
The Glory of Kings: A Festschrift for James B. Jordan

Fyodor Dostoevsky
(Christian Encounters Series)

Athanasius
(Foundations of Theological Exegesis and Christian Spirituality)

The Four: A Survey of the Gospels

Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom

From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John

Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture

1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary

The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter

A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons

Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature

Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen

The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism

A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel

From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution

Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy

Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper

A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament

Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature

Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays

Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life

The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church
In his book on Dostoevsky, Nicholas Berdyaev sets up a series of comparisons and contrasts between Dostoevsky and Nietzsche. Both recognize that man as he has been conceived in earlier ages is dead. Both know that man is “terrible free.” Both know that Humanism has self-destructed precisely in its deification of man – the creation of the man-god, counter to the God-man of orthodoxy. Both, in fact are Dionysians.
But Dostoevsky is a Christian Dionysian, and that makes all the difference. Berdyaev writes:
“For Nietzsche there was neither God nor man but only this unknown man-god. For Dostoievsky [sic] there was both God and man: the God who does not devour man and the man who is not dissolved in God but remains himself throughout all eternity. It is there that Dostoievsky shows himself to be Christian in the deepest sense of the word.”
Dostoevsky thus offers a new anthropology, a Dionysian Christianity and a Christian Dionysian. For Dostoevsky, man is all about dynamism; there is no smooth glass at the bottom of the soul, but a volcano ready to blow. All is flux. Dostoevsky is the most Heraclitean of writers. But, unlike Nietzsche and other Dionysians, Dostoevsky does not dissolve personality: “He was exclusively dionysiac, but the human person was affirmed with all the more strength in the heart of his exaltation; man, with all his dynamism and contradictions, remained himself all through, indestructible man.”
In this way, Dostoevsky surpassed not only Greek Dionysianism but also the “mysticism of many Christians for whom man vanished and left only the divine. Man has a part in eternity, and when Dostoievsky explored the deep places of life he came upon those of God as well. All his work is a plea for man. He was in radical opposition to the monophysite spirit: he recognized not one single nature, human or divine, but two natures, human and divine. He took such a strong line on this point that, compared with his, the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic conception seems almost to smack of monophysism, to suggest an inclination to absorb the human in the divine nature.”
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Saturday, June 5, 2010 at 11:10 am
Permission is given to use material on this site, provided the source is cited, blog entries are republished in full, and the author is notified in advance.