Given that DBH wrote that intro for a book that came out around twenty years ago now--and so must have written it some time prior to that--I'd be curious to know if he still feels this way:
"She was not a fourth hypostasis in the Godhead, nor a fallen fragment of God, nor a literal world-soul, nor an eternal hypostasis who became incarnate as the Mother of God, nor most certainly the ‘feminine aspect of deity.’ Solovyov possessed too refined a mind to fall prey to the lure of cultic mythologies or childish anthropomorphisms, despite his interest in Gnosticism (or at least in its special pathos); and all such characterizations of the figure of Sophia are the result of misreadings (though, one must grant, misreadings partly occasioned by the young Solovyov’s penchant for poetic hyperbole)."
If this still reflects his thinking, it's a hesitance I'd say I've moved away from him on. Not in that I think Sophia is a fourth hypostasis within the Trinity, but in the sense that a.) Sophia is in fact a literary afterlife of a real goddess who was worshiped in Ancient Israel and Judah as Yhwh's consort and b.) the philosophical/gnostic use of her from Philo down through the early Christian writers that make mention of her does variously place her as a real, and feminine, divine force or entity. Philo is explicit that Wisdom is God's wife, and there are triadic schemes among Early Christians that associate her with the Spirit.
But that's a big if. This is, after all, a decade well before Kenogaia and a flurry of texts that he has published from, let's say, TASBS until now, in all of which I think one can argue that he becomes a bit more openly Hermetic/gnostic on this score. Whether he feels that's a fair assessment or not, I can't say.
Beginning to read Bulgakov, but have an intuition from what’s here and I’ve read about his theology, that there is a case for it filling in for what might be possibly better described through Maximus
Thanks for this. I wonder how much though Sophia takes the place in Bulgakov of the uncreated energies and the logoi of Maximus the confessor. I’m just beginnin
Given that DBH wrote that intro for a book that came out around twenty years ago now--and so must have written it some time prior to that--I'd be curious to know if he still feels this way:
"She was not a fourth hypostasis in the Godhead, nor a fallen fragment of God, nor a literal world-soul, nor an eternal hypostasis who became incarnate as the Mother of God, nor most certainly the ‘feminine aspect of deity.’ Solovyov possessed too refined a mind to fall prey to the lure of cultic mythologies or childish anthropomorphisms, despite his interest in Gnosticism (or at least in its special pathos); and all such characterizations of the figure of Sophia are the result of misreadings (though, one must grant, misreadings partly occasioned by the young Solovyov’s penchant for poetic hyperbole)."
If this still reflects his thinking, it's a hesitance I'd say I've moved away from him on. Not in that I think Sophia is a fourth hypostasis within the Trinity, but in the sense that a.) Sophia is in fact a literary afterlife of a real goddess who was worshiped in Ancient Israel and Judah as Yhwh's consort and b.) the philosophical/gnostic use of her from Philo down through the early Christian writers that make mention of her does variously place her as a real, and feminine, divine force or entity. Philo is explicit that Wisdom is God's wife, and there are triadic schemes among Early Christians that associate her with the Spirit.
But that's a big if. This is, after all, a decade well before Kenogaia and a flurry of texts that he has published from, let's say, TASBS until now, in all of which I think one can argue that he becomes a bit more openly Hermetic/gnostic on this score. Whether he feels that's a fair assessment or not, I can't say.
He’d likely say different things on different days and mean them all in their own legitimate ways.
interesting and informative. great post.
interesting and informative. great post.
Beginning to read Bulgakov, but have an intuition from what’s here and I’ve read about his theology, that there is a case for it filling in for what might be possibly better described through Maximus
Thanks for this. I wonder how much though Sophia takes the place in Bulgakov of the uncreated energies and the logoi of Maximus the confessor. I’m just beginnin
He addresses both these questions directly in the opening chapter of his last book.
Thanks. I'm working through the Lamb of God. Which is his last work?
The Bride of the Lamb. It was not finished being copy-edited when he died. I highly recommend starting at the end with him.
Thanks for the recommendation!