Syncretistic Catholicism

another minority report

Syncretistic Catholicism where any Anglican, Episcopal, Roman & Orthodox

consensus informs core beliefs & divergences are received as valid theological
opinions

Another (Peircean) Musing about The Whole

Mystery of Christ: Creation as Incarnation in
Maximus Confessorby Jordan Daniel Wood

Below is another musing about The Whole Mystery of Christ

Creation as Incarnation in Maximus Confessor
by Jordan Daniel Wood

Does JDW’s Maximian “hypostatic identity of all things in the incarnate Word,”
avoid:
1) an apparent pantheism & determinism as in Bulgakov’s Sophiology?
2) subsuming individuals by the whole as in Royce’s Absolute?
3) theogony & nominalism as in other dynamical accounts, e.g. Whitehead &
Hartshorne?

While it goes beyond the ontological & participatory w/its logics of persons &
perichoreses, still, what work’s being done in his account by the analogia?
Might the Maximian Logos – logoi doctrine refer to – neither static
substantialist nor even dynamical process accounts of “being,” but –
theophanic accounts of manifestations, revelations & signs (e.g. Eriugena,
even Bulgakov).

Might it more so refer, then, to an account of synergistic “doing” in a

“metaphysic of communication” as unitively ordered toward inter-personal
communion?

In exploring Jordan’s “Maximian Woods” (St Meinrad’s alumni affectionately

recall their late, great Maximus scholar, Polycarp Sherwood & his lectures aka
“Sherwood’s Forest“), I think more so about how it might relate to the
Trinitarianisms of Eriugena & Peirce, semiotically & phenomenologically.

I appropriate the Woodsian account of a concrete social Absolute as an

intersubjective architectonic of the inter-personal activities of freely knowing,
willing & loving, i.e. as an inter-personal unitive doing of intimacy (in Bracken’s
Divine Matrix).

James Bradley, in “Beyond Hermeneutics: Peirce’s Semiology as a Trinitarian

Metaphysics of Communication,” writes:
“Peirce’s semiology can be divorced from its speculative-metaphysical context
of Trinitarianism. In one sense, this is obviously so: the triune semiological
process can be treated as a naturalist cosmology of communication, or merely
as a useful interpretive tool.”

Later, Bradley continues: “This is a theory of evolutionary process in which the

cosmos is understood as a sign that awaits its realization as a community by
the activity of interpretation. The ultimate telos is not the all-containing self-
completeness of transparent mind, but the mutuality of shared and perfect
community.”

It is thus that Peirce provides solutions to various problems, merely apparent

or clearly latent, in the systems of Bulgakov, Royce, Whitehead, Hartshorne &
others.

I contend that it is similarly thus that “creation is Incarnation” and “Christology

is cosmology.” It’s about signs in the heavens above & wonders on the earth
below, about communications & communions!

John Sobert Sylvest May 14, 2023 Uncategorized

Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment *

Name *

Email *

Website

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I
comment.
Post Comment

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Syncretistic Catholicism Blog at WordPress.com.