Home     The Theology of the Body    Resources    Articles    Essays    Links     Email

A Presentation on the Role of Pride In the Systems of Plotinus and Augustine With a Response from Christian Monasticism

By: Br. Silas Henderson OSB

In the novel The Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, James Joyce writes:

He [Stephen] burned to appease the fierce longings of his heart before which everything else was idle and alien.  He cared little that he was in mortal sin, that his life had grown to be a tissue of subterfuge and falsehood.  Beside the savage desire within him to realize the enormities which he brooded on nothing was sacred.  He bore cynically with the shameful details of his secret riots in which he exulted to defile with patience whatever images attracted his eyes.  By day and by night he moved among distorted images of the outer world.[1]

 In this passage, Joyce is speaking about the very human experience of sin and its tendency to grow and progress, directing the soul away from a right vision of God and creation. 

For centuries mankind has struggled with the notion of evil and separation from that which is understood to be the Ultimate Good.  The ancient neo-Platonist philosopher Plotinus speaks of a descent of the Soul and Tolma in the development of his theory of emanation and his works had a profound impact on the thought of Augustine of Hippo, whose own presentation of sin shaped the Christian conception of sin down to our present day.  These two men, in seeking to understand man’s separation from that Good, arrived at a philosophical system that shared foundational elements with Plotinus relying on reason (ratio) and Augustine being guided by Faith (fides).  A key element in their schema was the human tendency of pride.

As the early Christian community, guided by the Jewish and newer Christian Scriptures developed its own understanding of separation from God, it sought to find a way for man to overcome the tendency toward the sin of pride and its consequences.  The Egyptian deserts that gave birth to Christian monasticism became the battle-ground where early hermits, monks and nuns struggled with the most basic elements of human nature, particularly sin and the “moral triad” of pride (superbia), curiosity (curiositas), and concupiscence (concupiscentia)[2].  The later, more formal monastic system, that found its great representative in Benedict of Nursia (ca. 480-547), never lost sight of this early commitment to conquering self-will and man’s tendency toward a proud self-assertion.  This paper will seek to illustrate the relationship of the Tolma of Plotinus and the presentations of pride in Augustine and the place of pride within the context of early Christian monasticism.  It will also examine the potential of the monastic life to serve as an antidote for man’s misdirection of will (i.e. his preference for that which is other than the Ultimate Good).

The Tolma of Plotinus and Separation from the One

The neo-Platonist philosopher Plotinus was born in Egypt in 203 or 204 A.D.[3]  Studying under various professors at Alexandria, ultimately finding his way to Ammonius Saccas[4] when he was twenty-eight years old.  At forty years of age, and having traveled to Persia, Plotinus traveled to Rome where he established a school and enjoyed the favors of high Roman officials. 

            When Plotinus was sixty years old he received, as a pupil, Porphyry, who later wrote a life of Plotinus and it was Porphyry who attempted organize the writings of Plotinus in a systematic form.  Plotinus’ works, divided into six books with nine chapters each, came to be known as the Enneads.

            Plotinus was said to have had a “pleasant and eloquent oral style”[5] and he came to be recognized as a sort of spiritual director.  “He had many friends and no enemies, and though his personal life was ascetic, he was gentle and affectionate in character.”[6]  Plotinus possessed a deep spiritual life and even seemed to experience ecstatic unions with God.[7]  These mystical experiences and his own belief in the individual soul’s ability to be reunited with the ultimate Good had a profound, shaping impact on his teachings.

            Plotinus divides the cosmos into four realms, with the One, Nous, and Soul forming the “Divine Triad”, and a fourth hypostasis, Matter.  “All matter and multiplicity emanates from the One… The One creates Nous out of abundance.  Without diminishing Nous, Soul emerges.  Matter, the lowest level, emanates from Soul.”[8]

The Supreme Being in the philosophical system of Plotinus, the “One”, is absolutely transcendent: “He is the One, beyond all thought and all being, ineffable and incomprehensible.”[9]  The One is without need, a perfect unity in itself: a monad, a perfect simplicity.  In describing the One as a simplicity, Plotinus seeks to emphasize that it lacks distinguishing qualities.  In the schema of Plotinus, all proceeds from the One.  This belief is based on a philosophical Principle of Prior Simplicity which posits that “everything made up of parts, every composite thing, depends and derives in some way from what is not composite, what is simple.”[10] 

Neither essence nor being can be predicated of the One.  “The One cannot be identical with the sum of individual things, for it is these individual things which require a Source or Principle, and this Principle must be distinct from them and logically prior to them.”[11]  Therefore the One cannot be said to exist, but is prior to all existents.[12]  This does not mean that the One is nothing or non-existent; it is, rather, to say that the One transcends all being.  “The concept of being is drawn from the objects of our experience, but the One transcends all those objects and consequently transcends also the concept that is founded on those objects.”[13]

While Plotinus is unwilling to ascribe to the One any positive attributes, he does allow that Goodness may be attributed to the One.[14]  It is this Goodness that compels the One to be fecund, that is to give freely of itself.  The fecundity of the One is a giving of necessity: as the ultimate Good the One must give freely of itself.[15] 

A free creative act would imply that God issues froth from His state of tranquil self-containedness, and this Plotinus would not admit: he maintained then, that the world issues from God or proceeds from God by necessity, there being a principle of necessity that the less perfect should issue from the more perfect.[16]

In its giving forth of itself, the One, however, is not diminished in any way: the One remains untouched, undiminished, unmoved.

            We conclude that this Being is limitless and that in all the outflow from it there is no lessening, either in its emanation, since this also is the entire universe, nor in itself, the starting point, since it is no assemblage of parts (to be diminished by any outgo). (Ennead III.8.8.)

The first emanation from the One is Nous, i.e., Thought or Mind, “which is intuition or immediate apprehension, having a twofold object, (a) the One, (b) itself.”[17]  Since Nous, like the One, is eternal, this generation does not occur in time and it is in Nous that any multiplicity first appears; “it is one and many”[18]. 

All that is Intellectual-Principle [Nous] has its being—whole and all—in the place of intellection, what we call the Intellectual Cosmos: but there exists, too, the intellective powers included in its being, and the separate intelligences—for the Intellectual Principle is not merely one; it is one and many. (Ennead IV. 8.3.)

It is the “indefinite dyad”, an otherness or secondness, without which there is only the One.  In Nous exist the Ideas, not only of forms and classes but also of individuals.[19] 

Plotinus’s Nous combines the role of Plato’s Demiurge and his realm of ideas (Timaeus 28a-29d).  The Demiurge looks at the ideas, from which he remains separate, as he fashions the intelligible cosmos.  Nous works through everything like the Demiurge, but remains at rest like the ideas; Nous joins knower and known.[20]

It is an important element in the schema of Plotinus that it be understood that the Ideas are not separate from Nous.  Though difference exists in Nous, everything remains connected.  “Plotinus offers a compelling image: “the Intellectual-Principle itself “like some huge living organism contains potentially all the other forms”.  Hence soul exists in Nous, as does archetypal Matter.”[21]  Nous exists as mere potential, that is, it is unformed, having no essence. 

In what could be called the Exitus-Reditus aspect of Plotinus’ Divine Triad, Nous turns upon the One to contemplate that which is greater than itself, as Goodness is the beginning and the end.  In its turning back on the One, Nous contemplates this perfect Unity as a multiplicity of parts, thus receiving intelligence from its contemplation of that which is greater and also receiving the Forms.  In its contemplation, Nous obtains knowledge, being and vitality.  The One itself cannot be said to be omniscient because to predicate knowledge of the One would require a subject/object distinction that cannot exist in a perfect unity.  However it is the knowledge of Nous that constitutes the Divine Intellect.  Plotinus identifies the Forms or Ideas as the thoughts, the thinking activity, of the Divine Intellect.[22]

Proceeding from Nous is Soul (Psyche).  As Soul exists between sensible matter and the “supersensible levels”[23] of Nous and the One, it has two levels.  The first level, that close to Nous, is not connected directly with matter.  “Dwelling in a celestial body, the soul exists as soul.  It enjoys an unfettered relationship with Nous.  In the second level, physis (nature), souls fall into terrestrial bodies.  Nature is “last in soul” (Ennead IV. 4.13.).  Nature allows Soul and Matter to mingle.”[24]  Soul, as do Nous and the One, works as a fecund agent because it shares (although to a lesser degree) in the Goodness of the One.  It is temporal (i.e. experiencing successive moments of being) and in its desire to be fecund presses the Forms on the lower level of the material, thus serving to animate the material world.  Soul works as a unity in guiding and arranging the order of the world, yet operating in a downward motion, orienting itself more towards the material.  Soul has a natural and starting mid-rank position (mesē taxis) between the Intelligible World and bodiliness/form and while it should orient itself upwards in contemplation of Nous, this lower soul gives itself to the bodiliness of material form.

In accord with his conception of the emanative process as radiation of light, Plotinus pictures light as proceeding from the centre and passing outwards, growing gradually dimmer, until is shades off into that total darkness which is matter-in-itself, conceived as the privation of light…Matter, then, proceeds from the One (ultimately), in the sense that it becomes a factor in creation only through the process of emanation from the One; but in itself at its lowest limit, it forms the lowest stage of the universe and is the antithesis of the One.[25]

While Plotinus does see Matter, and ultimately the universe, as a privation, his depreciation of the visible universe is offset by his insistence on the unity and harmony of the cosmos bound together by Divine Providence.[26]

            In evaluating the desire of Nous and Soul for sustained/separated existence apart from that which is greater we discover “a willful desire for otherness, differentiation, temporal process, and self-determination”[27] which Plotinus called Tolma (Tolma).  Ennead V. 1(10).1 explicitly refers to Tolma as the origin of evil:

What can it be that has brought souls to forget the father, God, and, though members of the Divine and entirely of that world, to ignore at once themselves and It?

The evil has overtaken them has its source in self-will, in the entry into that sphere of process, and in that primal differentiation with the desire for self-ownership.

 The soul driven by Tolma is bold enough to desire something more than it already possesses.

In Plotinus, Tolma prompts the will to separate existence which is implicit in the very emanation and diffusion of the One.  Tolma contributes to a differentiation of One’s primal unity; such differentiation manifests itself on every level of the intelligible universe.  The Tolma of both Nous and Soul gives rise to increasing levels of plurality, variety, and distinctness.  For Plotinus, evil is equated with the very emergence of the manifold: he explicitly states that the manifold is less preferable to the absolute unity and simplicity of the One[28].[29]

[T]he giving-out of Soul from Intellect which is the next stage in the “unfolding” of derived being and depends upon the first, are acts of illegitimate self-assertion (Tolma).  All existence, in this way of looking at it, depends on a kind of radical original sin, a wish for separation and independence, of which Plotinus says explicitly in one passage that it would have been better if it had never been.[30]

            In the schema of Plotinus it is possible and desirable for the soul to transcend its fallen state, seeking a re-union with that which is greater, more Good than itself.  It is this union that Plotinus was said to have experienced in his own ecstatic experiences.  His is spiritual vision, Plotinus believes that “The soul, once seen to be precious, thus divine, you may hold the faith that by its possession you are already nearing God: in the strength of this power make upwards towards Him: at no great distance you must attain: there is not much between.”[31]  It is possible for the individual soul to reorient itself to contemplate the Upper or World Soul and transcend, if only for a short time, its own lesser state.  Herein lies a form of redemption within the system of Plotinus.  All can eventually be reunited with the One as a perfect unity and Good.

Augustine and the Sin of Pride

Although Saint Augustine (354-430) relies heavily on Scripture in his writings, Plotinian philosophy was influential in his works.  “His conception of beauty, his vision of God and belief in divine illumination, his emphasis on the soul, his insistence on the purification of the mind as a requirement for understanding truth, the view of evil as privation, his conception of time and eternity, and his desire for spiritual and intellectual community”[32] are all somehow grounded in Plotinus.  In evaluating Augustine’s early understanding of sin, particularly as it is presented in his work De Genesi contra Manichaeos libri II (388/389), we must examine Augustine’s conception of God and creation and humanity’s place therein. 

During his preparations for Baptism in 386-387, Augustine envisioned his act of conversion to Christianity as “taking place within a history of philosophic inquiry”[33].  It was his reading of Plotinus and Platonic philosophy that helped him to formulate both his search and the goal of that search.[34]  His understanding of Platonism allowed him to define evil not as the material substance that the Manichees believed in but as a “deficiency or lack that was to be rendered intelligible in terms of an overall universal order such as had been described by Plotinus”[35].  Platonism also enabled Augustine to understand the soul as immortal and immaterial and God Himself as the soul’s patria and as knowable.[36]

  In Augustine’s conception of sin (peccatum), he speaks of a willful misdirection of love and he makes a clear distinction between sin and evil, with evil referring to a “subversion or corruption of the original order of creation”[37].  It is in this understanding of sin as a misdirection that we can find a parallel to the Tolma of Plotinus[38].  Augustine identified pride (superbia) as both the chief sin and as the root of all sin citing the Scriptural text of Eccleiasticus/Sirach 19:9-14 as support for this statement:

⁹Why are dust and ashes proud?

            Even during life man’s body decays;

¹⁰A slight illness—the doctor jests,

            A king today—tomorrow he is dead.

¹¹When a man dies, he inherits corruption;

            Worms and gnats and maggots.

¹²The beginning of pride is man’s stubbornness

            In withdrawing his heart from his Maker;

¹³For pride is the reservoir of sin,

            A source which runs over with vice;

Because of it God sends unheard-of afflictions

            And brings men to utter ruin.

¹⁴The thrones of the arrogant God overturns

            And establishes the lowly in their stead.

Augustine writes:

But if the soul should abandon God and turn to itself and will to enjoy its own power as if without God, it swells up with pride, which is the beginning of every sin.  When punishment has followed upon this sin, it will learn by experience the difference between the good which it abandoned and the evil into which it has fallen.[39] (De Genesi 2.9)

            Within the Ordo (the Divine Order of the cosmos) of Augustine, the soul holds a mid-rank position between the spiritual and material/sensible realms of creation, with man himself being a composite of spiritual and material substances.  This Ordo is founded on the Neo-Platonic tradition with its hierarchy of emanations, however, Augustine is very clear in his belief of God’s free act of creation ex nihilo, abandoning the idea of emanation:

            -God—Absolute Being-Truth

            -Human Beings- medietas animae

            -World of Bodies

            The human person, this composite of soul and body, and all of creation, shares in the being of God but is distinct from God.  However, when the soul turns its gaze inward, it finds God within, in the memory wherein are contained an illumination of the transcendent realities, for “memory retains the image of God however deeply hidden”[40].  Man is called to realize freedom of the will so that he may ultimately embrace his end: delight in God.  However, because of our misdirected will, the result of our prideful preference for power without God[41], man experiences a concupiscence (misdirected desire) and a darkening of the intellect- a loss of the ability to make sound moral judgments.  Our human reason fails to recognize that which is morally good and our capacity to make moral insights and decisions is lessened.  “By means of the “evil will” (mala voluntas), the soul turns from God and directs itself toward the possession of lesser goods.”[42]

What does this mean but they were persuaded to refuse to be under God and to want rather to be in their own power without God?  Thus they refused to obey his law as if, by his prohibition, he jealously begrudged them an autonomy that had no need of his interior light, but used only their providence, like their own eyes, to distinguish good and evil.  This is what they were persuaded to do: to love to  excess their own power. (De Genesi 2. 15)

            As in Plotinus, it is ultimately the desire for otherness, a “standing away”[43] from God which amounts to rebellion against Divine Authority.  However, Plotinian Tolma is an implicit part of the emanation of the One, while in Augustine’s schema, the preference for that which is not God is rooted in Augustine’s understanding of original sin (peccatum originale).  For Augustine, man allows his attention and energy to focus on those things that are without and, as a result, man seeks his ultimate delight in the material world.  Mankind’s inclination toward sin is established by Augustine in a causal relationship: “The reason why human beings have the pervasive inclination to evil—evidence of their hostility to God—thwarting their moral decision and action is because of Adam’s sin.”[44]  Augustine believed that the prideful inclination to sin remains a permanent feature of human nature even after original sin has been removed from the soul in baptism, as a result, human sin and the misdirection of the soul are almost inevitable.  “The idea of an inherited sin served an explanatory function for why sin is universal, and thus the universal need for redemption.”[45]

Within Augustine’s exposition of sin, we find a triad of sins based on the “triple concupiscence” of the First Epistle of John.  “Concupiscentia [concupiscence], curiositas [curiosity], and superbia [pride] are, assuredly, terms which would seem to derive from the Johannine concupiscentia carnis, concupiscentia oculorum, and ambitio saeculi to which Augustine later on explicitly relates them.”[46]

Do not love the world or things of the world.  If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not with him.  For all that is in the world, sensual lust, enticement of the eyes, and a pretentious life, is not from the Father but is from the world. 

(I John 2:15-16)

For Both Plotinus and Augustine, it is both possible and desirable for the individual soul to rise above its fallen state.  For Plotinus this meant passing beyond virtue to the One/the Good, who is above virtue.[47]  In the system of Augustine, and within the Christian system in general, this means a death to one’s self-will and a growth in virtue and grace.  However, in both schools, this is an ascetical process or reorientation and discipline.  This is the ultimate religion of Plotinus[48] and the heart of the monastic tradition of Catholic Christianity, to which Augustine made contributions with his Rule, his sermons and other writings.

Christian Monasticism and Pride

            The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, “hatred of God comes from pride.  It is contrary to love of God, whose goodness it denies, and whom it presumes to curse as the one who forbids sins and inflicts punishments.”[49]  In these strong words, the Catholic Church, drawing on centuries of theological and spiritual tradition, states very clearly the evil nature of pride and its effect on the Christian life.  However, because pride lay at the root of the original sin inherent in all men and women, we are constantly faced with this tendency for self-preference and preferment.  It was this pride that allowed James Joyce’s character in The Portrait of the Artist of the Young Man to revel in his sins, caring little for the state of his soul.  It is pride that compels men and women to commit many of the sins excused by society as simple ambition or the desire to “get-ahead”.  However, the Church has continually condemned this tendency inviting men and women of all times and places to strive to overcome our human frailty and misdirection of will.

            This desire to grow, to conquer human nature, lay at the heart of Christian Monasticism.  The structures, theologies, philosophies and traditions of monasticism, a lay movement, invite and challenge the monk to rise above his pride and ambition, excessive curiosity and unrestrained concupiscence[50].    Within the Benedictine tradition the vows of Obedience, Stability and Conversatio Morum[51], wearing the habit, community rank, the hours of prayer, and a spirit of sacrifice and penance, all serve to facilitate our experience of God[52] and compel the monk to live for something beyond himself. 

            In their search to understand the meaning of sin and its consequences, the early Christian writers began to develop an ideological system that sought to combat man’s self-preference as it had come to be understood by the light of faith and relying on Sacred Scriptures.  Christian monasticism can be seen as the outgrowth of this system.

            Even before the time of Augustine, men and woman had realized that within humankind there is an underlying preference for self and lesser goods.  Some historians place the origins of the monastic movement in the mid-third century or even earlier.[53] 

The ascetic tradition in Christianity, on which the monastic movement is built, can of course be traced back to the New Testament.  Of particular importance was the tradition of virginity and celibacy that was grounded in the example and teaching of Jesus (Matthew 19:12) as well as in the writings of Saint Paul (I Corinthians 7)… What distinguishes the monastic movement from the earlier tradition of asceticism within Christianity is the practice of withdrawal from society.[54]

            The New Testament had a most profound effect on the early monastic movement and the relationship of the Church with society also played a major role in the development of the movement.  The persecutions preceding the acceptance of Christianity in the Roman Empire prompted many Christians to flee to avoid martyrdom and it seems that some of these banded together to form the nucleus of the earliest monastic communities.[55] The privations suffered in the desert would have contributed to the ascetic practices adopted by those living there.

            The end of these same persecutions has also been cited as a reason for the rise in monasticism.  “The monk came to replace the martyr as the hero of the early Church in its new triumphal condition.  When the triumph of the Church drove the demons from the cities, the new heroes of the faith pursued them to the desert, there to engage in single-handed combat.”[56]  While the martyrs undoubtedly held first place as heroes of the Church they were soon joined by virgins, who were also held in high regard.  By the end of the third century one writer refers to the virgins as martyrs and Athanasius, in his life of Anthony, refers to the virgins and martyrs “as testimony to the faith and teachings of Christ.”[57] 

            Very soon, monastic profession came to be seen as a second baptism, a place previously held by martyrdom. 

Martyrdom had earlier been seen as a substitute for baptism or, for those already baptized, as a second baptism.  When the monastic life came to be equated with or placed on the same level as martyrdom, it was but a short step to compare monastic profession to baptism… Just as baptism was held to forgive sins, so monastic profession came to be held to forgive sins… Since the opportunity for martyrdom no longer existed for those who wished to respond fully to the teaching and example of Christ, the development of monasticism may well have been in compensation for this, to provide an outlet for those who were not satisfied with mediocre Christianity.[58]

The notion of retreating or withdrawing from the world can be found in numerous pagan philosophies and schools.  Writers such as Cicero, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, and Plotinus, all wrote of retreat from the world for the sake of contemplation and peace of mind.  “In his life of Plotinus, Porphyry portrayed his master as loving to withdraw from the city.  It has been suggested that Athanasius had this work in mind when he composed his Life of Anthony.”[59]  With these pagan influences, the Scriptures[60] offered other precedents.

In the writings of Clement of Alexandria (d. ca. 200) we find the presentation of ideal of Christian man that was consistent with the Hellenistic ideal of one who has achieved contemplation of and unceasing union with the Godhead.[61]  In the Stromata, Clement stresses the importance of detachment from the world and this detachment is the fruit of knowing and contemplating the only good.  “Knowledge is purifying; it begins with repentance, separates from the passions and from what is purely pleasurable, and leads to a life of virtue.”[62]  He continues by saying that exercising control over one’s passions and the desire for good culminates in apatheia: a moderation and perfect calmness.[63]  Praise and self-oblation are the highest expression of love. “We glorify Him who gave himself in sacrifice for us, and we, in turn, sacrifice ourselves.”  The essential value in martyrdom is not the heroism of the act but the perfection of charity.[64]

By the end of the fourth century, the spiritual life came to be understood as the recovery of the divine image in man.[65]  “A man’s intention to live as a monk was the result of a personal decision”[66] and monastic writers, building on the system of Clement, such as Pachomius, Basil the Great, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory of Nyssa, Isaac of Syria, Athanasius of Alexandria, Origen, Evagrius Ponticus, and John Cassian, all developed the idea that the death of the monastic life, the search for apatheia (later called “purity of heart” by Cassian), and the common life of obedience, was the most effective and the most authentic expression of the Christian life.

It was within this theological and spiritual climate that Benedict of Nursia wrote his Rule[67].  Laying out in 73 relatively short chapters and a Prologue his vision of a strong monastic community, Benedict placed great emphasis on the idea that man is not called to live for himself.

Listen carefully, my son, to the master’s instructions, and attend them with the ear of your heart… The labor of obedience will bring you back to him from whom you had drifted by the sloth of disobedience.  This message of mind is for you, then, if you are ready to give up your own will, once and for all, and armed with the strong and noble weapons of obedience to do battle for the true King, Christ, the Lord.

Is there anyone here who yearns for life and desires to see good days?… What, dear brothers, is more delightful than this voice of the Lord calling to us?… We must, then, prepare our hearts and bodies for the battle of holy obedience to his instructions.  What is not possible to us by nature, let us ask the Lord to supply by the help of his grace.[68]

Here, very clearly, Benedict writing as a father to his children, lays out his vision of monastic life.  It is through the obedient performance of good works that we can hope to conquer pride and nature, relying on God’s grace rather than our own strengths or abilities, and attain eternal happiness, union with God.

            For Saint Benedict, no sin was more dangerous than that of pride and this prompts Benedict to direct that his monks rely on the will of the Abbot, who holds the place of Christ in the monastery[69], and strive to develop the virtue of humility.

Brothers, divine Scripture calls to us saying: Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled, and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.  In saying this, therefore, it shows us that every exaltation is a kind of pride, which the Prophet indicates he has shunned, saying: Lord, my heart is not exalted; my eyes are not lifted up and I have not walked in the ways of the great nor gone after marvels beyond me.[70]

It is only in developing the virtue of humility that the monk, and any person, can hope to conquer that tendency which leads one away from God.

            This humility is not an empty search for humiliations or low self-esteem.  It is an honest appraisal of who and what we are.  We must be able to honestly voice that we are creatures, relying on a creator for our sustained existence.  We are faulted, we don’t have the answers, and we can’t save ourselves.  The necessity of this painful self-evaluation and appraisal is what Benedict and the monastic fathers and mothers tried to community to their disciples.  This lay at the heart of the message of Christ and it is only in admitting our brokenness, our dependence, that we can allow God to lift us up beyond the fallen state that we are so proud to deny.  The monastic values stressed by Benedict were disseminated through the Christian world by the writings of later monastics such as Gregory the Great, Leander of Seville, Anselm of Canterbury, Romuald of Camaldoli, Bruno, Bernard of Clairvaux, and Aelred of Rievaulx.  

Conclusion and Reflection

            The preference for self-governance and independence has been regarded as the root of the evils of the created world by Plotinus and Augustine.  Their writings, relying on the two distinct lights of reason and faith, place pride in a central place in their schema for creation.  Despite their difference approaches to the questions of multiplicity and, most importantly, evil, they arrive at a profound realization: it is the mis-direction of the will towards that which is less that prevents creation from attaining its ultimate end.  That end is union with the supreme Good as it is understand in their systems. 

            This idea has strongly influenced the Christian tradition, particularly monasticism.  The early monastics accepted hardship as a necessary result of their flight to the desert but they came to place a high value on renunciation of worldly goods and rights.  They came to see this renunciation of freedom and privilege as a key aspect of their commitment to seek that which is greater than themselves.  As monastic theology and spirituality developed this idea moved beyond an aversion to the vice of pride to a search for the virtue of humility, seen by Saint Benedict of Nursia as the antidote for man’s pride.

            In the Beatitudes, as related in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus says, “Blessed are the clean of heart, they shall see God”[71].  I believe it could be said that it is pride that clouds our vision.  It is pride, with its preference for that which is lower, those base objects, attitudes and emotions that we seek to control, that all-too-often control us, that prevent us from seeing the face of God.  It seems somewhat ironic that while we, as Christians, expressing a belief rooted in very ancient philosophical concepts, claim that God is always within us and around us, and yet, we continue to seek those things which are not Him.  Our preference for that which is not-God, our sin, our desire for independence from His loving rule, clouds our vision.  It is only when we can divest ourselves of this preference that our eyes can be opened and we can realize our true dignity and worth.  Only then can we see the God who made us, sustains, and who calls us to union with himself.

Bibliography

Armstrong, Arthur H. The Architecture of the Intelligible Universe in the

Philosophy of Plotinus: An Analytical and Historical Study. Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1967.

---,  “Plotinus.” The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval

Philosophy. A.H. Armstrong, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967.

Augustine, Saint. On Genesis: Two Books on Genesis Against the Manichees and On the

Literal Interpretation of Genesis: an Unfinished Book. Roland J. Teske, S.J., transl. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1991.

Benedict of Nursia. RB 1980: The Rule of Saint Benedict in Latin and English with

Notes. Timothy Fry, ed. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1981.

Bowery, Anne-Marie. “Plotinus, The Enneads.” Augustine Through the Ages: An

Encyclopedia. Allan D. Fitzgerald, O.S.A., ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999.

Copleston, Frederick, S.J.. A History of Philosophy: Volume I: Greece and Rome- From

Pre-Socrates to Plotinus. New York: Image Books- Doubleday, 1993.

Cummings, Charles, O.C.S.O.. Monastic Pratices. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian

Publications, 1986.

Dreuille, Mayeul de, O.S.B.. Seeking the Absolute Love: The Founders of Christian

Monasticism. New York: Crossroads Publishing Company, 1999.

Hines, Brian. Return to the One: Plotinus’s Guide to God-Realization. Bloomington, IN:

Unlimited Publishing, 2004.

Joyce, James. A Portrait of the Artist As a Young Man. New York: Washington Street

 Press, 1988.

MacCormack, Sabine. “Classical Influences on Augustine.” Augustine Through the

Ages: An Encyclopedia. Allan D. Fitzgerald, O.S.A., ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B . Eerdmans Publishing, 1999.

O’Connell, Robert J. S.J. “The Plotinian Fall of the Soul in St. Augustine,” Traditio 19

(1963), 1-39.

O’Meara, Dominic J. Plotinus: An Introduction to the Enneads. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Plotinus. The Enneads. Stephen MacKenna, transl. Burdett, New York: Larson

Publications, 1992.

Rigby, Paul. “Original Sin.” Augustine Through the Ages: An Encyclopedia. Allan D.

Fitzgerald, O.S.A., ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B . Eerdmans Publishing, 1999.

Torchia, N. Joseph. “St. Augustine’s Treatment of Superbia and its Plotinian Affinities.”

Augustinian Studies 18 (1987), 66-80.

United States Catholic Conference. Catechism of the Catholic Church: Liberia Editrice

Vaticana. 2^nd Edition.  Washington, D.C.: U.S. Catholic Conference, 1997.

Wetzel, James. “Sin.” Augustine Through the Ages: An Encyclopedia. Allan D.

Fitzgerald, O.S.A., ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B . Eerdmans Publishing, 1999.

Wiley, Tatha. Original Sin: Origins, Developments and Contemporary Meanings. New

York: Paulist Press, 1999.