this poverty and in this humility, in the humility that is also lived in ecclesiality, is an experience of God which is loftier than that attained by reflection. In it we really touch God's Heart.

Today Dionysius the Areopagite has a new relevance: he appears as a great mediator in the modern dialogue between Christianity and the mystical theologies of Asia, whose characteristic feature is the conviction that it is impossible to say who God is, that only indirect things can be said about him; that God can only be spoken of with the "not", and that it is only possible to reach him by entering into this indirect experience of "not". And here a similarity can be seen between the thought of the Areopagite and that of Asian religions; he can be a mediator today as he was between the Greek spirit and the Gospel.

In this context it can be seen that dialogue does not accept superficiality. It is precisely when one enters into the depths of the encounter with Christ that an ample space for dialogue also opens. When one encounters the light of truth, one realizes that it is a light for everyone; polemics disappear and it is possible to understand one another, or at least to speak to one another, to come closer. The path of dialogue consists precisely in being close to God in Christ, in a deep encounter with him, in the experience of the truth which opens us to the light and helps us reach out to others - with the light of truth, the light of love. And in the end, he tells us: take the path of experience, the humble experience of faith, every day. Then the heart is enlarged and can see and also illumine reason so that it perceives God's beauty. Let us pray to the Lord to help us today too to place the wisdom of our day at the service of the Gospel, discovering ever anew the beauty of faith, the encounter with God in Christ.


Appeal for the People of China

My thoughts turn at this moment to the populations of Sichuan and the neighbouring Provinces in China, severely hit by the earthquake that has taken a heavy toll of human life with thousands missing and caused inestimable damage. I invite you to join me in fervent prayer for all those who have lost their lives. I am spiritually close to the people sorely tried by such a devastating calamity. Let us implore God for relief for the suffering. May the Lord sustain all the rescue workers involved in responding to the immediate needs.

* * *

I welcome all the English-speaking visitors present today, including the groups from England, Ireland, Japan, The Philippines, Trinidad and Tobago, and the United States of America. May your visit to Rome be a time of deep spiritual renewal. Upon all of you I invoke God’s abundant blessings of joy and peace.

© Copyright 2008 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

SOURCE : http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20080514.html

The beginning of Ambrose Traversari’s Latin translation of the Pseudo-Dionysian “Celestial Hierarchy” in the manuscript Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. lat. 171, fol. 1r.


Saint Dionysius the Aeropagite


Also known as

  • Denis the Aeropagite
  • Dionysius of Athens

Memorial

Profile

Assessor of the Areopagus in Athens, GreeceConverted from paganism to Christianity by Saint Paul the Apostle (Acts 17:34). Married to Saint Athens. Early writers say he became the first bishop of Athens, and was martyred. Later writers confused his story with that of Denis of France and others of the name in that period, and attributed any number of writings to him.

Died

Canonized

Patronage

Readings

Some of the people became followers of Paul and believed. Among them was Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman named Damaris, and a number of others. – Acts 17:42

MLA Citation

  • “Saint Dionysius the Aeropagite“. CatholicSaints.Info. 4 February 2019. Web. 19 January 2021. <https://catholicsaints.info/saint-dionysius-the-aeropagite/>

SOURCE : https://catholicsaints.info/saint-dionysius-the-aeropagite/


Antoine Caron  (1521–1599). Dionysius Areopagite and the eclipse of Sun, 1541, Getty Center  


Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite

By "Dionysius the Areopagite" is usually understood the judge of the Areopagus who, as related in Acts 17:34, was converted to Christianity by the preaching of St. Paul, and according to Dionysius of Corinth (EusebiusChurch History III.4) was Bishop of Athens.

In the course of time, however, two errors of far-reaching import arose in connection with this name. In the first place, a series of famous writings of a rather peculiar nature was ascribed to the Areopagite and, secondly, he was popularly identified with the holy martyr of Gaul, Dionysius, the first Bishop of Paris. It is not our purpose to take up directly the latter point; we shall concern ourselves here (1) with the person of the Pseudo-Areopagite; (2) with the classification, contents, and characteristics of his writing; (3) with their history and transmission; under this head the question as to the genuineness of, origin, first acceptance, and gradual spread of these writings will be answered.

Deep obscurity still hovers about the person of the Pseudo-Areopagite. External evidence as to the time and place of his birth, his education, and latter occupation is entirely wanting. Our only source of information regarding this problematic personage is the writings themselves. The clues furnished by the first appearance and by the character of the writings enable us to conclude that the author belongs at the very earliest to the latter half of the fifth century, and that, in all probability, he was a native of Syria. His thoughts, phrases, and expressions show a great familiarity with the works of the neo-Platonists, especially with Plotinus and Proclus. He is also thoroughly versed in the sacred books of the Old and New Testament, and in the works of the Fathers as far as Cyril of Alexandria. (Passages from the Areopagitic writings are indicated by title and chapter. in this article D.D.N. stands for "De divinis nominibus"; C.H. for "Caelestis hierarchia"; E.H. for "Ecclesiastica hierarchia"; Th.M. for "Theologia mystica", which are all found in Migne, P.G., vol. III) In a letter to Polycarp (Ep. vii; P.G., III, 1080 A) and in "Cael. hier." (ix, 3; P.G. III, 260 D) he intimates that he was formerly a pagan, and this seems quite probable, considering the peculiar character of his literary work. But one should be more cautious in regard to certain other personal references, for instance, that he was chosen teacher of the "newly-baptized" (D.D.N., iii, 2; P.G., III, 681 B); that his spiritual father and guide was a wise and saintly man, Hierotheus by name; that he was advised by the latter and ordered by his own superiors to compose these works (ibid., 681 sq.). And it is plainly for the purpose of deceiving that he tells of having observed the solar eclipse at Christ's Crucifixion (Ep., vii, 2; P.G., III, 1081 A) and of having, with Hierotheus, the Apostles (Peter and James), and other hierarchs, looked upon "the Life-Begetting, God-Receiving body, i.e., of the Blessed Virgin" (D.D.N., iii, 2; P.G., III, 681 C). The former of these accounts is based on Matthew 27:45, and Mark 15:33; the latter refers to the apocryphal descriptions of the "Dormitio Mariae". For the same purpose, i.e., to create the impression that the author belonged to the times of the Apostles and that he was identical with the Areopagite mentioned in the Acts, different persons, such as John the Evangelist, Paul, Timothy, Titus, Justus, and Carpus, with whom he is supposed to be on intimate terms, figure in his writings.

The doctrinal attitude of the Pseudo-Areopagite is not clearly defined. A certain vagueness, which was perhaps intended, is characteristic of his Christology, especially in the question concerning the two natures in Christ. We may well surmise that he was not a stranger to the latter, and rather modified, form of Monophysitism and that he belonged to that conciliatory group which sought, on the basis of the Henoticon issued in 482 by Emperor Zeno (Evagrius, Hist. Eccl., III, iv), to reconcile the extremes of orthodoxy and heresy. This reserved, indefinite attitude of the author explains the remarkable fact that opposite factions claimed him as an adherent. As to his social rank, a careful comparison of certain details scattered through his works shows that he belonged to the class of scholars who were known at the time as scholastikoi.

The writings themselves form a collection of four treatises and ten letters. The first treatise, which is also the most important in scope and content, presents in thirteen chapters an explanation of the Divine names. Setting out from the principle that the names of God are to be learned from Scripture only, and that they afford us but an imperfect knowledge of God, Dionysius discusses, among other topics, God's goodness, being, life, wisdom, power, and justice. The one underlying thought of the work, recurring again and again under different forms and phrases, is: God, the One Being (to hen), transcending all quality and predication, all affirmation and negation, and all intellectual conception, by the very force of His love and goodness gives to beings outside Himself their countless gradations, unites them in the closest bonds (proodos), keeps each by His care and direction in its appointed sphere, and draws them again in an ascending order to Himself (epistrophe). While he illustrates the inner life of the Trinity by metaphors of blossom and light applied to the Second and Third Persons (D.D.N., ii, 7 in P.G., III, 645 B), Dionysius represents the procession of all created things from God by the exuberance of being in the Godhead (to hyperpleres), its outpouring and overflowing (D.D.N., ix, 9, in P.G., III, 909 C; cf. ii, 10 in P.G., III, 648 C; xiii, 1 in P.G., III, 977 B), and as a flashing forth from the sun of the Deity (D.D.N., iv, 6 in P.G., III,701 A; iv, 1 in P.G., III, 693 B). Exactly according to their physical nature created things absorb more or less of the radiated light, which, however, grows weaker the farther it descends (D.D.N., xi, 2 in P.G., III, 952 A; i, 2 in P.G., III, 588 C). As the mighty root sends forth a multitude of plants which it sustains and controls, so created things owe their origin and conservation to the All-Ruling Deity (D.D.N., x, 1 in P.G., III, 936 D). Patterned upon the original of Divine love, righteousness, and peace, is the harmony that pervades the universe (D.D.N., chapters iv, viii, xi). All things tend to God, and in Him are merged and completed, just as the circle returns into itself (D.D.N., iv, 14 in P.G., III, 712 D), as the radii are joined in the centre, or as the numbers are contained in unity (D.D.N., v, 6 in P.G., III, 820 sq.). These and many similar expressions have given rise to frequent charges of Pantheism against the author. He does not, however, assert a necessary emanation of things from God, but admits a free creative act on the part of God (D.D.N., iv, 10, in P.G., III, 708 B; cf. C.H., iv, 1 in P.G., III, 177 C); still the echo of neo-Platonism is unmistakable.

The same thoughts, or their applications to certain orders of being, recur in his other writings. The second treatise develops in fifteen chapters the doctrine of the celestial hierarchy, comprising nine angelic choirs which are divided into closer groupings of three choirs each (triads). The names of the nine choirs are taken from the canonical books and are arranged in the following order. First triad: seraphimcherubim, thrones; second triad: virtues, dominations, powers; third triad: principalities, archangels, angels (C.H., vi, 2 in P.G., III, 200 D). The grouping of the second triad exhibits some variations. From the etymology of each choir-name the author labours to evolve a wealth of description, and, as a result, lapses frequently into tautology. Quite characteristic is the dominant idea that the different choirs of angels are less intense in their love and knowledge of God the farther they are removed from him, just as a ray of light or of heat grows weaker the farther it travels from its source. To this must be added another fundamental idea peculiar to the Pseudo-Areopagite, namely, that the highest choirs transmit the light received from the Divine Source only to the intermediate choirs, and these in turn transmit it to the lowest. The third treatise is but a continuation of the other two, inasmuch as it is based upon the same leading ideas. It deals with the nature and grades of the "ecclesiastical hierarchy" in seven chapters, each of which is subdivided into three parts (prologos, mysterion, theoria). After an introduction which discusses God's purpose in establishing the hierarchy of the Church, and which pictures Christ as its Head, holy and supreme, Dionysius treats of three sacraments (baptism, the Eucharist, extreme unction), of the three grades of the Teaching Church (bishopspriestsdeacons), of three grades of the "Learning Church" (monks, people, and the class composed of catechumens, energumens, and penitents), and, lastly, of the burial of the dead [C.H., iii, (3), 6 in P.G., III, 432 sq.; vi, in P.G., III, 529 sq.] The main purpose of the author is to disclose and turn to the uses of contemplation the deeper mystical meaning which underlies the sacred rites, ceremonies, institutions, and symbols. The fourth treatise in entitled "Mystical Theology", and presents in five chapters guiding principles concerning the mystical union with God, which is entirely beyond the compass of sensuous or intellectual perception (epopteia). The ten letters, four addressed to a monk, Caius, and one each to a deacon, Dortheus, to a priest, Sopater, to the bishop of Polycarp, to a monk, Demophilus, to the Bishop Titus, and to the Apostle John, contain, in part, additional or supplementary remarks on the above-mentioned principal works, and in part, practical hints for dealing with sinners and unbelievers. Since in all of these writings the same salient thoughts on philosophy and theology recur with the same striking peculiarities of expression and with manifold references, in both form and matter, from one work to another, the assumption is justified that they are all to be ascribed to one and the same author. In fact, at its first appearance in the literary world the entire corpus of these writings was combined as it is now. An eleventh letter to Apollophanes, given in Migne, P.G., III, 1119, is a medieval forgery based on the seventh letter. Apocryphal, also, are a letter to Timothy and a second letter to Titus.

Dionysius would lead us to infer that he is the author of still other learned treatises, namely: "Theological Outlines" (D.D.N., ii, 3, in P.G., III 640 B); "Sacred Hymns" (C.H., vii, 4 in P.G., III, 212 B); "Symbolic Theology" C.H., xv, 6 in P.G., III,336 A); and treatises on "The Righteous Judgment of God" (D.D.N., iv, 35 in P.G., III, 736 B); on "The Soul" (D.D.N., iv, 2 in P.G., III, 696 C); and on "The objects of Intellect and Sense" (E. H., i, 2 in P.G., III, 373 B). No reliable trace, however, of any of these writings has ever been discovered, and in his references to them Dionysius is as uncontrollable as in his citations from Hierotheus. It may be asked if these are not fictions pure and simple, designed to strengthen the belief in the genuineness of the actually published works. This suspicion seems to be more warranted because of other discrepancies, e.g., when Dionysius, the priest, in his letter to Timothy, extols the latter as a theoeides, entheos, theios ierarches, and nevertheless seeks to instruct him in those sublime secret doctrines that are for bishops only (E.H., i, 5 in P.G., III, 377 A), doctrines, moreover, which, since the cessation of the Disciplina Arcani, had already been made public. Again, Dionysius points out (D.D.N., iii, 2 in P.G., III, 681 B; cf. E.H., iv, 2 in P.G., III, 476 B) that his writings are intended to serve as catechetical instruction for the newly-baptized. This is evidently another contradiction of his above-mentioned statement.

We may now turn to the history of the Pseudo-Dionysian writings. This embraces a period of almost fifteen hundred years, and three distinct turning points in its course have divided it into as many distinct periods: first, the period of the gradual rise and settlement of the writings in Christian literature, dating from the latter part of the fifth century to the Lateran Council, 649; second, the period of their highest and universally acknowledged authority, both in the Western and Eastern Church, lasting till the beginning of the fifteenth century; third, the period of sharp conflict waged about their authenticity, begun by Laurentius Valla, and closing only within recent years.

The Areopagitica were formerly were supposed to have made their first appearance, or rather to have been first noticed by Christian writers, in a few pseudo-epigraphical works which have now been proved to be the products of a much later period; as, for instance, in the following: Pseudo-Origenes, "Homilia in diversos secunda"; Pseudo-Athanasius, "Quaestiones ad Antiochum ducem", Q. viii; Pseudo-Hippolytus, against the heretic Beron; Pseudo-Chrysostom, "sermo de pseudo-prophetis." Until more recently more credit was given to other lines of evidence on which Franz Hipler endeavoured to support his entirely new thesis, to the effect that the author of the writings lived about the year 375 in Egypt, as Abbot of Rhinokorura. Hipler's attempts, however, at removing the textual difficulties, ekleipsis, adelphotheos, soma, proved to be unsuccessful. In fact, those very passages in which Hipler thought that the Fathers had made use of the Areopagite (e.g., in Gregory of Nazianzus and Jerome) do not tell in favor of this hypothesis; on the contrary, they are much better explained if the converse be assumed, namely, that Pseudo-Dionysius drew from them. Hipler himself, convinced by the results of recent research, has abandoned his opinion. Other events also, both historical and literary, evidently exerted a marked influence on the Areopagite: (1) the Council of Chalcedon (451), the Christological terminology of which was studiously followed by the Dionysius; (2) the writings of the neo-Platonist Proclus (411-485), from whom Dionysius borrowed to a surprising extent; (3) the introduction (c. 476) of the Credo into the liturgy of the Mass, which is alluded to in the "Ecclesiastical Hierarchy" [iii, 2, in P.G., III, 425 C, and iii, (3), 7 in P.G., III, 436 C; cf. the explanation of Maximus in P.G., IV, 144 B]; (4) the Henoticon of the Emperor Zeno (482), a formula of union designed for the bishopsclericsmonks, and faithful of the Orient, as a compromise between Monophystism and orthodoxy. Both in spirit and tendency the Areopagitica correspond fully to the sense of the Henoticon; and one might easily infer that they were made to further the purpose of the Henoticon.

The result of the foregoing data is that the first appearance of the pseuodo-epigraphical writings cannot be placed earlier than the latter half, in fact at the close, of the fifth century.

Having ascertained a terminus post quem, it is possible by means of evidence taken from Dionysius himself to fix a terminus ante quem, thus narrowing to about thirty years the period within which these writings must have originated. The earliest reliable citations of the writings of Dionysius are from the end of the fifth and the beginning of the sixth century. The first is by Severus, the head of a party of moderate Monophysites named after him, and Patriarch of Antioch (512-518). In a letter addressed to a certain abbot, John (Mai, Script. vett. nov. coll., VII, i, 71), he quotes in proof of his doctrine of the mia synthetos physis in Christ the Dionysian Ep. iv (P.G., III, 1072 C), where a kaine theandrike energeia is mentioned. Again, in the treatise "Adversus anathem. Juliani Halicarn." (Cod. Syr. Vat. 140, fol. 100 b), Severus cites a passage from D.D.N., ii, 9, P.G., III, 648A (abba kai to pases — thesmo dieplatteto), and returns once more to Ep. iv. In the Syrian "History of the Church" of Zacharias (e. Ahrens-Kruger, 134-5) it is related that Severus, a man well-versed in the writings of Dionysius (Areop.), was present at the Synod in Tyre (513). Andreas, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappodocia, wrote (about 520) a commentary on the Apocalypse wherein he quotes the Areopagite four times and makes use of at least three of his works (Migne, P.G., CVI, 257, 305, 356, 780; cf. Diekamp in "Hist. Jahrb", XVIII, 1897, pp. 1-36). Like Severus, Zacharias Rhetor and, in all probability, also Andreas of Cappodocia, inclined to Monophysitism (Diekamp, a "Book of Hierotheus"---Hierotheus had come to be regarded as the teacher of Dionysius---existed in the Syrian literature of that time and exerted considerable influence in the spread of Dionysian doctrines. Frothingham (Stephen Bar Sudaili, p. 63 sq.) considers the pantheist Stephen Bar Sudaili as its author. Jobius Monachus, a contemporary of the writers just mentioned, published against Severus a polemical treatise which has since been lost, but claims the Areopagite as authority for the orthodox teaching (P.G., CIII, 765). So also EphraemArchbishop of Antioch (527-545), interprets in a right sense the well-known passage from D.D.N., i, 4, P.G., III,, 529 A: ho haplous Iesous synetethe, by distinguishing between synthetos hypostasis and synthetos ousia. Between the years 532-548, if not earlier, John of Scythopolis in Palestine wrote an interpretation of Dionysius (Pitra, "Analect. sacr.", IV, Proleg., p. xxiii; cf. Loof's, "Leontius of Byzantium" (p. 270 sq.) from an anti-Severan standpoint. In Leontius of Byzantium (485-543) we have another important witness. This eminent champion of Catholic doctrine in at least four passages of his works builds on the megas Dionysios (P.G., LXXXVI, 1213 A; 1288 C; 1304 D; Canisius-Basnage, "Thesaur. monum. eccles.", Antwerp, 1725, I, 571). Sergius of Resaina in Mesopotamia, archiater and presbyter (d. 536), at an early date translated the works of Dionysius into Syriac. He admitted their genuineness, and for their defence also translated into Syriac the already current "Apologies" (Brit. Mus. cod. add. 1251 and 22370; cf. Zacharias Rhetor in Ahrens-Kruger, p. 208). He himself was a Monophysite.

By far the most important document in the case is the report given by Bishop Innocent of Maronia of the religious debate held at Constantinople in 533 between seven orthodox and seven Severian speakers (Hardouin II, 1159 sq.). The former had as leader and spokesman, Hypatius, Bishop of Ephesus, who was thoroughly versed in the literature of the subject. On the second day the "Orientals" (Severians) alleged against the Council of Chalcedon, that it had by a novel and erroneous expression decreed two natures in Christ. Besides Cyril of AlexandriaAthanasiusGregory Thaumaturgus, and Felix and Julius of Rome, they also quoted Dionysius the Areopagite as an exponent of the doctrine of one nature. Hypatius rejected as spurious all these citations, and showed that Cyril never made the slightest use of them, though on various occasions they would have served his purpose admirably. He suspects that these falsifiers are Apollinarists. When the Severians rejoined that they could point out in the polemical writings of Cyril against Diodorus and Theodore the use made of such evidence, Hypatius persisted in the stand he had taken: "sed nunc videtur quoniam et in illis libris [Cyrilli] haeretici falsantes addiderunt ea". The references to the archives of Alexandria had just as little weight with him, since Alexandria, with its libraries, had long been in the hands of the heretics. How could an interested party of the opposition be introduced as a witness? Hypatius refers again especially to Dionysius and successfully puts down the opposition: "Illa enim testimonia quae vos Dionysii Areopagitae dicitis, unde potestis ostendere vera esse, sicut suspicamini? Si enim eius erant, non potuissent latere beatum Cyrillum. Quis autem de beato Cyrillo dico, quando et beatus Athanasius, si pro certo scisset eius fuisse, ante omnia in Nicaeno concilio de consubstantiali Trinitate eadem testimonia protulisset adversus Arii diversae substantiae blasphemias". Indeed, as to the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son the Areopagite has statements that leave no room for misinterpretation; and had these come from a disciple of the Apostles, they would have been all the more valuable. Hereupon the Severians dropped this objection and turned to another.

The fact must, indeed, appear remarkable that these very writings, though rejected outright by such an authority as Hypatius, were within little more than a century looked upon as genuine by Catholics, so that they could be used against the heretics during the Lateran Council in 649 (Hardouin III, 699 sqq.). How had this reversion been brought about? As the following grouping will show, it was chiefly heterodox writers, MonophysitesNestorians, and Monothelites, who during several decades appealed to the Areopagite. But among Catholics also there were not a few who assumed the genuineness, and as some of these were persons of consequence, the way was gradually paved for the authorization of his writings in the above-mentioned council. To the group of Monophysites belonged: Themistius, deacon in Alexandria about 537 (Hardoiun, III, 784, 893 sq., 1240 sq.); Colluthus of Alexandria (Hardouin III, 786, 895, 898); John Philoponus, an Alexandrian grammarian, about 546-549 (W. Reichardt, "Philoponus, de opificio mundi"); Petrus Callinicus, Monophysite Patriarch of Antioch, in the latter half of the sixth century, cited Dionysius in his polemic against the Patriarch Damianus of Alexandria (II, xli, and xlvii; cf. Frothingham, op. cit., after Cod. Syr. Vat., 108, f. 282 sqq.). As examples of the Nestorian group may be mentioned Joseph Huzaja, a Syrian monk, teacher about 580 at the school of Nisibis (Assemani, Bibl. orient., vol. III, pt. I, p. 103); also Ischojeb, catholicos, from 580 or 581 to 594 or 595 (Braun, "Buch der Synhados", p. 229 sq.); and John of Apamea, a monk in one of the cloisters situated on the Orontes, belonging most probably to the sixth century (Cod. Syr. Vat., 93). The heads of the Monothelites, Sergius, Patriarch of Constantinople (610-638), Cyrus, Patriarch of Alexandria (630-643), Pyrrhus, the successor of Sergius in Constantinople (639-641), took as the starting point in their heresy the fourth letter of Dionysius to Caius, wherein they altered the oft-quoted formula, theandrike energeia into mia theandrike energeia.

To glance briefly at the Catholic group we find in the "Historia Euthymiaca", written about the middle of the sixth century, a passage taken, according to a citation of John Damascene (P.G., XCVI, 748), from D.D.N., iii, 2, P.G., III, 682 D: paresan de — epakousas. Another witness, who at the same time leads over to the Latin literature, is Liberatus of Carthage (Breviarium causae Nestor. et Euthych., ch. v). Johannes Malalas, of Antioch, who died about 565, narrates, in his "Universal Chronicle", the conversion of the judge of the Areopagus through St. Paul (Acts 17:34), and praises our author as a powerful philosopher and antagonist of the Greeks (P.G., XCVII, 384; cf. Krumbacher, Gesch. d. byz. Lit.", 3rd ed., p. 112 sq.). Another champion was Theodore, presbyter. Though it is difficult to locate him chronologically, he was, according to Le Nourry (P.G., III, 16), an "auctor antiquissimus" who flourished, at all events, before the Lateran Council in 649 and, as we learn from Photius (P.G., CIII, 44 sq.), undertook to defend the genuineness of the Areopagitic writings. The repute, moreover, of these writings was enhanced in a marked degree by the following eminent churchmen: Eulogius, Patriarch of Alexandria (580-607), knew and quoted, among others, the D.D.N., xiii, 2, verbatim (P.G., CIII, 1061; cf. Der Katholic, 1897, II, p. 95). From Eulogius we naturally pass to Pope Gregory the Great, with whom he enjoyed a close and honourable friendship. Gregory the Great (590-604), in his thirty-fourth homily on Like, xv, 1-10 (P.L.L. XXVI, 1254), distinctly refers to the Areopagite's teaching regarding the Angels: "Fertur vero Dionysius Areopagitica, antiquus videlicet et venerabilis Pater, dicere" etc. (c.f. C.H., vii, ix, xiii). As Gregory admits that he is not versed in Greek (Ewald, Reg., I,28; III, 63; X, 10, 21) he uses fertur not to express his doubt of the genuineness, but to imply that he had to rely on the testimony of others, since at the time no Latin version existed. It is, indeed, most probable that Eulogius directed his attention to the work.

About the year 620, Antiochus Monachus, a member of the Sabas monastery near Jerusalem, compiled a collection of moral "sentences" designed for the members of his order (P.G., LXXXIX, 1415 sqq.). In the "Homilia (capitulum) LII" we discover a number of similar expressions and Biblical examples which are borrowed from the eighth letter of Dionysius "ad Demophilum" (P.G., III, 1085 sq.). In other passages frequent reference is made to the D.D.N. In the following years, two Patriarchs of Jerusalem, both from monasteries, defend Dionysius as a time-honoured witness of the true doctrines. The first is the Patriarch Modestus (631-634), formerly abbot of the Theodosius monastery in the desert of Judah. In a panegyric on the Assumptio Mariae (P.G., LXXXVI, 3277 sq.) he quotes sentences from the D.D.N., i, 4; ii,10; from the "Theologia Mystica", i, 1; and from Ep. ii. The second, a still brighter luminary in the Church, is the Patriarch Sophronius (634-638), formerly a monk of the Theodosius monastery near Jerusalem. Immediately after his installation he published an epistula synodica, "perhaps the most important document in the Monothelitic dispute". It gives, among other dogmas, a lengthy exposition of the doctrine of two energies in Christ (Hefele, Conciliengesch., 2nd ed., III, 140 sqq.). Citing from "Eph. iv ad Caium" (theandrike energeia), he refers to our author as a man through whom God speaks and who was won over by the Divine Paul in a Divine manner (P.G., LXXXVII, 3177). Maximus Confessor evidently rests upon Sophronius, whose friendship he had gained while abbot of the monastery of Chrysopolis in Alexandria (633). In accordance with Sophronius he explains the Dionysian term theandrike energeia in an orthodox sense, and praises it as indicating both essences and natures in their distinct properties and yet in closest union (P.G., XCI, 345). Following the example of Sophronius, Maximus also distinguishes in Christ three kinds of actions (theoprepeis, anthropoprepeis and miktai) (P.G., IV, 536). Thus the Monothelites lost their strongest weapon, and the Lateran Council found the saving word (Hefele, op. cit., 2nd ed., III, 129). In other regards also Maximus plays an important part in the authorization of the Areopagitica. A lover of theologico-mystical speculation, he showed an uncommon reverence for these writings, and by his glosses (P.G., IV), in which he explained dubious passages of Dionysius in an orthodox sense, he contributed greatly towards the recognition of Dionysius in the Middle Ages. Another equally indefatigable of Dyophysitism was Anastasias, a monk from the monastery of Sinai, who in 640 began his chequered career as a wandering preacher. Not only in his "Guide" (hodegos), but also in the "Quaestiones" and in the seventh book of the "Mediations on the Hexaemeron", he unhesitatingly makes use of different passages from Dionysius (P.G. LXXXIX). By this time a point had been reached at which the official seal, so to speak, could be put on the Dionysian writings. The Lateran Council of 649 solemnly rejected the Monothelite heresy (Hardouin III, 699 sq.). Pope Martin I quotes from D.D.N., ii, 9; iv, 20 and 23; and the "Ep. ad Caium"; speaks of the author as "beatae memoriae Dionysius", "Dionysius egregius, sanctus, beatus," and vigorously objects to the perversion of the text: una instead of nova Dei et viri operatio. The influence which Maximus exerted by his personal appearance at the council and by his above-mentioned explanation of theandrike energeia is easily recognized ("Dionysius duplicem [operationem] duplicis naturae compositivo sermone abusus est" — Hardouin, III, 787). Two of the testimonies of the Fathers which were read in the fifth session are taken from Dionysius. Little wonder, then, that thenceforth no doubt was expressed concerning the genuineness of the Areopagitica. Pope Agatho, in a dogmatic epistle directed to the Emperor Constantine (680) cites among other passages from the Fathers also the D.D.N., ii, 6. The Sixth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople (680) followed in the footsteps of the Lateran Synod, again defended "Eph. iv ad. Caium" against the falsification of Pyrrhus, and rejected the meaning which the Monothelite Patriarch Macarius assigned to the passage (Hardouin III, 1099, 1346, 1066). In the second Council of Nicaea (787) we find the "Celestial Hierarchy" of the "deifer Dionysius" cited against the Iconoclasts (Hardouin IV, 362). This finishes the first and darkest period in the history of the Areopagitica; and it may be summarized as follows. The Dionysian writings appeared in public for the first time in the Monophysite controversies. The Severians made use of them first and were followed by the orthodox. After the religious debate at Constantinople in 533 witnesses for the genuineness of the Areopagitica began to increase among the different heretics. Despite the opposition of Hypatias, Dionysius did not altogether lose his authority even among Catholics, which was due chiefly to Leontius and Ephraem of Antioch. The number of orthodox Christians who defended him grew steadily, comprising high ecclesiastical dignitaries who had come from monasteries. Finally, under the influence of Maximus, the Lateran Council (649) cited him as a competent witness against Monothelism.

As to the second period, universal recognition of the Areopagitic writings in the Middle Ages, we need not mention the Greek Church, which is especially proud of him; but neither in the West was a voice raised in challenge down to the first half of the fifteenth century; on the contrary, his works were regarded as exceedingly valuable and even as sacred. It was believed that St. Paul, who had communicated his revelations to his disciple in Athens, spoke through these writings (Histor.-polit. Blatter, CXXV, 1900, p. 541). As there is no doubt concerning the fact itself, a glance at the main divisions of the tradition may suffice. Rome received the original text of the Areopagitica undoubtedly through Greek monks. The oppressions on the part of Islam during the sixth and seventh centuries compelled many Greek and Oriental monks to abandon their homes and settle in Italy. In Rome itself, a monastery for Greek monks was built under Stephen II and Paul I. It was also Paul I (757-767) who in 757 sent the writings of Dionysius together with other books, to Pepin in FranceAdrian I (772-795) also mentioned Dionysius as a testis gravissimus in a letter accompanying the Latin translation of the Acts of the Nicaean Council (787) which he sent to Charlemagne. During the first half of the ninth century the facts concerning Dionysius are mainly grouped around the Abbot Hilduin of Saint-Denys at Paris. Through the latter the false idea that the Gallic martyr Dionysius of the third century, whose relics were preserved in the monastery of Saint-Denys, was identical with the Areopagite rose to an undoubted certainty, while the works ascribed to Dionysius gained in repute. Through a legation from Constantinople, Michael II had sent several gifts to the Frankish Emperor Louis the Pious (827), and among them were the writings of the Areopagite, which gave particular joy and honour to Hilduin, the influential arch-chaplain of Louis. Hilduin took care to have them translated into Latin and he himself wrote a life of the saint (P.L., CVI, 13 sq.). About the year 858 Scotus Eriugena, who was versed in Greek, made a new Latin translation of the Areopagite, which became the main source from which the Middle Ages obtained a knowledge of Dionysius and his doctrines. The work was undertaken at the instance of Charles the Bald, at whose court Scotus enjoyed great influence (P.L., CXXII, 1026 sq.; cf. Traube, "Poet. lat. aev. Carol.", II, 520, 859 sq.). Compared with Hilduin's, this second translation marks a decided step in advance. Scotus, with his keen dialectical skill and his soaring speculative mind, found in the Areopagite a kindred spirit. Hence, despite many errors of translation due to the obscurity of the Greek original, he was able to grasp the connections of thought and to penetrate the problems. As he accompanied his translations with explanatory notes and as, in his philosophical and theological writings, particularly in the work "De divisione naturae", (P.L., CXXII), he recurs again and again to Dionysius, it is readily seen how much he did towards securing recognition for the Areopagite.

The works of Dionysius, thus introduced into Western literature, were readily accepted by the medieval Scholastics. The great masters of Saint-Victor at Paris, foremost among them the much admired Hugh, based their teaching on the doctrine of Dionysius. Peter Lombard and the great Dominican and Franciscan scholars, Alexander of HalesAlbertus MagnusThomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, adopted his theses and arguments. Master poets, e.g. Dante, and historians, e.g. Otto of Freising, built on his foundations. Scholars as renowned as Robert Grosseteste of Lincoln and Vincent of Beauvais drew upon him freely. Popular religious books, such as the "Legenda aurea" of Giacomo da Voragine and the "Life of Mary" by Brother Philip, gave him a cordial welcome. The great mystics, EckhardtTaulerSuso, and others, entered the mysterious obscurity of Dionysius with holy reverence. In rapid succession there appeared a number of translations: Latin translations by Joannes Sarrazenus (1170), Robert Grosseteste (about 1220), Thomas Vercellensis (1400), Ambrosius Camaldulensis (1436), Marsilius Ficinus (1492); in the sixteenth century those of Faber Stapulensis, Perionius, etc. Among the commentaries that of Hugh of Saint-Victor is notable for its warmth, that of Albertus Magnus for its extent, that of St. Thomas for its accuracy, that of Denys the Carthusian for its pious spirit and its masterly inclusion of all previous commentaries.

It was reserved for the period of the Renaissance to break with the time-honoured tradition. True, some of the older Humanists, as Pico della Mirandola, Marsilius Ficinus, and the Englishmen John Colet, were still convinced of the genuineness of the writings; but the keen and daring critic, Laurentius Valla (1407-1457) in his glosses to the New Testament, expressed his doubts quite openly and thereby gave the impulse, at first for the scholarly Erasmus (1504), and later on for the entire scientific world, to take sides either with or against Dionysius. The consequence was the formation of two camps; among the adversaries were not only Protestants (Luther, Scultetus, Dallaeus, etc.) but also prominent Catholic theologians (Beatus Rhenanus, Cajetan, Morinus, SirmondPetaviusLequienLe Nourry); among the defenders of Dionysius were BaroniusBellarmine, Lansselius, Corderius, Halloix, Delario, de Rubeis, Lessius, Alexander Netalis, and others. The literary controversy assumed such dimensions and was carried on so vehemently that it can only be compared to the dispute concerning the Pseudo-Isidorian decretals and the pseudo-Constantinian donation. In the nineteenth century the general opinion inclined more and more towards the opposition; the Germans especially, Möhler, FesslerDöllingerHergenrötherAlzog, Funk, and others made no reserve of their decision for the negative. At this juncture the scholarly professor Franz Hipler came forward and attempted to save the honor of Dionysius. He finds in Dionysius not a falsifier, but a prominent theologian of the fourth century who, through no fault of his own, but owing to the misinterpretation of some passages, was confounded with the Areopagite. Many Catholics, and many Protestants as well, voiced their approval. Finally, in 1895 there appeared almost simultaneously two independent researches, by Hugo Koch and by Joseph Stiglmayr, both of whom started from the same point and arrived at the same goal. The conclusion reached was that extracts from the treatise of the neo-Platonist Proclus, "De malorum subsistentia" (handed down in the Latin translation of Morbeka, Cousin ed., Paris, 1864), had been used by Dionysius in the treatise "De div. nom." (c. iv, sections 19-35) A careful analysis brought to light an astonishing agreement of both works in arrangement, sequence of thought, examples, figures, and expressions. It is easy to point out many parallelisms from other and later writings of Proclus, e.g. from his "Institutio theologica", "theologia Platonica", and his commentary on Plato's "Parmenides", "Alcibiades I", and "Timaeus" (these five having been written after 462).

Accordingly, the long-standing problem seems to be solved in its most important phase. As a matter of fact, this is the decision pronounced by the most competent judges, such as Bardenhewer, Erhard, Funk, Diekamp, Rauschen, De Smedt, S.J., Duchesne, Battifol; and the Protestant scholars of early Christian literature, Gelzer, Harnack, Kruger, Bonwetsch. The chronology being thus determined, an explanation was readily found for the various objections hitherto alleged, viz. the silence of the early Fathers, the later dogmatic terminology, a developed monastic, ceremonial, and penitential system, the echo of neo-Platonism, etc. On the other hand it sets at rest many hypotheses which had been advanced concerning the author and his times and various discussions---whether, e.g., a certain Apollinaris, or Synesius, or Dionysius Alexandrinus, or a bishop of Ptolemais, or a pagan hierophant was the writer.

A critical edition of the text of the Areopagite is urgently needed. The Juntina (1516), that of Basle (1539), of Paris (1562 and 1615), and lastly the principal edition of Antwerp (1634) by Corderius, S.J., which was frequently reprinted (Paris, 1644, 1755, 1854) and was included in the Migne collection (P.G., III and IV with Lat. trans. and additions), are insufficient because they make use of only a few of the numerous Greek manuscripts and take no account of the Syriac, Armenian, and Arabic translations. The following translations have thus far appeared in modern languages: English, by Lupton (London, 1869) and Parker (London, 1894), both of which contain only the "Cael. Hierarchia" and the "Eccles. Hier."; German, by Engelhardt (Sulzbach, 1823) and Storf, "Kirkliche Hierarchie" (Kempten, 1877); French, by Darboy (Paris, 1845) and Dulac (Paris, 1865).

Sources

For the older literature, cf. CHEVALIER, Bio. bibl. (Paris, 1905). Recent works treating of Dionysius: HIPLER, Dionysius der Areopagite, Untersuchungen (Ratisbon, 1861); IDEM in Kirkchenlex., s.v.; SCHNEIDER, Areopagitica, Verteiligung ihrer Echteit (Ratisbon, 1886); FROTHINGHAM, Stephen Bar Sudaili (Leyden, 1886); STIGLMAYR, Der Neuplatoniker Proklus als Vorlage des sog. Dionysius Areopagita in der Lehre vom Uebel in Hist. Jahrb. der Gorres-Gesellschaft (1895), pp. 253-273 and 721-748: IDEM, Das Aufkommen der pseudo-dionysischen Schriften und ihr Eindringen in die christliche Literatur bis zum Laterankonzil (Feldkirch, Austria, 1895); KOCH, Der pseudepigraphische Charakter der dionysischen Schriften in Theol. Quartalscrift (Tübingen, 1895), pp. 353-420; IDEM, Proklus, als Quelle des Pseudo-Dionysius, Areop. in der Lehrer vom Bosen in Philologus (1895), pp. 438-454; STIGLMAYR, Controversy with DRASEKE, LANGEN, and NIRSCHL in Byzantinische Zeitschrift (1898), pp. 91-110, and (1899), pp. 263-301, and Histor.-polit. Blatter (1900), CXXV, pp. 541-550 and 613-627; IDEM, Die Lehrer von den Sakramenten und der Kirche nach Pseudo-Dionysius in Zeitschrift fur kath. Theol. (Innsbruck, 1898), pp. 246-303; IDEM, Die Eschatologie des Pseudo-Dionysius, ibid. (1899), pp. 1-21; KOCH, Ps.-Dionysius Areop. in seinen Beziehungen zum Neoplatonismus und Mysterienwesen (Mainz, 1900). See also the articles on Dionysius in the Patrologie of BARDENHEWER (Freiburg, 1901), in the Realencyk. fur prot. Theol., and in the Dict. of Christian Biography.

Stiglmayr, Joseph. "Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 5. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909. 19 Jan. 2021 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05013a.htm>.

Transcription. This article was transcribed for New Advent by Geoffrey K. Mondello.

Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. May 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.

Copyright © 2020 by Kevin Knight. Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

SOURCE : https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05013a.htm

"Denis the Areopagite, first apostle to the Gauls", from book 1, folio 1 recto of Les vrais pourtraits et vies des hommes illustres grecz, latins et payens (1584) by André Thevet.


Weninger’s Lives of the Saints – Saint Dionysius, and His Companions

Article

Athens, in Greece, was the birthplace of Saint Dionysius, the great Apostle of France. Already in his youth he devoted himself with so much zeal to the study of science, especially astronomy, that he was rightly counted one of the most learned men of the city. Hence he became one of the twelve judges or magistrates of Athens, who were called Areopagites, because they administered justice at a place named Areopagus. When, at the time of the Crucifixion of Christ, a three hours’ darkness, covered the earth, Dionysius was at Heliopolis, and as he perceived that this darkness was against the course of nature, he publicly declared while contemplating it: “Either the Lord of nature is suffering, or the world is coming to an end.”

When, some years later, Saint Paul came to Athens and announced to the inhabitants of the city the only true God and Redeemer, Jesus Christ, he was taken to the Areopagus, that he might there justify his new teachings. The holy Apostle did so with great energy, and when, in conclusion, he spoke of the resurrection of Christ, and at the same time said that all men would rise again from death, some shook their heads doubtingly, others derided him, but some believed his words. Among the latter was Dionysius, who invited Saint Paul into his house, and after being instructed by him, was baptized. The holy Apostle perceived in Dionysius great abilities for disseminating the Christian faith. Hence he instructed him most thoroughly in everything pertaining both to faith and to the practice of a Christian life, and consecrated him Bishop of Athens. Dionysius led many heathens by his sermons and virtuous example to the knowledge of Christ, and to a life worthy of their belief. At one time he made a journey to Jerusalem, as well to visit the places watered with the blood of the Saviour, as also to see Mary, the Mother of the Redeemer, who was still living. He afterwards related that, at the sight of her, he was so much overcome, that he would have worshipped her as a Goddess, had not his faith taught him that there was only one God.

Some years later, he appointed some one else to take his place as bishop, and went to Rome to the holy Pope Clement. Greatly rejoiced at his fervor and zeal to convert the heathen, the Pope sent him to France; to win the inhabitants of so large a country to the sweet yoke of Christ; as those, who had been sent thither by Saint Peter, were no longer among the living. Saint Dionysius set out on his journey, accompanied by a priest named Rusticus, and by Eleutherius, a deacon, and a few other zealous men. Many say that he went first to Arles, where many had become Christians, having been converted and baptized by Saint Trophimus. Here he remained for some time to the great benefit of the faithful, to whom he gave a bishop, that they might be strengthened and still better instructed in their new faith. From Arles, the Saint repaired to Paris, the Capital of the land, where he preached the Gospel with such energy, and confirmed his words by so many miracles, that the inhabitants became converted in great numbers. They broke to pieces or burned the idols they had until then worshipped, and erected several Churches to the true God; one in honor of the Holy Trinity, others dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, Saint Peter, Saint Paul and Saint Stephen. The first stood where afterwards the Church of Saint Benedict was built, and where yet remain in the chapel of Saint Denis, the words: “In this chapel Saint Dionysius invoked the Holy Trinity.”

The devil, finding the rapid growth of Christianity unendurable, incited against the Saint the idolatrous priests, who went to the Pagan Governor, Fescennius, and accused the new teachers as seducers of the people, and enemies of the gods. They at the same time insisted that he should do away with them, if he would save the city from ruin. Fescennius immediately had the Saint and his companions taken prisoners and brought into his presence. Immediately on their arrival he commanded them to revoke the doctrines they had preached and to worship the old gods. Dionysius, indignant at this order, represented to the governor the falsity of the Pagan gods; but the blinded tyrant gave no heed to his words and condemned him and the others to be tortured. First they were scourged; then tied upon gridirons, and slowly roasted, so that their death might be as painful as possible. The Almighty, however, took from the fire all power to burn, and the holy martyrs remained unharmed. Fescennius, still more embittered by this miracle, confined them in a dark, damp dungeon, the air of which was stifling, and a few days later cast them before wild beasts. But Saint Dionysius, by making the sign of the holy Cross over himself and blessing the animals, made them so tame that they laid themselves down quietly at his feet. The governor, more wild, more cruel than the beasts of the forest, would not be conquered, but commanded Saint Dionysius to be put upon the rack and to be torn with iron hooks. The holy Martyr bore this torture fearlessly, and praised and thanked God that he was found worthy to suffer for Christ’s sake, and ‘exhorted all present to be converted to Christianity. All who were witnesses of the fearful spectacle were greatly astonished and moved, that a man of 106 years bore with such undaunted courage the most terrible pains, and had the fortitude to announce Christ even in the agonies of death. A great many concluded from it,, that the faith he preached must be true, and confessed publicly that they would embrace Christianity. Hence, Fescennius, to end the martyrdom of the Saint, ordered him and his companions to be beheaded. The joy which Saint Dionysius felt at this sentence can hardly be expressed, as he looked upon his death as the commencement of eternal happiness. When the head of the Saint was severed from his body, he, by a wonderful miracle, seized the head with both hands, and carried it to a place two miles from Paris. A city named after him was afterwards built on the spot, in commemoration of this miracle. Catulla, a holy matron, who had been converted by the Saint, went to meet him and received the head, which she guarded as a precious treasure during the persecution, after which it was buried with the rest of the body with all due honors. This great miracle had so many witnesses, that its truth cannot be doubted. Many of the heathens who had seen it were in consequence converted to Christianity. Three centuries after the glorious death of Saint Dionysius, Saint Genevieve erected over his tomb, a magnificent church, which again two centuries later, was changed by King Dagobert into a still more splendid one, with a monastery attached to it which in time became quite celebrated. The Kings of France selected this Church for their last resting-place. There are still extant some learned books written by Saint Dionysius; but the enemies of the Church refuse to acknowledge the Saint as the author of them, because he clearly proves that those ceremonies and customs which they have rejected, were already used in the Catholic Church, more than a thousand years before Luther, and that the true Christians of those days believed all that Catholics now believe in regard to holy Mass and other articles. I know also that some Catholics, though for other reasons, doubt the authenticity of the same works; but it is also known that many learned Catholics have refuted the objections which have been brought against them. There are also some historians, who maintain, that it was another Dionysius that preached the Gospel in Paris, and suffered martyrdom there. Their reasons for thus saying are, however, not conclusive. Many men, renowned for their learning, give it as their conviction, that the objections raised against the ancient traditions are groundless, and follow, as we have done, the Roman Breviary and Martyrology.

MLA Citation

Father Francis Xavier Weninger, DD, SJ. “Saint Dionysius, and His Companions”. Lives of the Saints1876. CatholicSaints.Info. 10 May 2018. Web. 19 January 2021. <https://catholicsaints.info/weningers-lives-of-the-saints-saint-dionysius-and-his-companions/>

SOURCE : https://catholicsaints.info/weningers-lives-of-the-saints-saint-dionysius-and-his-companions/

Nicolas Poussin  (1594–1665). Saint Denis l'Aréopagite couronné par un ange, 1620-1621, 173 X 108, Musée des Beaux-Arts de Rouen  



St. Dionysius the Areopagite, Bishop of Athens, Martyr

See Acts xvii; Tillemont, t. 2; Cave, p. 66.

THE GREAT apostle of the Gentiles, esteeming himself equally a debtor to the learned and to the unlearned, arrived at Athens about the year 51, seventeen years after our Lord’s crucifixion, and boldly preached the faith in that city, which had been for many ages the chief seat of the muses, where the chief studies of philosophy, oratory, and polite literature flourished. All matters belonging to religion were, by an ancient law of that state, to be determined by the great council of the Areopagites, which was still observed; for, though the Athenians were fallen under the Roman yoke, yet, out of regard to their learning, and to the ancient dignity of their republic, the Romans restored to them many of their ancient privileges, with the name and title at least of their liberty. St. Paul therefore was summoned to give an account of his doctrine in the Areopagus. 1 The apostle appeared undaunted in that august and severe assembly of proud sages, though Plato so much dreaded a like examination at this tribunal, that he on no other account dissembled his sentiments of the unity of God, and other like truths, of which he was himself perfectly satisfied, especially after his travels into Egypt, as St. Justin Martyr testifies. 2 St. Paul explained before these learned senators the Christian maxims of repentance, purity of manners, the unity and omnipresence of God, his judgments, and the resurrection of the dead. The divine unction with which he delivered these great truths was an eloquence with which these masters of philosophy and oratory were unacquainted. The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead shocked many, and was a great stumbling-block, though Plato and other eminent philosophers among them had established many sublime sentiments with regard to the immortality of the soul, and the rewards and punishments of a life to come; but that our flesh, which putrifies in the earth, and perishes to all our senses, shall, by the power of God, be raised again the same that dies, was what many of these wise men of the world looked upon as a dream, rather than a certain truth. Many, however, among them were exceedingly moved with the sanctity and sublimity of this new doctrine, and with the marks of a divine mission with which the preacher delivered himself; and they said to him they would hear him again upon that subject on some other day. Some whose hearts were touched by a powerful grace, and who with simplicity sought after the truth, not the idle gratification of curiosity, pride, or vanity, without delay addressed themselves to the apostle, and received from him full satisfaction of the evidence of the divine revelation which he preached to them. Among these there was a woman named Damaris; but the most remarkable among these converts was Dionysius, one of the honourable members or judges of this most venerable and illustrious senate. 3 We are assured by the testimony of St. Dionysius of Corinth, 4 that St. Dionysius the Areopagite was afterwards constituted bishop of Athens; and that this was done by St. Paul himself we are informed by the Apostolical Constitutions, by Aristides cited by Usuard, and by several ancient martyrologists. Aristides, quoted by Usuard, and St. Sophronius of Jerusalem, styled him a martyr. The Greeks, in their menologies, tell us that he was burnt alive for the faith at Athens. 5 His name occurs in ancient calendars on the 3rd of October. The cathedral of Soissons is in possession of his head, which was brought thither from Constantinople, in 1205. Pope Innocent III. sent to the abbey of St. Denis, near Paris, the body of this saint, which had been translated from Greece to Rome.

We admire in this glorious saint, and other illustrious primitive converts, the wonderful change which faith produced in their souls. It not only enlightened their understandings, discovering to them new fields of the most sublime and important knowledge, and opening to their meditation the boundless range of eternity, and of the infinite riches of the divine goodness, justice, and mercy; but it also exerted the most powerful influence upon their wills. A spirit of the most sincere and profound compunction and humility was created in them, with a perfect contempt of the world, and all earthly things, and an entire disengagement of their hearts from all inordinate attachment to creatures. The fire of pure and ardent charity was also kindled in their hearts, which consumed all the rust of their passions, and purged their affections. From these virtues of humility and charity, which Christ declares to be the foundation of his spirit in a soul, arose an unalterable meekness, peace, fortitude, and constancy, with the whole train of virtues. Thus, by their conversion to the faith, they were interiorly changed, and became quite new men, endued with a temper truly heavenly, and animated with the spirit of Christ. The light of faith spreads its beams upon our souls. Why then has it not produced the same reformation and change in our wills and affections? This it cannot do whilst we refuse to open our hearts to this grace, and earnestly set not ourselves to remove all obstacles of self-love and the passions. Yet, till this change be wrought in our affections, we are earthly, strangers to the spirit of Christ, and want the mark of meekness and charity, by which those are to be known that belong to him. A Christian is not a mere name, or empty profession; it is a great and noble work; a work of difficulty which requires assiduous application, and continual pains; and in which the greater our endeavours and advances have been, with the greater ardour do we continually strive to advance higher towards perfection, saying with St. Paul, Not as though I had already attained, or were already perfect; but I follow after. I count not myself to have apprehended; but this one thing I do: forgetting the things that are behind, and stretching forth myself to those that are before, I press towards the mark, to the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. 6

Note 1. The Areopagus was so called from The Hill of Mars, [Greek], without the walls of Athens, where it stood. This council is thought to have been as ancient as the Athenian nation, though Solon gave it a new form and dignity. The number of the members or judges was not determined, but was sometimes two or three hundred, though at first only seven. For some time no one was admitted among them who had not been archon, that is, the supreme yearly magistrate of the commonwealth, by whose name the year was counted, as at Rome by the consuls. Nor was any one to be adopted into it who was not of the strictest morals, and his conduct without reproach. The assemblies of this court were always held in the night, and the severity of its proceedings made its sentence extremely dreaded. The reputation of the integrity of its judges procured it the highest respect and veneration, so that its decisions were received as oracles. See Rollin, Hist. Ancienne, t. 4, p. 420; Potter’s Antiquities of Greece, and FF. Catrou and Rouille, Hist. Rom. l. 57, t. 14, p. 61; also Joan. Henrici Mai, Diss. de Gestis Pauli in Urbe Atheni. ensium, edit. ann. 1727, et Jodni Meursii Areopagus ap Gronovium Ann. Græcar. t. 5, p. 207, ad 213. [back]

Note 2. Cohortatio ad Græcos. [back]

Note 3. During the three first ages it was a usual reproach of the heathens, that the Christians were poor miserable persons. See Celsus, (ap. Orig. l. 3, n. 4,) Cecilius, (ap. Mim. Felic.) Lucian, (Dial. de Morte Peregrini, n. 12,) &c. This the Christian Apologists allow in part; but sometimes testify, that there were among them persons illustrious for their birth, dignities, and learning. See Origen, (l. 3, adv. Cels. n. 49, ed. Ben.) Tertullian, (Apol. c. 37, ad Scap. c. 4,) &c. Joseph of Arimathea, Nicodemus, Gamaliel, the eunuch of Queen Candace, St. Barnabas, &c. were Jews of birth and fortune. Among the Gentiles, King Abgar, the proconsul Sergius Paulus, St. Thecla, and those whom St. Paul saluted in the house of Nero, are early instances that several persons of rank embraced the faith. Flavius Clemens, Flavia Domitilla, and Glabrio, who had been Trajan’s colleague in the magistracy. St. Nazarius, martyr under Nero, (see Tillem. t. 2, p. 93,) the senator Apollonius, St. Felicitas, and her seven sons, and many other martyrs, show the same. It is indeed clear from 1 Cor. i. 26, that the number of such that came over to the faith when it was first preached, was small in proportion to the multitude of converts. The reason is assigned by Lactantius: “More among the poor believe the word of God than among the rich, who are bound down by many impediments, and are chained fast slaves to covetousness and other passions; so that they are not able to look up towards heaven, but have their mind bowed down and fixed on the earth.” (Instit. l. 7, c. 1, p. 517.) The Pagans called the Christians poor, though many were such only by choice. “Nec de ultima plebe consistimus, si honores vestros et purpuras recusamus.” (Minucius Felix in Octav. p. 311.) That the first preachers of the faith were strangers to profane learning, was a demonstration of the finger of God in its establishment. (See John Lamius, De Erudit. Apostol. an. 1738.) Yet in the second age many scholars of the first rank became champions of Christianity; witness Quadratus, Aristides, Justin Martyr, Melito, Athenagoras, Pantænus, &c. In the third, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, Heraclas, Dionysius, Minucius Felix, &c. [back]

Note 4. Ap. Eus. Hist. l. 3, c. 4; l. 4, c. 23. [back]


Note 5. Hilduin, abbot of St. Denis, in 814, wrote his Areopagatica, in which, upon the authority of spurious and fabulous records, he pretends, that St. Dionysius, the first bishop of Paris, is the same person with the Areopagite; of which mistake, some traces are found in certain other writings. This opinion was unknown before the ninth century, nor was it thought of even by the monk who wrote the life St. Dionysius of Paris in 750. In a great number of ancient Martyrologies the festivals of these two saints are mentioned as on two different days, and the place and circumstances of their martyrdoms are distinguished. In ancient breviaries, missals, calendars, and litanies the apostle of France is placed after the saints who suffered under Marcus Aurelius; and we are assured by St. Gregory of Tours, and other authentic monuments, that he only arrived in Gaul in 250. The author of the Life of St. Fuscian, Fulbert of Chartres, and Lethaldus, distinguish the two Dionysiuses. See this fully proved by F. Sirmond, Diss. de Duobus Dionys. t. 4, Op. p. 354, and Dr. Lanoy, in express dissertations, Morinus, l. De Ordinationibus, part. 2, c. 2. Gerard Du Bois, Hist. Eccl. Paris, l. 1, c. 3. D. Dionysius de S. Marthe, Gallia Christiana Nova, t. 7, p. 6. Tillemont, t. 4, &c. It is adopted in the Paris, Sens, and other French Breviaries; also by Orsi, Mamachi, and the most accurate and late historians in France, Italy, or other countries.

  The works which have gone under the name of the Areopagite, at least ever since the sixth century, consist of a book, Concerning the Celestial Hierarchy; another, Of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy; a treatise, Of the Divine Names; another, Of Mystical Divinity; and ten Epistles, whereof the four first are written to the monk Caius, the fifth to Dorotheus, the sixth to Sosipater, the seventh to Bishop Polycarp, the eighth to the monk Demophylus, the ninth to Bishop Titus, and the tenth to St. John. They are maintained to be the genuine works of the Areopagite, in express dissertations, by D. Claude David, a Maurist monk, in 1702; by D. Bernard of Sept-Fonds, under the name of Adrian, in 1708; F. Honoratus of St. Mary, a Carmelite friar, in 1720, &c.; but it is now the opinion almost generally received among the learned, that they are suppositions, and were compiled only in the fifth century. Their style is swelling, lofty, and figurative; they are written with care and study, and with a great deal of artifice in the polishing and disposition of the periods, and in the exact method which is observed in the order of the arguments. The doctrine contained in them is everywhere orthodox; and though some parts are abstracted and subtle, the works are useful. The first uncontroverted work in which they are mentioned, is the conference between the Severians (a sect of Eutychians) and the Catholics, held in the Emperor Justinian’s palace, in 532, in which these heretics quoted them. St. Maximus and other writers in the following ages made frequent use of them. The author of the letters unjustifiably personates the Areopagite, as is manifest from the seventh, in which he says he observed, at Heliopolis, the miraculous eclipse which happened at the death of Christ. In the eighth, it is said the monk Demophilus had treated harshly and expelled out of the sanctuary a priest and a penitent layman, because he found the latter confessing his sins there to him. The author of the letter reproves him severely, because the priest was his superior, and because he ought not to have shown such inhumanity to a penitent sinner. Upon which occasion he relates, that when a zealous pastor, named Carpus, was weary in endeavouring in vain to reclaim an obstinate sinner, Christ in a vision mildly rebuked him, telling him, he was ready to die a second time for the salvation of sinners. In the book, On the Heavenly Hierarchy, the nine choirs of angels, and their different functions, are explained, with several subtle questions concerning them. The author says, that one of their functions is to sing without ceasing: Holy, holy, holy, the Lord God of hosts; all the earth is full of thy glory. Which is said also by St. Athanasius and St. Gregory Nazianzen. (Or. 38.) The book, On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy is much more useful; for in it are explained the ceremonies of baptism, of the mass, consecration of the holy chrism, the ordination of a bishop, priest, and deacon, the manner of blessing a monk, and the burial of the dead, in which the bishop prays for the remission of the sins of the person deceased. The author adds, that prayers are only useful to those who died well. In the beginning of this book he recommends to Timothy, to whom it is addressed, to keep secret all he shall say to him, and not to discover anything concerning our mysteries, except to those who have been baptized. And chap. 7, he says, he had not set down the words of any of the sacred consecrations and blessings, because it was not lawful to commit them to writing, lest they should be divulged, and exposed to be profaned. He mentions the sign of the cross used in sacred ordinations and consecrations. In the treatise, On the Divine Names, many epithets and names given to the three Divine Persons in the Trinity are expounded. In that, On Mystical Divinity, the author, after having invoked the succour of the Holy Trinity, and prayed to be raised to that eminent degree in which God discovers his divine secrets to pure souls, he teaches Timothy, that it is only by the disengagement of the affections from all sensible things, and from the inordinate love of ourselves, that we can be raised to the contemplation of the divine obscurity, that is, the incomprehensible Godhead. He admonishes him not to divulge this mystical theology in the presence of those who cannot persuade themselves that there is anything above natural and sensible objects; and who, being plunged in worldly affections, and material things, have not as yet acquired a purity of soul by the study of mortification, and the exercise of virtues. He repeats a saying of St. Bartholomew, that, “Theology is both copious and short; the gospel is an abridged word, yet diffusive, and of boundless extent.”

  It is certain that this author had learned from the lessons of some sincere and true contemplatives, several just notions and useful maxims concerning mystical theology; though he sometimes mixes certain notions, and uses terms borrowed from the Platonic philosophy, as St. Francis of Sales uses some taken from the modern scholastic Aristotelian philosophy. By this term of mystical theology we are not to understand any acquired habit or science, such as speculative theology is, but an experimental knowledge and relish of God, which is not acquired, and which no one can set himself to obtain, but to which a soul is raised by God in prayer or contemplation. Or, it is a state of supernatural passive prayer, in which a soul which has previously crucified in herself earthly affections, and being disengaged from worldly things, and exercised in heavenly conversation, is raised to God in such a manner that her powers are fixed on him without reasoning, and without corporeal images painted by the imagination. In this state, by the most fervent quiet prayer, and an internal view of the mind, she beholds God as an immense eternal light, and in an ecstacy contemplates his infinite goodness, love, and other adorable perfections; and in this operation, all her affections and powers seem transformed into him by sweet love, she either remaining in the quiet prayer of pure faith, or employing her affections in the most ardent acts of praise, adoration, &c. Our author thus describes this state: (Eccl. Hier. c. 1,) “The sovereign blessedness of God, the very essence of the divinity, the principle of deification, by which those are deified who are to be raised to this gift of union, has bestowed on men the gift of mystic theology, in a spiritual and immaterial manner, not by moving them exteriorly to divine things, but by inspiring their will interiorly, by the irradiation of a lively and pure faith.” We are assured by those who treat of this state, that no one who has not learned it by some degree of experience, can form a notion of it, any more than a blind man can conceive an idea of colours, or one understand Hebrew who has not learned something of that language, says St. Bernard. Let no one aim at, or desire it; let no one dwell on it, or take any complacency in himself about it; for such a disposition leads to pride, presumption, and fatal illusion; but let every one study in every state through which God shall be pleased to conduct him, and by every means, to improve himself in simplicity of heart, sincere profound humility, and pure and fervent charity. [back]

Note 6. Phil. iii. 12, 13, 14. [back]

Rev. Alban Butler (1711–73).  Volume X: October. The Lives of the Saints.  1866.


Фрески церкви Спаса на Ильине, 1378.

Spas na Ilyine - Saint Dionysius Areopagite


Hieromartyr Dionysius the Areopagite, Bishop of Athens

Commemorated on October 3

Troparion & Kontakion

Saint Dionysius lived originally in the city of Athens. He was raised there and received a classical Greek education. He then went to Egypt, where he studied astronomy at the city of Heliopolis. It was in Heliopolis, along with his friend Apollophonos where he witnessed the solar eclipse that occurred at the moment of the death of the Lord Jesus Christ by Crucifixion. “Either the Creator of all the world now suffers, or this visible world is coming to an end,” Dionysius said. Upon his return to Athens from Egypt, he was chosen to be a member of the Areopagus Council (Athenian high court).

When the holy Apostle Paul preached at the place on the Hill of Ares (Acts 17:16-34), Dionysius accepted his salvific proclamation and became a Christian. For three years Saint Dionysius remained a companion of the holy Apostle Paul in preaching the Word of God. Later on, the Apostle Paul selected him as bishop of the city of Athens. And in the year 57 Saint Dionysius was present at the repose of the Most Holy Theotokos.

During the lifetime of the Mother of God, Saint Dionysius had journeyed from Athens to Jerusalem to meet Her. He wrote to his teacher the Apostle Paul: “I witness by God, that besides the very God Himself, there is nothing else filled with such divine power and grace. No one can fully comprehend what I saw. I confess before God: when I was with John, who shone among the Apostles like the sun in the sky, when I was brought before the countenance of the Most Holy Virgin, I experienced an inexpressible sensation. Before me gleamed a sort of divine radiance which transfixed my spirit. I perceived the fragrance of indescribable aromas and was filled with such delight that my very body became faint, and my spirit could hardly endure these signs and marks of eternal majesty and heavenly power. The grace from her overwhelmed my heart and shook my very spirit. If I did not have in mind your instruction, I should have mistaken Her for the very God. It is impossible to stand before greater blessedness than this which I beheld.”

After the death of the Apostle Paul, Saint Dionysius wanted to continue with his work, and therefore went off preaching in the West, accompanied by the Presbyter Rusticus and Deacon Eleutherius. They converted many to Christ at Rome, and then in Germany, and then in Spain. In Gaul, during a persecution against Christians by the pagan authorities, all three confessors were arrested and thrown into prison. By night Saint Dionysius celebrated the Divine Liturgy with angels of the Lord. In the morning the martyrs were beheaded. According to an old tradition, Saint Dionysius took up his head, proceeded with it to the church and fell down dead there. A pious woman named Catulla buried the relics of the saint.

The writings of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite hold great significance for the Orthodox Church. Four books of his have survived to the present day:

On the Celestial Hierarchy

On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy

On the Names of God

On Mystical Theology

In additional, there are ten letters to various people.

The book On the Celestial Hierarchies was written actually in one of the countries of Western Europe, where Saint Dionysius was preaching. In it he speaks of the Christian teaching about the angelic world. The angelic (or Celestial-Heavenly) hierarchy comprises the nine angelic Ranks:

Seraphim

Cherubim

Thrones

Dominions

Powers

Authorities

Principalities

Archangels

Angels

The account of the Synaxis of the Bodiless Powers of Heaven is located under November 8.

The purpose of the divinely-established Angelic Hierarchy is the ascent towards godliness through purification, enlightenment and perfection. The highest ranks are bearers of divine light and divine life for the lower ranks. And not only are the sentient, bodiless angelic hosts included in the spiritual light-bearing hierarchy, but also the human race, created anew and sanctified in the Church of Christ.

The book of Saint Dionysius On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchies is a continuation of his book On the Celestial Hierarchies. The Church of Christ, like the Angelic ranks, in its universal service is set upon the foundation of priestly principles established by God.

In the earthly world, for the children of the Church, divine grace comes down indescribably in the holy Mysteries of the Church, which are spiritual in nature, though perceptible to the senses in form. Few, even among the holy ascetics, were able to behold with their earthly eyes the fiery vision of the Holy Mysteries of God. But outside of the Church’s sacraments, outside of Baptism and the Eucharist, the light-bearing saving grace of God is not found, neither is divine knowledge nor theosis (deification).

The book On the Names of God expounds upon the way of divine knowledge through a progression of the Divine Names.

Saint Dionysius’ book On Mystical Theology also sets forth the teaching about divine knowledge. The theology of the Orthodox Church is totally based upon experience of divine knowledge. In order to know God it is necessary to be in proximity to Him, to have come near to Him in some measure, so as to attain communion with God and deification (theosis). This condition is accomplished through prayer. This is not because prayer in itself brings us close to the incomprehensible God, but rather that the purity of heart in true prayer brings us closer to God.

The written works of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite are of extraordinary significance in the theology of the Orthodox Church, and also for late Medieval Western theology. For almost four centuries, until the beginning of the sixth century, the works of this holy Father of the Church were preserved in an obscure manuscript tradition, primarily by theologians of the Alexandrian Church. The concepts in these works were known and utilized by Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Dionysius the Great, pre-eminent figures of the catechetical school in Alexandria, and also by Saint Gregory the Theologian. Saint Dionysius of Alexandria wrote to Saint Gregory the Theologian a Commentary on the “Areopagitum.” The works of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite received general Church recognition during the sixth-seventh centuries.

Particularly relevant are the Commentaries written by Saint Maximus the Confessor (January 21). (trans. note: although many scholars suggest that the “Areopagitum” was actually written by an anonymous sixth century figure who employed the common ancient device of piously borrowing an illustrious name, this in no way diminishes the profound theological significance of the works.)

In the Russian Orthodox Church the teachings of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite about the spiritual principles and deification were at first known through the writings of Saint John of Damascus (December 4). The first Slavonic translation of the “Areopagitum” was done on Mt. Athos in about the year 1371 by a monk named Isaiah. Copies of it were widely distributed in Russia. Many of them have been preserved to the present day in historic manuscript collections, among which is a parchment manuscript “Works of Saint Dionysius the Areopagite” belonging to Saint Cyprian, Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus (September 16) in his own handwriting.

According to one tradition, he was killed at Lutetia (ancient name of Paris, France) in the year 96 during the persecution under the Roman emperor Dometian (81-96). Today most scholars and theologians believe that Saint Dionysius the Areopagite did not die in Gaul, and that Saint Dionysius (or Denys) of Paris is a different saint with the same name.

Saint Demetrius of Rostov says that the Hieromartyr Dionysius was beheaded in Athens, and that many miracles were worked at his grave.

SOURCE : https://www.oca.org/saints/lives/2019/10/03/102843-hieromartyr-dionysius-the-areopagite-bishop-of-athens

Aldersbach abbey ( Lower Bavaria ). Gate chapel ( 1767 ): Altar fresco ( 1767 ) showing saint Dionysius Areopagita by Matthäus Günter.

Kloster Aldersbach ( Niederbayern ). Portenkapelle: Altarfresko ( 1767 ) mit heiligem Dionysius Areopagita von Matthäus Günter.



San Dionigi l'Areopagita Discepolo di S. Paolo


m. 95 c.

Dionigi viene citato da Luca come uno dei pochissimi ateniesi che seguirono Paolo dopo il discorso all’Areopago. Un altro Dionigi, vescovo di Corinto del II secolo, scrive che l’Areopagita fu il primo pastore di Atene. Fu, poi, confuso con l’omonimo protovescovo martire di Parigi, la cui festa cade il 9 ottobre. Sotto il nome di Pseudo-Dionigi va l’autore (forse un monaco siriaco del V-VI secolo) di celebri scritti largamente diffusi nel Medioevo: tra essi il «De coelesti Ierarchia» e il «De divinis nominibus». In essi si afferma che Dionigi avrebbe visto l’eclissi della Crocifissione e assistito alla Dormizione di Maria. Perciò furono attribuiti all’antico ateniese. (Avvenire)

Martirologio Romano: Commemorazione di san Dionigi l’Areopagita, che si convertì a Cristo annunciato da san Paolo Apostolo davanti all’Areopágo e fu costituito primo vescovo di Atene.

E' una figura assai misteriosa: un teologo del sesto secolo, il cui nome è sconosciuto, che ha scritto sotto lo pseudonimo di Dionigi Areopagita. Con questo pseudonimo egli alludeva al passo della Scrittura che abbiamo adesso ascoltato, cioè alla vicenda raccontata da San Luca nel XVII capitolo degli Atti degli Apostoli, dove viene riferito che Paolo predicò in Atene sull'Areopago, per una élite del grande mondo intellettuale greco, ma alla fine la maggior parte degli ascoltatori si dimostrò disinteressata, e si allontanò deridendolo; tuttavia alcuni, pochi ci dice San Luca, si avvicinarono a Paolo aprendosi alla fede. L’evangelista ci dona due nomi: Dionigi, membro dell'Areopago, e una certa donna, Damaris.

Se l'autore di questi libri ha scelto cinque secoli dopo lo pseudonimo di Dionigi Areopagita vuol dire che sua intenzione era di mettere la saggezza greca al servizio del Vangelo, aiutare l'incontro tra la cultura e l'intelligenza greca e l'annuncio di Cristo; voleva fare quanto intendeva questo Dionigi, che cioè il pensiero greco si incontrasse con l'annuncio di San Paolo; essendo greco, farsi discepolo di San Paolo e così discepolo di Cristo.

Perché egli nascose il suo nome e scelse questo pseudonimo? Una parte di risposta è già stata data: voleva proprio esprimere questa intenzione fondamentale del suo pensiero. 
Ma ci sono due ipotesi circa questo anonimato coperto da uno pseudonimo. Una prima ipotesi dice: era una voluta falsificazione, con la quale, ridatando le sue opere al primo secolo, al tempo di San Paolo, egli voleva dare alla sua produzione letteraria un'autorità quasi apostolica. Ma migliore di questa ipotesi — che mi sembra poco credibile — è l'altra: che cioè egli volesse proprio fare un atto di umiltà. Non dare gloria al proprio nome, non creare un monumento per se stesso con le sue opere, ma realmente servire il Vangelo, creare una teologia ecclesiale, non individuale, basata su se stesso. In realtà riuscì a costruire una teologia che, certo, possiamo datare al sesto secolo, ma non attribuire a una delle figure di quel tempo: è una teologia un po' disindividualizzata, cioè una teologia che esprime un pensiero comune in un linguaggio comune. Era un tempo di acerrime polemiche dopo il Concilio di Calcedonia; lui invece, nella sua settima Epistola, dice: «Non vorrei fare delle polemiche; parlo semplicemente della verità, cerco la verità». E la luce della verità da se stessa fa cadere gli errori e fa splendere quanto è buono. Con questo principio egli purificò il pensiero greco e lo mise in sintonia con il Vangelo. Questo principio, che egli rivela nella sua settima Epistola, è anche espressione di un vero spirito di dialogo: cercare non le cose che separano, cercare la verità nella Verità stessa; essa poi riluce e fa cadere gli errori.

Quindi, pur essendo la teologia di questo autore, per così dire “soprapersonale”, realmente ecclesiale, noi possiamo collocarla nel VI secolo. Perché? Lo spirito greco, che egli mise al servizio del Vangelo, lo incontrò nei libri di un certo Proclo, morto nel 485 ad Atene: questo autore apparteneva al tardo platonismo, una corrente di pensiero che aveva trasformato la filosofia di Platone in una sorte religione filosofica, il cui scopo alla fine era di creare una grande apologia del politeisimo greco e ritornare, dopo il successo del cristianesimo, all’antica religione greca. Voleva dimostrare che, in realtà, le divinità erano le forze operanti nel cosmo. La conseguenza era che doveva ritenersi più vero il politeismo che il monoteismo, con un unico Dio creatore. Era un grande sistema cosmico di divinità, di forze misteriose, quello che mostrava Proclo, per il quale in questo cosmo deificato l'uomo poteva trovare l'accesso alla divinità. Egli però distingueva le strade per i semplici, i quali non erano in grado di elevarsi ai vertici della verità — per loro certi riti anche superstiziosi potevano essere sufficienti — e le strade per i saggi, che invece dovevano purificarsi per arrivare alla pura luce.

Questo pensiero, come si vede, è profondamente anticristiano. È una reazione tarda contro la vittoria del cristianesimo. Un uso anticristiano di Platone, mentre era già in corso un uso cristiano del grande filosofo. È interessante che questo Pseudo-Dionigi abbia osato servirsi proprio di questo pensiero per mostrare la verità di Cristo; trasformare questo universo politeistico in un cosmo creato da Dio – nell'armonia del cosmo di Dio dove tutte le forze sono lode di Dio – e mostrare questa grande armonia, questa sinfonia del cosmo che va dai serafini agli angeli e agli arcangeli, all'uomo e a tutte le creature che insieme riflettono la bellezza di Dio e rendono lode a Dio. Trasformava così l'immagine politeista in un elogio del Creatore e della sua creatura. Possiamo in questo modo scoprire le caratteristiche essenziali del suo pensiero: esso è innanzitutto una lode cosmica. Tutta la creazione parla di Dio ed è un elogio di Dio. Essendo la creatura una lode di Dio, la teologia dello Pseudo-Dionigi diventa una teologia liturgica: Dio si trova soprattutto lodandolo, non solo riflettendo; e la liturgia non è qualcosa di costruito da noi, qualcosa di inventato per fare un'esperienza religiosa durante un certo periodo di tempo; essa è il cantare con il coro delle creature e l'entrare nella realtà cosmica stessa. E proprio così la liturgia, apparentemente solo ecclesiastica, diventa larga e grande, diventa nostra unione con il linguaggio di tutte le creature. Egli dice: non si può parlare di Dio in modo astratto; parlare di Dio è sempre un hymnèin – un cantare per Dio con il grande canto delle creature, che si riflette e concretizza nella lode liturgica. Tuttavia, pur essendo la sua teologia cosmica, ecclesiale e liturgica, essa è anche profondamente personale. Egli creò la prima grande teologia mistica. Anzi la parola “mistica” acquisisce con lui un nuovo significato. Fino a quel tempo per i cristiani tale parola era equivalente alla parola “sacramentale”, cioè quanto appartiene al mystèrion, al sacramento. Con lui la parola “mistica” diventa più personale, più intima: esprime il cammino dell'anima verso Dio. E come trovare Dio? Qui osserviamo di nuovo un elemento importante nel suo dialogo tra filosofia greca e cristianesimo, tra pensiero pagano e fede biblica. Apparentemente quanto dice Platone e quanto dice la grande filosofia su Dio è molto più alto, è molto più “vero”; la Bibbia appare abbastanza “barbara”, semplice, precritica si direbbe oggi; ma lui osserva che proprio questo è necessario, perché così possiamo capire che i più alti concetti su Dio non arrivano mai fino alla sua vera grandezza; sono sempre impropri. Le immagini bibliche ci fanno, in realtà, capire che Dio è sopra tutti i concetti; nella loro semplicità noi troviamo, più che nei grandi concetti, il volto di Dio e ci rendiamo conto della nostra incapacità di esprimere realmente che cosa Egli è. Si parla così – è lo stesso Pseudo-Dionigi a farlo – di una “teologia negativa”. Possiamo più facilmente dire che cosa Dio non è, che non esprimere che cosa Egli è veramente. Solo tramite queste immagini possiamo indovinare il suo vero volto che, d'altra parte, è molto concreto: è Gesù Cristo. E benché Dionigi ci mostri, seguendo Proclo, l'armonia dei cori celesti, in cui sembra che tutti dipendano da tutti, il nostro cammino verso Dio, però, rimarrebbe molto lontano da Lui, egli sottolinea che, alla fine, la strada verso Dio è Dio stesso, il Quale si è fatto vicino a noi in Gesù Cristo.

E così una teologia grande e misteriosa diventa anche molto concreta sia nell’interpretazione della liturgia sia nel discorso su Gesù Cristo: con tutto ciò, questo Dionigi Areopagita ebbe un grande influsso su tutta la teologia medievale, su tutta la teologia mistica sia dell'Oriente sia dell'Occidente, fu quasi riscoperto nel tredicesimo secolo soprattutto da San Bonaventura, il grande teologo francescano che in questa teologia mistica trovò lo strumento concettuale per interpretare l'eredità così semplice e così profonda di San Francesco: Bonaventura con Dionigi ci dice alla fine, che l'amore vede più che la ragione. Dov'è la luce dell’amore non hanno più accesso le tenebre della ragione; l'amore vede, l'amore è occhio e l'esperienza ci dà più che la riflessione. Che cosa sia questa esperienza, Bonaventura lo vide in San Francesco: è l’esperienza di un cammino molto umile, molto realistico, giorno per giorno, è questo andare con Cristo, accettando la sua croce. In questa povertà e in questa umiltà – nell’umiltà che si vive anche nella ecclesialità – c'è un’esperienza di Dio che è più alta di quella che si raggiunge mediante la riflessione: in essa tocchiamo realmente il cuore di Dio.

Oggi esiste una nuova attualità di Dionigi Areopagita: egli appare come un grande mediatore nel dialogo moderno tra il cristianesimo e le teologie mistiche dell'Asia, la cui nota caratteristica sta nella convinzione che non si può dire chi sia Dio; di Lui si può parlare solo in forme negative; di Dio si può parlare solo col “non”, e solo entrando in questa esperienza del “non” Lo si raggiunge. E qui si vede una vicinanza tra il pensiero dell'Areopagita e quello delle religioni asiatiche: egli può essere oggi un mediatore come lo fu tra lo spirito greco e il Vangelo.

Si vede così che il dialogo non accetta la superficialità. Proprio quando uno entra nella profondità dell'incontro con Cristo si apre anche lo spazio vasto per il dialogo. Quando uno incontra la luce della verità, si accorge che è una luce per tutti; scompaiono le polemiche e diventa possibile capirsi l'un l'altro o almeno parlare l'uno con l'altro, avvicinarsi. Il cammino del dialogo è proprio l'essere vicini in Cristo a Dio nella profondità dell'incontro con Lui, nell'esperienza della verità che ci apre alla luce e ci aiuta ad andare incontro agli altri: la luce della verità, la luce dell'amore. E in fin dei conti ci dice: prendete la strada dell'esperienza, dell'esperienza umile della fede, ogni giorno. Il cuore diventa allora grande e può vedere e illuminare anche la ragione perché veda la bellezza di Dio. Preghiamo il Signore perché ci aiuti anche oggi a mettere al servizio del Vangelo la saggezza dei nostri tempi, scoprendo di nuovo la bellezza della fede, l'incontro con Dio in Cristo 

Autore: Papa Benedetto XVI (Udienza Generale 14.05.2008)

Tra i pochissimi che, udito il forbito discorso tenuto da Paolo all'Aeropago di Atene, aderirono a lui, Luca nomina "Dionigi l'Aeropagita", membro cioè di quel tribunale, e pertanto appartenente all'aristocrazia ateniese, "e una donna di nome Damaris", forse Damalis; secondo una tradizione riferita da s. Giovanni Crisostomo essa sarebbe la sposa di Dionigi, ma si tratta soltanto di una supposizione senza prova alcuna.

In una lettera di Dionigi, vescovo di Corinto, contemporaneo di papa Sotero, scritta agli ateniesi prima del 175, è detto, come ci ha conservato Eusebio, che Dionigi L'Areopagita morì primo vescovo di Atene; solo una leggenda tardiva lo ha identificato con il primo vescovo di Parigi, martirizzato verso il 270. Tale identificazione troviamo nel Martirologio e nel Breviario Romano, al 9 ottobre Tuttavia nel Vetus Romanum Martyrologium, i due Dionigi sono chiaramente distinti l'uno dall'altro; al 3 ottobre, infatti, si legge: "Athenis, Dionysii Areopagitae, sub Adriano diversis tormentis passi, ut Aristides testis est in opere quod de Christiana religione composuit; e al 9 ottobre: " Parisiis Dionysii episcopi cum sociis suis a Fescennino cum gladio animadversi " (PL, CXXIII, col. 171).

La Cronaca che porta il nome di Lucius Dexter identifica s. Dionigi di Parigi con Dionigi l'Areopagita, ma comunemente si nega l'autenticità di questo scritto. Il primo che identificò i due Dionigi fu Hilduinus, abate di S. Dionigi (m. 840), nella Vita s. Dionysii,. Sotto il nome di Dionigi l'Areopagita, vengono citati gli scritti, che probabilmente un monaco siriaco, promosso all'episcopato, compose tra il 480 e il 530 e che conobbero il più grande successo ed esercitarono un grande influsso durante tutto il Medio Evo: De coelesti hierarchia; De mystica theologia; De ecclesiastica hierarchia; De divinis nominibus, e dieci epistulae . Secondo la VII ep., Dionigi e il sofista Apollophanes avrebbero visto l'eclissi del sole nel giorno della crocifissione e secondo De divinis nominibus (III, 2) D. avrebbe assistito alla Dormitio della S.ma Vergine.

Da queste notizie leggendarie si è creduto che l'autore di questi scritti fosse Dionigi l'Areopagita, il discepolo di Paolo: il primo ad affermarlo fu il patriarca monofisita Severo di Antiochia (512-18), in una disputa con gli ortodossi a Costantinopoli, sotto Giustiniano I (533). Ma il portavoce dei cattolici, Hypatios, vescovo di Efeso, osservò che se tali scritti fossero stati di Dionigi, non sarebbero stati ignorati né da s. Cirillo, né da s. Atanasio: argomentazione, questa, che vale ancor oggi.

Autore: Francesco Spadafora


Busto reliquiario di San Dionigi Aeropagita, 1800-50 ca Certosa di Firenze, Cappella-Oratorio di Santa Maria Nuova, interno


Busto reliquiario di San Dionigi Aeropagita, 1800-50 ca Certosa di Firenze, Cappella-Oratorio di Santa Maria Nuova, interno

BENEDETTO XVI

UDIENZA GENERALE

Piazza San Pietro

Mercoledì, 14 maggio 2008

Pseudo-Dionigi Areopagita


Cari fratelli e sorelle,

oggi vorrei, nel corso delle catechesi sui Padri della Chiesa, parlare di una figura assai misteriosa: un teologo del sesto secolo, il cui nome è sconosciuto, che ha scritto sotto lo pseudonimo di Dionigi Areopagita. Con questo pseudonimo egli alludeva al passo della Scrittura che abbiamo adesso ascoltato, cioè alla vicenda raccontata da San Luca nel XVII capitolo degli Atti degli Apostoli, dove viene riferito che Paolo predicò in Atene sull'Areopago, per una élite del grande mondo intellettuale greco, ma alla fine la maggior parte degli ascoltatori si dimostrò disinteressata, e si allontanò deridendolo; tuttavia alcuni, pochi ci dice San Luca, si avvicinarono a Paolo aprendosi alla fede. L’evangelista ci dona due nomi: Dionigi, membro dell'Areopago, e una certa donna, Damaris.

Se l'autore di questi libri ha scelto cinque secoli dopo lo pseudonimo di Dionigi Areopagita vuol dire che sua intenzione era di mettere la saggezza greca al servizio del Vangelo, aiutare l'incontro tra la cultura e l'intelligenza greca e l'annuncio di Cristo; voleva fare quanto intendeva questo Dionigi, che cioè il pensiero greco si incontrasse con l'annuncio di San Paolo; essendo greco, farsi discepolo di San Paolo  e così discepolo di Cristo.

Perché egli nascose il suo nome e scelse questo pseudonimo? Una parte di risposta è già stata data: voleva proprio esprimere questa intenzione fondamentale del suo pensiero. Ma ci sono due ipotesi circa questo anonimato coperto da uno pseudonimo. Una prima ipotesi dice: era una voluta falsificazione, con la quale, ridatando le sue opere al primo secolo, al tempo di San Paolo, egli voleva dare alla sua produzione letteraria un'autorità quasi apostolica. Ma migliore di questa ipotesi — che mi sembra poco credibile — è l'altra: che cioè egli volesse proprio fare un atto di umiltà. Non dare gloria al  proprio nome, non creare un monumento per se stesso con le sue opere, ma realmente servire il Vangelo, creare una teologia ecclesiale, non individuale, basata su se stesso. In realtà  riuscì a costruire una teologia che, certo, possiamo datare al sesto secolo, ma non attribuire a una delle figure di quel tempo: è una teologia un po' disindividualizzata, cioè una teologia che esprime un pensiero comune in un linguaggio comune. Era un tempo di acerrime polemiche dopo il Concilio di Calcedonia; lui invece, nella sua settima Epistola, dice: «Non vorrei fare delle polemiche; parlo semplicemente della verità, cerco la verità». E la luce della verità da se stessa fa cadere gli errori e fa splendere quanto è buono. Con questo principio egli purificò il pensiero greco e lo mise in sintonia con il Vangelo. Questo principio, che egli rivela nella sua settima Epistola, è anche espressione di un vero spirito di dialogo: cercare non le cose che separano, cercare la verità nella Verità stessa; essa poi riluce e fa cadere gli errori.

Quindi, pur essendo la teologia di questo autore, per così dire “soprapersonale”, realmente ecclesiale, noi possiamo collocarla nel VI secolo. Perché? Lo spirito greco, che egli mise al servizio del Vangelo, lo incontrò nei libri di un certo Proclo, morto nel 485 ad Atene: questo autore apparteneva al tardo platonismo, una corrente di pensiero che aveva trasformato la filosofia di Platone in una sorte religione filosofica, il cui scopo alla fine era di creare una grande apologia del politeisimo greco e ritornare, dopo il successo del cristianesimo, all’antica religione greca. Voleva dimostrare che, in realtà, le divinità erano le forze operanti nel cosmo. La conseguenza era che doveva ritenersi più vero il politeismo che il monoteismo, con un unico Dio creatore. Era un grande sistema cosmico di divinità, di forze misteriose, quello che mostrava Proclo, per il quale in questo cosmo deificato l'uomo poteva trovare l'accesso alla divinità. Egli però distingueva le strade per i semplici, i quali non erano in grado di elevarsi ai vertici della verità — per  loro certi riti anche superstiziosi potevano essere sufficienti — e le strade per i saggi, che invece dovevano purificarsi per arrivare alla pura luce.

Questo pensiero, come si vede, è profondamente anticristiano. È una reazione tarda contro la vittoria del cristianesimo. Un uso anticristiano di Platone, mentre era già in corso un uso cristiano del grande filosofo. È interessante che questo Pseudo-Dionigi abbia osato servirsi proprio di questo pensiero per mostrare la verità di Cristo; trasformare questo universo politeistico in un cosmo creato da Dio – nell'armonia del cosmo di Dio dove tutte le forze sono lode di Dio – e mostrare questa grande armonia, questa sinfonia del cosmo che va dai serafini agli angeli e agli arcangeli, all'uomo e a tutte le creature che insieme riflettono la bellezza di Dio e rendono lode a Dio. Trasformava così l'immagine politeista in un elogio del Creatore e della sua creatura. Possiamo in questo modo scoprire le caratteristiche essenziali del suo pensiero: esso è innanzitutto una lode cosmica. Tutta la creazione parla di Dio ed è un elogio di Dio. Essendo la creatura una lode di Dio, la teologia dello Pseudo-Dionigi diventa una teologia liturgica: Dio si trova soprattutto lodandolo, non solo riflettendo; e la liturgia non è qualcosa di costruito da noi, qualcosa di inventato per fare un'esperienza religiosa durante un certo periodo di tempo; essa è il cantare con il coro delle creature e l'entrare nella realtà cosmica stessa. E proprio così la liturgia, apparentemente solo ecclesiastica, diventa larga e grande, diventa nostra unione con il linguaggio di tutte le creature. Egli dice: non si può parlare di Dio in modo astratto; parlare di Dio è sempre un hymnèin – un cantare per Dio con il grande canto delle creature, che si riflette e concretizza nella lode liturgica. Tuttavia, pur essendo la sua teologia cosmica, ecclesiale e liturgica, essa è anche profondamente personale. Egli creò la prima grande teologia mistica. Anzi la parola “mistica” acquisisce con lui un nuovo significato. Fino a quel tempo per i cristiani tale parola era equivalente alla parola “sacramentale”, cioè quanto appartiene al mystèrion, al sacramento. Con lui la parola “mistica” diventa più personale, più intima: esprime il cammino dell'anima verso Dio. E come trovare Dio? Qui osserviamo di nuovo un elemento importante nel suo dialogo tra filosofia greca e cristianesimo, tra pensiero pagano e fede biblica. Apparentemente quanto dice Platone e quanto dice la grande filosofia su Dio è molto più alto, è molto più “vero”; la Bibbia appare abbastanza “barbara”, semplice, precritica si direbbe oggi; ma lui osserva che proprio questo è necessario, perché così possiamo capire che i più alti concetti su Dio non arrivano mai fino alla sua vera grandezza; sono sempre impropri. Le immagini bibliche ci fanno, in realtà, capire che Dio è sopra tutti i concetti; nella loro semplicità noi troviamo, più che nei grandi concetti, il volto di Dio e ci rendiamo conto della nostra incapacità di esprimere realmente che cosa Egli è. Si parla così – è lo stesso Pseudo-Dionigi a farlo – di una “teologia negativa”. Possiamo più facilmente dire che cosa Dio non è, che non esprimere che cosa Egli è veramente. Solo tramite queste immagini possiamo indovinare il suo vero volto che, d'altra parte, è molto concreto: è Gesù Cristo. E benché Dionigi ci mostri, seguendo Proclo, l'armonia dei cori celesti, in cui sembra che tutti dipendano da tutti, il nostro cammino verso Dio, però, rimarrebbe molto lontano da Lui, egli sottolinea che, alla fine, la strada verso Dio è Dio stesso, il Quale si è fatto vicino a noi in Gesù Cristo.

E così una teologia grande e misteriosa diventa anche molto concreta sia nell’interpretazione della liturgia sia nel discorso su Gesù Cristo: con tutto ciò, questo Dionigi Areopagita ebbe un grande influsso su tutta la teologia medievale, su tutta la teologia mistica sia dell'Oriente sia dell'Occidente, fu quasi riscoperto nel tredicesimo secolo soprattutto da San Bonaventura, il grande teologo francescano che in questa teologia mistica trovò lo strumento concettuale per interpretare l'eredità così semplice e così profonda di San Francesco: Bonaventura con Dionigi ci dice alla fine, che l'amore vede più che la ragione. Dov'è la luce dell’amore non hanno più accesso le tenebre della ragione; l'amore vede, l'amore è occhio e l'esperienza ci dà più che la riflessione. Che cosa sia questa esperienza, Bonaventura lo vide in San Francesco: è l’esperienza di un cammino molto umile, molto realistico, giorno per giorno, è questo andare con Cristo, accettando la sua croce. In questa povertà e in questa umiltà – nell’umiltà che si vive anche nella ecclesialità – c'è un’esperienza di Dio che è più alta di quella che si raggiunge mediante la riflessione: in essa tocchiamo realmente il cuore di Dio.

Oggi esiste una nuova attualità di Dionigi Areopagita: egli appare come un grande mediatore nel dialogo moderno tra il cristianesimo e le teologie mistiche dell'Asia, la cui nota caratteristica sta nella convinzione che non si può dire chi sia Dio; di Lui si può parlare solo in forme negative; di Dio si può parlare solo col “non”, e solo entrando in questa esperienza del “non” Lo si raggiunge. E qui si vede una vicinanza tra il pensiero dell'Areopagita e quello delle religioni asiatiche: egli può essere oggi un mediatore come lo fu tra lo spirito greco e il  Vangelo.

Si vede così che il dialogo non accetta la superficialità. Proprio quando uno entra nella profondità dell'incontro con Cristo si apre anche lo spazio vasto per il dialogo. Quando uno incontra la luce della verità, si accorge che è una luce per tutti; scompaiono le polemiche e diventa possibile capirsi l'un l'altro o almeno parlare l'uno con l'altro, avvicinarsi. Il cammino del dialogo è proprio l'essere vicini in Cristo a Dio nella profondità dell'incontro con Lui, nell'esperienza della verità che ci apre alla luce e ci aiuta ad andare incontro agli altri: la luce della verità, la luce dell'amore. E in fin dei conti ci dice: prendete la strada dell'esperienza, dell'esperienza umile della fede, ogni giorno. Il cuore diventa allora grande e può vedere e illuminare anche la ragione perché veda la bellezza di Dio. Preghiamo il Signore perché ci aiuti anche oggi a mettere al servizio del Vangelo la saggezza dei nostri tempi, scoprendo di nuovo la bellezza della fede, l'incontro con Dio in Cristo.


Saluti:

Je suis heureux de vous accueillir chers pèlerins francophones, en particulier les jeunes des collèges du Vésinet et de Sallanches, du Lycée de Chateauneuf de Galaure et de l’École d’évangélisation de Paray-le-Monial. Que le don de l’Esprit Saint fasse de vous les messagers, pleins de joie, de la Bonne Nouvelle du salut. Avec ma Bénédiction apostolique.

I welcome all the English-speaking visitors present today, including the groups from England, Ireland, Japan, The Philippines, Trinidad and Tobago, and the United States of America. May your visit to Rome be a time of deep spiritual renewal. Upon all of you I invoke God’s abundant blessings of joy and peace.

Mit Freude grüße ich alle Pilger und Besucher aus allen Ländern deutscher Sprache. Gott - so verstehen wir von Pseudo-Dionysius her - ist nicht bloßer Name oder Begriff, sondern eine Person, die Ursprung und Ziel allen Lebens ist. Reinigen wir unser Herz, um in diese lebendige Beziehung mit Gott eintreten zu können und dann Boten seiner Liebe zu werden. Ich freue mich über die vielen, die aus allen Teilen Deutschlands heute unter uns sind, und grüße sie ganz herzlich, wünsche ihnen gesegnete Zeit in Rom und Gottes Segen auf allen ihren Wegen.

Saúdo os peregrinos de língua portuguesa, especialmente com um cordial abraço ao numeroso grupo de visitantes provindos do Brasil. Desejo a todos felicidades, paz e graça no Senhor! Faço votos de que a luz de Cristo ilumine sempre a vossa fé para que tenham uma vida digna, cristã e repleta de alegrias. Recebam a Bênção do Todo Poderoso que, de bom grado, estendo aos vossos familiares e amigos.

Saludo cordialmente a los visitantes de lengua española. En particular, a los peregrinos y grupos parroquiales venidos de Costa Rica, España, México, Perú y de otros países latinoamericanos. Que la visita a las tumbas de los Apóstoles acreciente en vosotros los deseos de conocer más a Cristo y renueve vuestros propósitos de llevar una vida cristiana cada vez más coherente y generosa. Que Dios os bendiga.

Saluto in lingua slovacca:

Zo srdca pozdravujem žiakov a pedagógov Základnej školy Jána Pavla Druhého z Bratislavy-Vajnor. Bratia a sestry, minulú nedeľu sme slávili sviatok Zoslania Ducha Svätého na apoštolov. Prosme Boha o zoslanie darov jeho Ducha, aby sme odvážne svedčili o svojej kresťanskej viere.
S láskou žehnám vás i vašich drahých. Pochválený buď Ježiš Kristus!

Traduzione italiana:

Di cuore saluto gli allievi e insegnanti della Scuola elementare “Giovanni Paolo II” di Bratislava - Vajnory. Fratelli e sorelle, domenica scorsa abbiamo celebrato la Solennità della Pentecoste. Preghiamo Dio che mandi i doni del suo Spirito perché possiamo divenire testimoni coraggiosi della nostra fede cristiana. Con affetto benedico voi ed i vostri cari. Sia lodato Gesù Cristo! 

Saluto in lingua polacca:

Pozdrawiam pielgrzymów z Polski, a szczególnie dzieci, które po raz pierwszy przystąpiły do Komunii św. Drogie dzieci, niech Pan Jezus zawsze mieszka w waszych sercach, aby były pełne Bożej miłości. Niech Jego obecność uświęca was i wasze rodziny. Serdecznie wam błogosławię.

Traduzione italiana:

Saluto i pellegrini provenienti dalla Polonia, e in particolare i bambini che per la prima volta ricevono la Santa Comunione. Cari bambini, il Signore Gesù abiti sempre nei vostri cuori, affinché siano colmi dell’amore di Dio. La Sua presenza santifichi voi e le vostre famiglie. Vi benedico di cuore.

Saluto in lingua romena:

Adresez un călduros salut pelerinilor români, în mod particular Seminarului Greco-Catolic din Cluj. Asigurându-vă pe voi şi pe toţi conaţionalii voştri că vă port în rugăciunile mele, invoc asupra fiecărui dintre voi Binecuvântarea mea Apostolică.

Traduzione italiana:

Rivolgo un cordiale saluto ai pellegrini rumeni, in particolare al Seminario Greco-Cattolico di Cluj. Mentre assicuro per voi e per tutti i vostri connazionali un ricordo nella preghiera, invoco su ciascuno la mia Benedizione.

Saluto in lingua croata:

Od srca pozdravljam sve hrvatske hodočasnike, a osobito krizmanike iz Hrvatske Katoličke Misije u Münchenu te visoke dužnosnike Ministarstva obrane Republike Hrvatske. Neka Kristova blizina i mir budu sigurnost i radost vaših života. Hvaljen Isus i Marija!

Traduzione italiana:

Saluto di cuore i pellegrini croati, particolarmente i cresimandi della Missione Cattolica Croata di München e gli alti ufficiali del Ministero della Difesa della Repubblica di Croazia. La vicinanza e la pace di Cristo siano sicurezza e gioia per le vostre vite. Siano lodati Gesù e Maria!

* * *

Rivolgo un cordiale benvenuto ai pellegrini di lingua italiana. In particolare saluto le Suore Cappuccine di Madre Rubatto, che partecipano al loro Capitolo generale e le incoraggio a continuare nell’impegno di adesione a Cristo, testimoniando coraggiosamente il Vangelo secondo il carisma della venerata Fondatrice. Saluto con affetto i sacerdoti provenienti da Trento e da Torino ed assicuro la mia preghiera affinchè il loro ministero, sostenuto dalla grazia di Dio, sia sempre più fecondo.

Mi rivolgo, infine, ai giovani, ai malati e agli sposi novelli. La Liturgia odierna ricorda l’Apostolo Mattia, annoverato tra i Dodici per rendere testimonianza della risurrezione del Signore. Il suo esempio sostenga voi, cari giovani, nella costante ricerca di Cristo; incoraggi voi, cari malati, ad offrire le vostre sofferenze affinché il Regno di Dio si diffonda in tutto il mondo; ed aiuti voi, cari sposi novelli, ad essere testimoni dell'amore di Cristo nella vostra famiglia.


APPELLO

Il mio pensiero va, in questo momento, alle popolazioni del Sichuan e delle Province limitrofe in Cina, duramente colpite dal terremoto, che ha causato gravi perdite in vite umane, numerosissimi dispersi e danni incalcolabili. Vi invito ad unirvi a me nella fervida preghiera per tutti coloro che hanno perso la vita. Sono spiritualmente vicino alle persone provate da così devastante calamità: per esse imploriamo da Dio sollievo nella sofferenza. Voglia il Signore concedere sostegno a tutti coloro che sono impegnati nel far fronte alle esigenze immediate del soccorso.

  

© Copyright 2008 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

SOURCE : http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/it/audiences/2008/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20080514.html

Atribuida a Vasco Pereira. San Dionisio Areopagita, Retablo de la Virgen de Belén. 1588. Iglesia de la Anunciación, Sevilla. Pintura manierista al óleo sobre tabla (h.), 



SAINT DENYS L'AREOPAGITE

(Traduction du Grec par l'Abbé Darboy)

DE LA HIERARCHIE CELESTE
(Traduction de Maurice de Gandillac)




J.-B. Thibaut. « Le pseudo-Denys l'Aréopagite et la « prière catholique » de l'Église primitive », Revue des études byzantines  Année 1921  123  pp. 283-294 : https://www.persee.fr/doc/rebyz_1146-9447_1921_num_20_123_4284

Voir aussihttp://jesusmarie.free.fr/denis_areopagite_oeuvres.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Istvan_Perczel/publication/27616471_Une_theologie_de_la_lumiere_Denys_l'Areopagite_et_Evagre_le_Pontique/links/5e84ad524585150839b33330/Une-theologie-de-la-lumiere-Denys-lAreopagite-et-Evagre-le-Pontique.pdf