Advertise on podcast: Maronite Meditations

Christ is the TYPE of Adam, in whose LIKENESS we sin. As humans, we are antetypes of Christ, and of Adam, but our sinning is according to the pattern of Adam. This study is part of working out a clear vocabulary of typology.

We see that beauty is a sign of the presence of God in this world, a manifestation of the TYPE or archetype which is heavenly, in the ANTETYPES or PRODUCTS of this world. It is the first of a series reading and commenting on the article on "Beauty in the Syrian Eastern Christian Tradition" in the book "Beauty and the Christian Tradition" edited by Matthew Del Novo, Robert Andrews, and Rohan Curnow.

Let us invoke the Holy Spirit as we approach the mystery of creation: the divine design and plan for the universe and humanity. In the Semitic way of thinking, God created theuniverse according to patterns, or types in His mind. We can still read those types in His work. The first example of creation by type is in Genesis 1:26-27, “And He said: Let us make man to our image and likeness … And God created man to his own image: to the image of God He created him: male and female He created them.” The “image of likeness” of God are thepattern (type) by which we were created.

This is a short and selective review of Jonathan Bernier’s 2022 volume, Rethinking the Dates of the New Testament. His fundamental conclusion is that the dates of the New Testament documents are earlier than is usually thought. He states that it is a sort of successor to Robinson’s 1976 study Redating the New Testament. Bernier confirms someof Robinson’s conclusions, disagrees with others, and perhaps most importantly of all, refines Robinson’s methodology. To anticipate, he does a very good job, although I think there is still room for improvement; but I do not wish to quibble. It is a welcome shower of cold water in a field too thoroughlydominated by the informal Bible studies establishment.

I examine the question of the “Only-Begotten Son of God,” from a Syriac perspective. I am going to suggest that there is an ambiguity in the English phrase the “Only-Begotten Son of the Father” to speak of Christ. Further, there is a richness in the Syriac concept of the yee.Hee.dō.yō which is not easily captured in English, Greek, or Latin. I am going to suggest that, just as there can only be one God, so too there can only be one yee.Hee.dō.yō. I shall argue that this is because the Father expressed the whole of Himself in his Son, for the purpose of our salvation: not a part, not a section, not some features. There is and can be only one Son alone because the being, the entirety of the Father and Son are one; and whoever sees the Son with the eyes of faith sees also the Father. But even more, no part of yee.Hee.dō.yō means “Son” or “begotten.” It means “unique,” or to be more precise, “uniquely united,” that is, uniquely united to the Father. I begin with the Syriac because that is the closest surviving language to the Aramaic which the Lord and His Apostles used. The Syriac word in question is yee.Hee.dō.yō. Accordingto Sokoloff, yee.Hee.dō.yō comes from the Syriac root, ܝܚܕto be united (yaHed, in what is called the Pa’el form). It means “lone one, unique one” and is quoted as referring to Jesus. Then there are secondary meanings of solitary, individual, and separate. The root word has nothing to do with being born – allit means is, in my paraphrase, uniquely united. But this meaning is not the first meaning of the other languages; hence the ambiguity in them. Let us commence with the English “Only-Begotten Son of the Father.” Those words make it sound as if God the Father produced one child and then stopped, almost implying that He could have had two or more, but did not; or that He could now decide to have another Son. This ambiguity was also inherent in the original meaning of theword monogenēs in ancient Greek. It is also used that way, sometimes, in the New Testament . The Greek root monosmeans “sole,” and the root “gen-” is connected with ideas of birth. But the same word is used for Christ in St John’s Gospel because the Greek word monogenēs has two broad meanings: first, “to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship;” and second, “to being the only one of its class, unique …” The more usual meaning, and the one which the dictionaries apply to the Son of God, is the meaning of “the only one of its kind.” That is, not only that God had only one Son, but that there only ever could be one. Only in the Syriac, I would say, is the original meaning of this adjective uniquely united, and no notion of birth is implicit, although it could be used for an only child. In the otherlanguages, being the only child or only example of a class is the dominant concept. St John is clearly being very careful about his vocabulary. Only St John  describes the Lord as the monogenēs of God. To conclude: Christ expresses the fulness of the Father in this world to we mortal men. The Father begot one Son alone, completely sharing with Him His own Being, so that there could not be another Son. Could there have been two or more sons, then the divinity would be split in two, or more. Were there multiple Sons, there would need to be something to distinguish one Son from the other. These “children of God” would be finite, bounded, limited in their essence – they would be like pagan gods. The fact that Our Lord is the Only-Begotten Son of the Father means that in Him, and in all His actions and words, we see the entirety of the Father to the degree that it is possible for mortal man to do so. The yee.Hee.dō.yō is our pledge of the unity of theSon and the Father, unto eternal life and salvation.

We examine the sins of gossip, detraction, and calumny. What are they? Why are they wrong? How can we make our consciences more sensitive to these sins?

A very good rule of life is to not talk about, to not even mention, other people, unless we have a good reason. This rule follows from basic moral principles of Christianity, and from psychological considerations. It is particularly well-suited totoday’s world, and includes not only use of the tongue but all forms of communication, including social media.

We are going to work through some of Sebastian Brock’s invaluable book The Syriac Fathers on Prayer and theSpiritual Life. It is an anthology of materials from Syriac writers,beginning at the very start with Aphrahat, although not including the Odes of Solomon . Little is known of Aphrahat, “the Persian Sage,” who: “… was evidently a prominent figure inthe Christian Church in the Persian Empire …” Aphrahat wrote 23 homilies known as the Demonstrations. Number 4 of these is the earliest surviving Christian text on prayer, other than those which deal with the Our Father. His writings were influential in the later Syriac tradition, and even translated into Armenian. The Demonstration on prayer opens powerfully: "Purity of heart constitutes prayer more than do all the prayers that are uttered out aloud, and silence united to a mind that is sincere is better than the loud voice of someone crying out."            Purity of heart constitutes prayer more than do all the prayers that are uttered out aloud, and silence united to a mind that is sincere is better than the loud voice of someone crying out.

We now consider the significance of what Blosius has to say about life, and how that melds into what he wrote about the oneness of God, and how that unfolds in the world.

We do a simple breathing meditation based on this statement by Blosius: "When he is occupied with conversation and business, if he is unable to attend freely to God, he must yet beware of entirely leaving the inner chamber of his heart, thus going away from God Himself, but he must continue tobreathe out some secret affection to Him, so that directly this outward occupation is over he may return to himself, and leaving all that is not God, may apply his whole soul to Him once more. "

Blosius says that we can divide our attention when working in the world: we are aware of what we are doing and “must yet beware of entirely leaving the inner chamber of (our) heart.” Yet we must return to contemplation of eternal light, which we cannot unless we are free of attachment to externals. Further, God can allow us to suffer dryness of heart to realise our dependence of God. Also, sweet sensation can be granted to those who are living very evil lives, not to show they have sanctity, but rather to show that God manifests His goodness. Blosius also says we should invoke the saints because: “The saint should be regarded as present in God, to whom he is united.”  We should refer all beauty “to the glory and praise of God, who is the fountain and origin of all things.” Whoever is close to God has all, for God has and contains in Himself, everything that delights or can give pleasure. “Every kind of perfection found divided among different created things, in Him is found united, and He, as He is the archetype, or original type, and exemplar, or eminent model, of all, is Himself all.” All things in God are one.

Blosius said that even when we are occupied with conversation and business, we are able to attend to God, not entirely leaving the inner chamber of our hearts. He suggested two prayers or aspirations. First, one suited to the Illuminative Way: “…Grant me to dwell with Thee in the sanctuary of my soul ; grant that by steadfast thought, clear knowledge and fervent love, I may always be able to flow into Thee.”  Then the aspiration suited to the Unitive Way. "These words alone: "O Lord God," if from time to time they are thought over and repeated with a devout heart, are able to maintain a man inthe presence of God, or in God, and to shut out from his mind wandering imaginations and vain thoughts.”

Blosius said that just as the three Persons of God work together in inseparable union, so do those three powers of the mind. The memory recalls nothing without the intellect and the will ; the intellect does not understand or know anything without the memory and the will ; and the will desires nothing without the intellect and the memory. Blosius says that union with God, is Introversion, and constantly calling back the mind to Him.  "The mind must be diligently called back from wandering thoughts to God everywhere present. The instability of our minds can be overcome by the grace of God and persevering effort. It is possible, whatever we are doing to bear in mind God's presence, and this is the chief means of introversion. The presence of God everywhere is to be firmly believed, and the intention is to be turned to it in every action.” We also look at distractions and curiosity. We see that although these are not necessarily bad in themselves, still, they are bad in taking us from the search for God. Usually, we are mot free from distractions when we are identified - when our attention is captured by an activity (t.v., sport, talking). In those activities, our attention is narrowed and is looking at the world. In higher activities, we are not so identified, and our spirits have to be more open - this means that distractions have more opportunity.

The editor of Blosius' book distinguishes ordinary andextraordinary contemplation. He wrote: “…ordinary contemplation means a close union with God in intellect and will, which is the result of faithful correspondence to the grace he bestows according to the ordinary laws of his providence in the supernatural life.” “Extraordinary contemplation is a singular and miraculous union of mind with God, by simple intuition, accompanied with most ardent love, exceeding the ordinary  laws of his providence in the supernatural life.” From humility, we should not presume to ask for extraordinary contemplation than for the gift of miracles or prophecy.” But we can ask for ordinary contemplation, because the gift of contemplation increases charity. Blosius tries to indicate “the wonderful closeness of spiritual union between the purified soul and the infinite majestyof God in mystical contemplation.” The editor notes an error called Quietism, saying: “Amongst others things Molinos contended that the "interior lifeconsists in annihilating the powers of the soul"; that is the memory, intellect and will. St Thomas, on the contrary, teaches that they should be employed in God's service.” He says that the third and highest part of the soul, called the mind or the apex, that is, the highest summit of the spirit, is the simple and God-like basis or groundwork of the soul, that is, the simple essence of the soul sealed with the image of God. When considered in relation to this spiritual basis of the soul, life is called super-essential, through which both the spiritual and active life are perfected. From the mind itself the three higher powers flow, and re-flow again into it, as rays of light emanate from the sun. Here, in truth, the likeness of God shines out in a wonderful way. For as the Father and the Son and the HolyGhost are three Persons, but one God, so the memory, intellect and will are three powers, but one mind. And just as the three Persons of God work together in inseparable union, so do those three powers of the mind. The memory recalls nothing without the intellect and the will ; the intellect does not understandor know anything without the memory and the will ; and the will desires nothing without the intellect and the memory.

We meditate upon the teachings of contemplative teachings of Blosius: Francois-Louis de Blois, Blosius the Venerable, was born in October 1506.   He has been called “the Doctor of the presence of God.” It is said that “Union with God was the theme of his life … he knew that such was to be obtained only by prayer and self-discipline.” Healways spoke of the “spiritual ascetic,” asceta spiritualis.  A summary of his Book of Spiritual Instruction (Institutio Spiritualis), says that “Blosius directs the eye of the soul away from itself, its own miseries andshortcomings, to God, his beauty and perfection. … If souls aiming at holiness can only be got to look at God instead of themselves, the battle is more than half won, victory becomes certain.”  The editor says that: “By contemplation is meant the raising up of the mind to God by intuition, accompanied by most ardent love. We mean by intuition a mental sight or view of the mind seeing truth without the intervention of argument, testimonyor reflections. … It is an experiential perception of God, not merely speculative, practical as well as theoretical; it is a union of will with him, and not a mere intellectual apprehension.”