Modern knowledge in the light of the anthropology of St. Maximus the Confessor

Contents Logos of creation. Will, energy, movement, time The vocation of man and creation to deification Theology Liturgies Space and time Liturgies Creation as a Divine symbol Eschatology of St. Maximus Autonomous thought The problem of reality Aeon and time Determinism and freedom Energy and information Fundamental science and theology of St. Maximus Methodology of science Conclusion According to the judgment of Nikolai Vladimirovich Lossky, the God-man Lord Jesus Christ, after His Ascension, carries out the economy of salvation through His Body - the Church. Being, in which the economy of salvation must be carried out, includes the entirety of humanity, including all spheres of human thinking and knowledge. Bishop Callistus (Ware) has the idea that Orthodoxy should be “not reactive, but provocative.” This refers to the Orthodox origin of events in the spiritual and cultural world, and not a reaction to events that have already occurred. If we limit ourselves to a reaction, then it must be an adequate reaction to the real state of spiritual and cultural existence “here and now.” If the reaction is completely adequate, then there is no significant difference between reactive and provocative, since for a genuine dialogue it is not so important who started it. We will try to show that the theology of St. Maximus the Confessor satisfies all the conditions necessary for an adequate dialogue with the sphere of modern knowledge, and present here fragments of such a dialogue. This means that the word of St. Maximus is prophetic, addressed not only to his time, but also to us. According to the judgment of Saint Ignatius Brianchaninov, the writings of the holy fathers are prophetic. They were written not only for their time. Permeated with the Holy Spirit, they enlighten our time - a time in which “the saint is poor,” a time involved in the End. This judgment of St. Ignatius is especially applicable to the theological heritage of St. Maximus 1. St. Maximus the Confessor stands out for its completeness and universality: his thought is not limited to answers to the “trouble of the day,” in particular, the Orthodox theological confession in response to unjust thinking (controversy with the teachings of Origen, the fight against the heresy of monothelitism and monoenergism), but covers all aspects of the relationship between God, man and the world. Researcher and translator of St. Maximus, A.I. Sidorov, speaks of the presence of not only a theological, but also a philosophical component in the work of St. Maximus: “These works [mean Ambigua and “Questions and Answers to Thalassia.” – A.G.], which most fully demonstrate the power of the theological and philosophical thought of the saint, occupy a worthy place not only in the history of Christian theology itself, but in the history of philosophical thought” 2. In the work of St. Maximus, the philosophical and theological aspects are inseparable. The very theology of St. Maximus is highly holistic, catholic: every fragment of his theological heritage is a “hologram” - explicitly or implicitly, collapsed or revealed, it concerns the entirety of his theology. For St. Maximus, dogmatic theology, cosmology, ascetic anthropology, ecclesiology, and eschatology are not separated from each other, but are different aspects of his single theological vision. “His system is more musical than architectural. This is more a symphony than a system - a symphony of spiritual experience...” writes Father Georgy Florovsky about St. Maxim 3. In particular, the teaching of St. Maximus about time and eternity, movement and rest in the unity of its philosophical and theological aspects is revealed in adequate symbols of the Liturgy and Orthodox feat. The Liturgy itself and the Orthodox feat are revealed not only as a concrete experience - conciliar or individual, but as the embodiment of the highest truth of existence. The philosophy of St. Maximus is unique in various respects. Remaining in the traditions of the Christianized ancient tradition in its Platonist and Aristotelian versions, at the same time it is permeated in its foundations with temporal categories: beginning - middle - end. Thus, it includes some synthesis of Platonism and Aristotelianism and, in addition, can be compared with the tradition of philosophical phenomenology that arose in modern times. The divinely inspired word of St. Maximus is permeated with the energies of what it proclaims. The noted involvement in the theology and philosophy of St. Maximus with the concepts of time and movement is another aspect of their dynamism. The theology of St. Maximus is Christocentric, therefore his philosophy is anthropocentric. Another feature of the philosophical and theological thought of St. Maximus is the absolute enlightenment of its foundations. The light of spiritual knowledge enlightens both the subject and the method of its thinking at the same time. The imperative requirement for modern humanitarian disciplines to understand one’s foundations in the work of St. Maximus is fulfilled to the maximum extent possible. His thought contains the foundation of itself - the theology of philosophy, theology of theology. In connection with all this, the thought of St. Maximus is relevant both for philosophy and for the philosophical foundations of modern fundamental science. We can say, using Aristotle's terminology, that the philosophy of St. Maximus contains both metaphysics and physics. Expressed a thousand years before the beginning of secular culture, the thought of the monk responds to its challenge, especially to the challenge of modern knowledge. Let us repeat that the philosophy of St. Maximus cannot be separated from his theology: the keys to an adequate understanding of the philosophical terms and concepts of St. Maximus lie in theology, based on the mysterious experience of communion with God and inseparable from it. The word of St. Maximus expresses his experience. It not only speaks about this experience, but reveals it. It combines depth of thought with spirituality and is permeated with a spirit of humility and love. The logical structure of this report can be expressed by the following statements in their interrelation: 1. Liturgy, ascetic life and the global dynamics of created existence are images of each other. (This vision, traditional for the Orthodox mystical-ascetic tradition, is revealed especially fully by St. Maximus.) 2. The metaphysics of St. Maximus - his teaching about logoi, movement and rest, time and eternity, will, energy - clarifies the spiritual logic of the Liturgy, the path of Orthodox feat, the path of all creation to God and the spiritual logic of their intercorrespondence. 3. Conversely, the most adequate expression of the metaphysics of St. Maximus is its expression in liturgical, ascetic and eschatological terms. 4. The metaphysics of St. Maximus overcomes Platonism (in the version of Origen's theology) and includes a synthesis of the Platonist and Aristotelian traditions, as well as the theology and philosophy of time. 5. The theology of St. Maximus is Christocentric, and his philosophy, accordingly, is anthropocentric. 6. A similar overcoming of Platonism and an anthropological turn are characteristic of the philosophy of modern times and the last decades of the development of fundamental science. 7. Thus, philosophy and science can be correlated with Maximian theology and, through theology, compared and contrasted with the experience of the Liturgy and Orthodox feat, and also perceived in an eschatolotic context. The theology of St. Maximus reveals the secret of his spiritual experience; it is inexhaustible. Our touch on the thought of St. Maximus will inevitably be superficial and incomplete. At the same time, as we said, the thinking of St. Maximus is catholic, and every crumb from the meal of his theology openly or covertly points to its entirety. Some problems of modern knowledge in the aspect of their correlation with the thought of St. Maximus will only be mentioned, but not expanded. In this report we want to pose some problems of modern knowledge in the light of the thought of St. Maximus, but we do not at all pretend to solve them. Logos of creation. Will, energy, movement, time The doctrine of logoi is central to St. Maximus and permeates his entire theology. We will present in abstract form some aspects of this teaching 4 . Creation is held together by Divine logos. The Divine Logos corresponds not only to every created thing, sensory or intelligible, but also to the relations between things, the attributes of things; Each aspect of created existence in its statics and dynamics corresponds to a logos. The logos of each thing contains the will of God about the thing, its idea, the energy by which the thing is brought into being (this statement is contained in the Areopagittic teaching about ideas-volitions). The logos of the existent of every thing contains the providence for it, the judgment and the end, the purpose for which it is brought into being (this distinguishes the logos of the existent from the Aristotelian form; it determines the relatively superficial level of the thing; the form corresponds not to the logos of the existent, but to the logos of nature). The Logos of existence presupposes the movement of a thing from beginning to end - to its logos, to the Logos, to God. In contrast to Platonism and Origen’s theology included in the Platonist tradition, time and motion do not belong to lower levels of being, much less are not a consequence of the Fall, but are caused by the action of the uncreated logos of a thing. The logoi of all things are united in the Logos – the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. The Divine Logos determines all the logoi of creation in their mutual relationships. All created things are presupposed in God thanks to their logos, but not in act (as in Origen), but in potency. Movement for St. Maximus is the movement of a thing towards its logos. Since the logoi of things are united in the Logos, movement for St. Maximus is always movement in relation to God. (Mechanical, psychological, historical movement - as they are considered by philosophy or science - is not movement in the sense of St. Maximus.) The movement of a thing stops when it reaches the End - its logos - its Cause, essential and hypostatic. This movement is passive on the part of the creature and creator, and partly active on the part of man, either agreeing with or rejecting the Divine plan. In his theology of time, St. Maximus replaces the Origen triad “stasis – kinesis – genesis” with the triad “genesis – kinesis – stasis” or a similar triad “beginning – middle – end” 5 . For St. Maximus, time is correlated with divine eternity and inseparably with his other concept - aeon (age). “An aeon is the time when it stops its movement, and time is an aeon when it is carried away by movement” 6. Movement occurs in time - from eon to eon. The dialectic of the unity and difference of time and eon, movement and rest in the ontology of St. Maximus, together with its other features, allows us to assert that the philosophical aspect of the teachings of St. Maximus is not reduced to either Platonism or the Aristotelian paradigm, but includes, at least in a compressed form, their synthesis. The relationship between a created thing and its logos and the relationships within the primordial creation are permeated with the breath of love and freedom. According to St. Maximus, creation is a prototype of the economy of the Incarnate Word: “The mystery of the incarnation of the Word contains the meaning of all the riddles and images of Scripture, as well as the knowledge of creatures revealed and comprehended by the mind. He who knows the mysteries of the Cross and the Sepulcher also knows the purpose for which God originally brought everything into existence.” 7 Just as in the economy of the incarnation and redemption the path of life-giving commandments is not imposed, but is offered for free acceptance or refusal, so in creation - the prototype of the incarnation - the creation, headed by man, freely responds to the calling of Divine love. The calling of man and creation to deification According to the teachings of St. Maximus the Confessor, the path of creation to the End, to its logoi, is carried out through man. Creation is deified through the deification of man, and man's path to deification includes the fulfillment of his calling in creation. According to St. Maximus, in primordial existence there were a number of differences: male and female, Paradise and earth, earth and sky, sensory and intelligible, created and uncreated. The first man had to unite the divided creation and present it to God as one. Then God would give Himself to creation. The deification of man and the deification of creation in man would be accomplished 8. St. Maximus calls the differences in the primordial creation hypostatic; Accordingly, a person’s overcoming of them is based on his personally free communication with a free creation. The possibility of a person fulfilling his calling lies in the logos of primordial man. The human logos contains the fullness of the logoi of creation - sensory and intelligible. Man is a microcosm. As a person grows in movement towards his logos, his microcosmic nature becomes actualized and increases. The microcosmic nature of man, affirmed in many traditions, in the Orthodox tradition, expressed in the theology of St. Maximus, has a clearly expressed dynamic character. The first Adam did not fulfill his calling. As a result of the Fall, man, as St. Maxim writes, ceased to see God as the only goal of his activity. St. Maxim writes that evil is ignorance of its Cause 9. If we place the Goal not in God, but in ourselves, then the activity dedicated to God to which man was called ceases. Man's activity, consistent with his logos, changes to activity against his logos. At the same time, it cannot be produced otherwise than on its basis. Therefore, the activities of fallen man are self-contradictory. The activity of a person, separated from God, is dedicated to false gods or is self-oriented, and generally does not contain sacrifice to another. St. Maximus says that the calling of man to unite what is divided was fulfilled by the New Adam, the God-man Jesus Christ. He explains in what sense and how Christ overcame in Himself, by His redemptive feat, each of the divisions of creation 10 - not only the primordial, but also subject to sin. If in the primordial creation there were hypostatic differences, then sin introduced into existence natural gaps caused by separation from God - gaps between people, between man and the rest of creation. These gaps in nature can only be overcome by the economy of the God-man Jesus Christ - Death on the Cross, descent into hell, Resurrection and Ascension. Thus, human activity, which determines the dynamics of reality, includes three components: the fulfillment of the original calling, sinful departure from God, and restoration on the path of deification in the Church. Activity outside the Church, outside the action of restoration in Christ, thus contains two components opposite to each other: autonomous human-divine activity and the fulfillment by man of his original calling. Therefore, on the one hand, the paths of autonomous human thought increasingly diverge from the path of the Church to God, and on the other hand, its findings can find more and more points of correlation with Orthodox tradition and the theological positions of St. Maximus. The deification of creation must be fully realized by the Second Adam - the Lord Jesus Christ through His Body - the Church. In the so-called Eucharistic theology, in particular in the works of Father Alexander Schmemann, the role of the Liturgy for the salvation of the world is revealed. Eucharistic theology, however, developed and is developing without connection with the patristic mystical-ascetic tradition. For this reason, Eucharistic theology does not deeply concern the anthropology of man in his inner connection with all creation; his testimony remains superficial and fails to achieve its purpose. The theology of the Liturgy of St. Maximus is inseparable from his ascetic anthropology: “The Holy Church of God is man, the altar in it represents the soul, the divine altar the mind, and the church the body... by the church, as a body, it represents moral philosophy; the altar, as if by the soul, indicates natural contemplation; with the divine altar, as with the mind, he manifests a mysterious theology... man is in a mysterious sense the Church, for with his body, like a church, he virtuously adorns the active ability of the soul, implementing the commandments in accordance with moral philosophy; with his soul, as an altar, he offers to God, through the mediation of reason and in accordance with natural contemplation, the logoi of sensible things, carefully purified in spirit from matter; with his mind, like an altar, he calls upon, with the help of the Silence of the invisible and unknown eloquence of the Divine, which rises above the verbosity and polyphony, much chanted in the Holy of Holies. And, as far as is possible for a person, he unites in mysterious theology with this Silence, becoming what one truly should be who has been honored with being with God and imprinted with His all-bright rays” 11. The vision in which the conciliar-liturgical and personal-ascetic aspects of Orthodoxy are dynamic images of each other is contained not only in St. Maximus. In Areopagitica, theology is identified with worship. In ascetic writings we come across the image of mental-heart prayer as a Liturgy, in which the liturgical bishop is the mind, and the throne is the deep heart (in St. John Climacus in the “Word to the Shepherd”, in hesychast theology, for example, in St. Gregory the Sinaite, and in other patristic ascetic creations). However, the idea that man is the image of the Church, and the Church is the image of man, is most fully developed by St. Maximus. In this word of St. Maximus, several statements can be distinguished. (1) Man is the image of the Church. (2) This symbolization has a dynamic character: Liturgy - “common cause” - symbolically corresponds to the ascetic work of the Orthodox ascetic. (3) Human activity and Liturgy are hierarchical. (4) The lowest degree of the church hierarchy corresponds to praxis - the active fulfillment of the Gospel commandments, the highest degrees - theory (in the usual praxis/theory dichotomy for the Orthodox ascetic tradition). (5) The average and highest degree of human activity, according to St. Maximus, corresponds to the theology of creation and mysterious theology - contemplation of God. (6) The theology of creation, like all human activity, is dedicated to God, it consists in bringing “the logoi of sensible things.” (7) The highest degree - mysterious theology - is associated with silence, so that “Silence” for St. Maximus is the Divine Name. According to St. Maximus, Christ in His Body - the Church - realizes what man was called to: unity in a divided existence. “The number of husbands and wives is almost incalculable, who differ and differ greatly from each other... The Church grants them, in accordance with faith, a single divine image and name - that is, to be and be called Christ's... so that everyone is and appears to be one body... He [Christ]... brings to Himself the many different types of beings... raises them to unity with Himself" 12. St. Maximus specifically dwells on the unity of the sensually comprehended and intelligible creation, which in the space of the Church are symbolized by the church and the altar, constituting a single building: “With all this, the world is one and is not divided along with its parts; on the contrary, by raising it to its unity and indivisibility, it abolishes their differences, which stem from the spiritual characteristics of these parts. After all, they, endlessly alternating, are identical to themselves and to each other, showing that each part can enter into another, as a whole into a whole. And both of them form the whole world, just as the parts form a unity; at the same time, they are formed by him uniformly and holistically, just as parts are formed by the whole. For those who have (spiritual) vision, the entire intelligible world appears mysteriously imprinted on the entire sensory world through symbolic images. And the entire sensory world, in spiritual speculation, appears to be contained in the entire intelligible world, being known (there) thanks to its logoi. For the sensible world exists in the intelligible through its logoi, and the intelligible in the sensible through its imprints. Their work is one, and, as Ezekiel, the wondrous contemplator of the great, said, they are like a wheel within a wheel (Ezek. 1:16), speaking, I believe, about two worlds” 13. Let us pay attention to the fact that the unity of the sensually comprehended and intelligible world, symbolized by Ezekiel’s Chariot, has the dynamic character of a constant movement towards God. St. Maximus not only views the Church as a symbol of the unity in God of intelligible and sensually comprehended existence, but also represents this unity in the Eucharistic symbols of the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ. In this view, the Body of Christ corresponds to sensually comprehended existence, and His Blood corresponds to intelligible existence. A person’s deed in relation to sensually comprehended existence—virtue—corresponds to partaking of the Body of Christ. What a person does in relation to intelligible being—knowing the logoi of the intelligible—corresponds to communion of the Blood of Christ. The bones that Scripture says should not be broken correspond to sacramental theology 14 . St. Maximus considers not only creation, but also Holy Scripture as a prototype of the Incarnation. Therefore, in his Mystagogy, reading or eating the Word of God is a prototype of Communion. This is also stated by Father Alexander Schmemann in his book “The Sacrament of the Kingdom.” Space and time of the Liturgy In the synchronic aspect, the hierarchy of St. Maximus is expressed spatially through the architecture of the Church: church - altar - altar, and in the diachronic, dynamic aspect through the process of the Divine Liturgy - the process of gathering and ascent to God. We have already said that St. Maximus develops a tradition in which the process of liturgical worship and the process of ascent into the mysterious theology of communion with God are images of each other. They are also images of the economy of salvation and the entire world in its eschatological perspective: genesis - kinesis - stasis. Creation as a Divine Symbol In accordance with his theology of the images of creation, created being is in the theology of St. Maximus the clothing of the Divine. The Transfiguration of the Lord, according to St. Maximus, reveals the contemplation of the uncreated Divinity, freed from created covers 15. According to the interpretation in Ambigua by Father Dumitru Staniloe, the transfiguration is a symbol of theology in which the unity of cataphatic and apophatic methods is realized 16 . For St. Maximus, creation is a parable (parabola) about the Creator 17. In this symbolization, kinesis - the movement of creation towards deification - is semiosis, so that in stasis the deified creature will know its Creator. If Saint Gregory of Nyssa, interpreting the ascent of Moses to Mount Sinai, speaks of Divine darkness, then Saint Maximus prefers to speak of Silence. The logoi of creation open the way to what is beyond creation: “Following... how it [the soul] embraces the logoi of sensible and intelligible things... the soul... through... adoption, having God as its only Father by grace, emanating from everything [my italics. – A.G.], the soul will unite with the Unity of His hiddenness... God-like, radiating in itself the goodness of the silence reigning in the impregnable sanctuary” 18. This silence is completely alien to the rumor-based and rumor-fueled culture of this world, especially a culture that anticipates its end. The light of its knowledge does not have Divine life: “Knowledge is light, say the proud scientists who have neither joy nor mercy. Look: the Sahara Desert is the sunniest place, but most of all it resembles a red-hot corpse." 19 “Of course, no one will call the light of knowledge intelligent and spiritual, but the divine light is both intelligent and intelligible... So, the knowledge obtained by external learning is not only not similar, but also opposite to the true and spiritual...” 20. The reasons for this, if we try to understand them, lie “at the beginning” - in the “church”, because secular culture is not concerned with “moral philosophy” - the active fulfillment of the Gospel commandments, but works for the world, which, according to the Monk Isaac the Syrian, is “a set of passions”; and in the “middle” - in the “altar”, because the logoi of creation are not placed in the Creator and are not offered to the Creator; and at the “end” - on the “altar”, because the altar is destroyed. Eschatology of St. Maximus The eschatology of St. Maximus, his theology of the End, is an aspect of his theology of logoi, the theology of time and movement. It is in unity with his ascetic anthropology. The image of the movement of the creature towards the end of the present eon with its degrees - genesis, kinesis, stasis, or beginning, middle, end - is the path of the Orthodox feat, the degrees of which can be designated differently, and the end of which is the deification of man. The eschatology of St. Maximus is also in unity with his ecclesiology and theology of the Liturgy. The architecture of the Church (synchronic plan) and the Liturgical process (diachronic plan), being images of each other, are images of man’s movement towards deification. The liturgical process and the path of Orthodox feat are images of each other. The end of creation is depicted by St. Maximus in the Eucharistic symbols of the Body of Christ: “Each of those who exist, in accordance with his logos... will fill his place in God, which corresponds to him as a useful member of the Body of Christ” 21. Therefore, the path of deification is not only effectively symbolized by the Liturgy, but is itself its symbol. The signs of the liturgical process, the path of Orthodox feat and the movement of creation in man towards the end are the logos and free nature of their dynamics, the reduction of space, the cessation of time, the transformation of rumor into silence (the cessation of the movement of information flows), the cessation of thinking, the ascent from complexity to simplicity, peace in communion with God. In the theological anthropology of St. Maximus, two paths of humanity are distinguished. The path in accordance with one’s logos and to one’s logos, in the terminology of St. Maximus, is the path to being, to good-being and ever-good-being. Another path of free choice is a path against one’s logos, a path into non-existence, evil-being. The first path - to one’s logos, to God - is realized, as we have seen, in the Orthodox feat and the Divine Liturgy. The second path - in its spiritual-mental projection - is realized in autonomous thought. The Church is one, but the world outside is plural. The modern world, including the world of modern thought, presents not one, but many visions of things, often incompatible with each other. When in further presentation we refer to any position of modern knowledge, this will not mean that this position is accepted by everyone, but will only mean that it has both its followers and its opponents. In the movement of thought, there is a movement towards unification and simplicity, a tendency towards division and an increase in complexity - through self-criticism and specialization. The movement of autonomous thought of independent humanity, not standing in God, contains contradictory components. She is both calmly self-sufficient and restlessly self-destructive. Such, for example, is any total philosophical system (for example, Hegel’s); it is blown up either by the author himself or by his followers. Accordingly, thought is contradictory - it gravitates towards truth independent of time and at the same time is subject to time. Activity, in particular, human mental activity, is increasingly moving away from the fulfillment of the divine calling and at the same time finding points of contact with it. The time of culture can, following St. Maximus, be measured by the beginning, middle and end. The fact that modern culture reveals not only a deepening divergence, but also an unexpected convergence with the theology of St. Maximus can be considered as a sign of culture’s participation in the “End” - not in terms of “times and seasons,” but in terms of the adequacy and necessity of the eschatological perspective. Let us note some trends in modern thought and correlate them with Orthodox theology in its synthesis carried out by St. Maximus. Disbelief in reality now permeates philosophy, the humanities and fundamental sciences. In each of these disciplines this disbelief has different aspects of applicability and different meaning. The concept of virtual reality emerged. Denial of reality is associated with a departure from God, Who is the only Source of reality. On the other hand, according to St. Maximus, the symbols of reality will change to the communion of reality itself only at the End; outside the End, in the Middle, a moving being, a creation moving towards its logos, is real only to the extent that it participates in God in its logos. Even on the “eighth day,” the day of deification, there will remain a gap between a thing and its logos, filled not naturally, but by grace. And in the End there will be, in the words of St. Maximus, “ever-moving peace” - the synergistic attraction of a thing to its logos. With this understanding, reality is not present, but always sought after. Virtual reality is virtual not because of its immateriality, but because its dynamics are external to the movement of a thing towards its logos. In this respect, every autonomous being is virtual. Denial of reality, to put it somewhat simplistically, has two manifestations. The first manifestation consists in the denial of reality without reference to man, outside of man’s awareness of it. In philosophy, for example, the phenomenological tradition in philosophy; the participant principle in physical cosmology, according to which a particle that arose at the beginning of the universe acquires the attribute of being only in the act of observing it 22 ; some positions of modern linguistics on the human factor in language. This anthropological bias can be correlated with the theological assertion that creation moves towards God through man. Another manifestation of the denial of reality is the denial of the reality of the person himself. This occurs, for example, in Foucault's philosophical anthropology and in transpersonal psychology. This position is associated with an insensibility to the absolute reality of the human person, which can only be realized in God. Two trends coexist in fundamental science. Beginning with Galileo and right up to recent times, science, in the opinion of its historians and philosophers, had a Platonist character 23 . Physical reality, in particular movement, was modeled by motionless, timeless mathematical eidos. In recent decades, another paradigm has been implemented, in which time is a fundamental concept 24. Similar is the coexistence of the Platonist and phenomenological traditions in philosophy. The theology of the eon and time of St. Maximus can be considered as their synthesis. Such a synthesis did not take place either before or after St. Maximus. The unity of time and eternity is realized in the Liturgy, on the path of Orthodox feat and in the global dynamics of created existence. Thus, the vision of things in philosophy and science, in which the emphasis is only on the timeless or only on the temporal aspect of reality, is one-sided. Therefore, modern knowledge needs to develop the theological and philosophical paradigm of St. Maximus. Another facet of the denial of platonism is the introduction of the concept of freedom into fundamental science. If fundamental science until the last decades of the last century was based on deterministic dynamics, then in recent decades, due to the penetration of philosophy based on quantum physics, the situation has changed dramatically: “The quantum microworld is not entangled in a dense web of causal relationships, but still “listens” to numerous unobtrusive commands and proposals. In the old Newtonian scheme, the force seemed to address the object with the unchallenged command: “Move!” In quantum physics, the relationship between force and object is based on an invitation rather than a command.”25 This brings together the vision of modern science and the vision of creation in its freedom presented by St. Maximus, which was discussed earlier. Another aspect of the change in thought is the transition from an energy to an information paradigm. It takes place in fundamental science 26 . Recently, it is not about the search for a universal theory, but rather about a program, the deployment of which simultaneously generates both the physical universe in the unity of its dynamic and informational aspects, and the hierarchy of laws that correspond to it. Thus, time and motion are included in the method of fundamental science. Time, energy and information are considered as different aspects of a single physical reality 27. The transition from energy to information takes place both in economic reality and in economic concepts, according to which society, which for a long time was in the stage of “industrial society” with the movement of energy resources defining it, moved to the stage of “information society”, defined by flows of information as a direct productive force 28 . This vision also correlates scientific thought with the theology of the logoi of St. Maximus, in which time is inseparable from the logoi. However, in an existence separated from God, the direction of information flows goes towards increasing dispersion and complexity, while the movement towards God in communication in logoi leads, as we noted above, to simplicity and silence. If we try to name this difference in the categories of the liturgical theology of St. Maximus, then the opposite directions correspond to the ascent in the church to the altar and altar - on the path to God and the descent-exit from the church, refusal of sacrifice - on the paths of autonomous knowledge. In ascetic terms we are talking about the contrast between the mind that rises to God in the deep heart and the mind of the scientist, divided from the heart. In general, the content of science can be defined, in the terminology of St. Maximus, as the comprehension of the intelligible logoi of sensory things. It can be noted that the understanding of logoi moves from a static Platonist understanding to the dynamics of the sensually comprehended and intelligible in their unity (remember the symbol of the chariot), which is presented in the theology of St. Maximus 29. Another thing is that science cannot achieve its goal, because the contradictory basis of thought divorced from God is the dispersion generated by self-destruction: “The insatiable spirit of knowledge, the restless mind of Faust, focusing on space, breaks up the celestial spheres too narrow for him in order to rush into endless spaces and get lost in them...” 30 “So, the knowledge obtained by external learning is not only not similar, but and opposite to the true and spiritual...” 31 Fundamental Science and Theology of St. Maximus In recent decades, fundamental science has undergone significant changes, some of which have been noted above. Let us dwell on other fundamental shifts in the picture of the world of modern science, which can be naturally correlated with the theology of St. Maximus. The role of man in the human universe. In scientific ideas that existed until recently, man was a part of nature - secondary, complex, not fundamental. In current ideas this is not the case. In particular, there is the so-called anthropic principle (the participant principle mentioned earlier is its strong form), which states that the precision of the relationship between the parameters of the early universe, under which it could develop as it did, can only be explained in terms of man: under other relations, man could not have been. Another aspect of the connection with man is the version of dynamic microcosmicity in modern science - the dynamic isomorphism between the expanding universe and growing consciousness 32 . The third aspect is the influence of consciousness on matter assumed by quantum physics (in one of its interpretations) 33 . Unlike previous ideas, the universe is not closed and in equilibrium, but open and nonequilibrium. Openness is not only energetic, but also informational in nature (loss of information in so-called black holes). According to modern concepts, space-time is born of dynamics, which is based on information. The idea of ​​modern physics about the formation of space-time dynamics, including information dynamics, corresponds to the relationship between time and eon in the theology of St. Maximus. Many worlds correspond to eons. Movement simultaneously along all trajectories corresponds to the analogy of the Logos of existence, of a thing - to the single Logos. The analogy between space, time and temperature, characteristic of modern theories, corresponds to the identity of the synchronic and diachronic hierarchies of being, while the hierarchy itself corresponds to the measure of energy increase. The idea of ​​a gap between creation and Creator, present even in the End, corresponds to the idea of ​​minimal scales characteristic of modern fundamental science. In the last two decades there has been a shift in the relationship between theoretical physics and mathematics. If until recently, Platonism in physics, which was discussed above, manifested itself in the fact that physics was reduced to mathematics, mathematics was used in physics, then recently mathematics began to be perceived within the framework of physics, and physics began to be used to pose and solve problems of pure mathematics 34. This shift parallels the transition from the Platonist worldview, which was at the basis of Origen’s theology, to the dynamic image of the relationship between the visible - sensually comprehended and the invisible - intelligible creation, which, as we saw above, is revealed in the theology of St. Maximus. In the theology of St. Maximus, creation is seen as a symbol of the Creator. The movement of creation through man to the Creator leads to the knowledge of the Creator in logoi and creations. Holy Scripture, like creation, is a type of the incarnation. Let us remember that “the mystery of the incarnation of the Word contains the meaning of all the riddles and images of Scripture, as well as the knowledge of creatures revealed and comprehended by the mind.” This knowledge grows through the feat of co-laboring with Christ. “Man knows living beings from the inside... language coincided with the very essence of things... heavenly language is regained... not by occult seekers, but only... merciful hearts... and wild animals live peacefully near the saints...” 35 We can contrast this vision with the contemporary emergence of modern science, Galileo's concept of nature as a book and paradigm of dialogue - questions to nature and its answers given in Platonist mathematical terms. This vision, which has an analogue in secular philosophy, corresponds to a severance of relations with God and a claim to independent ownership of nature while simultaneously depending on it. Man’s dialogue with being and with himself outside of God, constant rumor leads to self-destruction. The entire theology of St. Maximus comes from silence and leads to it. The book of nature is not read by man, but is revealed by God in silence. The Monk Gerasim had no questions for the lion, and the Monk Seraphim had no questions for the bear. And the Divine Liturgy is not a co-questioning, but an offering of creation to God in ascension to Him. In the theological heritage of St. Maximus the Confessor, the God-blessed path of man and creation and the vocation of man in relation to the fullness of created existence are revealed. The goal and end of the path, the end of time of the present eon, is the deification of man and creation in man. The word of St. Maximus not only talks about this path, but also reveals it. It not only enlightens the entire spiritual and cultural universe contemporary with St. Maximus, but, driven by the Spirit of prophecy, it enlightens our time and our knowledge, carrying out providence and judgment. The word of St. Maximus descends from the heights of sacramental theology and, through the spiritual experience of the Church in Liturgy and asceticism, expands to witness beyond the church fence. Turning to the knowledge of this world, it calls for conversion - a turn to God - in the transition from self-sufficient pride to repentance and humility, from rumor to silence, to the recollection and reproduction of the forgotten perception of the Liturgy and Orthodox feat in their original meaning. The world, represented by the symbols of modern knowledge, now comparable to theology, could then be perceived by the memory of the Church. We must, therefore, return to the premium, “cosmic” awareness of the Divine Liturgy as the fulfillment in Christ Jesus of the Divine calling of man, unfolded in the theology of St. Maximus the Confessor. We used the following works of St. Maximus and works devoted to his theology: Chapters: chapters on theology and the economy of the incarnation of the Son of God. Russian translation by A.I. Sidorov of these works in the edition: Rev. Maxim the Confessor. Creations. Book I. Theological and ascetic treatises. M., Martis, 1993. To Thalassius. - Rev. Maxim the Confessor. Creations. Book 11. Questions and answers to Thalassia. M., Martis, 1993. We also used the French translation of Ambigua: Ambigua. Collection l'Arbre de Jesse. Les Editions de l'Ancre. Paris-Suresnes, 1994. We used the fundamental work: Jean-Claude Larchet. La divinization de l'homme selon saint Maxime le Confesseur. 1994. We also constantly used the classic work of Vl. Lossky “Essay on the mystical theology of the Eastern Church” (Moscow, 1991). A.I. Sidorov. St. Maximus the Confessor: era, life, creativity // Rev. Maxim the Confessor. Creations. T. 1. P. 59. G.V. Florovsky. Eastern fathers of the 5th–7th centuries. M., 1992. P. 108. In presenting the doctrine of the logoi of creation, we use the review of Larchet (R. 112–123). Ambigua. Interpretation. 208. St. Nikolai Serbsky. Thoughts about good and evil. M., 2001. P. 31. St. Gregory Palamas. Triads in defense of the sacredly silent. (T 1, 10) and (I. 3, 3). M., Kanon, 1995. Quaestiones et dubia. 173. Quoted from the French translation: Larchet (R. 122). Wheeler J. Quantum and the Universe // Astrophysics, quanta and the theory of relativity. M., Nauka, 1975. pp. 535–558. For example: Alexander Koyre. Galileo and Plato // A. Koyre. Essays on philosophical thought. M., 1985. This, in particular, is the paradigm of the Prigogine school. See, for example: I. Prigogine. The end of certainty. Izhevsk, 1999. Davis P. Superpower: the search for a unified theory of nature. M., Mir, 1989. See, for example: B.B. Kadomtsev. Dynamics and information. M., 1997. See, for example: Scott M. Hitchcock. Time and Information. Preprint. 2001. pp. 220–221. Manuel Castells. Information Age. Economy, society and culture. M., 2000. pp. 36–37. The parallels between the theology of St. Maximus and modern science are noted by Emmanuel Ponsoye in his comments to his French translation of the works of St. Maximus. St. Gregory Palamas. Triads. I 1, 10. See, for example: Zizzi Paola. Emergent consciousness: from the early universe to our mind. Preprint. 2000. See, for example: Stapp Henry P. Quantum theory and the role of mind in nature. Preprint. 2001. This is noted, for example, by V.I. Arnold in the preface to the collection: International Congress of Mathematicians in Kyoto. M., Mir, 1996.