Boniface VIII defined that “outside of [the church] there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins”. Could it be that, after the schism, its monastic adherents being deprived of habitual grace, they developed a pseudo-nepsis as a technique rather than a spiritual exercise which opens the soul not to the passive purgation of the senses but to the influence of separated substances opposed to God? This idea seems to be anticipated by Maritain in The Degrees of Knowledge:
What metaphysician, not to speak of the ancient Brahmins, has felt more keenly than Plotinus this burning desire for the supreme unity? But the ecstasy of Plotinus is not this supreme act, rather is it the vanishing point of metaphysics, and metaphysics alone does not suffice to procure it. The good fortune which Plotinus knew four times during the six years that Porphyry lived with him suggests a brief contact with an intellectual light in its nature of greater force, the spasm of a human mind in contact with a pure spirit. If we believe Porphyry when he says that his master was born the thirteenth year of the reign of Severus, that he heard Ammonius at Alexandria, that he came to Rome when he was forty, that he died in the Campagna, and when he describes to us his state of health and way of life, his kindness to the orphans committed to his care, his way of teaching, of composing, of pronouncing Greek, his handwriting, etc., why do we not believe him when he says that the philosopher was inspired by a daemon who lived with him, and which showed itself, in a sensible form, at his death? ‘At that moment a serpent passed under the bed in which he was lying and glided into a hole in the wall; and Plotinus gave up his soul in death.’ What would be astonishing would be if the metaphysical eras, there where Christ does not dwell, did not call forth some form of collusion with superhuman intellectual natures, rectores hujus mundi.
January 3, 2020 at 9:56 am
Are you thinking of any particular phenomena in their lives?
January 3, 2020 at 1:33 pm
A very charitable reading would be that in much of the ancient world the serpent or dragon was the symbol of wisdom (as opposed to being the representation of evil and deceit as in the Hebrew tradition), and therefore the apparition of the serpent at the death of Plotinus would be a sign of heaven’s approval at his being a wise man. This depends on how absolute or relative you consider spiritual symbols and metaphors to be. If the serpent is absolutely the symbol of evil and deceit, then we have to consider all the wisdom of the ancient philosophers to be of the evil one, at least inasmuch as these philosophers have often been associated with the serpent or dragon for their wisdom. That would destroy most of the interreligious niceties of Vatican II lol.
Also, his having a daemon tutor of course is not necessarily a demon, a fallen angel. Daemon is more generally a disembodied spirit, so it could refer to a good angel or even his guardian angel, or the soul of a dead ancient philosopher who preceded him.
January 3, 2020 at 11:36 pm
“outside of [the church] there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins”
January 4, 2020 at 9:42 am
I was once slightly disturbed by seeing a dragon on a Chinese chasuble. I remarked on this to the Chinese person who was showing the photograph or picture of it and he said that in their culture the dragon is the good guy who brings wisdom and good fortune. I said, ‘that’s what he wants you to think’. My Chinese friend was quite amused.
I think from Genesis + Apocalpyse we can take it that whenever a serpent or dragon appears in a context of discovering/offering wisdom, it is a bad sign.