Skip to content

Wisdom’s Fire, Radiant and Unfading. Part I.

October 1, 2010

Royal colors shine through the clouds at dawn,
Red, purple and blue envelop the sky,
Petitioning those under its watch to look on,
To lift their eyes to the heavens on high.

The dread night is over, its terrors overcome,
The bright sun has gently arisen in glory,
Nurturing the soul, so what once was numb,
Feels eucatastrophic joy at the end of the story.

In his essay, “On Fairy Stories,” J.R.R. Tolkien gives to his readers one of his keenest insights: the relationship between fairy stories with the evangelium. He explains how fairy stories find themselves contained within the one universal story of the Gospel, granting them not only a foundation on which to stand, but also an explanation as to their ability to greatly affect the human soul. While many literary critics consider fairy stories to be mere escapist fantasies, this is not, as they would claim, a weakness. Rather, this is their strength. Those of us who are mired by the tragedies of life need hope, hope that the meaning of life is not found in mere catastrophe but what lies beyond catastrophe with what Tolkien calls the eucatastrophe.  It is the consolation which is found beyond the tragic, the joy of unexpected success which brings about a “happy ending”:

The consolation of fairy-stories, the joy of the happy ending: or more correctly of the good catastrophe, the sudden joyous ‘turn’ (for there is no true end to any fairy-tale): this joy, which is one of the things which fairy-stories can produce supremely well, is not essentially ‘escapist,’ nor ‘fugitive.’ In its fairly-tale – or otherworld – setting, it is a sudden and miraculous grace: never to be counted on to recur. It does not deny the existence of dyscatastrophe, of sorry and failure: the possibility of these is necessary to the joy of deliverance; it denies (in the face of much evidence, if you will) universal final defeat and in so far is evangelium, giving a fleeting glimpse of Joy, Joy beyond the walls of world, poignant as grief.[1]

In their structure, fairy stories tend to follow the outline of the evangelium. Elements of grief, assumed by the evangelium with the cross, are followed by joy, the joy of the resurrection. This relationship to the evangelium makes them to be realistic forms of literature, no matter what their detractors suggest. Life is filled with tragedy and hope, expected destruction and unexpected restoration. Fairy stories reveal the order of grace which surrounds us. “The peculiar quality of the ‘joy’ in successful Fantasy can thus be explained as a sudden glimpse of the underlying reality or truth. It is not only a ‘consolation for the sorrow of the world, but a satisfaction, and an answer to the question, ‘Is it true?”[2]

Dyscatastrophe, with an eucatastrophic ending, is the story of history, because it is the story of Christ. “The Birth of Christ is the eucatastrophe of Man’s history. The Resurrection is the eucatastrophe of the story of the Incarnation. This story begins and ends in joy.”[3] The Gospel, through Christ, gives to us the revelation of God. The Trinity acts in and through the economy of the Incarnation. The economic Trinity points to the transcendent mystery of the Immanent Trinity. All that is revealed in the economy of Christ is true about the Trinity, although the mystery of the Trinity transcends that revelation in its interior life. Through his life and work, Christ directs us to the Trinity so that we can share in the great and awesome mystery of the divine life. History is the reflection of eternity, where what is contained in the heart of Being itself is mixed with time, making for the historical Theo-Drama.

Since God is love, this drama must be seen as the drama of love. This explains why history is filled with the constant mix of tragedy and release. In the economic revelation of God, we see history is centered upon death and resurrection, of self-giving and restoration of the God-man. Christ, who loves us, gave his all for us. Christ’s love for us comes from his love for the Father. He was sent to the world because of the Father’s love for us. “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16 RSV). The world, because it exists in time, is given the Son in time, who gives himself to us in time. He willingly goes to the cross and gives the fullness of his being for us in time. But the cross itself is a reflection of the eternal self-giving love the Son has for the Father. He has eternally given himself over to the Father in eternity. And it is because he gives himself entirely to the Father, so that he has entirely died to his self, he finds himself restored in the reciprocal love the Father has for him. “But where the beloved responds in love, in him at least the lover leads a life.”[4] The Father, likewise, eternally loves the Son, and has given himself entirely over to the Son by begetting him. The Father and the Son, by giving each other their complete selves to each other, exist through love. It is the nature of love to give and receive in this fashion:

And whoever loves, dies. For his attention, oblivious of himself, is always turned to his beloved. If he does not think of himself he certainly does not think in himself. And therefore a soul thus affected does not function in itself, since the special function of the soul is thought itself. He who does not function in himself does not exist in himself either. For these two, function and existence, are equivalent to each other. Neither is there existence without function, nor does function go beyond existence itself. Nor can anyone function where he does not exist, and wherever he exists, he functions. Therefore the soul of a lover does not exist in itself because it does not function in itself. If it does not exist in itself, it also does not live in itself. He who does not live is dead. Therefore anyone who loves is dead in himself. But at least he lived in another? Certainly.[5]

The resurrection in history is but the revelation of the eternal begetting of the Son by the Father, where the Son is eternally restored to his person by the love of the Father. The eternal act between the Father and the Son, because it is an act of love, is fruitful and generates creation. It must be understood that creation, as well as history, are but representations of this eternal act of love, an act of love which reveals the nature of God (Sophia)[6] as love:

The self-revelation of the Holy Trinity is realized in such a way that God the Father, Who is the initial hypostasis and contains the fullness of the divine nature or Sophia as Love, renounce, in His self-revelation, this fullness for or in Himself, and goes out of Himself by the “generation” of the Son. The Son then is the hypostatic self-revelation of the nature of the Father, or the hypostatic Sophia, the self-consciousness or hypostatization of the Divine ousia of the Father; the Son is present before the Father as His Truth and Word, His knowledge of Himself in the Son: “no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; and neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son” (Matt. 11:27). [7]

It is, however, because their very nature is love, that is, self-giving and sacrificial, we find the prototype of all suffering found in the very heart of Being:

The sacrifice of love, in its reality, is pre-eternal suffering – not the suffering of limitation (which is incompatible with the absoluteness of divine life) but the suffering of the authenticity of sacrifice and its immensity. This suffering of sacrifice not only does not contradict the Divine all-blessedness but, on the contrary, is its foundation, for this all-blessedness would be empty and unreal if it were not based on authentic sacrifice, on the reality of suffering. If God is love, He is also sacrifice, which manifests the victorious power of love and its joy only through suffering.[8]

This sacrificial love is not contaminated by anything which is not love; it is pure, and so the “suffering” (a word which must be understood only analogously to suffering as we know it in the world) leads to a fruitful and joyful completion. The self-giving is allowed to end without annihilation.  It is the joy of the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, who allows their love to find completion. Indeed, the Holy Spirit is in a sense, this completion:

The Holy Spirit, as the Third hypostasis, represents the intratrinitarian completion of the sacrificial love of the Father and the Son, as the joy of this sacrifice, as its bliss, as love triumphant. In this lies His significance as the Comforter, not only with regard to the world but also in the intratrinitarian life. If God who is in the Holy Trinity is love, the Holy Spirit is then the Love of love.[9]

Love in the Trinity is triumphant and joyful, because it finds itself complete. The Holy Spirit completes the transfer of love from the Father to the Son, and the Son to the Father. The Spirit makes sure it is an eternal self-giving which grows and abounds, that such love is eternally fruitful and does not go unrequited. The Father loves the Son, the Son loves the Father, and through such love, they both love the love which is shared, a love which comes from their very nature, Sophia, and revealed in the Spirit as their companion and comforter. The Spirit is the one who shares their love with them by being that love in its bounty. The Spirit reveals what love is to the Father and the Son, and thus, is entirely transparent it self, revealing the nature of the Godhead, the love contained in the Godhead, to the Godhead in eternity through the way it has hypostatized the divine ousia. As the bounty of love, the continuation of love as flows out over itself for all eternity, the Spirit is therefore rightfully the Spirit of Life in history, where that overflow of love is found in the flow of time generated by the Godhead through the movement of the Spirit.

The act of creation, where something is created, can thus be understood when we understood the nature of love. Because God is love, creation exists. This love is the foundation and end of creation, where its purpose and essence is found. Though we must understand God’s omnipotence means God is free, the world can be said to be “necessary” for God, that is, God follows his own nature and creates out of love:

God needs the world, it could not have remained uncreated. But God needs the world not for Himself but for the world itself. God is love, and it is proper for love to love and to expand in love. And for divine love it is proper not only to be realized within the confines of Divinity but also to expand beyond these confines. Otherwise, self-absoluteness itself becomes a limit for the Absolute, a limit of self-love or self-affirmation, and that would attest to the limitedness of the Absolute’s omnipotence – to its impotence, as it were, beyond the limits of itself.[10]

God’s actions are not unreasonable and therefore follow through God’s own nature, the nature of love. Love is the heart of Being, the essence of what God is; the eternal act of God is the eternal act of love. Creation is made in the image of this love; it is a created love, created Sophia, made in the image of God’s uncreated love, uncreated Sophia. The world established in love, and called open itself up by self-giving in order share in the eternal glory of God. Because it is love, created in the eternal image of love, it contains within itself tragedy and the potentiality for the bountiful joy of restoration. However, it is only by following the path of uncreated love, in dying to the self, that the joy of the resurrection is found; until one completely unites oneself in the image of love, that which is left as unlove becomes the foundation for evil and the suffering which comes from it. Death has come to the world through the sin, because, by sin, by the attempt to halt the pathway of love, the Spirit has been quenched. History is meant to be transcended through our entrance into eternity through a life of love; it is entered, now, in tragedy due to sin, and it is only because of the unmerited love of God for us that God has taken this modality into himself. Death remains, but its sting has been taken, for death has been transformed, so that it can become the means by which we enter into eternal life instead of being the means by which we perish for all eternity.


[1] J.R.R. Tolkien, “On Fairy Stories,” in Poems and Stories (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1994), 175.

[2] Ibid., 178.

[3] Ibid., 179.

[4] Marsilio Ficino, Commentary on Plato’s Symposium of Love. Trans. Sears Jayne (Woodstock, CT: Spring Publications, 1994), 57.

[5] Ibid.  55.

[6] Uncreated Sophia is the essence of God, the divine ousia. God’s Divine Simplicity means all that one can predicate to God (such as good, beautiful, wise) is actually all one in God as God’s eternal, simple nature, a nature which revelation names as Wisdom and demonstrates as Love.

[7] Sergius Bulgakov, The Comforter. Trans. Boris Jakim (Grand Rapids, MI: William B Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 2004), 63.

[8] Sergius Bulgakov, The Lamb of God. Trans. Boris Jakim (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 2008), 99.

[9] Sergius Bulgakov, The Comforter, 66.

[10] Sergius Bulgakov, Lamb of God, 120.

8 Comments
  1. Cindy permalink
    October 1, 2010 3:56 pm

    Maybe reading what you have posted here, can help me with my sadness when I try and think about our nature. This makes it seem beautiful, and I’m glad that you put this up.

  2. October 1, 2010 4:02 pm

    I’m glad this is of help!

    It is only the beginning of a long series which I hope to put together. I hope they will also be of help. I have not written the other parts (I only wrote this today, but have been thinking about it for sometime), and so I do not know how long it will be until I put up Part II. I have a kind of plan for what I want to put into the series.

    Because of the nature of writing, I don’t plan to respond to comments in the posts until the last one is up, except for small comments here and there. I will try, if I see the necessity, to respond to comments in the texts themselves. The reason for this is that it is often said, when writing, it is best not to say things in advance, because one sometimes loses out and does not actually finish the writing itself.

    In saying this, I want to affirm that I will appreciate hearing responses, positive or (if they come) critical, even if I don’t respond.

  3. Magella permalink
    October 1, 2010 4:56 pm

    Henry, who wrote that opening poem?

  4. NJCitizen permalink
    October 1, 2010 7:41 pm

    Be careful of what you say about the correlation between folk tales (a well known part of the spectrum of mythology) and the Jesus story. Jesus has been long and poorly interpreted in terms of well-known mythological themes, but close study of the Synoptics shows how He was chary of those who wanted to do this to him while he lived and worked. Gnosticism was par excellance the attempt to capture Jesus in near-Eastern myth. And Jesus’ resurrection is completely misunderstood if it is reduced to the “happy ending” reversal of the end of a myth. That is why we are comforted by the confused differences in the resurrection appearances as they have come down to us. Jesus broke all the molds when he rose, including molds by which we have put the God of Israel into our back pockets thru standard human mythologizing. The Good News is not just good news. What is different about it is that it is Over-whelming, Extravagant, Outlandish, Blow Your Mind News, not just another group of folk peasants from the boonies of Galilee telling a fireside story. It is the story that renders all other stories “Vanity of vanities,” to borrow from Ecclesiastes.

    • October 2, 2010 3:00 am

      NJCitizen

      We will strongly disagree with each other. First, as to what myth and fairy story contain (where, you will find, the end is indeed unexpected), and second, as to the relationship between Jesus and story. Jesus is the Logos, and as Logos, stories do find themselves validated in the Story.

  5. Ronald King permalink
    October 2, 2010 9:12 am

    As created beings we are then created to create love and be loved. The field of interpersonal biology has discovered this truth in researching human relationships and how the brain actually responds and physically grows in loving vs non-loving enviornments.

    What you are writing Henry has critical practical applications in areas of conflict that have been discussed here and elsewhere. I do not know if this will be understood by those who have influence in these conflicts.

    • October 2, 2010 1:05 pm

      Ron,

      Yes, there is much to what I am putting together, and I hope some of the applications will develop as the series is written. We shall see.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 174 other followers