[Published in Inter: Romanian Review for Theological and Religious Studies 2/1-2 (2008) 354-64; although

the editors have placed the notes as footnotes I have preserved my original preference for endnotes; also,
this version contains a series of slight modifications that do not affect the content of the article]

The Seekers of Truth, the Egalitarian Myth and the Aristocracy of Spirit:
Reconnecting Today with Mystical Tradition*
Doru Costache

My paper shall discuss issues concerning the access to truth. I will argue that parallel to the so-
called objective truth, as more or less scientifically established and by public consensus, there is
an existential (‘subjective’) truth, as lived by the saints and transcending all secular expertise.
Firstly, I will deal with the egalitarian myth of public opinion, an important feature of modern
culture, together with some of its main implications for the contemporary mindset. Secondly, I
shall examine St Silouan the Athonite’s parable with the hens, the rooster and the eagle, as a
traditional and hierarchical counterpart to the modern egalitarian perspective. Thirdly, I will
endeavour to offer an insight into the mystical tradition of the Byzantine saints, as represented by
Maximus the Confessor, Symeon the New Theologian and Gregory Palamas.
Of course, the purpose of this paper is not to demonstrate the superiority of the Byzantine
tradition over any other tradition. In fact choosing to analyse the teachings of the aforementioned
saints, I was motivated by the fact that they represent landmarks for my own framework.
Consequently, the purpose of this paper is simply to put in relief the ecclesial alternative to the
existential poverty, closely linked to, and connatural with, the egalitarian myth. My contention is
that if the modern mind (whose icon will be MM, modern mind) will ever decide to overcome the
perspective of its own inexorable desertification, it should turn more perceptively to, and
acknowledge the value of, the traditional wisdom of the saints (whose icon will be TM,
traditional mind). We have already witnessed the dawn of such a process with the emergence of a
series of exotic spiritualities within Western culture, during the last century. Perhaps it is time for
contemporary theologians, in so far as they are still bearers of the

……….355……….

ecclesial tradition, to present Christian spirituality as a serious contributor to a holistic

development of our society.
Ultimately this essay points to an existential theory of knowledge.

A Democratic Theory of Knowledge

One of the most interesting features of modern culture is the attempt to democratise the access
to knowledge, to indiscriminately open its doors to the wider public. This displays however just
one aspect of the complex phenomenon represented by modern culture, whose more obscure side
consists ultimately in a non-traditional (if not anti-traditional) mindset. The epitome of this main
trend of modernity was doubtlessly, from the outset, the slogan of the French revolution – liberté,
egalité, fraternité. Emphatically, this slogan states the rights of individuals to freely and equally

*
This is an extended version of my paper, with the same title, presented at the Biennial Conference in
Philosophy, Religion and Culture – ‘Truth and Truthfulness in Uncertain Times’ (the Catholic Institute of
Sydney, 29/09/06 - 01/10/06).

1
participate in all matters concerning society, as a challenge addressed to the ideals of the
medieval hierarchical society. At an epistemological level, the content of this unprecedented
major cultural shift may be expressed as the passage from the traditional paradigm of the
forbidden garden’s gatekeepers to that of the fountain of knowledge at everyone’s disposal.
This non-traditional shift has become already manifest with the Enlightenment and the French
encyclopaedic project. Reacting to the previous establishment of the hierarchical system – as
expressed, for instance, in the ecclesiastical office of magisterium – the Enlightenment’s
promoters launched the egalitarian manifesto labelled by Karl Popper as the myth of public
opinion.1 According to this manifesto, within the modern frame everyone is granted the access to
knowledge, with the subsequent specification that the opinion of the majority establishes what the
truth is. The fundamental achievement of the process is eminently represented by modern
sciences, speaking, in theory, a universal language and aiming to configure the general mindset of
society.

(1) 

(2) 

The mountain of knowledge as an image of the egalitarian system:

(1) Utopian representation: all enlightened by ‘objective’ knowledge
(2) Realistic representation: all (spiritually) blind

However, three questionable aspects of this phenomenon can be readily traced, representing
ultimately three steps in the process of dissolving the traditional way of accessing truth. Although
the situation slightly changed with contemporary science (e.g., the philosophical and
epistemological implications of quantum theory) and post-modernism, these aspects are still
highly influential (including within ecclesial milieus).

……….356……….

(1) Confusing truth and public consensus.

The process of democratising knowledge resulted in the regrettable confusion of
epistemological consensus of the general public (if not just of the scientific community) and truth
(as an accurate image, in its complexity, of reality2).

TM (humble approach): the truth is out there  consensus = prejudices

MM (arrogant approach): truth exhausted by representation  consensus = truth
In light of TM and by way of a syllogism, MM’s contention displays as follows:
modern truth = mere prejudices

2
 Modern mind became gradually less motivated to look beyond its own, newly established, ideas
and to acknowledge the pluralistic character of the act of knowing, the multiple coexistent
perceptions of reality. In fact, and in direct proportion, modern mind surrendered to the
temptation of overestimating its own approximations, of canonising by public consensus a
generally accepted representation of reality, no matter how reductionist such an average model
might have been. The extreme case illustrating this tendency is that of a scientist refusing to
acknowledge reality as such, endeavouring to substitute it by simplifying models.3 Along with
this extreme example, and as a general tendency within the hard sciences and humanities alike,
this situation becomes obvious in the propensity to discuss others’ theories and opinions, instead
of getting involved with the examination of the actual objects. We reflect on reflections instead of
reflecting on realities. Reflections have become the object of our intellective effort – ultimately,
our ‘objective’ and public truth.

(2) Abandoning the traditional premises of cognitive process.

Modern culture condemns to oblivion what represents the common norm of a traditional
culture. The basic premises of any humble approach to knowledge – such as the transcendence of
truth, the indefinite degrees of perception, and the existential prerequisites of accessing truth – are
strenuously ignored and marginalised. Relying uncritically on a prideful rationalistic mainstream,
to the majority, today, the complex perspective of mystical experience and holistic (traditional)
mind appear as absurd. There can be no doubt that eventually, and not very far in the future, the
traditional premises of knowledge will be completely washed away from the horizon of the
modern mind. It is not surprising therefore, in this context, that humility, as a prerequisite of any
reverent or apophatic approach to reality, is displaced from its central position and replaced by
the arrogant anthropocentric trend of the systematic exhaustion of mysteries.

TM – the paradox of humility: MM – the paradox of arrogance:

a holistic perspective a narrow perspective
God

past   future  future
 
world/society world/society

……….357……….

In short, the traditional premises of knowledge are replaced by ideologies (such as positivism
and scientism), nurturing the apotheosis of vainglory as experienced by the modern mind.

(3) Classifying spiritual formation as obsolete.

Whilst generous in its aspiration to uplift the masses’ level of awareness, the egalitarian
manifesto fails by overlooking the distinction between edifying knowledge, or wisdom, and pure
information. Under the weight of increasing accumulation of data, the ancient dictum non multa,
sed multum4 – suggesting wisdom as the core of education – ceases to illustrate a relevant cultural
feature. Information is substituted for wisdom, within a process prioritising existentially neutral
data against personal formation.

TM: wisdom == information

MM: information, wisdom

3
 With this trend, the awareness of the close connection of personal experience and knowledge
disappears. People elaborate theories and promote ideas with ‘objectivity’ or intellectual
detachment, ignoring the traditional sense of true knowledge (theoria) as embodied into a way of
living (praxis). This results on the one hand in a process of depriving the domain of personal life
of any solid existential criteria and on the other hand of transforming the human mind into an
encyclopaedia of futile knowledge (the hard-disk mind). The climax of this process has been
already reached with the abandoning of any ideals of inner transformation. Everyday language
witnesses abundantly to this trend, speaking of well informed people but never of well formed
people.

The unexpected outcome of the democratic dream is the absolute relativisation of truth and
correlatively the extinction of major spiritual ideals. The existential consequences of this failure –
personal disorientation, anxiety, psychoses, alienation, depression etc. – are beyond the reach of
customary statistics, undermining the stability and coherence of modern society. Hence exactly
these consequences impose on contemporary consciousness to seek more solid criteria and to
introduce spiritual geodesics into the chaos of personal and social life. Therefore, given the
anthropological, existential efficacy of traditional systems, reconnecting to the traditional ways of
accessing truth appears as urgent for our culture. Or, it is a matter of fact that the encounter
between modern mind and traditional mind finds obstacles exactly in the distance introduced by
the former; as for the traditional mind, it already and passionately embraces modern mind…

St Silouan the Athonite’s Parable

The parable with the hens, the rooster and the eagle
illustrates perfectly the traditional approach to truth
and its existential prerequisites. It also represents

……….358……….

a meaningful story, suggesting the necessary means to

overcome the issue of existential poverty resulting
By Ion from the implementation of the egalitarian myth. A
Nedelcu
2006 summary of the parable is required.5

Paraphrasing, the story speaks of a rooster which

one day flew onto the farm fence, like he usually did,
to scrutinise the surroundings. What was special about
that very day was the rooster’s determination to share
his experience with the hens that never left the
ground, being concerned exclusively with looking for
food. The rooster started to challenge the hens, asking
them to lift up their eyes to the skies and to join him
on the top of the fence. Predictably, the hens had no intention to relinquish their important
activities and mocked the rooster for wasting time with such nonsensical things like the
contemplation of the world. And since the rooster kept on insisting by telling them how large the
world is when perceived from a certain altitude they firmly rejected him. Actually they expressed
their absolute conviction that there is no wider world than the farm where they had always lived.
Overwhelmed by the distress of being misunderstood, the rooster returned to his favourite activity

4
– of contemplating the world from above. Later on, an eagle descended from the upper regions,
inviting the rooster to join him in his superior contemplation. And although the eagle
endeavoured to convince him of the wider perspective one has from the zenith, our rooster
resisted bravely. To him, a superior contemplation to that which he had on the top of the fence
was simply impossible …

The parable, retold by Archimandrite Sophrony (Saint Silouan the Athonite, 486):
An eagle was flying high in the heavens, delighting in the beauty of the world; and he thought,
‘I fly across wide expanses, and see valleys and mountains, seas and rivers, meadows and
forests. I behold a multitude of wild beasts and birds. I look down upon cities and hamlets, and
see how men live. But the country cock knows of nothing save his barnyard, where he sets eyes
on only a handful of people and a few cattle. I will fly down and tell him of the life of the
world.’
The eagle flew down on to a cottage roof, and watched the cock strutting about among his
hens, and thought to himself: ‘so he is content with his lot, then. But all the same, I will tell him
of the things I know.’
And the eagle began telling the cock of the beauty and riches of the world. At first, the cock
listened attentively but he did not understand anything, so the eagle was vexed and it became an
effort to talk to the cock; while the cock, not understanding what the eagle was saying, began to
weary, and found it hard to listen to the eagle. But each of them remained content with his lot.6

……….359……….

Not without subtle humour, St Silouan (d.1938) reiterates here a classic theme, shared by
distinguished fathers of the Church, the likes of Sts Basil the Great,7 Gregory the Theologian,8
Gregory of Nyssa9 and Dionysius the Areopagite.10 Basically his parable reiterates for modern
Christians the traditional insight into the mystical meaning of the ascent of Moses on Sinai. In the
very line of the mentioned fathers, St Silouan differentiates various perceptions of reality,
distinguishing a multitude of ‘subjective’ or existential truths.













 

The mountain of knowledge as an icon of the hierarchical11 system:

Various levels of perception and worthiness

In the economy of the parable,12 the hens represent the majority of people, living somatically,
that is exclusively concerned with this transitory life and ignoring the horizon of higher nobility.
Entrapped with the egalitarian myth and

5
 ……….360……….

interpreting life in materialistic terms, they cannot dream of perceiving reality other way than
looking downwards to the ground. The rooster’s behaviour is completely strange and absurd to
them: they are altogether unable to understand why someone would claim that reality may be
more than eating and laying eggs… In turn, the rooster illustrates those who question the
unilateral way of earthly, epidermal, life, together with its narrow perception of reality.
Notwithstanding he is not necessarily situated high above the hens, existentially speaking, the
rooster endeavours with superior – intellectual and spiritual – activities, attempting to
comprehend the meaning of life and world. Providing his mind with the necessary spiritual food,
and becoming aware of himself and the complex relief of reality, he progresses toward perceiving
the scenery of life in a more nuanced way. It is therefore surprising that whilst being
unintelligible to the hens, when confronted with the superior insight of the eagle the rooster
behaves like any other complacent hen.13 He cannot bear the idea of a higher and wider
perception of reality, for the simple reason of not being able to follow the eagle in the latter’s
upwards journey. In the end, the barrier experienced by both the hens and the rooster is the same,
although they experience it differently: an idiosyncratic tendency to overlook at the same time the
various degrees of accessing truth and the obvious pre-eminence of the aristocracy of spirit. Yet,
within the parable and beyond it, certain are two things. The first: reality is complex, and it may
be perceived from indefinite points of view,14 corresponding to the various ways of living. The
second: the superior access to truth remains conditioned by the intensity of one’s commitment
with the virtuous life. Arriving at this conclusion, the parable emphasises the intimate nexus
between experience and knowledge.
If Francis Bacon formulated the relation between knowledge and power in terms of
proportionality, tantum possumus quantum scimus (we acquire power according to the measure of
our knowledge) or scientia potentia est (science is power), St Silouan unveils another facet of the
cognitive process: we know proportionally to our personal experience on the virtuous path. Here
it becomes obvious the main difference between the outward orientation of modern mind, willing
to demiurgically operate as ‘ecosystemic’ principle, and respectively the inward orientation of
traditional mind, interested in the transformation of human person.

MM: the species of ‘to do’ TM: the species of ‘to be(come)’

 
 
 

Consequently, when it is about personal becoming – like in the ascent from the condition of
hens to that of the rooster, or from that of the rooster to that

……….361……….

of the eagle – the presupposed know how can no longer be mere information. Instead, the required
know how consists in the wisdom of the saints who have been there and have done that… To

6
access the existential, transforming, truth necessitates spiritual guidance and a traditional
framework.

Approaching Truth with the Byzantine Fathers

We are now turning to another dimension of the traditional mind, that of complexity of tradition
and the necessity of spiritual guidance.
During the first centuries, and echoing the liturgical rhythms of the early Church, the awareness
concerning the coexistence of multiple perceptions of Christian truth has been manifested by way
of distinguishing two levels of tradition and their corresponding degrees of initiation.15 In line
with the complex structure of the liturgy, with its two main parts – the liturgy of the catechumens
(those to be enlightened) and respectively of the faithful (the enlightened) –, St Basil the Great16
discerned the levels of κηρύγµατα and δόγµατα. By κηρύγµατα (‘proclamations’) he indicated the
external layer, or the public manifestation of the ecclesial life, whereas by δόγµατα (‘opinions’)
he designated the inner side of tradition, a sum of criteria characterising the ecclesial mindset. For
St Basil, the level of δόγµατα, to which there is no true access without superior guidance, casts
the definitive light upon the meaning and purpose of that of κηρύγµατα. In a similar fashion, a
whole series of fourth century pre-baptismal and post-baptismal catechisms witnessed the
development of a process of initiation, under the careful guidance of a bishop or an appointed
catechist.17 The epitome of this complex process remains undoubtedly the relations established
between the elders and the novices, as depicted by the famous Sayings of the Desert Fathers.18
The present section of my paper will focus however on the endeavours of three later fathers,
who have contributed immensely to the clarification of what the inner side of tradition consisted
in. These illustrious authors – Sts Maximus the Confessor, Symeon the New Theologian and
Gregory Palamas (representing the so-called philokalic tradition) –, have also brought forth an
unambiguous answer to the issue of accessing truth. Contrarily to the Western idea of
magisterium, they identified the true mystagogues (or guides into the mystery) not exclusively
with the representatives of the established hierarchy; instead, they acknowledged the priority of
the aristocracy of spirit as represented by the saints. Correlatively they have put into relief the
existential content of the tradition’s inner side. As a common feature to all three of them, they
emphasised the organic connection between accessing truth and living virtuously. Living the truth
was ultimately for them to participate in the divine and deifying life,19 an experience impossible
to realise outside the tradition of the saints.

……….362……….

To introduce his interesting theory of the five polarities of reality (in his major work, Ambigua),
St Maximus the Confessor makes explicit mention of the mystical succession, or tradition, of the
saints. According to him, the saints receive the knowledge of divine things in two distinct ways:
by the mediation of other saints and by direct experience.20 Starting with the apostles, as
followers and servants of the Logos, this chain of saints represents the uninterrupted succession
of a mystical tradition outside which no real access to (Christian) truth is possible. Maximus was
so convinced of the capital importance of the mystical tradition, that in his famous treatise
Mystagogy he introduced a central character, the elder, who apparently initiated him in the
mysteries celebrated within the liturgy. The whole treatise21 may serve as prolegomena to the
traditional Byzantine method of accessing truth. In an earlier work, On the Ascetic Life, St
Maximus illustrated how things went with the existential instruction or the living tradition,
imagining a dialogue involving an elder and a novice. The dialogue echoes conversations from
the aforementioned Sayings.

7
 In turn, St Symeon emphasises more the antithesis between those initiated by the saints and all
other people. In his 15th Catechetical discourse,22 he contrasts the ‘carnal people,’ ‘living under
the dominion of darkness,’ on the one hand, and the ‘spiritual and holy men’ and their ‘thoughts
of the light’ on the other hand. He emphasises the difficulties experienced by the former when
struck by the challenging message and the experiential superiority of saints. Unwilling to
contemplate the spiritual light, and because of their ‘ignorance and unbelief,’ carnal people feel
provoked to oppose and hate the saints. Characterised by ‘darkness of passions,’ ‘blindness of
mind,’ ‘insensitivity and ignorance,’ far from partaking in ‘the mind of Christ,’ the carnal people
end by refusing to be taught. Unable to acknowledge others’ superior spiritual state, out of
obtuseness, they prefer to imagine they know, even though ‘they know nothing,’ remaining away
from the mystical experience. As for the saints, they enjoy the privilege of receiving – according
to the degree of their worthiness – divine features by unfathomable participation. God being light,
‘to those who have entered into union with him he imparts of his own brightness to the extent that
they have been purified.’ Those who approach God by way of purification are granted to become
‘gods by adoption,’ ‘sons of the Most High according to the image of the Most High and
according to his likeness.’ Without promoting the idea of a gnostic-like elite, St Symeon
ultimately describes the experience of the saints for pedagogical reasons, to reveal the icon of true
Christian life and to invite all to pursue it: ‘by our discourse

……….363……….

we have shown, as on a pillar, who are Christians and what is their nature, that those men may
compare themselves to the model and find out how far they fall short of those who are truly
Christians’. Although a minority, the saints make visible the inner nobility of all those who want
to become, like them, sons and daughters of God. Indirectly they teach us how, having equal
chances in front of God, we make use of them differently.

Antitheses in St Symeon the New Theologian’s 15th Catechetical discourse

Spiritual people Carnal people
thoughts of the light living under the dominion of
darkness
the mind of Christ
ignorance and unbelief
purified
darkness of passions
they have entered into union with
God blindness of mind
gods by adoption insensitivity and ignorance
sons of the Most High according to they know nothing
the image of the Most High and
they refuse to be taught
according to his likeness

St Gregory Palamas, in the Declaration of the Holy Mountain,23 continues this trend,
synthesising the major ideas of previous fathers. In line with St Basil, he distinguishes within the
Christian doctrines those ‘openly proclaimed’ and respectively those ‘mystically and
prophetically revealed by the Spirit’ to the saints. Accessing the mystical teachings is not an easy
thing and it is a matter of fact that for many these teachings represent nonsense if not blasphemy.
Palamas observes, like St Symeon before him, the symmetry between the Jews who are unable to
interpret Christologically the Old Testament and the Christians who, deprived of ‘proper
reverence,’ reject out of ignorance ‘the mysteries of the Spirit’. Or, these mysteries or the
‘blessings of the age to come,’ being ‘promised to the saints,’ are already ‘disclosed prophetically

8
to those whom the Spirit accounts worthy.’ Accessing truth requires personal transformation and
it is obvious that not many are ready to renounce their idiosyncrasies for the sake of a superior
life. The saints, made worthy by the Holy Spirit, are however ‘persons who have been initiated by
actual experience, who have renounced possessions, human glory and the ugly pleasures of the
body for the sake of the evangelical life’. The influence of St Maximus becomes in this point
visible: although they have their own experience as individuals, the saints are not isolated. They
all live and grow within tradition: ‘they have also strengthened their renunciation by submitting
themselves to those who have attained spiritual maturity in

……….364……….

Christ’. Even in this respect there are various levels to be distinguished. If not all those striving
for a superior life manage to reach the climax of perfection and the mystical knowledge, they
have nonetheless the possibility to learn ‘about these things through their reverence, faith and
love’ for the saints.
For the Byzantines, tradition represents a complex framework where theoretical principles and
criteria – expressions of the ecclesial mindset – merge with the life of the Church as excellently
manifested by the experience of the saints. A new meaning of hierarchy and aristocracy emerges:
having nothing to do with an unjust social establishment, the saints – coming from all walks of
life – reveal with compassion, gradually and exemplarily the inner nobility to which are called all
human beings. The saints incarnate, ultimately, the actual landmarks necessary to any spiritual
pursuit. Rather than being the gatekeepers, they illustrate a living path in seeking truth and the
accomplishment of this endeavour in the very form of their way of living.

Conclusive remarks

Seeking truth is not a marginal endeavour; even if we are far from reaching truth, ultimately
this quest defines who we are. But the quest for truth is a process to be accomplished within an
aristocratic or hierarchical system (with the sense depicted in the above). Seeking truth – the
existential truth – becomes possible in wisdom and by following in the footsteps of those who
being guided by others went there before us, already experiencing what we all are called to
experience.
To the Byzantine tradition, like for St Silouan, it is certain thing that accessing truth and
acquiring higher personal nobility go hand in hand. Without both the personal endeavour to
realise inner transformation and the guidelines of tradition, no relevant truth can be found – at
least not a truth able to significantly enrich and give consistency to our life. Reinstating the
aristocracy of spirit or the tradition of the saints as a decisive epistemological criterion does not
mean to return to a medieval-like stratification. It represents in turn a fine chance to regain
normality, a possibility to open to people a mature way of reshaping their lives and to acquire full
humanity.
One question remains yet unanswered: are we ready to give up our prejudices and start flying
upwards, with the eagle?

Notes

1
Cf. K. Popper, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (London and New
York: Routledge, 2002) 467-9sq.

9
2
Like in Thomas Aquinas adaequatio intellectus et rei ‘correspondence between thought and reality’
(Summa Theologiae, I, q. 16, a. 2).
3
Cf. Al. Mironescu, Certitudine şi adevăr [Certitude and truth] (Bucharest: Charisma, 2002) 92-3.
4
In paraphrase, wisdom is not to know many things (information) but to have deep comprehension of
things.
5
Cf. Wisdom from Mount Athos: The Writings of Staretz Silouan 1866-1938; edited by Archimandrite
Sophrony; trans. from the Russian by R. Edmonds (Crestwood, NY: SVS Press, 1975) 107. See also
Archimandrite Sophrony (Sakharov), Saint Silouan the Athonite; trans. from the Russian by R. Edmonds
(Essex: Stavropegic Monastery of St John the Baptist, 1991) 486-7.
6
My paraphrase presents the story from the point of view of a hen who wants to fly, an ascending
perspective. In turn, Fr Sophrony’s displays the descending perspective of an eagle.
7
Cf. St Basil the Great, Homilies on Hexaemeron 1:1 (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series, vol. VIII)
(Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978) 52-3.
8
Cf. St Gregory of Nazianzus, Theological Orations 2:2-3. In On God and Christ: The Five Theological
Orations and Two Letters to Cledonius, trans., intro. and notes by F. Williams & L. Wickham (Crestwood,
NY: SVS Press, 2002) 37-9.
9
Cf. St Gregory of Nyssa, The Life of Moses II.152-161 (Classics of Western Spirituality Series); trans.,
intro. and notes by A.J. Malherbe and E. Ferguson; pref. by J. Meyendorff (New York & Ramsey &
Toronto: Paulist Press, 1978) 91-4.
10
Cf. Dionysius the Areopagite, Mystical Theology 1:3. In Pseudo-Dionysius, The Complete Works (The
Classics of Western Spirituality Series), trans. by C. Luibheid; foreword, notes, and trans. collaboration by
P. Rorem; pref. by R. Roques; intro. by J. Pelikan, J. Leclerq, and K. Froelich (New York & Mahwah:
Paulist Press, 1987) 136-7.
11
For a nuanced meaning of hierarchy, see Archbishop Stylianos (Harkianakis), ‘Priorities in True Culture’
Phronema vol. 20 (2005) 1-7.
12
The hens, the rooster and the eagle echo the classic three stages of traditional communities in Late
Antiquity, respectively the somatikoi (the somatic), the psychikoi (the psychic) and the pneumatikoi (the
spiritual). The NT makes allusion to the three categories: Romans 7:14; Jude 19; 1 Corinthians 2:13 & 3:1.
I am indebted to Fr Patrick McInerney (Columban Centre for Christian-Muslim Relations, Sydney) who
signalled me the possibility of interpreting the three-stages perspective in light of B. Lonergan’ Method in
Theology (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990) 81-100. According to Lonergan, there are four
realms of experience: the world of common sense; the world of theory; the world of interiority; the world
of transcendence (the last two correspond to the third stage, of the eagle).
13
Commenting on his own parable, St Silouan observes that ‘when the spiritual man meets with his
opposite, their discourse is tedious and burdensome for both of them.’ Cf. S. Sakharov, Saint Silouan the
Athonite, 487.
14
With no emphasis on the existential dimension of the act of knowing, B. Nicolescu (Nous, la particule et
le monde (Paris: Rocher, 2002) 267-272) mentions indefinite levels of reality and respective levels of
perception. See also A. Nicolaidis, ‘The Metaphysics of Reason,’ in B. Nicolescu & M. Stavinschi (eds.),
Science and Religion: Antagonism or Complementarity? (Bucharest: XXI The dogmatic eon, 2003) 235-8.
15
Cf. J. Day, ‘Adherence to Disciplina Arcani in the Fourth Century’ Studia Patristica vol. XXXV
(Leuven: Peeters, 2001) 266-70; D. Costache, ‘The Inner Side of the Visible: Apostolic Criteria and Spirit
in the Orthodox Tradition,’ in Prof. Univ. Dr Teodosie Petrescu (ed.), Omagiu Profesorului Nicolae V.
Dura la 60 de ani [In Celebration Prof. Nicolae V. Dura at the age of 60] (Constanta: Editura
Arhiepiscopiei Tomisului, 2006) 387-8.
16
Cf. St Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit 66; trans. and intro. by D. Anderson (Crestwood, NY: St
Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1980) 98-9.
17
See for instance E. Mazza, Mystagogy: A theology of Liturgy in the Patristic Age, trans. by M. J.
O’Connell (New York: Pueblo Publishing Co., 1989). The volume explores the catechetical practices of
Ambrose of Milan, Theodore of Mopsuestia, John Chrysostom and Cyril of Jerusalem.
18
Cf. The Sayings of the Desert Fathers: The Alphabetical Collection (revised edition), transl., with a
foreword by B. Ward, SLG; preface by Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh (Kalamazoo: Cistercian
Publications, 1984).
19
Cf. N. Russell, The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2004) 262-95, 301-9.

10
20
Cf. Ambigua 41, PG 91, 1304.
21
Cf. The Church’s Mystagogy, in Maximus Confessor: Selected Writings (Classics of Western Spirituality
Series), trans. and notes by G.C. Berthold, intro. by J. Pelikan, pref. by I.H. Dalmais (New York &
Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1985) 183-214.
22
Cf. St Symeon the New Theologian, The Discourses (The Classics of Western Spirituality Series), trans.
by C.J. de Cantazaro; intro. by G. Maloney S.J.; pref. by B. Krivocheine (London: SPCK, 1980) 193-7.
Similarly, St Silouan observes: ‘The spiritual man meditates day and night on the law of the Lord, and
in prayer rises towards God; whereas the mind of the indifferent man is tied to the earth, or engaged in
idle thoughts. The soul of the spiritual man delights in peace, whereas the other’s soul remains empty
and distracted. Like the eagle, the spiritual man soars in the heights, and with his soul feels God, and
beholds the whole world, though he be praying in the darkness of night; whereas the soul of man who is
not spiritual delights in vainglory or in riches, or seeks the pleasures of the flesh.’ Cf. S. Sakharov,
Saint Silouan the Athonite, 487.
23
The Declaration of the Holy Mountain in defense of those who devoutly practice a life of stillness,
prologue. In The Philokalia, vol 4, trans. from the Greek and edited by G.E.H. Palmer, Ph. Sherrard, K.
Ware (London: Faber & Faber, 1994) 418-9.

11