Editing Apophatic theology (section)

===Western Christianity===
[[File:Hands_of_God_and_Adam.jpg|thumb|left|In ''[[The Creation of Adam]]'' painted by [[Michelangelo]] ({{Circa|1508}}–1512), the two index fingers are separated by a small gap ({{convert|3/4|in|cm}}):<ref>{{cite news |first=Tom |last=Lubbock |title=Buonarroti, Michelangelo: The Creation of Adam (1510) |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/great-works/buonarroti-michelangelo-the-creation-of-adam-1510-744396.html |date=January 5, 2007 |newspaper=[[The Independent]] |location=[[Northcliffe House]], [[Kensington]] |access-date=April 26, 2023}}</ref> some scholars think that it represents the unattainability of divine perfection by man.<ref>{{cite book |first=Raymond |last=Tallis |author-link=Raymond Tallis |title=Michelangelo's Finger. An Exploration of Everyday Transcendence |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rYEmqPH8fvgC |year=2010 |publisher=[[Atlantic Books]] |location=Ormond House in [[Bloomsbury]], [[London Borough of Camden]] |pages=[https://books.google.com/books?id=rYEmqPH8fvgC&dq=%22The+Creation+of+Adam%22%22At+the+centre%22%22are+two+fingers+separated+by+a+small+gap%22%22It+represents+the+moment+after+the+separation+of+God+and+man%22%&pg=PT5 v]-[https://books.google.com/books?id=rYEmqPH8fvgC&dq=%22The+index+fingers+are+the+final+point+at+which+separation+takes+place%22&pg=PT6 vi] |isbn=978-1-848-87552-4}}</ref>]]

Negative theology has a place in the Western Christian tradition as well. The 9th-century theologian [[Johannes Scotus Eriugena|John Scotus Erigena]] wrote:

{{blockquote|We do not know what God is. God Himself does not know what He is because He is not anything [i.e., "not any created thing"]. Literally God {{em|is not}}, because He [[transcendence (religion)|transcends]] [[being]].<ref>[https://www.google.com/search?&tbm=bks&q=Eriugena+%22We+do+not+know+what+God+is.+God+Himself+does+not+know+what+He+is+because+He+is+not+anything.+Literally+God+is+not%2C+because+He+transcends+being%22 Quote] on [[Google Books]].</ref>}}

When he says "He is not anything" and "God is not", Scotus does not mean that there is no God, but that God cannot be said to exist in the way that creation exists, i.e. that God is uncreated. He is using apophatic language to emphasise that God is "other".<ref>{{cite book|last1=Indick|first1=William|title=The Digital God. How Technology Will Reshape Spirituality |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=C0PYBgAAQBAJ |date=2015|publisher=[[McFarland & Company|McFarland]] |location=[[Jefferson, North Carolina]] |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=C0PYBgAAQBAJ&dq=%22We+do+not+know+what+God+is.+God+Himself+does+not+know+what+He+is+because+He+is+not+anything.+Literally+God+is+not,+because+He+transcends+being.+%E2%80%94John+Scotus+Erigena%22&pg=PA179 179] |isbn=978-0-786-49892-5}}</ref>

Theologians like [[Meister Eckhart]] and [[John of the Cross]] exemplify some aspects of or tendencies towards the apophatic tradition in the West. The medieval work, ''[[The Cloud of Unknowing]]'' and John of the Cross' ''[[Dark Night of the Soul]]'' are particularly well known. In 1215 apophatism became the official position of the [[Catholic Church]], which, on the basis of [[Religious text#Christianity|Scripture]] and [[Sacred tradition|church tradition]], during the [[Fourth Council of the Lateran|Fourth Lateran Council]] formulated the following [[Dogma in the Catholic Church|dogma]]:

{{blockquote|Between Creator and creature no [[Analogy|similitude]] can be expressed without implying an even greater [[Difference (philosophy)|dissimilitude]].<ref>''[[Catechism of the Catholic Church|CCC]]'' [https://web.archive.org/web/20200625021339/http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:UHEmtAWsIFsJ:www.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c1.htm+%22between%2BCreator%2Band%2Bcreature%2Bno%2Bsimilitude%2Bcan%2Bbe%2Bexpressed%2Bwithout%2Bimplying%2Ban%2Beven%2Bgreater%2Bdissimilitude%22%2217%2BLateran%2BCouncil%2BIV%3ADS%2B806%22 43].</ref><ref>{{in lang|la}} ''[[Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum]]'' [https://web.archive.org/web/20210309022010/http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:catho.org/9.php%3Fd%3Dbxw+806+%22Inter+Creatorem+et+creaturam+non+potest+similitudo+notari,+quin+inter+eos+maior+sit+dissimilitudo%22 806].</ref><ref>{{in lang|la}} ''CCC'' [https://web.archive.org/web/20210311174322/http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:www.vatican.va/archive/catechism_lt/p1s1c1_lt.htm+43+%22Inter+Creatorem+et+creaturam+non+potest+similitudo+notari,+quin+inter+eos+maior+sit+dissimilitudo%22 43].</ref>}}

====The {{lang|la|via eminentiae}}====
{{Main|Analogia entis}}
{{see also|Credo ut intelligam|Fides et ratio}}
[[Thomas Aquinas]] was born ten years later (1225–1274) and, although in his {{lang|la|[[Summa Theologiae]]}} he quotes Pseudo-Dionysius 1,760 times,<ref>{{citation |last=Ware |first=Kallistos |author-link=Kallistos Ware |year=1963 |title=The Orthodox Church |page=[https://archive.org/details/orthodoxchurchac00ware/page/73 73] |place=London |publisher=Penguin Group |isbn=0-14-020592-6 |url=https://archive.org/details/orthodoxchurchac00ware/page/73 }}</ref> stating that "Now, because we cannot know what God is, but rather what He is not, we have no means for considering how God is, but rather how He is not"<ref>[https://www.ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/FP/FP003.html ''ST'' 1a, q.3, prologue] (Benziger Bros. edition, 1947). Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=White |first=Roger M. |title=Talking about God. The Concept of Analogy and the Problem of Religious Language |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=I6gQ5BNABl8C |year=2010 |publisher=[[Ashgate Publishing]] |location=[[Farnham]] |isbn=978-1-409-40036-3 |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=I6gQ5BNABl8C&dq=%22theologia+negative%22%22Now,+because+we+cannot+know+what+God+is,+but+rather+what+He+is+not,+we+have+no+means+for+considering+how+God+is,+but+rather+how+He+is+not%22&pg=PA189 189]}}</ref> and leaving the work unfinished because it was like "[[Thomas Aquinas#Late career and cessation of writing (1272–1274)|straw]]" compared to what had been revealed to him,<ref>{{cite book |last=Murray |first=Paul |chapter=10. The collapse, the silence |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MWMDAAAAQBAJ&q=%2210.+The+collapse,+the+silence%22&pg=PA27 |title=Aquinas at Prayer. The Bible, Mysticism and Poetry |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MWMDAAAAQBAJ |year=2013 |publisher=[[A & C Black]] |location=London |isbn=978-1-441-10755-8}}</ref> his reading in a [[Aristotelianism|neo-Aristotelian]] key{{sfn|Przywara|2014|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=Fc9RAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA38&dq=%22Thomas+Aquinas+stands+out+as+Aristotle's+most+important+medieval+commentator+—+both+for+having+clarified+received+notions+of+analogy+and+for+assessing+its+theological+uses%22 38 ("Thomas Aquinas stands out as Aristotle's most important medieval commentator – both for having clarified received notions of analogy and for assessing its theological uses")]}} of the conciliar declaration overthrew its meaning inaugurating the "analogical way" as {{lang|la|[[wikt:tertium|tertium]]}} between {{lang|la|via negativa}} and {{lang|la|via positiva}}: the {{lang|la|via eminentiae}}. In this way, the believers see what attributes are common between them and God, as well as the unique, not human, properly divine and not understandable way in respect of which God possesses that attributes.<ref>Thomas Aquinas, ''Quaestiones disputatae de potentia'', q. 7, a. 5, ad 2. Cited in {{cite web|author=[[International Theological Commission]]|url=https://www-vatican-va.translate.goog/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_cti_doc_20111129_teologia-oggi_it.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=it&_x_tr_pto=wapp|trans-title=Theology Today: Perspectives, Principia and Criteria|title=La teologia oggi: prospettive, principi e criteri|language=it,en|year=2012|website=Holy See}} (at n°. 97)</ref>

According to Adrian Langdon:

{{blockquote|The distinction between univocal, equivocal, and analogous language and relations corresponds to the distinction between the {{lang|la|via positiva}}, {{lang|la|via negativa}}, and {{lang|la|via eminentiae}}. In Thomas Aquinas, for example, the {{lang|la|via positiva}} undergirds the discussion of univocity, the {{lang|la|via negativa}} the equivocal, and the {{lang|la|via eminentiae}} the final defense of analogy.{{sfn|Langdon|2014|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=f2JNAwAAQBAJ&dq=%22The+distinction+between+univocal,+equivocal,+and+analogous+language+and+re-+lations+corresponds+to+the+distinction+between+the+via+positiva,+via+negativa,+and+via+eminentiae%22&pg=PA189 189a]-[https://books.google.com/books?id=f2JNAwAAQBAJ&dq=%22In+Thomas+Aquinas,+for+example,+the+via+positiva+undergirds+the+discussion+of+univocity,+the+via+negativa+the+equivocal,+and+the+via+eminentiae+the+final+defense+of+analogy%22&pg=PA189 189b]}}}}

According to ''[[Catholic Encyclopedia]]'', the ''Doctor Angelicus'' and the [[Scholasticism|scholastici]] declare that:

{{blockquote|God is not absolutely unknowable, and yet it is true that we cannot define Him adequately. But we can conceive and name Him in an "analogical way". The perfections manifested by creatures are in God, not merely nominally ({{lang|la|equivoce}}) but really and positively, since He is their source. Yet, they are not in Him as they are in the creature, with a mere difference of degree, nor even with a mere specific or generic difference ({{lang|la|univoce}}), for there is no common concept including the finite and the Infinite. They are really in Him in a supereminent manner ({{lang|la|eminenter}}) which is wholly incommensurable with their mode of being in creatures. We can conceive and express these perfections only by an analogy; not by an analogy of proportion, for this analogy rests on a participation in a common concept, and, as already said, there is no element common to the finite and the Infinite; but by an analogy of proportionality.<ref>{{Catholic Encyclopedia |last=Sauvage |first=George |inline=1 |wstitle=Analogy}}</ref>}}

Since then [[Thomism]] has played a decisive role in resizing the negative or apophatic tradition of the [[magisterium]].<ref name="payton">{{cite book |last=Payton |first=James R. Jr. |title=Light from the Christian East. An Introduction to the Orthodox Tradition |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=urE6DAAAQBAJ |chapter="POSITIVE" AND "NEGATIVE" THEOLOGY" (pp. 72-78) |date=2007 |publisher=[[InterVarsity Press|IVP Academic]] |location=[[Downers Grove, Illinois]] |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=urE6DAAAQBAJ&q=%22%E2%80%9CPOSITIVE%E2%80%9D+AND+%E2%80%9CNEGATIVE%E2%80%9D+THEOLOGY%22%22Western+Christian%22%22%E2%80%9Cpositive%E2%80%9D+%28also+called+%E2%80%9Ccataphatic%E2%80%9D%29+theology+and+%E2%80%9Cnegative%E2%80%9D+%28or+%E2%80%9Capophatic%E2%80%9D%29+theology%22&pg=PA72 |isbn=978-0-830-82594-3}}</ref><ref>See for example the [[Regensburg lecture]] delivered on 12 September 2006 by [[Pope Benedict XVI]] at the [[University of Regensburg]] in Germany: [https://web.archive.org/web/20210308025410/https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg.html+%22as+the+Fourth+Lateran+Council+in+1215+stated+-+unlikeness+remains+infinitely+greater+than+likeness,+yet+not+to+the+point+of+abolishing+analogy+and+its+language%22 "as the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 stated – unlikeness remains infinitely greater than likeness, yet not to the point of abolishing analogy and its language."]</ref>