In this post I want to turn, once again, to Maximus the Confessor's treatment of virtue. As I mentioned in Part 2, Maximus argues that every created person is a small (finite) logos that participates in the greater (Infinite) Logos. Christ is the ground of all created being as described in Colossians 1: "All things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together." As Maximus says (Note: lower case logos, and the plural logoi, refers to created being and capital Logos refers to Christ):
Because [Christ] held together in himself the logoi before they came to be, by his gracious will he created all things visible and invisible out of non-being...a logos preceded the creation of human beings [and] a logos preceded everything that receives its becoming from God...Through this Logos there came to be both being and continuing to be, for from him the things that were made came to be in a certain way and for a certain reason, and by continuing to be and by moving, they participate in God. For all things, in that they came to be from God, participate proportionally in God...
Again, this is the point I've been making over the last few posts, how the existence of the individual person (their logos) flows out of the ontological ground of the Logos. Well-being is achieved when your logos becomes attuned to the Logos.
Must this attunement, however, be explicitly confessional? What is the relationship between belief in the Logos and well-being?
Maximus argues that, since our being is rooted in Christ, all virtue flows from that ontological ground. Maximus writes:
There can be no doubt that the one Word of God is the substance of virtue in each person. For our Lord Jesus Christ himself is the substance of all the virtues...It is evident that every person who participates in virtue as a matter of habit unquestionably participates in God, the substance of virtues. Whoever by his choices cultivates the good natural seed shows the end to be same as the beginning and the beginning to be the same as the end. Indeed the beginning and the end are one...The inclination to ascend and to see one's proper beginning was implanted in man by nature.
Due to our existence being grounded in Christ there is a natural and universal logic to our flourishing. An "inclination to ascend" toward God is "implanted" in humanity "by nature." Maximus calls this the "good natural seed" of human virtue. Consequently, when we "participate in virtue" we "participate in God" who is the "substance of all virtue." Virtue names those locations where we make contact with our ontological ground.
God makes this easier, Maximus argues, by causing our movement away from him to be painful and a source of suffering. As Maximus states, "it is only when we have been taught by suffering that we who love non-being can regain the capacity to love what is." This is the sermon of Sophia, how those who despise the ground of being come to injure themselves.
The point to be observed is that a capacity for virtuous living is given to all of humanity as a natural endowment. An inclination to ascend to God has been implanted in humanity by nature. Since we exist in Christ we can participate in virtue, which is necessarily a participation in God.
If we accept Maximus' argument the virtue of non-believers doesn't present a problem. All virtue, no matter where we find it, exists because it is making contact with our ontological ground. That's how we recognize virtue as virtue, as something good, because it is a participation in God.
Of course, this raises another question. If all virtue comes from God, no matter where we find it, then does confession and explicit belief in Christ add anything to our spiritual development and flourishing?
I'll turn to that question in the next post.
