richard o' st. victor

so here's the thing about richard st. victor (it'd be funny if he looked like the guy on the cover of this book, huh?). at least according to g. zinn, he's writing in the 12th century as one of the 2nd generation leaders of his monastery in france and at a moment in history when people, apparently, felt a real need to organize and systematize how contemplation works. he is concerned to relate imagination, reason and faith, it seems. starts to sound a bit like ol' thomas aquinas who, really, does not end up having much respect of my new friend rsv.

okay. so, in what zinn guesses is rsv's more mature work, rsv wants to think about how we can think about the trinity. its interesting that he leaves this final systemization of this squirrely doctrine to the end of his life. he tells us he wants to use reason to explain the trinity but only proceeds to show the necessary plurality of god's personhood. he uses beautiful community-oriented language that leaves me thinking he's more concerned with teaching his community how to live in love and charity than anything else. its almost like the trinity becomes a metaphor for how we ought to live in charity together.

but that's not completely fair because he continues to detail how supreme goodness shows trinity, happiness declares trinity and then glory confirms trinity. agh...this obsession with threes! starts to make me think the conversation ought to be more anthroplogical/cultural than theological! anyhow, to return: it seems necessary to lay out the top two ways that rsv sees contemplation happening:
#5: "above reason, but not beyond reason" &
#6: "above reason & seemingly beyond reason."

these two are almost a dialectic which humans must (and, through much disciplined contemplation are able to) move between in order to catch a glimpse of trinity.

it also seems that the creed of Athansius falls in the realm of #6. the legitimacy & problematic nature of that is a far different paper.

so...what if rsv's real intent here is to push at #5 as far as it bumps into #6, though they are necessarily like the human/adam and god--ever and infinitely connected, though never touching. its like the two cherubims that are metaphors for each of these: the look to each other, holding these tensions, looking for ways to achieve both/and.

ah, the mystics. beautiful and confusing and startling all in one. kind of like the trinity.