The Reception of Dionysius up to Maximus the Confessor

Abstract

Abstract The final demonstration that Dionysios was indebted in his thought and language to Neoplatonism of a Prokline affinity has led to a quandary for modern interpreters, and this has affected attempts to understand his influence, often reduced to bewitchment by his pseudo-apostolic authority. Initially, at least in the Mediterranean world, his influence was slow. Even though within a few decades of his becoming known, a critical edition, with variants, was made by John of Skythopolis, his influence seems to have been limited to Christology, on which he was cited by both Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians. His influence was more ample among the Syrians. Among the Greeks, Dionysios gradually came to be seen as clarifying the matrix of Byzantine theology as inherited from the Cappadocians with its strong emphasis on the liturgy as the locus of theology, and his distinction between apophatic and kataphatic theology providing conceptual tools for accommodating mystery.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.