Let's follow up on De Koninck's idea that man is the raison d’être of the whole of nature: if true, it explains a lot of things that are otherwise inexplicable, for example, our immaterial transcendence of the physical cosmos.
That is to say, knowledge of material reality presupposes our transcendence of it. By way of analogy, suppose you are confined to a two-dimensional Flatland. First, how could you ever know that reality is a two-dimensional plane, since you are restricted to those same two dimensions?
Second, how could you know whether Flatland is closed and self-sufficient, or whether it is open to a higher dimension (i.e., the sphere)?
Of course, we live in a 3D world, 4D if we throw in time. But even then, although we are in 4D, we cannot be of 4D, or we couldn’t be having this conversation. Rather, we are open to higher dimensions of truth, understanding, meaning, unity, beauty, et al.
Kallistos Ware’s The Orthodox Way begins with a passage by a Fr. Georges Florovsky: "The Church gives us not a system, but a key.” Oh? A key to what?
Well, first of all, it’s a key, not to be confused with the world opened up by the key -- any more than we should confuse eyeglasses with what they permit us to see through them. The point is, the key opens us to a higher dimension of reality.
Referring back to Flatland, note that a third dimension doesn’t have to move in order to be in constant contact with the lower two. A single sphere can incorporate an infinite number of circles without ever changing.
Analogously, we could say that God is both infinitely distant -- in that higher dimension -- but infinitely close -- right here in these ones as well; and, as with the sphere, without having to undergo change.
Now, what is interiority as such but another dimension? The question is, is it just an inexplicable bump on the exterior surface of matter, or is it more like a descent from -- and in contact with -- something above?
Back to De Koninck. He writes that “It is only in human understanding that the cosmos becomes a universe in the full sense.”
Likewise, it is only in human understanding that our little circle can be seen as a declension from the sphere.
“It is important to note,” writes De Koninck, “that God does not act on things, but from within.” Which is one reason why we can say that man contains the cosmos and not vice versa:
Intellectual natures have a greater affinity to the whole than other beings; for every intellectual being is in a certain manner all things...
Our intellect in understanding is extended to infinity.... In its active nature the intellect is therefore capable of knowing everything that exists.... [T]he ultimate perfection to which the soul can attain is that in it is reflected the whole order of the universe and its causes (Thomas Aquinas).
Or, in the words of De Koninck, "Already in man the world is bent in on itself, and in God its extremes touch." Which reminds me of Schuon's claim that
Fundamentally there are only three miracles: existence, life, intelligence; with intelligence, the curve springing from God closes on itself like a ring that in reality has never been parted from the Infinite.
Moreover,
To the question of knowing why man has been placed in the world when his fundamental vocation is to leave [i.e., transcend] it, we would reply: it is precisely in order that there be someone who returns to God.
Bottom line for today: we agree with De Koninck that "Creation is essentially a communication." Which implies messenger, message, and recipient, each entailing the others. Now, supposing man is the most important message of creation...
Hold that thought. We'll continue down this avenue in the next post...
Dear Dr. Godwin and other readers:
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the post. This post, and the one before, position man in a central position of importance in the Universe.
I don't doubt man is central in the scheme of things, but I think the tenure of such centrality needs to be thought about.
When we look at deep time, we see that God spent around 10 billion years after the Big Bang playing around with non-living stuff only, and apparently God enjoyed this inanimate play. He must have or he wouldn't have spent so freaking long about it.
I asked Him about that one time and I was given ocean wave sounds in reply. I have no idea what He meant.
People haven't around long and I am leery of declared us central when by all appearances we have just winked into existence a comparative half-hour ago, and the stars and planets, the original party guests, have been hanging out for a full year. So are homo sapiens that central? New kid on the block?
And consider evolutionary drift. In a million years, an hour in comparative time, we will be something different. The human body is such a moving target, constantly mutating.
No, I think the real central player is the human soul. Now when a human body is not there to hold it, then it manifests in some other form. The soul is eternal. It has been at the party for a century of comparative time. The soul has seen the rise and fall of Universes and still persists. So.....
My comment, part the second:
ReplyDeleteFrom the excellent post: "To the question of knowing why man has been placed in the world when his fundamental vocation is to leave [i.e., transcend] it, we would reply: it is precisely in order that there be someone who returns to God."
I would say the above statement has a large grain of truth but it is fundamentally wrong in the main.
Man's primary vocation is not the leave the world; he leave's it only to return again and again. The primary vocation is not to escape the world, it is to transform the world. Each of us, by existing, puts a little more light into the dense material of the Earth. Slowly over time this light accumulates and starts to awake matter to its true self.
Meanwhile, the soul, like a fighter aircraft strafing enemy troop concentrations, swoops down from heaven, delivers its payload and in the course of allotted time returns to its heavenly base to rearm and ready the next sortie. After each rough landing back at the heavenly aerodrome, the soul hand=carries the action reports to God, so that He has no shortage of persons returning to see Him.
We are not meant to transcend the Earth. We are meant to cause the Earth to transcend itself. The job will be done when the rocky crust, the mantle, the very core, have all been irradiated and shaped and worked and the planet as a whole awakens into glorious sentience and burst into song.
Now I could be mistaken about this. Any opinions? Ideas?
The word of the Trench, servant of Christ. Go forth and spread your light to all.
Which implies messenger, message, and recipient, each entailing the others. Now, supposing man is the most important message of creation...
ReplyDeleteGives new meaning to the parable of the Prodigal. What if, instead of going forth prematurely and squandering his inheritance (the Fall from a different perspective), he had gone forth according to his father's will, to later return with more than what he had when he set out? Then he becomes not a wastrel, but an apostle, perhaps.