The Neoplatonic Soul of Theurgic Orthodoxy

Sensory theology and the sacredness of matter: the practical and textual evidence

---

As a long read, not all of this post will show up in your inbox. Click “read more” at the bottom to see the full post, or click here to view the full post in your browser.

Too many emails? Get these posts in the app instead: go to Settings, scroll to Newsletter Delivery, and select “Prefer app.”

---

First, a personal note.

My exploration of these topics began over a decade ago, when my then-employer at a language school asked me to prepare part of a cultural immersion course for visitors arriving to learn Modern Greek. I spread my wings at that school, developing new courses, and I will always be grateful to my then-boss, also a good friend, for giving me the freedom to experiment.

That was when I created the kernel that is now unfurling both here on Thyrathen and in my other related work. One element introduced visitors to Orthodox churches. The aim was to expose them to other dimensions of Greek reality beyond the food, sunshine, and how to order a coffee.

This was pitched as an effort to help them feel less intimidated by the “foreignness” of it all, especially to mostly Northern European and American participants.

We ran that course for several years; the feedback was always great. The unexpected benefit was the degree to which it helped me to reconnect with my heritage after many years abroad and in big cities. I got to apply my academic skills and natural curiosity to what I like to call an anthropological field observation of my environment and culture.

Especially as a third-culture kid (half-Greek, half-mixture of Central European/ British/ Commonwealth/ other Mediterranean), who had spent several years in what felt like exile abroad, it was like coming home all over again.

Lecturing on the symbolism in Greek icons in Gothenburg, Sweden, 2015, during an invited lecture tour where I drew strongly on my cultural immersion course to bring a fresh perspective to a very different culture.

In trying to make the course accessible for people totally unfamiliar with Greek life, I became more sensitive to how intensely the physical senses are engaged not just in ritual, but in the architecture of the ritual space set up for deeply performative communal ritual. Nothing is left to chance, and even the most ardent non-believer senses that something otherworldly is afoot. They may rationalise or dismiss it as something simply “foreign,” ostentatious, or exotic, but once experienced and perceived, it cannot be unseen.

I left that job after personal tragedy, and for a few years ran an art gallery and cultural space where I began developing a broader programme on Greek culture inspired by this experience. Before I could launch it, I lost that gallery to a second personal tragedy. Thyrathen represents my gradual return to the land of the living, and this is my third attempt to bring that project to fruition.

I live on a popular tourist island, and struggle with the way that as “Modern Greeks,” we are treated with a good deal of disrespect by a majority of visitors: over-entitled tourists and intellectuals alike. Recently a visitor, a supposed devotee of Orpheus who develops performances and practices based on what they call “Orphism," asked me to read a street sign for them, saying: “I can read Greek letters, but it’s just Modern Greek, isn’t it, so nothing like ‘real’ Greek.” The street sign simply featured place names…

I explained why Modern Greek is little more than an evolution of Koine, sarcastically adding that I didn’t realise we needed permission for our linguistic evolution.

Even more recently, a respected scholar of Alexandrian and Renaissance Hermeticism jubilated over an aspect of the Neopagan revival in Greece, saying “it’s so good to see the Greeks finally reconnecting with their roots.” She could not understand why I was more than a little snippy over that.

The painful truth is that Modern Greece is routinely dismissed as a faded irrelevance by those dreaming of their particular imagined antiquity, while we, the living descendants of “the Greeks” consistently have to hear how we are lesser, different, not good enough, and “won’t you get me a club sandwich with that cocktail?” Our history is misunderstood, misread, and misappropriated, our language and traditions dismissed, our very existence debated by those who have never set foot here.

Of course this is not universal, but it is prevalent. Among intellectuals contributing to the phenomenon, the embrace of Christianity and linguistic evolution seem to be the two key reasons why. I address some of the reasons in this piece.

In this little corner of the internet, I am dedicated to addressing these misconceptions through highlighting the incredible, radical evidence and stories I see around me daily.

Which brings me to today’s offering.

In short: Sensory rituals deriving straight from Neoplatonist theurgy are built into Orthodox ritual, resting on the sensory theology of Pseudo-Dionysios, codified into Orthodox theology. Their purpose is to tap into divine energies and commune directly with the divine; a sacralisation of the flesh with the aim of theosis.

This article summarises how each of the senses is targeted, what Neoplatonic principles underpin them, how they are reiterated in Orthodox theology and expressed in ritual practice. Upcoming pieces tackle each of the senses and attendant practices in more depth.

Housekeeping

I’ve struggled to balance engaging material for free and paying subscribers. Publishing two weekly articles of this depth is proving unsustainable, and multiple emails probably annoy readers.

So, I’ll publish one weekly long-read with a paywall after a substantial preview, allowing free subscribers a lengthy piece and committed readers access to deeper content all in one go. The paywalled content includes translations and analysis on a par with the free samples already published; see for example my recent pieces on the Voces Magicae and on Solomonic material in Orthodox and folk ritual.

Extra articles may occasionally appear if a piece grows unwieldy, and I’ll share snippets on Notes for juicy tidbits.

I hope this suits everyone, and I’m grateful for your support—please consider a paid subscription to help sustain this work!

---

The sacrality of the senses in Neoplatonism

The Neoplatonic cosmological structure is a hierarchical emanation from the One, an ineffable source, through consciousness (Nous), which contains intelligible forms of the divine, to the Soul, which mediates between the intelligible and material realms, and finally to the physical world.

The emanation of divinity is described as “rays” emanating through to the material world, touching all of Creation, whereby “higher” strata in the hierarchy transmit “divine light” to lower ones.

The aim of theosis, or divine union, involves the soul’s ascent back to the One, achieved through sensory experiences that connect the material realm with the divine.

Theurgic ritual engages the physical senses to attune with the divine rays. This acts as a conduit for direct experience of divine presence, purifying the soul and aligning it with higher realities. These sensory practices are essential for the soul’s return to unity with the divine, bridging the cosmological divide. Obviously there are mental and intellectual exercises attached, but today’s focus is on the senses.

Iamblichos provides explicit statements on each of the senses in turn, specifying: Τὰ αἰσθητὰ σύμβολα συνάπτουσι τὴν ψυχὴν πρὸς τὸ θεῖον (Sensible symbols connect the soul to the divine). ¹ Specifically:

• Sight: Αἱ εἰκόνες τῶν θεῶν καθιστῶσι τὸ θεῖον ὁρατόν (Images of the gods make the divine visible”);²

• Smell: Τὰ εὐώδη προσφέρματα καλοῦσι τὰς θείας δυνάμεις (Aromatic offerings summon divine powers); ³

• Sound: Ὁ ἦχος τῶν ἱερῶν ὕμνων ἀναφέρει τὴν ψυχὴν (The sound of sacred hymns elevates the soul)⁴

• Touch: Τὰ ἱερὰ ἀντικείμενα συνάπτουσι τὴν ψυχὴν πρὸς τὴν θείαν δύναμιν (Sacred objects unite the soul to divine power)⁵

• Taste: Ἡ βρῶσις τῶν ἱερῶν συνάπτει τὴν ψυχὴν πρὸς τὰς θείας δυνάμεις (Eating sacred foods conjoins the soul to divine powers)⁶

Proklos emphasises the primacy of vision: “Τὰ ὁρατὰ σύμβολα ἀναφέρουσι τὴν ψυχὴν πρὸς τὰ νοητά” (“Visible symbols raise the soul to the intelligible”).⁷

These sensory practices aimed to bridge the human and divine, a framework transmitted to Christianity by Pseudo-Dionysios the Areopagite.

Writing in the late 5th or early 6th century, Pseudo-Dionysios adapted theurgic principles for Christian liturgy, describing sensory rituals and sensible (intelligible via the senses) objects, as pathways to God: Τὰ αἰσθητὰ εἰκόνες τῶν νοητῶν, ἄγουσι πρὸς τὸ θεῖον (Sensible things are images of the intelligible, leading to the divine).⁸

For all the scholarly identification of his pseudepigraphy, Dionysian theology is foundational to Orthodox tradition, so the historical facts surrounding his identity matter less than his role in adapting theurgic principles for Christian liturgy and justifying them as pathways to God, since matter was seen as the work of the Creator, thus inherently sacred. Origen, despite being declared a heretic, is also partly redeemed in Orthodox thought. I should probably add that while Western theology rests heavily on St. Augustine through a scholastic lens, Augustine and scholasticism are not part of Orthodox theological reasoning. Details can wait for another time.

Dionysos’ Celestial Hierarchy framed liturgy as a sensory ascent, echoing Proklos: Ἡ ἱεραρχία διὰ τῶν αἰσθητῶν ἄγει εἰς τὴν θείαν ἕνωσιν (The hierarchy, through sensible things, leads to divine union).⁹

Dionysian sensory theology was streamlined and codified in Orthodox theology by 7th century Byzantine theologian Maximos the Confessor. He integrated Dionysian sensory theology into the doctrine of theosis,¹⁰ while Ioannes of Damascus (8th century), defended icons as sensory conduits.¹¹ Through liturgical reforms, Dionysios’ ideas were explicitly enshrined in Orthodox practice, shaping the sensory emphasis of Byzantine worship, which is maintained unchanged today.

The practice of this sensory theology culminates in the Divine Liturgy in an Orthodox Church, and is augmented by a series of optional practices by the faithful, all of which engage the five senses.

In the liturgical context, the experience begins the moment you enter: as I used to explain in my cultural immersion course, you must imagine (preferably experience) walking down the aisle, and the sensory bombardment with the heavy scent of incense swirling; candlelight flickering and illuminating the icons; echoing chants amplified by ingenuous engineering, and the physicality of rising and standing for much of the service (kneeling is rare and not encouraged in Orthodoxy; though some choose kneeling and prostration, it is a personal and unusual choice). Worshippers kiss the icons, touch relics and sacred fabrics, and engage taste through the Eucharist and other ritual meals.

In short, the Divine Liturgy involves the priest as hierurgist, facilitating the expression of the divine in matter, with the faithful as theurgists and theurgic receptacles simultaneously, consciously partaking of the divine rays mediated through the senses and the sacraments.

A core differentiation between Orthodox and other Christian practices is its communal nature - an entirely mandatory aspect. The individualisation of Western practices is an even more definitive distinction than is the Christology of Orthodoxy (even when we are speaking of Western applications of Neoplatonism among modern practitioners). I will tackle this in a separate offering as it is very revealing.

Below, I trace the precise theurgic antecedents to these ritual sensory practices, one sense at a time, and their role in theosis, whether Neoplatonic or Orthodox.

At the end I query whether the evidence is sufficient to claim that we really are looking at continuity or not (Spoiler: we are, and I do not use the term lightly).