All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.1
In this text we shall look at the notion of city – a communal, geographical, aesthetical and ethical notion. In the contemporary context, cities are the latest paradox being both in decline and expansion: the population, at least the wealthier one, of a number of cities is ‘moving out’, that is leaving them, while at the same time the cities expand infrastructurally (often without planned infrastructural solutions) transforming before our own very eyes into something else. But let us leave ‘the else’ for someone else, to reconsider the meanings of creation and shared common space. This is, from a theological perspective, the ethical question par excellence.
First, in biblical and eschatological language we are the citizens of the Kingdom to come, of the transformed city that is to come.2 In some respects, this eschatological notion, is not bound merely to eschaton but to the present as – liturgically speaking – the eschaton already manifested in the mysteries and, by mercy, in the human heart. Mercy, sometimes translated as charity, is the key word here. It is mercy that is the manifestation of perfect love, through which God created the world – the shared common space for the human beings made in the image and (yet to be) likeness of God. God creates, as George Florovsky argues “whatever was created, was indeed created by the good will and deliberation of God.”3 As Florovsky further reminds us of St. Gregory Palamas who contended that unless a clear distinction had been made between the “essence” and “energy” in God, one could not distinguish also between “generation” and “creation.”4 The distinction between the Divine Being and the Divine Will is here essential, for while we do not know the ‘essence of God’, we know Him through His energies, through His Will, that is, through His love.
This complex question debated throughout the centuries is an important not on the plane of intellectual exercise but on the level of praxis. If God acts mercifully and lovingly, can man act in the same way? Can man create in the same way? Could this, to great extent ascetic praxis, restore at least on a small scale, the rupture produced by “the fall”, expressed in the overwhelming greediness and corruption of our days, visually manifested through the cities, divisive – segregated – overpriced dwellings of the new Les Misérables rather than spaces of community where life and creativity flourish in the best sense of the word. Again, this is the same problem that Dostoevsky posed through the conversation with the Great Inquisitor: – “…You did reply that man does not live of bread alone…You did desire man’s free love, that he should follow You freely, enticed and captive by You. Whom have You raised up to Yourself? Is the man capable of doing what You did?”5 This is the question of harmony6 between God and man, thus the question of freedom – free will and love, of God’s creation and man’s creation.
The city is a man-made habitat, incorporating sacred spaces (churches, synagogues, mosques and other spaces of worship), but the city itself serves as a common space that people share. Cities, broadly speaking, are built and decorated also to express the beauty and the spirit that manifests in its aesthetics.7 Cities change, as people and times change, and what is left from the previous centuries is now considered a common heritage, and in some cases ‘the world heritage.’ City is the geo-cultural space in which community(ies) share the basics such as air and water, and the everyday life and culture, which ideally is developed by these community(ies). Although all of this is subject to constant change, to a lesser or greater degree, the main issues do not change as they are deeply connected to the human condition.
How can a city be a sacred space? The concept of “sacred cities are a crystallisation in space and time of a reality that belongs to the spiritual world”8 usually refers to the cities of religious importance. Would not one’s concept of ‘sacredness’ inevitably clash with other’s understanding of sacredness? This depends on what we mean by ‘sacred’ and how we approach it: if we centralise human life as sacred, and ‘well-being of other rather than myself’, the notion of sacredness receives new meanings. Let us consider this question through the eyes of Florovsky, and his writings on St. John Chrysostom’s concept of charity.9 Florovsky centre staged St John Chrysostom, reviving his homilies, teachings and life before the world, focusing on Chrysostom’s main topics which stem from the tradition of the early church practices.
Florovsky focuses on Chrysostom’s thought that “everything belongs to God, our common Master, everything is given for common use…Water, air, sun and moon, and the rest of creation, are intended for common use. Quarrels begin usually when people attempt to appropriate things which, by their very nature, were not intended for the private possession of some, to the exclusion of others.”10 He continues that it is so even with “the worldly things: cities, market-places, streets-as a common possession…as God’s economy is of the same kind.”11
Florovsky further argues drawing upon Chrysostom that in order for the city to become a sacred space, its inhabitants must build the altars of charity within themselves, that is, charity must become the sacred praxis: “no person can grow in virtue, unless he serves his brethren…those who fail to do charity will be left outside the bridal chamber of Christ.”12 In that sense, charity is essential for human life and it is essential for the life of the community. If charity is replaced with anything else, particularly greed, society inevitably crumbles, as human persona crumbles being reduced to an (isolated) individual in a mass society, where good can be replaced with evil, and vice versa. Charity is deeply connected to the issue of wealth and power – prosperity on one side, and misery and powerlessness on the other.
Thus, for Chrysostom, one of the most important topics was that of “wealth and misery”, and it is well-known that he perceived “prosperity as a danger” even as “the worst kind of persecution, worse than an open persecution.”13 He argued that “a love for wealth is abnormal,“ and that “wealth itself has no value…it is a guise, under which the real face of man is concealed, but those who hold possessions come to cherish them, and are deceived.”14 He argued that “one cannot be rich, except at the cost of keeping others poor…the root of wealth is always in injustice.”15 His criticism did not spare the church either, he argued against “the splendour of the temples” while “Christ, as a homeless stranger, is wandering around and begging, and instead of receiving Him”, we “make decorations.“16 This connected to the issue of discrimination and deep stratification. As Florovsky argues “Chrysostom was always suspicious of discrimination: – was it not dangerous to discriminate between the ‘strong’ and the ‘weak’? and Who could judge and decide in advance?”17 Chrysostom was deeply engaged with the poor, rejected, ill, desolated. However, he criticised wealth, but he did not idealise poverty, considering poverty profitable, that is as “a blessing, only when it is cheerfully accepted for Christ’s sake.” For Chrysostom wealth and poverty were human-made and human-induced due to the fall, however these were not merely social matters but the spiritual matter, related to pride, power and greediness. This is one of the reasons why Chrysostom tried to eliminate inequality: first, where there is true Christian love present everything is done in the service of others, second, both wealth and poverty are sources of temptation that can result in unrest and bloodshed: “poverty can be tempting too, not only as a burden, but as an incentive of envy or despair.”18 Florovsky concludes that Chrysostom fought poverty to ease the suffering, but to remove temptations also.19
He who was “desperately concerned with the renewal of society” proposed “the healing of social ills” through “preaching and practicing charity, founding hospitals and orphanages, and helping the poor and destitute.” For Chrysostom this was his personal life, “the Way”, however, he saw it as a praxis that would be a remedy for the whole society. Chrysostom goes to the core of social problems observing them through the spiritual: his inspiration by the Divine love, that is, the spirit of Christ, enabled him to see the material as things that have no values in themselves. It is rather mankind who ascribes those values. However, material things, given by God, are necessary, however their necessity lies in their purposivity for others, rather than in their intrinsic, often imaginary, value and their “unjust use.”20
However, what separates Chrysostom’s thought from “communism”, and other utopian ideologies, is that Chrysostom “has mystical depth”, as Florovsky argues, “Chrysostom did not believe in abstract schemes; he had a fiery faith in the creative power of Christian love.”21 That means, in other words, that “the mind and heart of a person enlightened by Christ can never cease to feel sorrow for the misfortunes that befall people everywhere, every day, every minute.”22 Mercy represents renewal of the heart, the altar from which the restoration of society begins. While many studies emphasize landscapes and natural settings as sacred areas, it is crucial to re-shift our focus to the urban environment, as it represents a shared space where diverse communities coexist. Analysing this phenomenon through Florovsky’s perspective can enhance our understanding of urban-cultural (‚man-made‘) environment, the cities, which rather than growing hostility may foster and offer experience of community. Therefore, the transformation of the city into a ’sacred space‘ can be achieved through Christian praxis rather than through the implementation of ideological concepts, which may frequently benefit one group at the expense of another.
Footnotes:
1 The Gospel according to St. John, Prologue. 1:3. KJV.
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven. Revelation. 21:2. KJV.
3 St. Athanasius‘ Concept of Creation: https://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/aspects_church_history_florovsky.htm
4 https://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/aspects_church_history_florovsky.htm
5 The Great inquisitor, Fyodor Dostoevsky: The Brothers Karamazov.
6 Collaboration, σῠμφωνῐ́ᾱ, between God and men. In re-thinking God’s creation and human creation, the question of harmony is the one to be pondered on. In human creation harmony is a manifested also through ethics and aesthetics, both stemming from that which lies beyond mere morality: to its source and cause.
7 The aesthetics also expresses the positions of power; however this topic is beyond the scope of this article.
8 Serageldin, Ismail, Shluger, Ephim, Brown-Martin Joan (eds.): Historic Cities and Sacred Sites, The World Bank, Washington, p.2.
9 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
10 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
11 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
12 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
13 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
14 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
15 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
16 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
17 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
18 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
19 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
20 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
21 Florovsky, Georges: St. John Chrysostom: The Prophet of Charity, Catholic Culture, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=5977
22 Popović, Justin: The memory of our venerable father St. Isaac Sirin, Life of the Saints; https://www.rastko.rs/filosofija/jerotic/vjerotic-isak_sirin.html
Photocredits:
Title image: www.freepik.com
Image Nr. 2: Wikimedia Commons
RaT-Blog Nr. 20/2024