The Transfiguration

Nikolay Petkov

Abstract: In the Eastern Christian tradition, the Transfiguration is among the greatest of holidays. The present text juxtaposes the reading of the Transfiguration in two types of traditions – the high patristic one, in the texts of authoritative figures such as Athanasius of Alexandria, John Chrysostom, Dionysius the Areopagite, and together with the liturgical tradition found in liturgical texts.

1504326172_tekken7_SMALL  PDF Keywords: transfiguration, patristic tradition, liturgical tradition, Athanasius of Alexandria, John Chrysostom, Dionysius the Areopagite

In The Gospel According to Luke it is a part of the ninth chapter. Christ has already fed the hungry with five pieces of bread and two fish and has spoken the words “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.” (Luke 9:27). The next verse tells us of the events about a week later when along with Peter, Jacob and John, He ascends the mountain to pray. “As he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became as bright as a flash of lightning.” (Luke 9:29). In his first sermon[1] against Akindynos, Philotheus I of Constantinople insists that Christ had intended this exact event when He had spoken of “some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God.” [2]

In my view, the contextual logic is clear. After Christ exhorts his disciples that “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life” (Luke 9:22) there’s the need to show them that this is not the end. For that exact reason – Luke proceeds – the theme of the conversation between Christ, Moses and Elijah is The End. According to the Bulgarian synodal translation the word is “death”, but the one used by Luke is éxodos (’εξοδος) which points towards the temporary death on the cross, and at the same time towards the promised Exit[3]. The scripture talks of the End in an eschatological perspective[4], so that it becomes clear that the path towards the Kingdom of God does not end with the cross but rather starts from there.

 Of course, if the semantic emphasis is placed on the verb «speaks», then the miracle of the Transfiguration would become one of the many proverbs of Christ. And while it may be one more sensitive and more action driven than its predecessor, in which thousands are fed with just the five breads and two fish, and it may be considered more miraculous even, it would still remain… simply a proverb.

We may reach a similar conclusion if we were to carefully read through Pope Benedict the XVI’s book “Jesus of Nazareth”. In it there is no mention of the Transfiguration. What’s more, even when addressing the proverbs in the Gospel According to Luke (pages 239-269), the Transfiguration is completely absent.

Perhaps this has been the case in Western reflections since the time of Philotheus I of Constantinople. And that is why – in my humble view – his arguments regarding the tradition and practice of liturgy are quite interesting. In his view these start with Dionysius the Areopagite and remind that “when we are replete with the Divine manifestation, then we shall always be with the Lord”[5].

Today this quote from the First Epistle to the Thessalonians (1 Thessalonians 4:17) is still associated with the prayer for peace in the funeral service and with the preparation of the dead for being buried. In order to show us this has been as such since the old times; and that Christ spoke to his disciples preparing them for His funeral not so much in words but through the miracle of the Transfiguration. It will happen here-and-now but this week it will be in the Future century. For that reason, the distance between the two events according to the Gospel of Luke is eight days.

These are days in which the holiday is a sacrifice, but the sacrifice is a holiday as well. In the traditions of the Old Testament in these times one calf and eight lambs are slaughtered so to welcome the time of forgiveness. It is in these times that the high priest solemnly pronounces the Name of God in the temple’s Holy of Holies. The four semi-consonants (YHWH, which we consider sounding like Yahweh) are pronounced in a gentle whisper (1 Kings 19:12), in accordance with the way in which God revealed Himself to Moses on the mountain (Exodus 3:14). Centuries later, these eight days will match the eight voices of the Octoechos or the time of the nightless Eight day in which the Sun of Justice will never come down. In the same way in which the silent pronunciation of the Name of God will correspond to the spirit of the hesychia in a different era. The link between all these realities being the Shekhinah or the chasm of God’s Glory. In Jewish tradition (Exodus 25:8) it is God’s presence (in Hebrew the word is Kavod and we will encounter it in the root of the word «кивот» [kivot], which is the Slavonic word for the Arc of the Covenant; as well as in the roots of the word «Аз» [Az], meaning “I” and «душа[6]» [dusha], meaning “soul”). In any case, God’s Glory is that which we recognize as the Divine and it is that which is undiscernibly different from His essence. We could put an equal sign between The Old Testament’s Shekhinah and The New Testament’s use of Glory and say that according to Luke it is an indelible property of God (Luke 2:9, Acts 7:55). Such is the case with apostle Paul as well (Romans 11:36, Phil. 4:20, Tim. 3:16, Tit 2:13). So, it is with the eyewitness of the Transfiguration – St. John the Apostle, who also believes that namely this Glory of God is the shared being of God, because “we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.” (I John 3:2).

It cannot be otherwise as Christ himself had said in the above sermon: «Blessed are the pure at heart for they will see God» (Mat.5:8)

That is why Philotheus insists that it is namely the Glory that Moses had glimpsed when he had seen God’s back[7](Exodus 33:23). Of course, with regards to the question what it was exactly that which Moses saw, Philotheus answers that “clarity on this is unnecessary[8]”. And – so in order to not finish his essay with these words – he further adds that John Chrysostom (in On the Incomprehensible Nature of God, chapter III) writes that “the things seen in God are descents” [9]. The analogy with Proclus the Successor and his proodoses is apparent but Proclus himself will be born 6-7 years after the death of John Chrysostom. Undoubtedly if Chrysostom was quoting anyone, then that is St. Athanasius I of Alexandria, who, in his sermon on the Annunciation, explains that seeing God’s back is nothing else but the glimpses of the essence on which we theologize and which we sing about[10]. To which Philotheus adds that in reciting these glimpses or contemplations, St. Gregory of Nyssa names them: self-governance, wisdom, creative and God-worshipping will power[11]. These are the glimpses of the “place of God”, which – in accordance with the definition provided by St. John of Damascus (in An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, chapter 13 852b, 6-7) – Philotheus I of Constantinople describes[12] as “that which is part of the Divine power and grace”.

It is logical that in creating the polemical text and expecting objections and accusations of all kinds over the notion of introducing corporeality and multiplicity in God, the patriarch of Constantinople sought after the arguments of the mostindubitable (at the time; in the 14th century) sources – namely, the liturgical ones. That is why his arguments are built on the triad St. Dionysius the Areopagite – St. John Chrysostom – St. John of Damascus and thus appear more than reassuring.

And since the liturgical link between the Octoechoes and the authority of St. John of Damascus is unquestionable, immediately after quoting Dionysius the Areopagite, the patriarch refers to St. John of Damascus’ “On the Transfiguration of Christ”, assuring us that through the Transfiguration, Christ shows us the manner in which “in the age to come He will shine with the light of divinity”. The same is said in the first song of the second cannon in the festive matins of Transfiguration: “now appeared in the light of unapproachable divinity”. A few verses later in the kontakion it is added that Tabor beckons us to climb towards “the height of the divine ascents”.

So, reading through the menologium for the August service of the Transfiguration, it is not hard to discover the principles of the polemical aesthetics utilized by St. Philotheus of Constantinople. Nor is it hard to discover that in composing his arguments, he had followed the “higher” thought of the models of theology – St. Athanasius, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Gregory of Nazianzus, St. Dionysius the Areopagite, St. John of Damascus…, and combining it with the widely accepted (perhaps sometimes around the end of the tenth century) liturgical practice. With the caveat that the synthesis of these two types of theology does not yield some mingling in-between two starting points, but rather presents us with an exceptional characteristic of that which (although as of recently[13]) we call Byzantine philosophy.

[1] Philotheos Kokkinos, De Domini luce. Editio princeps (Bibliotheca christiana 18), ed. et transl. P. Yaneva, Sofia 2011.

[2] Cf. p. 153 from the cited issue.

[3] Cf. Sabev, P. Γραφή and Κήρυγμα. An introduction in the literature of the Holy Gospel. V. Tarnovo: University press, 2017, p. 298.

[4] Cf. Sabev, P. In these final days. Veliko Tarnovo University Press, 2013, p. 11-38.

[5] See page 154 from the cited issue.

[6] Cf. The New Biblical Dictionary, publishing house: New Man, 2007, p. 1288.
(Originally: Нов Библейски речник, изд. “Нов човек”, С 2007, стр. 1288.)

[7] Ibid. p. 158.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid. p. 159.

[10] The quote is in accordance with Philotheus of Constantinople, see quoted text, p. 195.

[11] Ibid. p. 195.

[12] Ibid. p. 199.

[13] More on the topic can be found in Georgi Kapriev’s book Byzantine Philosophy.

Philosophia 31/2023, pp. 43-48