W
weirdcatholic
Guest
Does anyone here know what the Church’s position is on the theology/philosophy of Pseudo-Dionysius? I was curious because I picked up a book of his writings the other day from the library.
I’ve always found the mystical interpretation of scripture to be very fascinating.According to S. Bonaventure, as Gregory the Great being the teacher of moral sense of scripture, Pseudo-Dionysius would be the teacher of the mystical life in scripture, and Augustine would be the teacher of the literal sense of scripture. Anselm would follow after Augustine in the literal sense, Bernard would follow after Gregory in the moral preaching, and Richard would follow after Pseudo-Dionysius. I do not know anything about Richard.
St Thomas Aquinas (Feast day today!) was a great fan of Pseudo-Dionysius, and cites him a great many times, especially in his treatise on the virtues and love. Richard of St Victor was one of the first of the Scholastics to cite Dionysius extensively, especially the Divine Names.Does anyone here know what the Church’s position is on the theology/philosophy of Pseudo-Dionysius? I was curious because I picked up a book of his writings the other day from the library.![]()
I think for being so important of a figure, it is amazing that not so many people know about psuedo-dionysius.St Thomas Aquinas (Feast day today!) was a great fan of Pseudo-Dionysius, and cites him a great many times, especially in his treatise on the virtues and love. Richard of St Victor was one of the first of the Scholastics to cite Dionysius extensively, especially the Divine Names.
Yes, I totally agree. I don’t know why it is the case, but maybe it’s because as he went out of favour with the rise of rationalism in the Enlightenment he has struggled to recover his pride of place since.I think for being so important of a figure, it is amazing that not so many people know about psuedo-dionysius.