Amidst the postmodern rejection of any claim to objective validity, how can the ACNA respond in a loving manner to contentious social issues like homosexuality, gender confusion, racial tensions, and political correctness, in accordance with the rich, catholic, and apostolic tradition that she has inherited? The lionshare of the social issues we face are manifestations of a materialist paradigm with an explicitly anti-hierarchical ethos. The recapitulation of an hierarchical, ontological metaphysic can reframe contemporary problems, compel the pursuit of beauty, and encourage the rediscovery of ancient Christian practices like private confession and monasticism. 

Anglican Bishop George Berkeley asserts, “esse est percipi (aut percipire)” – “to be is to be perceived (or to perceive).”1 Whether or not one accepts his theory of immaterialism (although there are remarkable parallels in Proclus and Gregory of Nyssa),2the importance of perception has become pivotal for understanding many issues that confront modern society. Dr John Vervaeke, Assistant Professor of Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Science at the University of Toronto, in explaining the manner in which minds group qualia together, has popularized the term “relevance realization” to deal with the problem of combinatorial explosion (the intractability of a problem due to its hypercomplexity).3 Because our minds are affronted perpetually with infinite multiplicity, they necessarily group smaller 

things into larger identities, imbuing them with greater or lesser meaning, and thereby constructing hierarchies of relevance. 

The concept of epistemic relevance hierarchies has direct parallels with the ontological hierarchies of middle Platonic and Neoplatonic thought, such as Philo’s cosmic mediation of the Logos,4 and the manner that everything emanates from the One, as iterated in Plotinus and Proclus.5 The belief in this hierarchical contingency of existence has caused some to describe the Christian metaphysic as panentheist (although this anachronism deserves cautious clarification). Gregory of Nyssa asks, “Who, looking at the universe, would be so feeble-minded as not to believe that God is all in all; that he clothes himself with the universe, and at the same time contains it and dwells in it?”6 Dionysius the Areopagite7, the third-most quoted author in Aquinas’ Summa Theologica,8 writes in The Divine Names, “Beauty [an epithet for God] unites all things and is the source of all things. It is the great creating cause which bestirs the world and holds all things in existence by the longing inside them to have beauty. And there it is ahead of all as Goal, as the Beloved, as the Cause toward which all things move, since it is the longing for 

beauty which actually brings them into being.”9 Further, for Dionysius, the telos of the ontological hierarchy is, “to enable beings to be as like as possible to God and to be at one with him.”10 Therefore, the ontological hierarchy is both grounded in, and inhabited by God, and yet, wholly transcended by Him. 

Likewise, Maximus the Confessor, the last great Saint common to both East and West, employs the term logoi for the rational principles that separate identities from their constituent parts. In this way, logoi is similar to the concept of Gestalt, or haecceity.11 For Maximus, the logoi are all contained within the Logos, affecting a reconciliation of multiplicity and unity. This synthetic power (as Balthasar denotes it)12is love. To summarize: the entire cosmos is composed of an ontological hierarchy, held together through love, mediated through Logos, which God simultaneously grounds, imbues, and transcends. 

This paradigm is cosmological, epistemological, ontological, and teleological, asserting God as the fountain and goal of all. It is, however, not a pagan, pantheistic monism. Rather, to say “God is love” is to resolve most beautifully the paradox of monism and dualism. It is to assert that multiplicity and unity are eternally reconciled in the agapic interpenetration of the three hypostases of the one, Triune God, a love that is the ground of all existence, and in which man is invited to participate. 

This paradigm is experienced phenomenologically. Each person’s body is 

composed of parts, constituted of matter, made of subatomic particles, etc. down to the quantum level. People also periodically manifest various principalities, serving as “body” to higher identities. For example, when a person writes to their municipal government, the secretary responds, not as herself, but on behalf of the city. So too, it could be said, “General Sherman attacked Columbia,” whether or not General Sherman himself was personally engaged in combat, as the army was an extension of his agency. In explaining this relation, Dionysius writes, “I see nothing wrong in the fact that the Word of God calls even our hierarch an ‘angel,’ “why is it that our human hierarch is designated in scriptures as ‘angel of the all-powerful Lord’? (Malachi 2:7, Malachi 3:1, Galatians 4:14, Revelations 2-3)… We affirmed that the final ranks lack the full and complete power of the more senior ones. But they do have a partial, proportionate share in that power and they do so as part of that one, harmonious, intertwined communion of all…. Indeed all intelligent godlike beings have their own participation in wisdom and knowledge, and the difference between them depends on whether this share is direct and primary or secondary and inferior, relative to the capacities of each.. I see nothing wrong in the fact that the Word of God calls even our hierarch an “angel,” for it is characteristic of him, that like the angels he is, to the extent of which he is capable, a messenger, and that he is raised up to imitate, so far as a man may, the angelic power to bring revelation. Now the hiddenness of the Godhead is a transcendent one. It is far above everything. No being can in any way or as a matter of right be named like to it. Yet every being endowed with intelligence and reason, which, totally and as far as it can, is returned to be united with him, which is forever being raised up toward his divine enlightenments, which if one may say so, tries as hard as possible to imitate God – such a

one surely deserves to be called divine.” Thus, a person can embody a city, desire, virtue, demon, angel, or Christ.13 

Understanding the functioning of these immaterial, intermediary principalities also elucidates humanity’s purpose as mediator of heaven and earth. (A priori, one must understand that symbolism in an ancient, theological sense does not connote substitution of one thing for another, but rather, the joining together of multiple levels of meaning, or the embodiment of higher truth. Matthieu Pageau, in The Language of Creation, writes, “This metaphysical framework implies a universe where all events may be interpreted as both factual and meaningful at the same time, possessing concrete reality as well as spiritual significance.”) Just as Adam was created by the joining of heavenly breath and earthly body, so too can all phenomena be described as an intercourse between heaven (the spiritual/incorporeal) and earth (the material/corporeal). Matthieu Pageau, in The Language of Creation, writes, “Humanity’s impetus in the universe can adequately be summed up as: ‘informing matter with meaning and expressing meaning with matter.’ This extremely simple formula surprisingly encompasses all human activity, including reproduction, technology, government, and science.”14 

Ancient peoples reenacted and ritualized the cosmic hierarchy architecturally, aesthetically, and dramatically, as a psychotechnology, understanding that giving attention to multiple levels of the hierarchy gives them body and potential. Pyramids, ziggurats, obelisks, steeples, and high altars all assume this, and disclose the hierarchy’s directional and teleological nature. Incidentally, almost all ancient theologies conceived of Paradise as a garden on a mountaintop (including Ezekiel 40)15. Courtrooms, professional attire, graduations, manners, and even Santa Claus are all modern vestiges of this paradigm, demonstrating its ultimate inevitability. For example, The dinner meal was a sacred part of American life, for it signified the importance of the family. Direct causality aside, is it any wonder that there is a correlation between the trivialization of the family meal and the dissolution of the family at large? People stand for the anthem because they innately understand the benefit of having a country, and the potential detriment of losing national identity. Alternatively, people kneel during the anthem as an attestation that the hierarchy is improperly structured, and that focus should be brought down the hierarchy back to its body. (Whether or not one agrees with one position or the other, this is clearly what’s taking place symbolically). 

Understanding how hierarchy functions can also elucidate differences between Protestant and Catholic practice. Proper hierarchical engagement produces a mutual reciprocation – a procession and retrogression. Proclus states, “Every effect remains in its cause, proceeds from it, and returns to it.” Similarly, Romans 11:36 (RSV) reads, “For from Him, and through Him, and to Him are all things.” Dionysius states, “The revealing rank of principalities, archangels, and the angels presides among themselves over the human hierarchies, in order that the uplifting and return toward God, and the communion and union, might occur, according to proper order, and indeed so that the procession might be benignly given by God to all hierarchies and might arrive at each one in a shared way in sacred harmony.” He further says that the higher beings “in their goodness they raise their inferiors to become, so far as possible, their rivals. They ungrudgingly impart to them the glorious ray which has visited them so that their inferiors may pass this on to those yet farther below them. Hence, on each level, predecessor hands on to successor whatever of the divine light he has received and this, in providential proportion, is spread out to every being.” It is through this movement that ascension up the hierarchy is possible, spoken of as climbing the mountain, ascending the ladder, or going to heaven. To the Protestant mind that has collapsed the celestial hierarchy to a bivalent structure of God and man without any intermediary beings, to attribute worth to anything other than God, such as relics and icons, is to commit idolatry. However, to the Catholic or Orthodox perspective, veneration is to direct glory up the ontological hierarchy, back to God. If Romeo wrote a sonnet

about Juliet’s handkerchief, Zwingli would most assuredly be at Romeo’s side, accusing him of infidelity. Conversely, the Rites for Holy Matrimony in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer include, without fear of idolatry, the words “with my body I thee worship.” Adiaphora aside, Anglicanism, as via media, neither monolithically Protestant or Catholic, has, through Dionysius, the Cappadocians, and Maximus, apostolically inherited this beautiful cosmological vision and can reutilize it as a tool for contextualizing and reframing modern social issues. 

In contrast to this vision, through various cultural and philosophical developments like nominalism16, the Copernican Revolution, the Enlightenment, and the scientific method, society progressively adopted a materialism so pervasive that it was unwittingly assumed as a metaphysic. The scientific method necessitates a temporary suspension of perceptual movement between levels of the ontological hierarchy, focusing instead on direct mechanical causality of single phenomena. In contrast, miracles, from a spiritual perspective, are seen as the microcosmic instantiations of cosmic patterns. Matthieu writes, “from a spiritual perspective, explaining a miracle with mechanical causality would be the equivalent of detailing the steps required to construct a written word with marks, which is hardly relevant at all.” Viewing the world through the lens of mechanical causality and forgetting the power of attending to various levels of the ontological hierarchy aesthetically and culturally, it is no surprise that culture is enslaved to principalities (Acedia, Hermaphroditus, Eros, Moloch, Mammon) that it doesn’t believe exist. 

To further illustrate the mechanism of principalities, take for example, pornography. If someone looks at porn, the demon/principality of lust is actually manifesting itself through the actions of the porn-watcher. Furthermore, principalities are false gods in the sense that they take for themselves the worship that is due to God. In this way, a pagan medieval town could worship a “false deity”, a Saint evangelize the town, restore worship to the true God, and essentially usurp that principality. In this way, Saint Sebastian still operates in the city of San Sebastian, and the cathedral, festivals, art, iconography et. all constitute part of the body of Saint Sebastian. Society 

does not acknowledge these intermediary beings. Is it any wonder, then, that everyone is constantly watching porn on their iphones and taking antidepressants to deal with incessant panic attacks and existential anxiety? So too, the ancient Church Fathers understood asceticism, ie. taming of the passions, as spiritual warfare. This is not a metaphor. Fasting is actually warring with demonic principalities and natural passions. 

As the loss of this cosmological, hierarchical vision took place, so too did the world experience a surfeit of revolutions, even promoting revolution as its own intrinsic good. The French, American, and Bolshevik Revolutions, despite substantial differences, nonetheless shared an anti-hierarchical ethos. It is the ethos of the quote (attributed to Diderot), man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.”17 While Christian revolution, standing prophetically against evil and willingly bearing the consequences of such action, restores proper hierarchy, worldly revolution inverts, usurps, and flattens hierarchy. 

This revolutionary ethos found a particularly potent incarnation in postmodern philosophy. Foucault, Deleuze, Lyotard, and Derrida reinterpreted history as Nieztschean power conflicts and posited that freedom was to be found only in the deconstruction of hierarchies (Derrida, Foucault, Lyotard), or in pleasure (Deleuze, Guattari, Boudrilliard).18 These philosophers, while occasionally criticizing Marxism as a problematic metanarrative, nonetheless held varying degrees of allegiance to the ideology, even amidst the Russian gulags and Chinese cultural revolution, appropriating a Marxist dialectic in the pursuit of deconstructing “hierarchies of oppression.”19 Their devotees continued their work, recapitulating the Marxist bourgeois-proletariat class struggle as conflict between women and patriarchy, whites and blacks, cisgender and transgender, etc. Unsurprisingly, the revolutionary movements these activists have perpetuated are explicit about their deconstructive teleologies (“abolish the patriarchy”, “tear down systems of oppression”, “eradicate white hegemony”). 

The contrast between the early Christian paradigm and the modern secular paradigm can be demonstrated with the change of justice’s definition. Contemporary “social justice” movements equate justice and equity, defining equity as equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity (or at least utilize this as the metric of success). In contrast, Aquinas, furthering Anselm’s definition of justice as “rectitude”, and Isidore’s as “rendering to each one his right”, defines justice as “a habit whereby a man renders to each one his due by a constant and perpetual will.”20 Even Augustine’s definition as “love serving God alone” is intrinsically hierarchical, for it presumes that love (Maximus’ synthetic power), concentrated too heavily on any particular thing without situating it in proper hierarchy, is by definition unjust. Likewise, Dante depicts those in hell as being bound by improper affection for their particular vices.21 

However, it must be stated that the very existence of a cosmic hierarchy insinuates that every other hierarchy, even those built in similitude, miss the mark to varying degrees. Even in relatively competent hierarchies, too much power can aggregate at the top, leaving those at the bottom disenfranchised. Yet, Jesus dines with the prostitute and tax collector, and Mary exclaims, “He hath put down the 

mighty from their seat: and hath exalted the humble and meek. He hath filled the hungry with good things: and the rich he hath sent empty away.”22It is part of the Messianic hope, that commensurate with the pattern of the salvific reversal (the trampling of death by death), God ultimately eradicates all evil hierarchies, institutes justice, and restores proper order. Nonetheless, just as Galatians 3:28 (“there is neither male nor female…”) does not inherently promote transgenderism (or for that matter, feminism or women’s ordination) neither do the seemingly revolutionary passages concerning John the Baptist or the Magnificat negate an a priori hierarchical metaphysic held in common by virtually all of ancient Christendom. 

No doubt, there is utility in having a degree of corrective deconstruction. Marx, though failing to produce a valid roadmap to Utopia, nonetheless, offered poignant critiques of capitalism. Likewise, the iconography of The Sheep and the Goats differentiates between Christ’s left hand (as excluding) and right hand (as gathering). However, the necessary function of exclusion, in the Christian vision, ultimately serves a higher telos of purification. Thus, the function of excommunication is actually to compel the sinner back into relationship with God and His Church. Consequently, this neoPlatonist Christian metaphysic, as paragon for emulation, implies the indispensability of ascertaining the telos of any deconstructive mechanism during cultural engagement. 

It could also be argued that this hierarchical paradigm, operating within a pluralistic, secular society, is opposed to censorship and political correctness, as free speech operates both as a refining force, and the only mechanism whereby the Church can continue to promulgate the Gospel. The most robust structures are intrinsically antifragile, and apologia only increases resilience. Although censorship is a perennial issue in any society, it is indicative of the greatness of this paradigm that many of its strongest proponents risked their lives over related theological minutia. (Maximus the Confessor died from wounds received in the defense of dyothelitism.) 

Concerning issues of sexuality and gender identity, it may be useful to understand the architectural layout of the church (a hierarchical structure of participation) in its relation to the rite of confession. Still the practice in Eastern Christianity (although once ubiquitous), the altar, separated either by iconostasis and veil or by rood screen, was accessible exclusively to those who had been designated to serve there, while the nave was inhabited by faithful communicants, and the narthex by penitents, catechumens, and inquirers. Through confession, one might be placed under penance, temporarily restricted from the Eucharist, and relegated to participation from the narthex. Although odd to modern sensibilities, throughout church history it would have been normative practice, as a large part of working out one’s salvation was taming the passions. In contrast to many modern churches, which have collapsed the distinction between priest and laity, considering all men priests and all sins equal (thereby unfortunately inviting the active judgment of the community and eradicating potential means of participation for individuals struggling with particular issues) the inviolate privacy of the confessional relationship promoted trust, allowed space for individual’s struggles, and discouraged public ostracism. Furthermore, monasticism provided a tangible ideal, in which the burden of denying one’s passions was at least tempered by the example and encouragement of non-hypocritical exemplars. Renormalizing monasticism and private confession are potential, tangible means of restoring hierarchies of participation.

Participation is further compelled by beauty. As Bernardo Kastrup asserted, “banality abdicates responsibility.”23 There is a sinister comfort in producing utilitarian buildings, buying mass produced decorations, and playing mediocre music. If, however, we take this metaphysic seriously, matter and space participate hierarchically as potential conduits for the glory of God, and we are ethically obliged to promote beauty. Will the ACNA build churches that will compel transcontinental pilgrims in a hundred years, produce music that will be sung by the next generation, or write poetry and theology that will last past our lifetimes? 

There is much to be gained by the reapplication of ancient Christian thought and practice through the lens of this symbolic, hierarchical framework. It provides questions for dealing with contentious social issues, such as, “what is the intrinsic telos of this ideology and action?” It also provides a framework of integration through private confession, and mitigates the hypocrisy of the church by promoting monasticism. Furthermore, if this worldview is to be taken seriously, it will transform the manner in which we approach ecclesiology, liturgy, architecture and theology. Although distinct from some of the nominalist and materialist presuppositions inherited through the last millenia, this entire metaphysical vision is nonetheless firmly within the apostolic tradition that Anglicanism has inherited. Even if postmodern society reduces the Gospel to one metanarrative among many, we can rejoice in the promulgation of the most beautiful metanarrative of all: the cosmos is held together through love, mediated through the Logos, who became man, died, and resurrected that we might participate fully in the life of God. 

1 Downing, L. (2011, January 19). George Berkeley. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/berkeley/2 Bradatan, Costica (2003) On some ancient and medieval roots of George Berkeley’s thought, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4077/
3 Vervaeke, J., Lillicrap, T. P., & Richards, B. A. (2009). Relevance realization and the emerging framework in Cognitive Science. Journal of Logic and Computation, 22(1), 79–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exp067
4 Lévy, C. (2022, August 16). Philo of Alexandria. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philo/
5 Helmig, C., & Steel, C. (2020, August 3). Proclus. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/proclus/ 6 Carey, J. (2022, May 23). On Orthodox Panentheism, part 2: Preliminary evidence and the primary problem. Jesus and the Ancient Paths. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://jesusandtheancientpaths.com/2022/05/23/on-orthodox-panentheism-part-2-preliminary-ev idence-and-the-primary-problem/
7 If one takes seriously the arguments of this essay, and the implication that saints can become angels and principalities, then it makes sense that the principality of the first bishop of Athens, converted at Mars Hill after Paul’s discourse with the philosophers, would manifest himself in the world 400 years later in a student of Proclus, and to call him “Pseudo” is an anachronism.
8 Stephen Beale (n.d.). Which church fathers most influenced St. Thomas Aquinas? NCR. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://www.ncregister.com/blog/which-church-fathers-most-influenced-st-thomas-aquinas
9 Dionysius, Colm Luibheid, and Paul Rorem. Pseudo-Dionysius, the Complete Works. New York: Paulist Press, 1987. Pg. 77
10 Dionysius, Colm Luibheid, and Paul Rorem. Pseudo-Dionysius, the Complete Works. New York: Paulist Press, 1987. Pg. 154
11 Cross, R. (2022, January 18). Medieval theories of Haecceity. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/medieval-haecceity/
12 von, Balthasar Hans Urs, and Brian Daley. Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe According to Maximus the Confessor. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003. Pg. 339
13 Pageau, J. (2018, July 24). Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy Exist. YouTube. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXnef2Ltklg
14 Pageau, M. (2018). The Language of Creation: Cosmic Symbolism in Genesis: A commentary. self-published. 15 Also Psalm 15, Psalm 24, Genesis 2 (the rivers flowing from the garden), Ezekiel 28, Hebrews 12:22, and St. Ephrem “I gazed upon Paradise: the summit of every mountain is lower than its summit.” pg. 78
16 Spade, P. V., & Panaccio, C. (2019, March 5). William of Ockham. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ockham/
17 The actual quote is, “Et ses mains ourdiraient les entrailles du prêtre, Au défaut d’un cordon pour étrangler les rois.” (“His hands would plait the priest’s guts, if he had no rope, to strangle kings.”) from Denis Diderot, “Les Éleuthéromanes,” Poésies Diverses, p. 16 (1875).
18 Pluckrose, H. (2020, June 22). The evolution of Postmodern thought | Helen Pluckrose. YouTube. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoi9omtAiNQ
19 In fairness to the postmodernists, it should be noted that the argument presented here is not that postmodernism espouses an intrinsically anti-hierarchical metaphysic, but rather, an anti-hierarchical ethos (hermeneutic of suspicion, per Nietzsche). In contrast, the Christian
Krenshaw, Mary Pavan, Edward Said, Barbara Applebaum, Robyn D’Angelo, Ibram X Kendi etc.)metaphysic judges all hierarchies vis-a-vis the one, perfect hierarchy (hermeneutic of beauty, per John Vervaeke).
20 Summa theologiae. SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: Home. (n.d.). Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://www.newadvent.org/summa/ 
21 Alighieri, D., Lombardi, S., & Riondino, D. (2002). Dante Inferno. Garzanti.
22 Luke 1:46-55
23 YouTube. (2022, June 4). Jonathan Pageau & Bernardo Kastrup: Orthodoxy and the resurrection of the western mind, body, & soul. YouTube. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usFMBUTkaLk

Bibliography 

Alighieri, D., Lombardi, S., & Riondino, D. (2002). Dante Inferno. Garzanti. 

Bradatan, Costica (2003) On some ancient and medieval roots of George Berkeley’s thought, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4077/ 

Carey, J. (2022, May 23). On Orthodox Panentheism, part 2: Preliminary evidence and the primary problem. Jesus and the Ancient Paths. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from 

https://jesusandtheancientpaths.com/2022/05/23/on-orthodox-panentheism-pa rt-2-preliminary-evidence-and-the-primary-problem/ 

Cross, R. (2022, January 18). Medieval theories of Haecceity. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/medieval-haecceity/ 

Dionysius, Colm Luibheid, and Paul Rorem. Pseudo-Dionysius, the Complete Works. New York: Paulist Press, 1987. 

Downing, L. (2011, January 19). George Berkeley. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/berkeley/ 

Ephraem, Sebastian P. Brock, and Ephraem. Hymns on Paradise. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2010.

Hart, D. B. (2004). The beauty of the infinite: The aesthetics of christian truth. William B. Eerdmans. 

Helmig, C., & Steel, C. (2020, August 3). Proclus. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/proclus/ 

Lévy, C. (2022, August 16). Philo of Alexandria. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/philo/ 

Pageau, J. (2018, July 24). Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy Exist. YouTube. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXnef2Ltklg 

Pageau, M. (2018). The Language of Creation: Cosmic Symbolism in Genesis: A commentary. self-published. 

Pluckrose, H. (2020, June 22). The evolution of Postmodern thought | Helen Pluckrose. YouTube. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoi9omtAiNQ 

Spade, P. V., & Panaccio, C. (2019, March 5). William of Ockham. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ockham/ 

Stephen Beale (n.d.). Which church fathers most influenced St. Thomas Aquinas? NCR. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from 

https://www.ncregister.com/blog/which-church-fathers-most-influenced-st-tho mas-aquinas

Summa theologiae. SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: Home. (n.d.). Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://www.newadvent.org/summa/ 

Vervaeke, J., Lillicrap, T. P., & Richards, B. A. (2009). Relevance realization and the emerging framework in Cognitive Science. Journal of Logic and Computation, 22(1), 79–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exp067 

von, Balthasar Hans Urs, and Brian Daley. Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe According to Maximus the Confessor. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003. 

YouTube. (2022, June 4). Jonathan Pageau & Bernardo Kastrup: Orthodoxy and the resurrection of the western mind, body, & soul. YouTube. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usFMBUTkaLk

Matthew Wilkinson

Organist, Pianist, Conductor, Arranger, Recording Artist

Copyright © 2025 Divi. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy