Posts Tagged eastern orthodox tradition
Isaac of Nineveh: God’s Justice is not Rome’s Imperial ‘Iustitia’
Posted by Dallas Wolf in Monasticism, Patristic Pearls, Theology on July 4, 2014
Isaac of Nineveh – 7th century ascetic and mystic, born in modern-day Qatar, was made Bishop of Nineveh between 660-680. Here Isaac easily debunks the Western Latin notion that God’s righteousness, or “dikaiosyne theou“, is the same as secular Imperial Roman Justice, or “Iustitia“.
“How can you call God just when you read the parable of the laborers in the vineyard and their wages? ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong… I choose to give to this last as I give to you… do you begrudge my generosity?’ Likewise how can you call God just when you read the parable of the prodigal son who squanders his father’s wealth in riotous living, and the moment he displays some nostalgia his father runs to him, throws his arms around his neck and gives him complete power over all his riches? It is not someone else who has told us this about God, so that we might have doubts. It is his own Son himself. He bore this witness to God. Where is God’s justice? Here, in the fact that we were sinners and Christ died for us…” ~ Ascetic Treatises, 60
Concept of “Person” 5
Posted by Dallas Wolf in Concept of "Person" (series) on July 4, 2014
“The demand of the person for “absolute freedom” involves a ‘new birth’, a birth ‘from on high’, a baptism.”
So, Yannaras adds to our concept of “person” the necessity of “personal immediacy” and “direct personal relationship”. At the zenith of this immediacy and relationship, of course, is love.
In his book, “Being as Communion”, Studies in Personhood and the Church”, Orthodox theologian Metropolitan John ( Zizioulas) of Pergamon (1931- ), maintains that the theology of the person would not have been possible without the mystery of the Church. Zizioulas maintains that humanity, being made in the image of God, has an inherent God-given drive for “absolute freedom”. However, existing as an “absolute freedom”, completely free and independent of its nature, is humanly impossible. He tells us that, “the being of each human person is given to him; consequently, the human person is not able to free himself absolutely from his “nature” or from his “substance”, from what biological laws dictate to him, without bringing about his annihilation.” To Zizioulas, deification and union with God involves escaping this “given” and sharing in the “absolute freedom” of divine existence; not after death, but beginning in this life.
Zizioulas tells us that escaping our “given” being, or nature, can only be accomplished through a “new birth”: “The demand of the person for “absolute freedom” involves a ‘new birth’, a birth ‘from on high’, a baptism. And it is precisely the ecclesial being which ‘hypostasizes’ the person according to God’s way of being. That is what makes the Church an image of the Triune God.” God’s way of being, Zizioulas notes, includes that “absolute freedom” which humans seek, and the Christian shares in this way of being even during his/her earthly pilgrimage.
This is the way in which a concrete, free “person” can emerge. Our “person” can emerge due to the fact that Christ deified our human nature through his incarnation. His perfect human nature deified humankind’s fallen nature.
Maximus: “The scriptural Word knows of two kinds of knowledge of divine things.”
Posted by Dallas Wolf in Hesychasm - Jesus Prayer, Patristic Pearls, Theology on July 3, 2014
Maximus the Confessor (c. 580 – 662) was a 7th century Christian monk, theologian, and scholar who many contemporary scholars consider to be the greatest theologian of the Patristic era. Two of his most famous works are “Ambigua” – An exploration of difficult passages in the work of Pseudo-Dionysius and Gregory of Nazianzus, focusing on Christological issues, and “Questions to Thalassius” or “Ad Thalassium” – a lengthy exposition on various Scriptural texts. This quote is from the latter work. It affirms the primacy of experience in an authentic spiritual life.
Maximus the Confessor (c. 580 – 662)
“The scriptural Word knows of two kinds of knowledge of divine things. On the one hand, there is relative knowledge, rooted only in reason and ideas, and lacking in the kind of experiential perception of what one knows through active engagement; such relative knowledge is what we use to order our affairs in our present life. On the other hand, there is that truly authentic knowledge, gained only by actual experience, apart from reason and ideas, which provides a total perception of the known object through a participation by grace. By this latter knowledge, we attain, in the future state, the supernatural deification that remains unceasingly in effect.” ~ Ad Thalassium 60
Concept of “Person” 6
Posted by Dallas Wolf in Concept of "Person" (series) on July 3, 2014
“…because humanity is created in the image of God with the drive for “absolute freedom”, it ‘is able to carry with [it] the whole of creation to its transcendence’.”
The Incarnation of the Logos, the Son, the Christ, created the possibility for humankind to attain by adoption, what Christ is by nature. Zizioulas tells us:
“Thanks to Christ man can henceforth “subsist”, can affirm his existence as personal not on the basis of immutable laws of his nature, but on the basis of a relationship with God which is identified with what Christ in freedom and love possesses as Son of God with the Father. This adoption of man by God, the identification of his hypostasis with the hypostasis of the Son of God, is the essence of baptism.”
“The ecclesial hypostasis exists historically in this manner as a confirmation of man’s capacity not to be reduced to his tendency to become a bearer of individuality, separation and death. The ecclesial hypostasis is the faith of man in his capacity to become a person and his hope that he will indeed become an authentic person. In other words it is faith and hope in the immortality of man as a person.”
Zizioulas concludes his thoughts on the concept of “person” with the vision of humanity in communion and in an intimate love relationship with humankind, all creation, and with God:
“It becomes a movement of free love with a universal character, that is, a love which, while it can concentrate on one person as the expression of the whole of nature, sees in this person the hypostasis through which all men and all things are loved and in relation to which they are hypostasized. The body for its part as the hypostatic expression of the human person, is liberated from individualism and egocentricity and becomes a supreme expression of community – the Body of Christ, the body of the Church, the body of the eucharist.”
Zizioulas tells us that the concept of person, “implies the ‘openness of being,’ and even more than that, the ek-stasis of being, i.e., a movement toward communion which leads to transcendence of the boundaries of the ‘self’ and thus to freedom.” Moreover, because humanity is created in the image of God with the drive for “absolute freedom”, it “is able to carry with [it] the whole of creation to its transcendence.”
This is some pretty awesome spiritual thinking and imagery, isn’t it?
Zizioulas: “a person cannot be imagined in himself but only within his relationships.”
Posted by Dallas Wolf in New Nuggets on July 3, 2014
Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon (1931- ). He is the Chairman of the Academy of Athens. He has degrees from the University of Thessaloniki, studied at Harvard Divinity School, and received his PhD from the University of Athens. He has taught at the Universities of Athens, Edinburgh, Glasgow, and King’s College in London.
Met. John (Zizioulas)
“The significance of the person rests in the fact that he represents two things simultaneously which are at first sight in contradiction: particularity and communion. Being a person is fundamentally different from being an individual or a “personality,” for a person cannot be imagined in himself but only within his relationships.” ~ Being as Communion
Larchet: “God, in effect, does not grant healing unless it is asked of him…”
Posted by Dallas Wolf in New Nuggets on July 2, 2014
Dr. Jean-Claude Larchet (1949- ) is a French Orthodox theologian and is one of the foremost Patristics scholars writing today. Dr. Larchet converted to the Orthodox Church from the Roman Catholic Church at the age of 22. He holds doctorates in philosophy (1987) and theology (1994) from the University of Strasbourg.
Dr. Jean-Claude Larchet
“God, in effect, does not grant healing unless it is asked of him, for he has granted man free will and in all the cases respects his will and will not act against it. However, the will of the individual is not always fully at his disposal. . .Those who are disturbed in a significant way cannot even ask for their own healing or give evidence of their faith. . . And yet it is possible for such individuals to be delivered and healed thanks to the faith and the prayers of those around them or accompanying them, as well as to those of the saint to whom they are entrusted.” ~ Mental Disorders & Spiritual Healing: Teachings from the Early Christian East
The Concept of “Person” 7
Posted by Dallas Wolf in Concept of "Person" (series) on July 2, 2014
“… a person is one who has passed from the image to the likeness [of God].”
Theologian Metropolitan Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos (1945- ) in his aptly titled, “The Person in the Orthodox Tradition”, brings us back full circle with his exposition and analysis of the thinking of the church Fathers on the concept of “person”. He summarizes his thoughts by concluding:
“All of this shows that the holy Fathers used the term ‘Person’ to point to the particular Hypostases of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But they more often use the term ‘anthropos’, man, for people. Yet there are some indications that the term ‘person’ is sometimes also applied to a man. But this must be done with special care, for it is possible to give a philosophical and abstract character to the term ‘person’. Properly a man and a person is one who has passed from the image to the likeness. In the teaching of the holy Fathers, to be in the image is potentially to be in the likeness, and being in the likeness is actually the image. In the same way the man created by God and recreated by the Church through Holy Baptism, is potentially a person. But when, through his personal struggle, and especially by the grace of God, he attains the likeness, then he is actually a person.”
This means that the idea of the emergence and perfection of our “person” is integrally connected to the spiritual process of purification (katharsis), illumination (theoria), leading to union with God (theosis); or deification.
In summary, clearly there is a massive difference between an “individual” and a “person”.
The great Cappadocians first distinguished between “essence or nature” (ousia) and “person” (hypostasis) for us.
Vladimir Lossky then explained the idea of a “person” in terms of the “irreducibility of man to his nature” and its ability to transcend its nature while still including it.
Christos Yannaras introduced us to the idea that a “person” is necessarily relational; in “direct personal relationship and communion”, participating “in the principle of personal immediacy, or of the loving and creative force which distinguishes the person from the common nature”.
John Zizioulas then explained that it is only within the context of baptism, or new birth, that fallen humanity can achieve the “absolute freedom” to love and unite itself and creation with God. It is this “ecclesial being which ‘hypostasizes’ the person according to God’s way of being”, becoming “a movement of free love with a universal character”, “able to carry with [it] the whole of creation to its transcendence.”
The Concept of “Person” 8
Posted by Dallas Wolf in Concept of "Person" (series) on July 1, 2014
“It is the “person” that recognizes that it is created in the image of God with the single purpose to attain to His likeness…”
Hierotheos Vlachos then summed up for us all of the church Fathers’ thinking on the concept of “person”: “In the teaching of the holy Fathers, to be in the image is potentially to be in the likeness, and being in the likeness is actually the image. In the same way the man created by God and recreated by the Church through Holy Baptism, is potentially a person. But when, through his personal struggle, and especially by the grace of God, he attains the likeness, then he is actually a person.”
Hierotheos brings the concept of “person” into the context of 21st century society. He tells us that becoming a “person” takes some real work and effort, “The theology of man as a person can play an important part in contemporary society. To be sure, the person par excellence is God, but man too, as created in the image and likeness of God, can become a person… But, in order to reach this point it is necessary to live the asceticism of the person. The Fathers of the Church give great weight to this matter… If we do not look at the ascetic dimension of the human person, then we fail to see the patristic teaching concerning the person, no matter how many patristic references we may use.”
Vlachos concludes his thoughts by speaking about the value the teaching about the “person” can be to society: “The teaching about the human person will solve many problems which are arising every day. Love, freedom, the solution to social problems, anguish and insecurity, the eastern religions, dialogue, [and] psychological phenomena cannot be cured and confronted apart from the patristic teaching about man and about the person.”
Given what we have learned here, it is no surprise that the concept of “person” has been lost to “individual”-obsessed Western culture, including the church. The concept of “person” has been reduced to being equated with “individual”. I think all of us have had the uneasy feeling that the fundamental self-centeredness and worldliness inherent with modern society’s idolatry with “individuality” might somehow fall short of God’s plan for us. Now we can see that indeed it does and, better yet, why.
The “individual” is an instance of human nature; the self-centered, ego driven subsistence of human nature that pits itself and defends its interests against all other individuals. The “person” is not the same; it includes the “individual” and yet transcends it. It is the “person” that recognizes that it is created in the image of God with the single purpose to attain to His likeness in an intimate relationship of agape love for humankind and for all creation, bringing the created world along to union with God; “partaking of the divine nature”.
Lossky: “The man who is governed by his nature… is the least personal.”
Posted by Dallas Wolf in New Nuggets on June 30, 2014
Vladimir Lossky – (1903 – 1958) was one of the most influential Orthodox Christian theologians of the 20th century. He emphasized theosis as the main principle of Orthodox Christianity.
Vladimir Lossky (1903-1958)
“The man who is governed by his nature and acts in the strength of his natural qualities, of his ‘character’, is the least personal. He sets himself up as an individual, proprietor of his own nature, which he pits against the natures of others and regards as his ‘me’, thereby confusing person and nature.” ~ The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church
Justin: “Whatever things were rightly said among all men, are the property of us Christians”
Posted by Dallas Wolf in Patristic Pearls on June 28, 2014
St. Justin Martyr (c. 100 – 165) taught that all truth came from the Logos, or Word, of God. Therefore, whatever truth was stated by any human being at any time, anywhere, was the result of the influence of the immanent Logos within him/her; and was, therefore, Christian. It was later generations of Christians that claimed for the institutional Christian church a total monopoly on truth as its sole source and repository… as it does to this day.
St. Justin Martyr
“the teachings of Plato are different from those of Christ, … they are not in all respects similar, as neither are those of the others, Stoics, and poets, and historians. For each man spoke well in proportion to the share he had of the spermatic word [spermatikos logos; the Logos inherent in all humans], seeing what was related to it. But they who contradict themselves on the more important points appear not to have possessed the heavenly wisdom, and the knowledge which cannot be spoken against. Whatever things were rightly said among all men, are the property of us Christians… For all the writers were able to see realities darkly through the sowing of the implanted word [spermatikos logos] that was in them. For the seed and imitation imparted according to capacity is one thing, and quite another is the thing itself, of which there is the participation and imitation according to the grace which is from Him.” Second Apology, 13.
First Thoughts 