Princeton Theological Monograph Series

K. C. Hanson, Editor

Recent titles in the series

Richard Valantasis et al., editors

The Subjective Eye: Essays in Honor ofMargaret R. Miles
Theosis
Byron C. Bangert
Consenting to God and Nature:
Toward a Theocentric, Naturalistic, Theological Ethics
Deification in Christian Theology
Sam Hamstra Jr.
The Reformed Pastor: Lectures on Pastoral Theology by
John Williamson Nevin

David A. Ackerman
Lo, I Tell You a Mystery: Cross, Resurrection, and Paraenesis
in the Rhetoric of 1 Corinthians

PaulO. Ingram, editor

Constructing a Relational Cosmology Edited by Stephen Finlan
Caryn Riswold
and Vladimir Kharlamov
Coram Deo: Human Lifo in the Vision of God

John A. Vissers
The Neo-Orthodox Theology of W. W. Bryden

Michael G. Cartwright
Practices, Politics, and Performance:
Toward a Communal Hermeneutic for Christian Ethics
, (

Philip Harrold
A Place Somewhat Apart: The Private Worlds ofa Late
Nineteenth-Century University

Mark A. Ellis, translator Pickwick Publication,~-"""'" --,----~

~efjOa'~' y\ .~; ~Vi\.lyi!; Liceal
The Arminian Confession of 1621 Eugene, Oregon
•
01"'''01 0'[ •.''-' H.. _".-, - ,I rt-.,·,," !!I~I 1
<N:~~:,~.:::~~7_~.6:r.~.~~~~. I
THEOS IS
Deification in Christian Theology Con ten ts
reserved. Except
Copyright © 2006 Stephen Finlan and Vladimir Kharlamov. All rights Introduction 1
no part of this book may be
for brief quotations in critical publications or reviews, Stephen Finlan and Vladimir Kharlamov
ion from the publisher. Write:
reproduced in any manner without prior written permiss Defining the Term
lh Suite 3, Eugene, OR 97401. 1
Permissions, Wipf & Stock Publishers, 199 W 8 Ave.,
Terminology ofTheo sis 5
Pickwick Publications Histor y of Scholarship 8
A Division ofWipf & Stock Publishers A Renewed Discussion 9
199 W 8th Ave., Suite 3
Eugene, OR 97401
Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology 16
Gregory Glazov
ISBN: 1-59752-438-7
1. Theosis and Old Testament Biblical Theology 17
2. The~s~s and Old Testament Covenantal Anthropology 21
Cataloging-in-Publication Data 3. Theosls and Old Testament Sapiential Anthropology 25
and Vladimir
Theosis: deification in Christian theology / edited by Stephen Finlan
Second Peter's Notion of Divine Participation 32
Kharlamov
Stephen Finlan
x + 185 p.; 23 cm. (Princeton Theological Monograph Series; 52) Middle-Platonic Background 33
Stoic Growth in Virtue 36
Includes bibliographical references. Apocalyptic Judaism 40
ISBN 1-59752-438-7
Pauline Parallels; Petrine Disputes 43
1. Deification (Christianity). 2. Sanctif ication -Histor y of doctrines.
I. Finlan, Knowledge of Christ 45
Stephen. II. Kharlam ov, Vladimi r. III. Title. IV. Series. "(

BT767.8 T75 2006

Manufactured in the U.S.A. Vll

Emergence of the Deification Them e in the Apostolic Fathers 51
Vladimir Kharlamov Divinization and Spiritual Progress in Maximus the Confessor 134
54 Elena Vishnevskaya
Didache
The Epistle of Barnabas 55 The Fundamentals of Divinization 134
Clement of Rome (First Clement) 57 Ascetic Practice and Contemplation 138
59 Purification in Love 142
Second Clement
Ignatius of Antioch 60
65 Reforming Theosis 146
Polycarp of Smyrna
65 Myk Habets
Conclusion
Worlds Apart 146
67 Theosis and the West 147
Deification in the Apologists of the Second Centu ry
Vladimir Kharlamov T. F. Torrance: A Case Study 152
69 Imago Dei 153
Justin Martyr
74 Creator-Creature Distinction 158
Tatian
77 Reconciling Exchange 162
Theophilus of Antioch
80 Conclusion 166
Athenagoras
Epistle to Diognetus 83
Conclusion 84 The Come dy of Divin izatio n in Soloviev 168
Stephen Finlan
Irenaeus on the Christo logical Basis of Huma n Divinization 86 Divinization and Comedy 171
Jeffrey Finch Trini tarianism 172
Theological Anthropology: Image and Likeness Recapitulated 87 Sophiology 174
God Partakable 91 Following the Christ Pattern 176
Christ the Head 97 Anti-Gnostic Triumph 178

Athanasius on the Deifying Work of the Redeemer 104 List of Contr ibutor s 185
Jeffrey Finch
Introd uction 104
The One and the Many 107
Huma n Cooperation and Appropriation 110
By the Incarnation Alone? 115

122
Augustine's Conce ption of Deification, Revisited "(
Robert Puchniak
The Principal Passages 123
Augustinian Polemic 126
Infrequency of Deification Imagery 131

IX
V11l
 Introduction
Stephen Finlan and Vladimir Kharlamov

Defining the Term

The closest English equivalent of theosis is "deification." In Christian

theology, theosis refers to the transformation of believers into the likeness
of God. Of course, Christian monotheism goes against any literal "god
making" of believers. Rather, the NT speaks of a transformation of mind,
a metamorphosis of character, a redefinition of selfhood, and an imitation
of God. Most of these passages are tantalizingly brief, and none spells out
the concept in detail.
Deification was an important idea in the early church, though it took a
long time for 8EW0I5 (theosis) to emerge as the standard label for the process.
The term was coined by the great fourth century theologian, Gregory of
Nazianzus. Theologians now use theosis to designate all instances where
any idea of taking on God's character or being "divinized" (made divine)
occurs, even when the term 8EW0I5 is not used. And of course, different
" ( Christian authors understood deification differently.
It is difficult to define theosis, but not difficult to cite several biblical
passages that strongly suggest a process of heightened reflection of godly
nature, which stimulated Christian deification discourse. The following

1
 Theosis Introduction

grouping of biblical passages is meant to bring out the logical development

FINAL DIVINIZATION OF THE KOSMOS:
of the idea: The earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as
the waters cover the sea. (Hab 2: 14)
IMITATION OF GOD:
The effect of righteousness will be peace, and the result of righteousness,
Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matt 5:48)
quietness and trust forever. (Isa 32: 17)
The one who believes in me will also do the works that I do and, in fact,
When all things are subjected to him, then ... God may be all in all.
will do greater works than these, because I am going to the Father. Uohn
(1 Cor 15:28)
14:12)
Be imitators of God, as beloved children. (Eph 5: 1)
Although some of these passages concern the afterlife, or events
TAKING ON GOD'S NATURE: connected with the return of Christ, all of them have implications for the
You ... may become participants of the divine nature. (2 Pet 1:4) present life of believers, suggesting an ongoing transformation, a progressive
You are gods, children of the Most High, all of you. (Ps 82:6) engodding of the believer, to use the endearing Old English phrase. l
Is it not written in your law, 'I said, you are gods'? Uohn 10:34) Let us look at the implications of this grouping of biblical sayings.
Imitation of God leads to a reception of the character traits of God, an
INDWELT BY GOD: idea that is standard throughout most of the Bible. The idea of being
Truly it is the spirit in a mortal, the breath of the Almighty, that makes indwelt by a special spirit of God is found intermittently throughout the
for understanding. Uob 32:8) OT, and is a central idea in the NT. This is not synonymous with theosis,
The Spirit of truth ... abides with you, and he will be in you. Uohn but it is an indispensable element in any theology of theosis. Without the
14:17) constant guidance of God, we humans always go astray. Without "en-
It is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children couragement," the renewal of spiritual courage in our hearts, we constantly
of God. (Rom 8:16) grow faint, like Peter after Jesus was arrested. But with a strong connection
to inner guidance, believers "shall renew their strength, they shall mount
BEING RE-FORMED BY GOD:
up with wings like eagles" (Isa 40:31). "We do not lose heart. ... our
What is born of the Spirit is spirit. Uohn 3:6)
inner nature is being renewed day by day" (2 Cor 4:16). As Jesus said,
Be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern
what is the will of God-what is good and acceptable and perfect. (Rom "the kingdom of God is within 2 you" (Luke 17:21 NIV, KjV, TEV). This
12:2) saying should not be marginalized just because it occurs in only one gospel.
Clothe yourselves with the new self, created according to the likeness of It is an indispensable part of the proclamation of Jesus, and is fully
God in true righteousness and holiness. (Eph 4:24) consistent with his teachings about an indwelling Spirit of Truth that
"will be in you,"3 and of a "light in yoU."4
BEING CON-FORMED TO CHRIST:
He will transform the body of our humiliation that it may be conformed
I Pusey, Lenten Sermon 108, Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon, 1989) 5: 200.
to the body of his glory. (Phil 3:21)
2 Heightening the social aspect of the gospel, NRSV offers "among," but "within" or
.... predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. (Rom 8:29) "inside" are more accutate translations of'EvT05 entos. C. H. Dodd points out, "When
All of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though Luke means 'among' he says 'EV J.1EOCY" (The Parables o/the Kingdom [New York: Charles
reflected in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from Scribner's Sons, 1936J 84 n.1).
one degree of glory to another. (2 Cor 3:18) 3 John 14:17; cf. 14:26; 17:23; 15:4.
4 Matt 6:23; 5:16; Luke 11:35.
When he [Christ] is revealed, we will be like him. (1 John 3:2)

2 3
 Theosis Introduction

What surely suggests theosis is the notion of being transformed by concepts are closely related to soteriology, Christology, and anthropology.
God, or taking on the divine nature. In the letters of Paul, in particular, Doctrines about baptism and the Eucharist, the resurrection of the dead,
this means being transformed into the likeness of Christ, who is the eternal life, the image of God in human beings, redemption, and
embodiment of God. Believers are "conformed to" and "transformed into" sanctification contain themes that relate to theosis. But simply replacing
the image of Christ (Rom 8:29; 2 Cor 3:18; Phi13:21), even having the theosis with sanctification is an attempt to supplant Patristic theology with
"mind of Christ" (Phil 2:5; 1 Cor 2:16). One may, perhaps, suppress the standard Reformation language. Deification was often seen as the telo:!
divinizing implications of these passages, but not of those that say that (goal) of human existence and of salvation.
believers will "become the righteousness of God" (2 Cor 5:21), and after The church fathers of the late second to fourth centuries (Irenaeus,
death, "will also bear the image of the man of heaven" (1 Cor 15:49). Clement ofAlexandria, Origen, Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory
Theosis is central to the theology of Paul throughout. 5 of Nazianzus) make theosis a major theme, yet none of them defines the
All of this depends upon, and revolves around, Christianity's central term,8 or discusses it at sufficient length to clear up ambiguities; they
and unique idea: the incarnation-in Christ, God lived a human life. The seem to assume that its content is common knowledge in the Christian
incarnation is the definitive and unique doctrine of Christianity. Further, commulllty.
without the incarnation, there would be no theosis. Christians are meant The first theological definition of theosis was given in the sixth century
not only to learn from the life of the divine Son, but to reproduce the by Pseudo-Dionysius, but it is general and inexact: "Divinization consists
pattern of spiritual progress that he revealed, even to the point of taking of being as much as possible like and in union with God."9 The meaning
on the character of God! A typical expression would be that of Didymus of theosis varies throughout Patristic theology, sometimes even within the
the Blind, who spoke of the soul's process of becoming "perfect same author. 1o Some scholars project later developments of theosis onto
[TEAEIOUa8at teleiousthaz], becoming like [ol-lolw8RvCXI homoiothenaz] earlier church fathers, underestimating the role of specifically second-
God."G This is a staggering idea, and one that certainly needs to be century themes. The articles here by Kharlamov will try to clarify how the
connected with a mature and well-balanced theology. theological concerns of the Apostolic Fathers and Apologists situate and
This is more than just the longing for union with the divine, which is shape their deification concepts.
a central goal for most religions. Not all religions take it so far as to develop
a concept of theosis while still preserving human personal identity, as
Christianity does. But it is not always well-defined. Deification played an Terminology of Theosis
important'? but not definitive, role in early Patristic theology. Despite
Patristic fascination with deification, the fathers do not develop a "doctrine" A great variety of terms are used to communicate the idea of deification.
of theosis. Nor do the doctrinal controversies and decisions of the Church Ben Drewery sums up "the content or attributes of deification" as
Councils deal with the subject.
8 Jules Gross, The Divinization ofthe Christian According to the Greek Fathers (Anaheim,
The popularity of the idea is matched by a lack of precise definition. Cali£: A & C Press, 2002) 271-72.
The church fathers argue for, rather than spell out, deification. Theosis 9 Ecclesiastical Hierarchy 1.3; Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works. The Classics of

Western Spirituality (New York: Paulist Press, 1987) 198; in the original Greek: Corpus
5 Err
See also the deification concepts in Col 1:9, 27; 2:10; 3:10; 3:19; 4:23-24; 5:l. Dionysiacum, Patristische Texte Und Studien, Bd. 36, ed. Beate Regina Suchla (Berlin: de
6 Commentary on Ecclesiastes on 3:19; from Didymos der Blinde. Kommentar zum Gruyter, 1991) 66.
Ecclesiastes, pt. 2, ed. M. Gronewald (Bonn: Habelt, 1977) 99, located using TLG 8.0 10 Donald F. Winslow proposes a "six-fold dimension" for theosis in Gregory of Nazianz us

(electronic database) © 1999 Silver Mountain Sofrware. alone: as a spatial, visual, epistemological, social, ethical, or "progressive union" metaphor
7 "Deification was the ultimate and supreme thought" (Adolf von Harnack, History of (The Dynamics of Salvation: A Study in Gregory of Nazianzus [Cambridge, Mass.:
Dogma, tr. Neil Buchanan [New York: Dover, 1961 (1900)]3:164 n.2). Philadelphia Patristic Foundation, 1979] 193-98).

4 5
 Theosis Introduction
"TEAE1W01S teleiosis (ethical perfection), aTIcX8Ela apatheia (exemption out that not all Greek words for deification connote a strong literal meaning
from human emotions or passions), acp8apola aftharsia, a8avaola of "becoming a god" or being "deified." Often it is the qualities of Godliness
athanasia (exemption from mortal corruption or death)."ll Among the that are being emphasized.
conceptual equivalents for deification are union, participation, partaking, 1; favorite word ofAthanasius, 8EOTIOIEW theopoieo, with the element
communion/partnership, divine filiation, adoption, recreation, intertwined TIOIEW poieo, "to make," "to produce," implies agency, something done
with the divine, similitude with God, transformation, elevation, someone. It can be translated, "to make god." Athanasius derives the
to
transmutation, commingling, assimilation, intermingling, rebirth, noun 8E?TIOI1l01S theopoiesis and the adjective 8EOTIoillToS theopoietos
regeneration, transfiguration. The preferences of particular authors vary greatly. from thIS verb. A mortal being made god is a paradox for Christian
Considering the language of theosis, special attention should be given theology, where only God is without beginning or ending (aYEvllToS
to vocabulary groups in all their grammatical forms, of words for union- agenetos-"uncreated," "unoriginated"). Of course, the mortal was
EVW01S henosis; participation-IlETouo( a metousia (from IlETEXW generated or created (YEVVllToS gennetos), and so is not God. Athanasian
metechiJ), IlE8ESIS methexis, IlETcXAll\jJIS metalepsis (from IlETaAall~cXvw 8EOTIOI1l01S theopoiesis connotes the idea of passive deification: the human
metalambano); partaking-IlEToXOS metochos; and communion- is acted upon, so God retains primacy and infinity.
KOlvwvla koinonia (from KOlVWVEW koinoneo). In English, "partaking" Gregory of Nazianzus, in his poetry, uses 8EOV TEUXW theon teucho
and "sharing" suggest a distinction of the part from the whole, and connote ("to make/produce god"), 14 8EOV TEAE W theon teleo ("to complete/
a limited possession of the whole. In Greek, metousia, methexis, and meta- accomp1IS· h go d") ,15 an d TUKTOS\ 8EOS\ tyktos theos ("created god") .16
lepsis convey the idea of "having together" or "obtaining a certain quality." The extraordinary richness of Greek language offered Patristic writers
Metalepsis, in addition, can imply "harmonious mutual existing" or "acting a broad sel~ction to choose from. Even though 8EOTIOIllOIS theopoiesis
together." Koinonia and metousia express the idea of "communion" or and later 8EWOIS theosis became the choice expressions for Christians,
"union." Also, we need to be aware that the terms listed above are not other deification vocabulary was retained.
only applicable to deification; they could refer to other issues as well. There is less diversity in deification terminology in Latin than in Greek.
There are five groups of Greek words that explicitly point to making Some Latin writers simply transliterate Greek 8EW01S theosis, as we
into a god or deifying: 1) aTI08Eow/aTIo8El<)w-arto8EW01S apotheool continue to do in English. Greek aTI08EW01S apotheosis was often rendered
apotheioo-apotheosis 2) 8EOTIOIEW- 8EOTIOlla- 8EOTIOlll01S- 8EOTIOIOS
I I I I
in Latin as consecratio or visa versa. The Latin consecratio was the official
theopoiesis-theopoios; 3) EK8E ow/ EK8E Iow - EK8E wo IS - EK8E WT IKOS term used for declaring the deceased emperor, or any other figure, as divus.17
ektheoolektheioo-ektheosis-ektheotikos; 4) 8EOW- 8EW01S 12 theoo-theosis; Reflecting this widespread pagan usage, the English term "apotheosis"
5) aTI08ElcXSW-EK8ElcXSW apotheiazo ektheiazoY The subject-verb sets u~ually signifies an exaltation or a metaphorical glorification, usually
8EOS EIIII theios eimi ("to be god") and especially 8EOS yt YVOllal theos WIthout any Christian content.
gignomai ("to become god") were extensively used. Here, we purposefully Some English language authors make a distinction between
use the word "god" with the lower case letter "g" to indicate that the di~inization (taking on godly qualities) and deification (become a godlike
deified human person never stops being human. Here we should point belllg); others do not. Of course, all Christian authors made such a
distinction conceptually, whether or not they make it terminologically.
II Benjamin Drewery, "Deification," in Christian Spirituality: Essays in Honour o/Gordon

Rupp, ed. Peter Brooks (London: SCM, 1975) 38.

12 Although coined in the fourth century, 6ewol5 theosis did not become the standard 14 Carm. 1.1.3.4.
designator for deification until after Pseudo-Dionysus in the sixth century. 15 Carm. 1.2.14.92.
13 See Norman Russell, The Doctrine o/Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (Oxford: 16 Cam). 1.2.9.132.

Oxford University Press, 2004) 333--44. 17 Russell, Doctrine ofDeification, 22.

6 7
 F
Theosis Introduction

When Latin writers came up with the term deificatio, derived from the the line of Harnack's thinking, categorizing theosis with decline and with
verb, deificare, they were not making a distinction from "divinization," doctrinal hardening.
but providing another word for it. It was already obvious, from the At the opposite pole are theologians who build their entire theology
standpoint of Christian theology, that no mortal becomes God. upon a Christian concept of theosis, including Vladimir Lossky,22 Panayiotis
Nellas,23 and C. Stavropoulos,24 who create the impression that there is
nothing more important in Christian theology than deification, and,
History of Scholarship further, that Eastern Orthodoxy holds a "copyright" on it. Jean Danielou
exposes the anachronism of their approach, their interpreting the early
The Eastern Orthodox Church has retained theosis as a concept for fathers in light of later fathers. 25
theological reflection, while the Western churches-separated by time,
language, and philosophy from the Greek thinkers of the early church-
have dropped it. In fact, theosis simply does not exist for most contemporary A Renewed Discussion
Western theologians. In lay theology the term is usually perceived as either
blasphemous or absurd. 18 Some Protestants try to assimilate it to familiar Between the polarized views-deification is either a pagan idea or the
Western concepts such as "sanctification by grace" or "justification by essential Orthodox doctrine-we find more moderate and historically
faith," trying to connect the Reformation directly to the Bible, as though oriented scholarly works. In 1938, Jules Gross published an extensive study
the intervening centuries had no significance. We hope to show that the of divinization in the Greek fathers,26 providing the first comprehensive
lines of continuity and transmission through the centuries of Christian and chronological analysis of the notion, looking at Patristic, Hellenistic,
thought are essential to Christian understanding at anyone time and mystery religion, biblical, and postbiblical sourcesY More recently, new
place. The near disappearance in Western Christendom of an idea that
was widely accepted for over a thousand years (including by Latin
theologians like Augustine) , is a serious loss for the Christian thought and 22 Vladimir Lossky, In the Image and Likeness of God (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's
hope. Seminary Press, 1974); The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (Crestwood, N. Y.:
St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1976, 1998); The Vision of God (Crestwood, N.Y.: St.
A significant line of modern scholarship adopts the thesis of Adolf
Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1983).
Harnack about the Hellenization of early Christianity, the transformation 23 Panayiotis Nellas, Deification in Christ: Orthodox Perspectives on the Nature ofthe Human
of the living faith "into the creed to be believed," with theosis considered Person, tr. Norman Russell (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1987). First
to be "creedal" rather than "living." This is said to be the change of "the published in Greek in 1979.
glowing hope of the Kingdom of heaven into a doctrine of immortality 24 C. Stavropoulos, Partakers ofDivine Nature (Minneapolis: Light of Life, 1976).
25 Jean Danielou, "Introduction," in La Deification de l'homme, selon la doctrine des Peres
and deification."19 M. Werner,20 B. Drewery,21 and many others follow
grecs. The book is authored by Myrrha Lot-Borodine (Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1970) 15.
26 Jules Gross, La divinisation du chretien d'apres les peres grecs: Contribution historique a

la doctrine de lagrace (Paris: j. Gabalda, 1938). Published in English as The Divinization

18 E.g., Francis J. Hall, The Incarnation (New York: Longman, Green and Company, ofthe Christian According to the Greek Fathers, tr. Paul A. Onica (Anaheim, Calif.: A & C

Old Testament (Pittsburgh, 1975) 1.

..
1915) 192; Donald E. Gowan, When Man Becomes God: Humanism and Hybris in the
(
Press, 2002) .
27 See also Edouard des Places, 1. H. Dalmais, and Gustave Bardy, "Divinisation"

19 Adolf von Harnack, History of Dogma, tr. Neil Buchanan (New York: Dover, 1961 (Dictionnaire de spiritualite asdtique et mystique, original eds., M. Viller, F. Cavallera,
[1900]) 1:45. and J. de Guibert. Continued by Charles Baumgartner. Vol. 3, Paris: Beauchesne, 1957)
20 M. Werner, Formation of Christian Dogma (New York: Harper, 1957) 168. 1370-98 and H. Rondet, "La divinisation du chretien," Nouvelle Revue Theologique 17
21 Drewery, "Deification," 49-62. (1949) 449-76, 561-88.

8 9
 Theosis Introduction
attention to theosis was stimulated by the work of John Meyendorff 28 "Partakers of the Divine Nature: Deification/ Theosis in the Christian
and through ecumenical dialogue. 29 A number of dissertations that deal Traditions," held at Drew University, Madison, New Jersey, on May 21-
with the history of theosis or with theosis in the works of particular figures, 22, 2004, reaffirmed the significant academic and interdenominational
were produced. 30 In addition, several articles and books have appeared interest in this aspect of Christian theology. It is gradually becoming a
recentlyY The first International Academic Conference on theosis, more appreciated topic in Western theological discourse.
While some articles in this collection discuss pre-Christian antecedents
28 John Meyendorff, "Theosis in the Eastern Christian tradition," in Christian Spirituality: of theosis, Greek and Jewish, most focus on particular Christian
Post-Reformation and Modern, eds. Louis Dupre and Don E. Saliers (New York: Crossroad,
understandings. The article by Gregory Glazov examines OT covenant
1989) 470-76. The theme of deification is widely scattered throughout Meyendorff's
works. theology, with an emphasis on divine adoption, and on bearing the fruit
29 For instance, Paul R. Hinlicky, "Theological Anthropology: Toward Integrating Theosis of knowledge or attaining the stature of a tree of righteousness in Proverbs,
and Justification by Faith," Journal 0/ Ecumenical Studies 34 (1997): 38-73; Tuomo Isaiah, and Sirach. The article by Stephen Finlan on 2 Pet 1:4 ("You may
Mannermaa, "Justification and theosis in Lutheran-Orthodox perspective," in Union with become participants of the divine nature") examines the epistle's apparent
Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 25-41; Jouko Martikainen, "Man's Salvation:
borrowings from Middle Platonic spirituality, Stoic ethics, and Jewish
Deification or Justification? Observation of Key-Words in the Orthodox and the Lutheran
Tradition," Sobornost series 7, no. 3 (Summer 1976): 180-92; Sa/zJation in Christ: A apocalyptic expectation. The epistle stresses "knowledge of Christ," which
Lutheran-Orthodox Dialogue, eds. Robert Tobias and John Meyendorff (Minneapolis: means cultivation of godly character and growing up into Christ.
Augsburg, 1992) and Michael McDaniel, "Salvation as Justification and Theosis," in the Vladimir Kharlamov's first article examines the emergence of the
same volume. deification theme in the Apostolic Fathers with its culmination in the
30 Here we list just some of the Ph.D. dissertations: Isaac Chae, "Justification and
passion mysticism of Ignatius of Antioch, who speaks of becoming a
Deification in Augustine: A Study of His Doctrine of Justification," Trinity Evangelical
Divinity School, 1999; Caren F. Calendine, "Theosis and the Recognition of Saints in "Christ-carrier" and emphasizes the full integrity of human nature that
Tenth Century Byzantium," University of Wisconsin, 1998; Arkadi Choufrine, "Gnosis, participates in salvation and eternal life. The second article covers
Theophany, Theosis: Studies in Clement of Alexandria's Appropriation of his Apologists such as Justin Martyr (who considers the human being worthy
Background," Princeton Theological Seminary, 2001 (published by Peter Lang in 2002); to become a son of god, and even "god") and Theophilus of Antioch (for
J. A. Cullen, "The Patristic Concept of the Deification of Man Examined in the Light of
whom the human being reaches full maturity and is declared god through
Contemporary Notions of the Transcendence of Man," Oxford University, 1985; Jeffrey
Finch, "Sanctity as Participation in the Divine Nature According to the Ante-Nicene the therapeutic experience of death and resurrection).
Eastern Fathers, Considered in the Light ofPalarnism," Drew University, 2001; Maurice Jeffrey Finch shows the integral connection between incarnational
Fred Himmerich, "Deification in John of Damascus, " Marquette University, 1985; Nancy Christology and deification in the thought of two of the Church's most
Joyce Hudson, "Theosis in the Thought of Nicholas ofCusa: Origin, Goal, and Realized important theologians. For Irenaeus, the incarnation, the Recapitulation work
Destiny of Creation," Yale University, 1999; Keith Edward Norman, "Deification: The
of Christ, and deification of the believer are closely linked. For Athanasius of
Content of Athanasian Soteriology," Duke University, 1980; Eric David Perl, "Methexis:
Creation, Incarnation, Deification in Saint Maximus Confessor," Yale University, 1991;
N. Russell, "The Concept of Deification in the Early Greek Fathers," Oxford University, and Theosis," in Greek Orthodox Theological Review 43, no 1-4 (1998): 377-99; Nonna
1988; Elena Vishnevskaya, "Perichoresis in a Context of Divinization: Maximus the Verna Harrison, "Theosis as Salvation: An 0 rthodox Perspective," in Pro-Ecclesia 6 (1997):
Confessor's Vision of a 'Blessed and Most Holy Embrace,'" Drew Unviersity, 2004; 429-43; Steve McCormick, "Theosis in Chrysostom and Wesley: An Eastern Paradigm
Kenneth Warren Wesche, "The Defense of Chalcedon in the 6~ ~entury of the Doctrine on Faith and Love," Wesleyan Theologicaljournal26 (1991): 38-103; Frederick W Norris,
of 'Hypostasis' and Deification in the Christology of Leontius of Jerusalem," Fordham "Deification: Consensual and Cogent," Scottish Journal o/Theology 49 (1996): 411-28;
University, 1986; Anna Ngaire Williams, "Deification in Thomas Aquinas and Gregory Norman Russell, Doctrine 0/ Deification; Kenneth Paul Wesche, "Eastern Orthodox
Palamas," Yale University, 1995. Spirituality: Union with God in Theosis," in Theology Today 56 (1999): 29-43; Anna
31 We mention just a few among most recent: George D. Dragas, "Exchange or Ngaire Williams, The Ground o/Union: Deification in Aquinas and Palamas (New York:
Communication of Properties and Deification: Antidosis or Communicatio Idiomatum Oxford University Press, 1999).

10 11
 Theosis Introduction
Alexandria, the intimate contact between humanity and divinity in the Danielou, Jean. "Introduction." In La Deification de l'homme, selon la doctrine
incarnation of the Word enabled the possibility of human deification. des Peres grecs, edited by Myrrha Lot-Borodine, 9-18. Paris: Cerf, 1970.
Robert Puchniak reminds readers of the importance of deification Didymus the Blind. Commentary on Ecclesiastes. From Didymos der Blinde.
ideas to Augustine, including (but not exclusively) in some recently Kommentar zum Ecclesiastes, pt. 2. Edited by M. Gronewald. Bonn: Habelt,
discovered letters. The God who "justifies," also "deifies" the Christian. 1977. Quotation taken from TLG 8. 0 (electronic database) © 1999 Silver
Elena Vishnevskaya summarizes the systematic doctrine of theosis in Mountain Software.
Maximus the Confessor, delineating the roles of the divine initiative and Dodd, C. H. The Parables ofthe Kingdom. Rev. ed. New York: Scribner, 1936.
Dragas, George D. "Exchange or Communication of Properties and Deification:
the human response, which together make divinization possible. The
Antidosis or Communicatio Idiomatum and Theosis." Greek Orthodox
liturgy provides a glimpse of future divinization. Theological Review 43 (1998) 377-99.
Myk Habets spells out the role of deification in Luther, Calvin, and Drewery, Benjamin. "Deification." In Christian Spirituality: Essays in Honour of
the important evangelical writer, T. F. Torrance. Luther, for instance, taught Gordon Rupp. Edited by Peter Brooks, 33-62. London: SCM, 1975.
that Christians are made, not just deemed, righteous. Stephen Finlan's article Finch, Jeffrey. "Sanctity as Participation in the Divine Nature According to the
on the brilliant Russian philosopher, Vladimir Soloviev, who stimulated Ante-Nicene Eastern Fathers, Considered in the Light of Palamism." Ph.
much discussion of deification, examines Soloviev's humbled thinking in D. diss., Drew University, 200l.
his later years, and his warnings against false theosis and false Messiahs. Gowan, Donald E. When Man Becomes God' Humanism and Hybris in the Old
Soloviev provides a Trinitarian philosophy of divine goodness, truth, and Testament. Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1975.
beauty penetrating human life. Gregory of Nazianzus. Carmina. PG 37.
Although these articles stretch from the antecedents of Christian theosis Gross, Jules. La divinisation du chretien d'apres les peres grees: Contribution historique
it fa doctrine de fa grace. Paris:]. Gabalda, 1938. Published in English as The
to the distinctive shaping of the concept by particular Christian thinkers,
Divinization of the Christian According to the Greek Fathers, trans. Paul A.
they all shed light on the divinization concept, the only idea that is adequate
Onica. Anaheim, Calif: A & C Press, 2002.
to describe the linkage between inward and outward, personal and Hall, Francis J. The Incarnation. New York: Longman, Green and Company,
universal, spiritual progress. 1915.
Harnack, Adolfvon. History ofDogma. Translated by Neil Buchanan. New York:
Dover, 1961 [1900].
Bibliography Harrison, Nonna Verna. "Theosis as Salvation: An Orthodox Perspective." Pro-
Ecclesia 6 (1997) 429-43.
Bakken, Kenneth L. "Holy Spirit and Theosis: Toward a Lutheran Theology of Himmerich, Maurice Fred. "Deification in John of Damascus." Ph. D. diss.,
Healing." Saint Vladimir's Theological Q;,tarterly 38 (1994): 409-23. Marquette University, 1985.
Calendine, Caren F. "Theosis and the recognition of saints in tenth century Hinlicky, Paul R. "Theological Anthropology: Toward Integrating Theosis and
Byzantium." Ph. D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 1998. Justification by Faith." Journal ofEcumenical Studies 34 (1997) 38-73.
Chae, Isaac. "Justification and Deification in Augustine: A Study of His Doctrine Hudson, Nancy Joyce. "Theosis in the Thought of Nicholas of Cusa: Origin,
of Justification." Ph.D. diss., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1999. Goal, and Realized Destiny of Creation." Ph. D. diss., Yale University, 1999.
Choufrine, Arkadi. Gnosis, Theophany, Theosis: Studies in Clement ofAlexandria's Lossky, Vladimir. In the Image and Likeness ofGod Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's
.'
Appropriation ofhis Background. New York: Lang, 2062. Seminary Press, 1974.
Cullen,]. A. "The Patristic Concept of the Deification of Man Examined in the - - - . The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. Crestwood, N.Y.: St.
Light of Contemporary Notions of the Transcendence of Man." Ph. D. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1976, 1998.
diss., Oxford University, 1985. . The Vision of God Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press,
1983.

12 13
 Theosis Introduction
Mannermaa, Tuomo. "Justification and Theosis in Lutheran-Orthodox Vishnevskaya, Elena. "Perichoresis in a Context of Divinization: Maximus the
Perspective." In Union with Christ: The New Finnish Interpretation ofLuther. Confessor's Vision of a 'Blessed and Most Holy Embrace.'" Ph.D. diss.,
Edited by C. E. Braaten and R. W Jensen. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Drew University, 2004.
Martikainen, Jouko. "Man's Salvation: Deification or Justification? Observation Werner, M. Formation of Christian Doctrine: An Historical Study ofthe Problem.
of Key-Words in the Orthodox and the Lutheran Tradition." Sobornost 7. 3 Translated by S. F. G. Brandon. San Francisco: Harper & Bros., 1957.
(1976) 180-92. Wesche, Kenneth Warren. "The Defense of Chalcedon in the 6 th Century the
McCormick, Steve. "Theosis in Chrysostom and Wesley: An Eastern Paradigm Doctrine of 'Hypostasis' and Deification in the Christology of Leontius of
on Faith and Love." Wesleyan Theologicaljournal26 (1991) 38-103. Jerusalem." Ph.D. diss., Fordham University, 1986.
McDaniel, Michael. "Salvation as Justification and Theosis." In Salvation in - - - . "Eastern Orthodox Spirituality: Union with God in Theosis." Theology
Christ: A Lutheran-Orthodox Dialogue. Edited by Robert Tobias and John Today 56 (1999) 29-43.
Meyendorff, 67-84. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1992. Williams, Anna Ngaire. "Deification in Thomas Aquinas and Gregory Palamas."
Meyendorff, John. "Theosis in the Eastern Christian tradition." In Christian Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1995.
Spirituality: Post-Reformation and Modern. Edited by Louis Dupre and Don - - - . The Ground of Union: Deification in Aquinas and Palamas. New York:
E. Saliers, 470-76. New York: Crossroad, 1989. Oxford University Press, 1999.
Nellas, Panayiotis. Deification in Christ: Orthodox Perspectives on the Nature of Winslow, Donald F. The Dynamics of Salvation: A Study in Gregory ofNazianzus.
the Human Person. Translated by Norman Russell. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Cambridge, Mass.: Philadelphia Patristic Foundation, 1979.
Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1987. First published in Greek in 1979.
Norman, Keith Edward. "Deification: The Content of Athanasian Soteriology."
Ph. D. diss., Duke University, 1980.
Norris, Frederick W "Deification: Consensual and Cogent." Scottish Journal of
Theology 49 (1996) 411-28.
Perl, Eric David. "Methexis: Creation, Incarnation, Deification in Saint Maximus
Confessor." Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1991.
Places, Edouard des, I. H. Dalmais, and Gustave Bardy. "Divinisation." In
Dictionnaire de spiritualite ascetique et mystique, 1370-98. Originally edited
by M. Viller, F. Cavallera, and J. de Guibert. Continued by Charles
Baumgartner. Vol. 3. Paris: Beauchesne, 1957.
Pseudo-Dionysius. Ecclesiastical Hierarchy. In Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete
Works. The Classics of Western Spirituality. New York: Paulist Press, 1987.
In the original Greek: Corpus Dionysiacum, Patristische Texte Und Studien;
Bd. 36. Edited by Beate Regina Suchla. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1991.
Rondet, H. "La divinisation du chretien," Nouvelle Revue Theologique 17 (1949)
449-76,561-88.
Russell, N. The Doctrine ofDeification in the Greek Patristic Tradition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2004.
Stavropoulos, C. Partakers ofDivine Nature. Minneapoli6:,Light of Life, 1976.
Tobias, Robert and John Meyendorff, editors. Salvation in Christ: A Lutheran-
Orthodox Dialogue. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1992.

14 15
 Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology
Theosis and Old Testament Biblical Theology

Accustomed by doctrine and tradition to "put a hedge around the Torah,"

the Jew, confronted by Christian doctrines of Trinity, incarnation, and
theosis, feels little interest in qualifying and adapting these concepts so as
to make them consistent with the incommensurability between the divine
and the human. To qualify and nuance something that seems idolatrous
is to remove the hedge. 2 It is thus difficult to know what Christians may
hope to obtain from scholarly demonstrations that Christian concepts
such as theosis are rooted in intertestamental Judaism and other
developments in postbiblical Judaism. If Christians hope that such
demonstrations will eventually constitute biblical support, the question
Theosis, Judaism, and is: for whom? For Orthodox Jews, such texts may be simply analogous to
what confronts Christians in the Gnostic gospels. For Christians, the New
Old Testament Anthropology Testament evidence and Church teaching already suffice to ratify that
which is presented as apostolic doctrine, which here includes the mystery
Gregory Glazov signified by theosis. But if this is the case, the reasons for seeking Old
Testament grounding for such doctrines need to be clarified.
Utilizing the threads of the Old Testament to present itself as its
fulfillment, the New Testament can hardly be understood without the
The purpose of this reflection is to explore why Old Testament and Hebraic
Old. The New is the fruit growing from the ground of the Old. By His
biblical models are relevant to the study of the Christian concept of theosis
incarnation and Resurrection, the Christ reminds us (against certain Greek
and to explore the form and relevance of models underpinning biblical
instincts) that it is eminently good to be incarnate, in this world and the
covenant theology and wisdom literature. I write from a Roman Catholic
next, thus grounding St. Irenaeus's famous saying that "God's glory is
perspective.
man fully alive." Without the penultimate word of the Old, 3 the
Theosis is not only a major principle in Eastern Orthodox theology,
proclamation and reception of Jesus as the Christ is meaningless and the
it has roots in both the Old and New Testaments, and in Jewish theology.
There is some continuity between Patristic interests in "embodied the os is" 2The Christian doctrines of the Trinity and the incarnation may be regarded as idolatrous
and second temple Jewish conceptions that touch on messianic thought in Judaism (cf. Maimonides's commentary on the Mishna, 'Avodah Zarah 1:3, and Hilchot
and on angelomorphic glorification of human beings through mystical Akum 9:4). This, coupled with the teaching that idolatry is prohibited by the Noahide
vision before the Throne of God and through liturgies. 1 But there are law for the Gentile as well as for the Jew (Sanhedrin 63b), undergirds R. Moshe Feinstein's
serious difficulties for current interplay between Jewish and Christian and R. Joseph Soloveitchik's influential instruction to American Orthodox Jewry to
abstain from any Jewish-Christian dialogue lest it create appurtenance for idolatry in
theology. Israel and give occasion to Christian gentiles to reaffirm such beliefs (David Ellenson, "A
.t' (
Jewish Legal Authority Addresses Jewish-Christian Dialogue: Two Responses of Rabbi
Moshe Feinstein" [Jacob Rader Marcus Center of the American Jewish Archives, 2001].
Available at www.huc.edu/aja/00-4.hnn).
ICf. Alexandre Golitzin, "Scriptural Images of the Church: an Eastern Orthodox 3 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison (New York: Macmillan, 1953)

Reflection," 2001, published on the web at www.marquette.edu/maqom/church. passim.

16 17
 Theosis Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology
Eucharist, instituted by him in the context of a Jewish Pasch, identified possibly agree over any area of biblical theology, even if granted another
by him with the priestly "blood of the covenant" and the prophetic "new thousand years for the task, is simply to dodge one's rival's claims to one's
covenant," is incomprehensible. 4 If the Christ is incomprehensible without spiritual patrimony. But, in biblical terms, the rival remains a brother and
the Old Testament, this must also be the case with theosis. as such must be known and kept. Christians cannot abandon the quest for
The recent renewal of Catholic thought through ressourcement5 in the a biblical theology because it is the foundational witness to their Messiah.
Fathers of the Church has been fed by, and continues to precipitate, an In preparing to search for biblical models of theosis, it would be
interest in a rapprochement with Orthodoxy. The same can be said about interesting to take bearings from Jewish reflections and enquire what, in a
ressourcement in Hebrew sources, and a rapprochement between definition such as that given by Kallistos Ware, may conflict or harmonize
Protestantism and Israel. But if ressourcement in the witness of the Hebrew with Jewish theology:
Scriptures makes Christians feel secure, their footing is radically
undermined by the Jewish repudiation of Christian exegetical claims. The While God's inner essence is forever beyond our comprehension, His
quest for an Old Testament biblical theology is thus an attempt at securing energies, grace, life and power fill the whole universe, and are directly
a foothold, a grip on something fairly crucial to Christian security. Jewish accessible to us .... The essence signifies the whole God as he is in
biblical scholars, however, are uninterested in attempts to construct a himself; the energies signifY the whole God as he is in action .... The
dialogical biblical theology.G While explaining that this disinterest derives essence-energies distinction is a way of stating simultaneously that the
from the Jewish aversion to playing biblical Trivial Pursuit with whole God is inaccessible, and that the whole God in his outgoing love
Christo logically loaded dice, Levenson argues that a common biblical has rendered himself accessible to man. By virtue of this distinction ...
theology between Jews and Christians is impossible since, by reading the we are able to affirm the possibility of a direct or mystical union between
First Testament through two different prisms (the New Testament and man and God-what the Greek Fathers term the theosis of man, his
the Mishnah) Jews and Christians are effectively reading a different book. "deification"-but at the same time we exclude any pantheistic
Similarly, Eastern and Western Christians have been divided by a identification between the two: for man participates in the energies of
millennium of tradition. However, critiquing positions without reference God, not in his essence.... Man still remains man. 8
to their internal context surely results in cross-purposed babble, and it is
premature to despair of the fruits that may be yielded in the next millennium The essence-energy distinction seems to resonate with Fackenheim's
by serious attempts of groups engaged in religious dialogue to understand insistence that in Judaism, "Grace is manifest in the gift of the
the internal context determining the views and readings of their rivals? To commandment itself which, bridging the gulf between two
preemptively declare that groups separated by millennia of tradition cannot incommensurables, makes a human community partner in a divine-human
covenant," a covenant that, in contradistinction to Hegel's "absolute
4 Cf. Matt 26:28 and Mark 14:24 with Exod 24:8; Luke 22:20 and 1 Cor 11 :25 with Jer religion" and "divine-human identity ... does not accept the identity of
31 :31 and all fourwirh Isaiah 53; Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, "Is the Eucharist a Sacrifice?" the Divine and the human."9 What Fackenheim denotes as the
in The Debate on Sacraments. Concilium 4.3 (1967). incommensurability of God with man, Ware calls the indivisible Divine
5 A "re-sourcing," or rediscovery of sources.
essence, non-admissive of any pantheistic identification. The role that
6 Jon D. Levenson, "Why Jews Are Not Interested in Biblical Theology," in The Hebrew
Bible, the Old Testament, and Historical Criticism: Jews and Christians in Biblical Studies
(Louisville: Westminster, 1993) 33-6l. 8 Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox ~y (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press,
7 Hilarion Alfeyev, "The Patristic Heritage and Modernity," paper delivered at the 9th 1995) 22-23.
International Conference on Russian Monasticism and Spirituality, Bose Monastery (Italy), 9 Emil Fackenheim, "Demythologizing and Remythologizing in Jewish Experience:
20 September 2001. Available at www.orrhodoxeurope.org/print/111112.aspx. Reflections Inspired by Hegel's Philosophy," in Myth and Philosophy, ed. George F.

18 19
 Theosis Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology
Ware accords to divine energies, Fackenheim accords to grace manifest in the Messiah will melt swords into ploughshares relates to what Jews have
the divine commandment, and the role that Ware reserves for "union but experienced historically from Christian sovereigns. 11
not fusion or confusion," Fackenheim reserves to "covenant understood From this perspective, the root Jewish scandal over Jesus is nothing else
as community partnership." Could divine commandments, words, and than the scandal of the biblical Job and of Dostoyevsky's Ivan Karamazov
energies be understood as commensurable realities? Could union and who cannot square God with suffering "for nothing." It is not a specifically
covenant be understood so as well? What are divine commandments if Jewish metaphysics that leads them to repudiate him as Messiah. The Jews
not energies able to either transfer a human subject into a covenantal in repudiating Jesus simply represent, with all the genius of their commitment
relationship or transform one in such a relationship into something that to realism and the created order, the basic reasons why humanity would
the relationship is meant to nurture? On the other hand, even though rather have bread and security than a suffering Messiah. If this is correct, it
Fackenheim is able to nuance his reading of Christianity to admit that it follows that the Christian understanding of the process of theosis must also
repudiates Hegel's implicit "divine-human identity" and pantheism,1O it be intrinsically linked to a participation in Jesus' via dolorosa, to a concrete,
is a safe bet that Athanasius' dictum would prove too much for him. organic immersion in His passion, in a way that grants a redemptive role to
What exactly is the scandalizing impediment that stands at the parting suffering and removes the scandal of what usually looks like a bloody mess.
of the ways between rabbinic Judaism and the early church? It would seem In fact, were it not for this linkage between suffering and theosis, the
that the Jewish repudiation ofJesus as the Only Son of God, Word of God, mysteries of the Kingdom, as preached by Jesus, would have been more
God's "I Am," the Messiah who renews the Law and Covenant is a gestalt. immediately comprehensible and palatable to his apostles and audiences.
None of these ideas taken individually necessarily contradicts postbiblical Given that Jesus' parables of the Kingdom are aimed at resolving this
Judaism. But judging from the thrust of the rhetoric in the Gospels, the problem,12 the parables are another quarry for scriptural anthropological
chief scandal impeding the recognition of Jesus as Messiah even for those models grounding the Christian doctrine of theosis. And to the extent
Jews who became Jesus' apostles and disciples is the idea of his incumbent that these parables are composed in Hebraic biblical terms, they can in
and necessary suffering and death, coupled with the belief that entry into turn serve to identifY areas of Hebraic biblical narrative that anticipate
the Kingdom of God necessitates following him to the Cross. and ground the Christian conception of the way into the Kingdom.
Even though Judaism eventually found room for a suffering and dying
Messiah, the Messiah ben Joseph, this recognition did not imply that the
road to salvation necessarily involves everyone's participation in the Theosis and Old Testament Covenantal Anthropology
Messiah's suffering and "birth-pangs." The Messiah was expected to restore
sinners to the ways of righteousness and loving-kindness, to bring peace The importance of the covenant for this reflection emerges from the
through the dissemination of divine understanding, to feed the hungry, comparison of Kallistos Ware's and Emil Fackenheim's emphases on theosis
heal the sick, give liberty to captives, melt swords into ploughshares, and and covenant, respectively, in discussing their conceptions of divine-human
restore the kingdom and glory ofIsrael (Acts 1:6). If St. John the Baptist union. Is there any common ground between these? The answer depends
could stumble in relating this list to what he saw and heard of Jesus (Luke
7:20,23), it is no surprise that most Jews fail to see how the prophecy that
" (
11 C£ Moses Nachmanides (Ramban), Eric Smilevitch trans., La di;pute de Bareelone:

suivi du eommentaire sur Esafe 52-53 (Vikuaeh ha-Ramban [Lagrasse, France: Verdier,
McLean, vol. 45 of Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 1984]) passim.
(Catholic University of America, 1973) 20, 22, 23. 12 C£ Dale C. Allison, Jr., The New Moses: A Matthean Typology (Minneapolis: Fortress,

10 Fackenheim, "Demythologizing," 20. 1993) passim.

20 21
 Theosis Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology
on the content of each concept. Having defined theosis I turn to covenant. 13 is resistance to the insight that covenantal categories underpin kinship
St. Irenaeus taught that understanding salvation history "consists in showing motifs. This thesis was advanced in the late 60s and 70s by Dennis J.
why there are a number of covenants with mankind and in teaching what is McCarthy, S. J.,21 whose survey of ancient Near Eastern covenants
the character of those covenants." 14 The centrality of the covenant to biblical including suzerain-vassal treaties inductively demonstrated that covenants
narrative was axiomatic in theology and scholarshipl) until thirty five years in the ancient Near East principally served to forge relationships based on
ago when Perlitt's conclusion that the concept was oflate Deuteronomistic diverse degrees of kinship depending on the status of the contracting
origin (7 th c. BC) signalled the collapse of the scholarly consensus regarding parties. Thus, if the parties were kings of equal status, they emerged from
its traditio-historical centrality. 16 Consequently, the covenant could no longer covenantal ceremonies as "brothers"; vassals in trusting relationships
be regarded as the root and ground ofIsrael's self-awareness. The conclusion emerged as "sons" while vassals suspected of rebelliousness emerged as
is termed neo-Wellhausean because Julius Wellhausen, the father of higher "servants" as attested in biblical examples of secular covenants. 22 Eminent
Old Testament criticism, argued that the relationship with God was originally authorities have rallied to this position 23 even though mainstream
'it natural one as that ofson to father, "but that "Jehovah and Israel came to discussions of covenantal theology continue to rotate round Wellhausen. 24
be regarded as contracting parties of the covenant by ... the Deuteronomic Divine-human covenants are unattested in human religious history
Iaw. "17 except in Israe1. 25 McCarthy's reconstruction not only legitimates the
Scholars following Wellhausen often differed in explaining the origins traditional understanding of the centrality of the Israelite covenantal idea
of the covenant but predominantly agreed that it was secondary. Scholars but illuminates significant corollaries, such as salvation history being
rooted the sense of kinship in socio-political arrangements of confederalism 18 essentially a narrative explaining that history is the arena of God's recurrent
or in suzerain-vassal treaties. 19 When it became difficult to prove that such attempts to restore humankind-that is, Adam, created in His image and
structures actually informed the Sinai pericope, Nicholson concluded that likeness as His son-to family unity. The reason for the divine institution
no covenant took place at Sinai as described in Exod 24:1-11 but only a of successive covenants is the failure of preceding ones to realize God's
ceremony of adoptive kinship, Yahweh as Father adopting Israel and giving purposes. As Israel falters via the Golden Calf incident to answer God's
them laws to understand the prerequisites of family union. 20
The motif of kinship being primitive remains constant in all the
21 McCarthy, Old Testament Covenant: A Survey o/Current Opinions (Richmond, Virg.:
scholarly observations regarding covenantal origins. What is also constant
John Knox, 1972); idem, Treaty and Covenant. Analecta Biblical 21A, rev. ed. (Rome:
Biblical Institute Press, 1978).
13 I do so in grateful dependence on Scott W Hahn, "Kinship by Covenant: A Biblical 22 See the kinship language in the covenants between Asa of Judah and Ben-Hadad of

Theological Study of Covenant Types and Texts in the Old and New Testaments" (Ph.D. Damascus (1 Kgs 15:18-20); between Ahab ofIsrael and Ben Hadad of Syria (1 Kgs
diss., Marquette University, 1995). 20:31-34), and between Ahaz ofJudall and Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria (2 Kgs 16:7-
14 Against Heresies, 1.10.3. 9); Syrian examples of ANE covenants (McCarthy, Treaty and Covenant, 98).
15 Walther Eichrodt, The Theology o/the Old Testament, 2 vols. (London: SCM, 1961). 23 "The failure to recognize the rootage of the institution of covenant ... in the structure

16 Lothar Perlitt, Bundestheologie imAlten Testament, WMANT 36 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: of kinship societies has led to confusion and even gross distortion in the scholarly
Neukirchener Verlag, 1969). discussion of early Israelite religion" (Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew
17 Julius Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History 0/Ancient Israel (New York: Meridian, Epic: Essays in the History o/the Religion o/Israel [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
1957 [1889]) 469. .' (
Press, 1973] 14).
18 Max Weber, Ancient Judaism (New York: Free Press, 1952) 79, 118. 24 A. D. H. Mayes and R. B. Salters, eds., CoverzantAs Context: Essays in Honour olE. W

19 George E. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East (Pittsburgh, Nicholson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).
Penn.: The Biblical Colloquium, 1955) 26-36. 25 But for one possible exception: the Sumerian Urukagina text concerning the covenant
20 Ernest W Nicholson, God and His People: Covenant and Theology in the Old Testament between King (ensi) Urukagina of Lagash (ca. 24th c. B.c.) and his God Ningirsu discussed
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1986) 69, 295. by McCarthy, Treaty and Covenant, 31.

22 23
 Theosis Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology
call to become a kingdom of priests and minister to humanity as His Hahn states, humans can only adopt other humans 29 ), a true imago Dei
firstborn son, and confirms its recalcitrance again by its harlotry at Beth inscribed into human nature that urges him to aspire for mature likeness
Peor, Moses gives it a second covenant on the plains of Moab. Israel receives unto God. Validating this argument leads Hahn to Mettinger's proposapo
Deuteronomy on account of its hardness of heart, but the law aims to that the Israelite concept of royal divine sonship demythologizes ANE
effect within them a cathartic circumcision of the heart and restore them royal ideologies while transforming their mysterious religious idea through
to the status of sonship (Deut 30:1-7).26 an interpretatio israelitica that combines elements of pagan symbolic rites
This understanding of the centrality of the paternal-filial categories with prophetically or sacerdotally mediated performative utterances that
informing the representation of the divine-human covenant in Israel's constitute something mysterious but reaP! Thus, Israelite royal-sonship
creation theology and salvation history shows that some concept of real ideology, being both ethical and monotheistic, could have contributed to
kinship, and thus of divinization or theosis in some qualified sense the later emergence of Christo logy and theosis.
underpins this theology and history, giving rise on occasion to the classical
"son of God" passages that often puzzle interpreters (Gen 6: 1-4; Exod
4:22; Exod 7:1; Deut 32:6; 2 Sam 7:14; Pss 2:7,89:27,82:6 [Matt 22:45, Theosis and Old Testament Sapiential Anthropology
Mark 12:37, Luke 20:44]; Prov 30:4; Hos 11:1-3; Isa 45:9-11). Without
understanding of the kinship terminology and the unity underpinning The second motif stressed by Fackenheim was that of commandment.
the structure of biblical narrative, these are misinterpreted as signifying Fackenheim sharply contrasts spirituality grounded on commandments
"creatureliness, election and intimacy. It has no messianic connotation, with post-Enlightenment Kantian rationalism. 32 For Kant, the good is
and it is certainly not intended to signify divinity."27 done only by him who understands what he is doing and wills it, and not
One could begin to respond to such a conclusion by asking what the by him who does it without understanding its inner reasons, i.e., only on
biblical authors and redactors wished to accomplish by designating the faith. The problem with Kant's view is that it closes the individual in
Israelite king as Son of God (2 Sam 7:14, Pss 2:7; 89:27). Nicholson says· upon himself, for the ethical act is grounded on one's own understanding
that Israel's covenantal ideology is developed precisely to demythologize and will. Such grounds, it would seem, would provide no occasion for
primitive pagan beliefs and replace these by the idea that relationship acts oflove understood as sacrifices of one's own will, as self-surrenders to
with God can only be secured by ethical behavior (Pss 15, 24). But does another. Fackenheim pleads for living on the basis of obedience because
ethical behavior create or arise from merely metaphorical sonship? Those only such really opens and frees the self to respond to another. This validates
who recognize that there is more than metaphor at play here suggest that the importance of circumcision of the heart and of an ascetical moment
the terminology is rooted in the language of Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) in the journey towards God, which is vital to the Christian understanding
adoption customs. 28 But here too, the question arises as to whether the of theosis.
legal metaphors are fictions or whether they point at something real (as

29 Hahn, "Kinship by Covenant," chap. 6.

30 Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, King and Messiah (Lund: Gleerup, 1976) 254-93.
26 On the devout as sons or daughters of God, see Deut 14:hI.sa 1:2; 30:1; Hos 1:10. 31 Performative verbs or utterances, e.g.: "I hereby crown you" or "I confess," do not

27 Herbert Haag, '''Son of God' in the Language and Thinking of the Old Testament," in report or describe an action but perform or accomplish it. They cannot be true or false
Jesus, Son of God? Concilium 153.3 (1982) 36. but require contexts, conventions, sincerity and uptake from the audience to be felicitous;
28 M. W Schoenberg, "HUIOTHESIA: The Adoptive Sonship of the Israelites," AER cf. John L. Austin, How to Do Things with Wor@ (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
143 (1960) 261-73; Gerald Cooke, "The Israelite King as Son of God," ZAW73 (1961) Press, 1962) 130-39.
218-24; idem, "The Sons of (the) God(s)," ZAW76 (1964) 22-47. 32 Fackenheim, "Demythologizing," 16-27.

24 25
 Theosis Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology
The core teaching of biblical wisdom literature, the principle that that between the stages of initial dust and final dust and ashes, humanity
stands at the beginning, middle, and end of the book of Proverbs (Prov exists in a more exalted state, which, carrying through the metaphor of
1:7; 9:10; 15:33; 30:30) and at strategic points in Job, Ecclesiastes, and vegetation, may be that of a lofty and glorious tree, or of something smaller
the so-called Deuteronomistic History, is the teaching that the fear of the like a vine, or even grain.
Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and that understanding entails departure Such representations are invoked in scripture, especially in the
from evil. Alternatively it is the teaching that wisdom consists in the humble sapiential and prophetic strata, to illustrate what von Rad calls the "nutshell
keeping and doing of God's words and commandments. These two of the Israelite theory of knowledge," namely, that the knowledge and
formulations are synonymous inasmuch as one takes the commandments wisdom of God begin with (Prov 1:7; 9:10; 15:33; 31:30; Job 28:28; Sir
to heart by committing oneself to doing them, departing from evil. The 1:13)-and are thus "rooted" in (Sir 1:18; Wis 3: 15)-reverential fear of
fear of the Lord, humility and righteousness may be the root and initial him who empowers humanity to depart from evil and to keep, in the face
stages of wisdom (Ps Ill: 10; Sir 1: 18) but they are not its end. In scripture, of all tribulation, His commandments and so, by righteousness, gain access
keeping is normally a prerequisite for knowing (Gen 4:9; Exod 31: 13; Deut to the waters of divine instruction (Psalm 1; Sir 24:23-33) enter into life
7:9; 8:2; Prov 3:1;33 John 8:52, 55; 14:15; 2 Pet 1:8). For the end of (Deut 30:15-16).
keeping God's words is entry into their life-giving energies, into the joy of Entry into life means transformation from lowly earth, that is, soil,
knowing and savoring their inner wisdom and goodness, gaining the ability into the full stature of an exalted tree of righteousness (Prov 11 :30; Sir
to discriminate between things that lead to life and things that do not, 24:13-19; Isa 61:3), a paradisal tree of life and knowledge (see the
and the capacity to bring peace-making judgment and to dispense life- identification of the righteous with "the Lord's paradise, the trees of life"
sustaining counsel. Being ubiquitous in biblical wisdom, psalmody and in Pss. Sol. 14:3,4), or a fragrant vine of understanding (Sir 24:15, 17,
salvation history, these patterns may be read back into the Garden of 19), thus becoming capable of yielding the fruit of righteousness (Prov
Eden story in Genesis 2-3 to help unravel the meaning of one of its 3:9 LXX; Prov 13:2; Pss. Sol. 15:3; Hos 10:12), the fruit of knowledge and
multi fold layers of wisdom. understanding of God (Isa 4:2; 27:6; 53:11; Sir 1:14; 4 Ezra 8:6).
The Hebrew Scriptures speak of man as being earth and dust (Gen Conversely, the tree that humanity is or is meant to be, however glorious
2.7; 3:19, 23; Job 34:15; Eccl 3:20; 12:7) and the LXX adds to this by or proud, withers or blows away (Ps 1:4; Isa 1:30; 27: 10-11; Jer 17:6-10;
describing man as "earthborn" and "kindred [to the] earth" (Yllyevou5 Ezek 19:10-14), is cut down or burned up (Ezekiel 31; Isa 5:24; 6:13;
... olloiorro:8R ... y~v, gegenous . .. homoiopathe . .. gen) in Wis 7: 1,3. Mal 4:1).
This identification emphasizes humanity's lowly and humble origin, and Even the Messianic hope is expressed in terms of the Branch from the
is underscored by the observation that humanity turns into ashes, the stump ofJesse (Isa 11:1-2; Jer 23:5; 33:15; Zech 3:8; 6:12), the shoot
residue of burnt wood or vegetation, so "human beings are dust and ashes" and handiwork of God's hands that will repossess the land for all time (Isa
(Sir 17:32; c£ 10:9; Gen 18:27;Job 30:19; Wis 2:3).34 The imagery suggests 60:21 MT and LXX). The focus on humanity as soil and its transformation
by diverse kinds of seed surfaces clearly in 4 Ezra 4:29-39, which describes
33See also the connection between keeping and living, Prov 4:4; 7: 1. Adam's heart as "the field where the good has been sown" (4:29), which
34The exegesis of scripture in this paragraph is largely indebted to Levi Khamor, The could have yielded a harvest of righteousness (v. 35) and understanding
Revelation ofthe Son ofMan (Petersham, Mass.: St. Bede's, 19~9) passim, esp. 1-12, and (8:6) had it held on to the good seed, but did not and still fails to do so
The Revelation ofBethlehem (Petersham: St. Bede's, 1989) (auth~rship attributed to "Two
because it is dominated by evil seed that was also sown in it "from the
Hermits") 37--41,44-52. Summarizing these anthropological reflections is Gregory Glazov,
"Biblical Anthropology and Medical Ethics," in Proceedings of the 2(Jh Anniversary of the beginning" (4:30), and consequently burdening it with so much "fruit of
Foundation of the Linacre Centre International Conference at Queens College, Cambridge, ungodliness" (4:31). The sons of men spend their lives in the field from
28-31 july, 1997, ed. Luke Gormally (Linacre Centre Publications, 1999) 90-116. which Adam was taken (Gen 2:15,3:23; c£ Matt 13:38). God has provided

26 27
 Theosis Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology
the seed and rain for joyous growth (lsa 55:10-13), but people often fail of the agent who sowed the seed-word, but also transcendent inasmuch as
to receive it. the spiritual animating principle of any living organism transcends its
The anthropology informing this sapiential imagery may in turn be matter.
applied to the imagery and terminology of Genesis 2-3 to infer that Yahweh The biblical anthropological models taken from covenant salvation
intended Adam, whom he fashioned from the dust of the earth and history and wisdom narratives provide many bases for a biblical theosis
transferred into the Garden of Eden, to be transformed, via the holding theology. Before evaluating their relevance to Christian theosis theology,
and keeping, in righteousness, of the one simple word and commandment it is necessary to clarifY how much, in fact, Christian theosis was grounded
which he entrusted "upon him" into, as it were, a glorious and lofty not just on explicit texts about transformation and divine adoption, but
paradisal tree of life and of knowledge, yielding the fruit of righteousness on teachings about the hidden, seed-like transformative energies of divine
and knowledge of God. Adam's failure to enter into life and preserve the words and the potencies of human covenantal obedience.
status of an "oak of righteousness" (lsa 61:3) derived not so much from a
desire to "become like God," (God did, after all, create Adam in His own
image and likeness), but, as in the case of the Pharaoh of Ezekiel 31 , from Bibliography
the failure to become really like God by means of an inward, organic,
trans formative appropriation of godliness via holding onto God's words, Alfeyev, Hilarion. "The Patristic Heritage and Modernity," Paper delivered at
opting, instead, to try to attain this status via an act that severs any organic the 9th International Confirence on Russian monasticism and spirituality, Bose
link between what one does and what one is and thus to deny the ethically Monastery (Italy), 20 September 2001. Available at www.orthodoxeurope.org/
print/111112.aspx.
reflexive nature of human action (Prov 1:29-33; 12: 14; lsa 3:10). By means
Allison, Dale c., Jr., The New Moses: A Matthean TJpology. Minneapolis: Fortress,
of this process, he would not have become less human, just as soil does
1993.
not become any less material by entering into the life of a seed that opens
Austin, John L. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
within it. But he would have become transhumanized-become more University Press, 1962.
than he was-just as soil becomes more than it was, when it is transformed Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Letters and Papers from Prison. Edited by Eberhard Bethge.
into a plant. Translated by Reginald H. Fuller. New York: Macmillan, 1953.
One may note a resonance with Jesus' explanation, by means of the Bouyer, Louis. The Christian Mystery: From Pagan Myth to Christian Mysticism.
Parable of the Sower (Matthew 13), of the principle for entering the Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1989.
kingdom of God-receptivity to the seed. As the understanding of this Cooke, Gerald. "The Israelite King as Son of God." ZAW73 (1961) 218-24.
parable is prerequisite to understanding all the other parables (Mark 4: 13), - - . "The Sons of (the) God(s)." ZAW76 (1964) 22-47.
it provides the foundation for soteriology and theosis. Theosis begins with Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of
the humble opening up of oneself to the reception of God's word, and the Religion ofIsrael Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973.
Golitzin, Alexandre. "Scriptural Images of the Church: an Eastern Orthodox
progresses through the keeping and cultivation, i.e., the doing of the word
Reflection" (unpublished, 2001, written at the request of the Ecclesiology
Games 1:22-27). Given the conditions of "life in the field" (Matt 13:38),
section of Faith and Order, World Council of Churches; available at
this necessitates a certain watchfulness and asceticism with regard to www.marquette.edu/maqom/church).
whatever is noxious and injurious, but as a keeper p-erseveres in truth and Eichrodt, Walther. The Theology ofthe Old Testament. 2 vols. Translated by J. A.
righteousness, he matures in loving-kindness, fulfilling the potential of Baker. London: SCM, 1961.
humble humanity by attaining to the full stature of divine sonship. Ellenson, David. ''A Jewish Legal Authority Addresses Jewish-Christian Dialogue:
Transformed, metamorphosed or divinized by the word, he remains human Two Responses of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein" Oacob Rader Marcus Center of
throughout. The source of the seed remains mysteriously near in the form the American Jewish Archives, 2001. Available at www.huc.edu/ajalOO-4.htm) .

28 29
 Theosis Theosis, Judaism, and Old Testament Anthropology
Fackenheim, Emil. "Demythologizing and Remythologizing in Jewish Schoenberg, M. W "HUIOTHESIA: The Adoptive Sonship of the Israelites."
Experience: Reflections Inspired by Hegel's Philosophy." In Myth and AER 143 (1960) 261-73.
Philosophy, 16-27. Edited by George F. McLean, OMI. Vol. 45 of Proceedings Ware, Kallistos. The Orthodox 1.%)1. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary
of the American Catholic Philosophical Association; The Office of the Press, 1995.
National Secretary of the Association; The Catholic University of America, Weber, Max. Ancient Judaism. Translated and edited by Hans H. Gerth and
1971. Don Martindale. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1952.
Glazov, Gregory. "Biblical Anthropology and Medical Ethics." In Proceedings of Wellhausen, Julius. Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel. New York:
the 20'h Anniversary of the Foundation of the Linacre Centre International Meridian, 1957 (1889).
Conference at Queen's College, Cambridge, 28-31 July, 1997. Edited by Luke
Gormally. Linacre Centre Publications, 1999.
Haag, Herbert. "'Son of God' in the Language and Thinking of the Old
Testament." InJesus, Son of God?, 1-36. Concilium 153.3 (1982).
Hahn, Scott W "Kinship By Covenant: A Biblical Theological Study of Covenant
Types and Texts in the Old and New Testaments." Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept.
Theology, Marquette University, 1995.
Khamor, Levi. The Revelation ofBethlehem. Petersham, Mass.: St. Bede's, 1989.
Authorship attributed to "Two Hermits."
- - - . The Revelation ofthe Son ofMan. Petersham, Mass.: St. Bede's, 1989.
Levenson, Jon D. "Why Jews Are Not Interested in Biblical Theology." In The
Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament, and Historical Criticism:Jews and Christians
in Biblical Studies, 33-61. Louisville: Westminster, 1993.
Mayes, A. D. H., and R. B. Salters, editors. CovenantAs Context: Essays in Honour
ofE. W. Nicholson. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
McCarthy, Dennis]., SJ. Old Testament Covenant: A Survey ofCurrent Opinions.
Richmond, Virg.: John Knox, 1972.
- - - . Treaty and Covenant. Analecta Biblica 21A. Rev. Ed. Rome: Biblical
Institute Press, 1978.
Mendenhall, George E. Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East.
Pittsburgh, Penn.: The Biblical Colloquium, 1955.
Mettinger, Tryggve N. D. King and Messiah. Lund: Gleerup, 1976.
Nicholson, Ernest W God and His People: Covenant and Theology in the Old
Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1986.
Moses Nachmanides (Ramban). Translated by Eric Smilevitch. La dispute de
Barcelone: suivi du commentaire sur Esai"e 52-53 (Vikuach ha-Ramban)
Lagrasse, France: Verdier, 1984.
Perlitt, Lothar. Bundestheologie im Alten Testament. WMANT 36. Neukirchen-
Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1969.
Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal. "Is the Eucharist a Sacrifice?" In The Debate on
Sacraments, 35-40. Concilium 4/3 (1967).

30 31
 r
·.,"··'·"1'"

!t2 Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation

In reality, there is probably not a strict dividing line between the respectable
philosophies (Platonism and Stoicism) and the popular religions, but I
!' will maintain this barrier anyway, since it was a barrier that the philosophers
and theologians themselves tried to maintain, and which we can observe
when we study Hellenistic influences on biblical authors.

Middle-Platonic Background

An important connection between Plato and 2 Pet 1:4 is in the latter's

reference to "escap[ing] the corruption that is in the world because of
lust." That last term is E1Tl8ullia epithymia, the same word that Plato uses
Second Peter's Notion of to describe "appetite" or "desire," the lowest level of a human being. 2
Second Peter seems to share the Platonic instinct that there is a high and
Divine Participation noble level associated with correct knowledge, and a lowly level associated
with epithymia.
Stephen Finlan The superiority of soul to body is a constant theme in Plato's thought;
the body is like a tomb for the soul. 3 He writes, "we ought to try to escape
from earth to the dwelling of the gods as quickly as we can; and to escape
For a Christian writer around 100 CE to say, "you may become participants is to become like God, to become righteous and holy and wise."4 But it is
of the divine nature" (2 Pet 1:4), was to evoke not only biblical images, a mistake to think of Plato as fundamentally escapist. 5 His most celebrated
but also concepts of divinization that were central to the leading Hellenistic work, The Republic, affirms that, rather than ascending to more spiritual
philosophies-Middle-Platonism and Stoicism. Of course, Second Peter's! levels, the spiritual person has the higher duty of staying in human
is a Christian teaching, but here he uses terminology that is recognizable community and helping others. 6 Social obligation and virtue are the central
from the Greek philosophical traditions, and this should not be overlooked focus of several of his works. 7
in studies of Second Peter. But the afterlife involves real community with gods. The souls that
Second Peter has no hesitancy about using Middle Platonic and Stoic have not been corrupted in this life, but "who truly love wisdom,"8 go on
religious concepts and terms to express his biblical monotheism, but what to find "gods for companions and guides."9 Even clearer is the expression
he envisions by "participation in the divine" is far from obvious. It is not 2 Republic, 437.
clear whether it means the "divinization" of the believer. One should 3 Gorgias493A; cf. Phaedo 67A-E.

suspend bias, investigate the relevant biblical and nonbiblical texts, and 4 Theaetatus 176B, from Plato, vol. 2, tr. H. N. Fowler. LCL (London: Wm. Heinemann,

1921) 129.
examine the message of Second Peter itself
5 AsN. T. Wright does. See The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress,
I leave aside almost entirely the "apotheosis" or(deification of heroes 2003) 355.
and emperors, since both Jews and Christians recoiled from these notions. 6 Republic, 519E.
7 Certainly the Meno, Republic, Statesman, Crito, and Laws.

1 I use the term "Second Peter" to designate both the unknown author, and the epistle 8 Phaedo 82C.

itself 9 Phaedo 108B; cf 111B.

32 33
 Theosis Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation
found in Plato's Laws, despite his taking a generally down-to-earth approach Philo ofAlexandria is, in my view, the most interesting Middle Platonic
in this work: his protagonist advises that "what god wants is that we should thinker, utilizing both Platonic and Stoic terms and allegorizing, while
be as like him as possible."lo remaining connected to Jewish monotheism. Philo draws heavily upon
Imitation of God is a major theme of Middle Platonism, which seeks Plato and the interpreters of Plato for ethics and metaphysics alike. Philo
to systematize Plato's metaphysics and theology, and which heightens the uses the adjective theios to speak of God's justice and mercy, as we might
notion of deification. These are articulated most vividly by the prolific expect, but also to describe the special status of biblical figures, especially
authors Plutarch of Chaeroneia and Philo of Alexandria. Plutarch uses Moses, who was "a piece of work beautiful and godlike, a model for those
the same adjective that Second Peter uses in our key passage-6Elos theios, who are willing to copy it."16
"divine." Plutarch uses 6Elos theios to describe the incorruption, power, But imitation of God is possible for anyone: solitude is an opportunity
virtue, and reason of God. II Plutarch teaches that humans can take on the for "those who ... desire to find God ... to become like his blessed and
first three of these characteristics, "incorruption, power, and virtue; and happy nature."I? Those draw near to God "who regard it as their goal to
the most revered, the divinest of these, is virtue."12 The goal of life is to be fully conformed to God who begat them."18 People are "nearly related
come to resemble God. In order to do this, it is necessary to repudiate to God."19 God "made man partaker of kinship with Himself in mind
sensuality and selfishness. 13 Spiritual progress means imitating God, taking and reason"20 ("kinship" here is aVYYEvE tex syngeneia, not KOI vc.uVOS
on God's righteous, rational, controlled nature. This results in an actual koinonos). The human intellect is "an impression of, or a fragment or a ray
transformation, even taking on God's incorruption. 14 God is the perfect of that blessed nature."21
model. Deification involves progress, and is available only for a few: More than the average person, however, the prophet is a "friend of
God," and "would naturally partake [here it is KOIVc.uVOV koinonon] of
A few good men, specially honoured by the deity, may themselves become God himself."22 Moses, again, was "full of the divine spirit and under the
Daemons and act as guardian angels to others .... The better souls influence of that spirit."23 This is not just spiritualizing language for a
undergo a transformation from men to heroes, from heroes to daemons, purely mental experience. Philo believes that the human mind is
and from daemons, some few souls, being purified through prolonged temporarily"removed .... at the arrival of the divine [6Elov] Spirit, but
practice of virtue, are brought to a participation in the divine nature is again restored to its previous habitation when that Spirit departs."24
itself 15 Thus, there are two kinds of theosis in Philo: prophetic oraculation, which

16 Mos. 1.158; from Jervis, "Becoming Like God," 148.

17 Abr. 87.
10 Laws 715E; from Christopher Rowe, An Introduction to Greek Ethics (London: 18 Opif 144; from Philo, vol. 1, tr. F. Colson and G. Whitaker, LCL (Cambridge, Mass.:

Hutchinson & Co., 1976) 97. Harvard University Press, 1929) 115.
11 James M. Starr, Sharers in Divine Nature: 2 Peter 1:4 in Its Hellenistic Context. 19 Mos. 1.279.

Coniectanea Biblical 33 (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 2003) 128. 20 Opif 77; LCL edition.

12 Aristides 6.2-3; from L. Ann Jervis, "Becoming Like God through Christ: Discipleship 21 Opif 146; Hendrickson edition.

in Romans," in Patterns o/Discipleship in the New Testament, ed. Richard N. Longenecker 22 Mos. 1.156.

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996) 147. , ( 23 Mos. 1.175.

13 Genio 585A, 591D-E; De virt442; Proftctus 83F; Starr, Sharers, 139; c£ Plato, Phaedo 24 Her. 265; cf. QG 3.9; Spec. 4.49. See Gregory E. Sterling, '''Wisdom Among the
82C, 83B. Perfect': Creation Traditions in Alexandrian Judaism and Corinthian Christianity," Nov T
14 Starr, Sharers, 137-38. 37 (1995) 381; Carl R. Holladay, Theios Aner in Hellenistic-Judaism: A Critique 0/ the
15 Plu., De Deftctu 415 B-C; from John Oakesmith, The Religion o/Plutarch (London: Use o/This Category in New Testament Christology, SBL Dissertation Series 40 (Missoula,
Longmans, Green, & Co., 1902) 172. Mont.: Scholars, 1977) 158.

34 35
 Theosis Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation
is an extraordinary but momentary divinization; and the gradual But the general thrust of Stoicism is pantheistic, identifying the divine
divinization or "conforming to God" that results from lifelong practice of with the active principle (Logos) and with Nature (which is run by the
reason and piety. Logos). Most Stoics cannot be said to have a personal God; everything
that happens in Nature is a manifestation of the Logos, so everything in
Nature is equally divine. The Divine is the active principle behind Nature
Stoic Growth in Virtue or Kosmos (world): the "seminal principle of the world," or a "designing
fire" (rrup TEXVIKOV pyr technikon).32 Greek polytheism is made to fit
Although having a weak theology (that is, concept of God), Stoicism was into this system; the gods are seen (or explained away) as reflections of the
intensely religious, and had a strong concept of deification, or rather, of Logos. Imitation of the gods is a paramount value for the Stoics. In fact,
reunion with the Logos. Further, Stoicism had more followers, and at "the only sufficient worship of the gods is to imitate them."33 However,
more levels of society, than did Middle Platonism, which was embraced one can argue that, "the theistic language is mere metaphor," and that,
mostly by the highly educated. with these explanations, "the gods are abolished .... The Deity in which
The Stoics believed that Reason (the Greek word is "'OY05 Logos) he [CleanthesJ truly believes is the cosmos."34 But this is not sufficient to
pervaded the world. Human reason is connected with this Logos;25 it is "a account for a Seneca or an Epictetus.
part of the mind of God that has descended in to the body."26 Epictetus Some early Stoics had difficulty with the idea of progress. Their monism
said, "You are a principal work, a fragment of God Himself, you have in indicated that one was either in harmony or out of harmony with Logos,
yourself a part of Him .... You bear God about with you, poor wretch, and if one was truly in harmony with reason, one was the equal ofJupiter. 35
and know it not."27 The deification of the sage really grows out of Stoic "deification of human
There can be little doubt that Second Peter was living in "a pervasively virtue"36; to be truly virtuous was the highest possible condition for god
Hellenistic environment."28 Even his use of <!>U0I5 fYsis in our key verse or human. And later Stoics allowed that there could be progress toward
(1:4), like his use of <!>UOIK05 fYsikos in 2:12, "employs the vocabulary of this goal. Still, it remains close to pantheism. Deification is really just
Hellenistic piety," specifically the Stoic variety.29 To be "in agreement with reunion with the Divine. The soul will return to the Divine when it dies,
Nature" (<!>U0I5 fYsis) was the supreme virtue for a Stoic, because nature is although there is not much notion of individual identity; this is more like
ruled by reason, and reason is God, more or less. 30 reabsorption into the All. Thus, "death is not a great change from what
Some Stoics speak of God as a personal being, for instance Epictetus, now is .... You will not be, but something else will be, of which the world
who says, "Rational creatures ... are by nature fitted to share in the has need"37-a very unselfish sentiment.
society of God, being connected with Him by the bond of reason-why Although ostensibly materialist (that is, believing everything, even
should he not call himself a citizen of the universe and a son of God?"31 Logos, was physical), Stoic philosophy was rich with religious thought
and feeling, including in its exhortation toward moral and mental
25 J.Daryl Charles, Virtue amidst Vice: The Catalog o/Virtues in 2 Peter 1, JSNT Sup 150
(Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997) 102, citing Epictetus, Diss. 1.20.5; 2.20.2l. 32 Diogenes Laertius, Lives 7.134-37; Starr, Sharers, 152.
26 Starr, Sharers, 159, summarizing Seneca, Epistle 120.14. 33 Starr, Sharers, 158; citing Seneca, Ep. 95.50.
27 Epict. Disc. 2.8; from The Stoic and Epicurean Philosophe'l'( ed., tr. Whitney J. Oates 34 Ludwig Edelstein, The Meaning o/Stoicism (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University

(New York: The Modern LibralY, 1940) 295. Press, 1966) 34.
28 Charles, Virtue amidst Vice, 47. 35 Jacques Maritain, Moral Philosophy, tr. Joseph W Evans (New York: Scribner's, 1964) 55.
29 Charles, Virtue amidst Vice, 101, with note 17. 36 Maritain, Moral Philosophy, 54.

30 Edwyn Bevan, Stoics and Skeptics (Oxford: Clarendon, 1913) 55. 37 Epict., Disc. 3.24; taken from Cyril Bailey, Phases in the Religion 0/ Ancient Rome

31 Epict., Disc. 1.9; Stoic and Epicurean, 240. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1932) 242.

36 37
 Theosis
Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation
betterment. Everyone received "seeds of virtue" or "seeds of reason" at
birth,38 but virtue needs to be developed, perfected, or it only gets practiced using EKTnJP0JatS' ekpyrosis,43 the Stoic technical term for the final
intermittently. Reason may be inherent, but virtue is acquired. What is conflagration. At any rate, Second Peter accepts the notion of a final,
needed is a complete change in one's behavior, even a conversion of one's violent day of judgment, similar to what is described in Jewish apocalyptic
life purpose, accompanied by the joining of a new community,39 ideas works such as First Enoch. And the approach of the end "like a thief" has
that resonate with Second Peter. But where a Stoic would say that one's a Pauline sound (1 Thess 5:2). Second Peter's theology is consistent with
inclinations must become more rational, Second Peter would say one needs biblical monotheism, not with Stoic pantheism. Still, a fiery destruction
to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord"; in fact, that is his final followed by a cosmic re-formation does have a Stoic overtone. Pagan
exhortation (3: 18). Knowledge is central, but it is a particular kind of Hellenism is a suggestion that refuses to go away, despite the presence of
knowledge. specifically Jewish influences.
As Stoics stress the necessity of choosing the mental over the sensual Of course, in theology per se, Second Peter departs sharply from
life, Second Peter articulates a choosing of "goodness ... and self-control" Stoicism: he affirms the sovereignty and free will of God (not an impersonal
(1 :5-6) over "dissipation ... adultery .... greed .... licentious desires" "reason" in the cosmos), and the certainty of a judgment day under a
(2:13-14, 18). The virtues list in 2 Pet 1:5-7 is easily the "most Hellenistic personal God, not a mechanistic collapse of all things. Second Peter is
of the NT ethicallists."4o Some of its words are rare in the LXX, but common confident about the personal God having spoken through the prophets
in Greek moralizing literature. After "faith" and "goodness," Second Peter (1:19) and manifested Godselfin the Lord Jesus Christ.
lists YVc00EI gnosei or "knowledge," a common term in Hellenistic It is entirely possible that Second Peter is arguing against the allegorizing
philosophy (as in CH 13 41 ), and then EYKPcXTEICX egkrateia or "self- stories and re-interpreted myths told by the Stoics, when he argues against
control"-one of the principal Stoic virtues. Next come "endurance," "cleverly devised myths" (1:16). He could be attacking those to whom he
"godliness," "mutual affection," and the list culminates on "love," the was formerly close, ideologically. Additionally, some scholars see an attack
supreme Christian virtue, so it is safe to say that Christian distinctiveness is on Epicurean skepticism in 3:3-4, 9. 44 Second Peter may be distancing
clearly evident in the first and last terms. Inside the list, however, are words himself from his former philosophical comrades. Some of these comrades
that are as much or more at home in a Stoic list of virtues. may have joined him in converting to Christianity, but then slid back to
In 2 Pet 2:22 there is an evident reference to Prov 26: 11 (a dog pagan philosophy, like a dog returning to its vomit (2 Pet 2:22). Second
returning to its vomit), but Second Peter attaches a nonbiblical, "oriental Peter 2 sounds somewhat Stoic (even if directed against Stoics), but sounds
proverb"42 about a sow returning to the mud. Immediately after even more like the way that Jewish apocalyptic inveighs against sin.
paraphrasing Ps 90:4 with "one day is like a thousand years" (3:8), Second The sharp contrast between godliness and the sensuality of the world
Peter speaks of the heavens passing away, the elements being dissolved found in Second Peter recalls similar rhetoric in Middle Platonic, Stoic,45
with fire (3:10, 12). This is a really fascinating conflation of influences, and Hellenistic Jewish writings. 46 Anti-sensualism itself does not signal to
seeming to combine Jewish apocalyptic with Stoic apocalyptic, possibly 43 There is significant variation among the ancient manuscripts for 2 Pet 3: 10-12. They
ci:arly. speak of the heavens and the ea~th bein& dis;olved or burned up, but only a
38 Musonius Rufus, Fr. 2 and Seneca, Ep. 94.29, respectively; Starr, Sharers, 163. mmonry of scholars argue for the StoIC term EKTTUpc.uot5 ekpyrosis being present;
39 Troels Engberg-Pedersen, Paul and the Stoics (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2000) Bauckham (Jude, 2 Peter, 317-18) mentions Olivier and Windisch.
, 44 Charles, Virtue amidst Vice, 45-46; "Epicureans were known in terms of their denial
102-9, 125. " ( ,t
40 RichardJ. Bauckham, jude, 2 Peter, WBC 50 (Waco: Word, 1983) 187. I of divine judgment" (Neyrey, 2 Peter, jude, 122).

!
41 Bauckham, jude, 2 Peter, 186. 45 "You bear Him about within you and are unaware that you are defiling Him with

42 According to Richard Bauckham's footnote in the HarperCollins Study Bible unclean thoughts and foul actions" (Epicr., Disc. 2.8; Stoic and Epicurean, 295); c£ Disc.
(1993) 2289. 2.18; Diogenes Laertius, Lives 7.110, 113.
46 Testament o/Reuben 5-6; Philo, Ebr. 5-6; idem, Spec. 1.206; 4.89-91.

38

l 39
 Theosis Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation
us whether the influence upon Second Peter's mind is "pagan" or Jewish.
influential apocalyptic book we call First Enoch are more obvious: 2 Pet
Second Peter repeatedly chooses terminology that is common in "pagan"
2:4 speaks of the rebel angels being "com~itte~ ... to chains o~ deepest
Hellenistic literature, but his eschatology closely resembles that of
darkness to be kept until the judgment, whICh seems to denve from
apocalyptic Judaism.
'~azel" being "b[ou]nd ... and throw[n] into the darkness," then covered
with rocks until "he may be sent into the fire on the great day of judgment"
(I En. 10:4-6).49 Second Peter goes on to speak of the judgment of the
Apocalyptic Judaism ungodly, lawless, and lustful (2:6-11), recalling the severa~ Enochian
chapters that speak of the punishment of the lustful .and vIOlent. rebel
Some scholars want to treat lightly all of the "Hellenistic garb" found in
angels, the "Watchers" (J Enoch 9-14, 18, 21). The nghteous believers
Second Peter, arguing that his apocalyptic shows biblical, not Hellenistic,
are promised that they will "be partners with the good-hearted peo.ple of
rootsY While I think the Hellenism is more than merely "garb," I can
heaven" (104:6); God "and my son are united with them forever In the
accept the notion that the main Hellenistic influence upon the author is
upright paths" (105:2). There will be a "new heaven" (94:16), a "new
Hellenistic Judaism, especially the apocalyptic genre. The original meaning
creation" (72: 1).
of the Greek word "apocalyptic" is "revelatory," but since much of the
Not all Hellenistic Jewish literature shares the same apocalyptic
literature that spoke of revelation also spoke of God and God's angels
viewpoint, or uses the same philosophic strategies. There is a work very
separating the good people from the evil people, carrying out an end-time
different from First Enoch which sheds light on 2 Pet 1:4. Pseudo-Phocylides
judgment, and re-making the world, the term "apocalyptic" has naturally
is a moralizing teaching text, presenting both Jewish and Hellenistic ideas
taken on this implication of end-time catastrophe and judgment, and I
in a thoroughly Hellenistic guise, ascribing the authorship to a Greek
am intending to include that implication when I use the term here.
writer (Phocylides 50). Far from being an effort to persuade Gentiles to
Echoing the popular apocalyptic literature of the time, Second Peter
consider the "philosophy of Moses" (as with Philo), this is an effort to
promises that incineration is "comingtcftheungodly" (2:6), who will be' .
instill principles of right and wrong, without distinguishing Greek from
destroyed like animals (2:12), sent "to the deepest darkness" (2:17). Yet
Jewish philosophy. It has a divinization passage that seems to blend Jewish
there is no hint of any knowledge of covenant thinking or of the importance
bodily resurrection with Platonic godlikeness. Pseudo-Phocylides 103-4
of holy days, things one would expect from a Galilean Jew. Despite the
says, "We hope that the remains of the departed wip soo~ come to th~
reference to prophecy fulfilled (1: 19), no specific prophecy is given; and
light ... and afterward they will become gods [8col TEAe80vTCXI them
despite a knowledge of biblical stories (in 2 Pet 2:4-8, 15-16), some details
telethontai] ."51 The sentences that immediately follow this one sound very
are peculiar (Balaam's father's name is misspelled in 2: 15). These
Hellenistic, where the spirit is "on loan," and people are destined to
peculiarities in Jewish knowledge tend to suggest a pre-Christian identity
"b ecome go ds. "
as either a non-Palestinian Jew or a devout Gentile who was being
instructed in Judaism.
Second Peter's apoclypticism bears resemblarices to some passages in with fire and making a new heavens and new earth (Isa 66: 16, 22) is repeated in 2 Pet
3:7, 13. Most of the individual elements in 2 Pet 3:7-13 are independent ofIsaiah.
Isaiah, but with only one certain quotation. 48 But the allusions to the 49 Translated by E. Isaac, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1, ed. James H.

Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983) 17.

47 Charles, Virtue amidst Vice, 47 n.14, agreeing with R. Bau6kham, E. Loevestam, and
50 An authority on ethics cited by Plato and Aristotle (Rep. 407a7; Pol. IVII.1295b);
M. Green.
John J. Collins,fewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age, OTL (Louisville: Westminster John
48 The heavens rolling up (Isa 34:4), or vanishing like smoke (Isa 51 :6), may be echoed
Knox, 1997) 159.
in 2 Pet 3: 10, 12, where the earth passes away, dissolves. The weakness of these parallels
51 P. W van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides: With Introduction and
is strengthened, however, by the one actual quotation: the Lord executing judgment
Commentary, SVTP 4 (Leiden: Brill, 1978) 185.

40
41
 Theosis Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation

Yet elsewhere Pseudo-Phocylides restates certain moral principles that Pseudo-Phocylides alerts us to a linkage between theology and sociology,
can be found in the Pentateuch and Proverbs, without ever giving a hint but, of course, notions of deification can be had by people of greatly
that these are Jewish in origin. Since the whole piece is presented as a divergent social strategies and theologies. First Enoch, with its intense moral
work of Greek wisdom, and Jewish ideas are never identified as such,52 resentment of oppressive outsiders, strongly suggests a sectarian social
and since its divinization concept looks so Greek, its author seems to be profile, while Pseudo-Phocylides' instinct for moral education and ostensible
interested in assimilating to Greek culture. In fact, there may be a significant Greek identity implies an assimilationist strategy. In the social dimension,
parallel between conceptualization and socialization. The author's Second Peter is closer to Enoch's sectarianism.
assimilation to Greek culture seems to be paralleled by his concept of The lack oflofty intellectualizing in Second Peter blocks the application
i'
assimilation to the Divine; one is drawn into God, much like one is drawn of the label "Platonic." The absence of even a hint of any notion that
into the universal culture! nature is to be identified with God, shows an ability to dispense with
Second Peter is not assimilationist, nor does he speak of becoming fundamental Stoic principles. The strong perpetuation of Jewish literary
gods or God, but of partaking of the divine nature, which seems to mean themes, along with the absence of any interest in the temple cult or holy
divine character, knowledge of the Savior, and proper self-controlled and days, suggests diaspora Judaism as the most likely social background for
ethical behavior. Second Peter has a different social strategy from Pseudo- the author. But we cannot understand Second Peter if we do not explore
Phocylides, but there is a point of similarity, in that both assert their truths his specifically Christian beliefs.
as universal principles, not tied to the Jewish nation or the Mosaic covenant.
In that sense, both are Hellenistic; Hellenism is characterized by the search
for universal principles and universal community. Second Peter, however, Pauline Parallels; Petrine Disputes
has a particular ideology and social group-Christianity-distinct from
popular Hellenistic culture, and in that sense is very different from Pseudo- There is a peculiar kind of Pauline influence. Second Peter clearly borrows
Phocylides, though both use Hellenistic ideas. from certain portions of the letters of Paul, but shows no hint of any
Both of these works, as well as 1 Enoch, envision the salvation of notion of justification, substitution, typology, fulfillment of promises made
righteous Gentiles. First Enoch says that the Son of Man, the Chosen to Abraham, or Jesus as a Second Adam-the distinctive soteriology and
One, will be "the light of the gentiles and he will become the hope of salvation history of Paul, yet Second Peter does share some of Paul's ideas
those who are sick in their hearts. All those who dwell upon the earth about the Second Coming, moral purification, and divinization of the
shall fall and worship before him" (48:4-5). "He shall proclaim peace to believer. In any case, Second Peter's connections to the letters of Paul are
you in the name of the world that is to become" (71: 15). much more numerous than his links to First Peter. Just a few of them are:
For 1 Enoch and 2 Peter, there is a severe dividing line between the salvation being "bought" (forms of the verb ayopat;w agorazo, 2 Pet
good and the evil people, but this is an ideological and moral divide, not 2:1; 1 Cor 6:20; and of coutse, this is a soteriological image); something
an ethnic one. First Enoch is still closely attached to Jewish identity, but "stored up" for destruction (forms of the verb 8TJoo:uplt;w thesaurizo, 2
the criterion of judgment that is spelled out is always ethical, not national. Pet 3:7; Rom 2:5 53); being a slave to corruption (¢8opa fthora, 2 Pet
Those who are going to be punished are "governors, kings, high officials, 2:19; Rom 8:21). One of the last theological points in Second Peter, being
and landlords" (I En. 63:12), "those who amass gold and silver" (94:7), "found by him ... without spot or blemish (a~c0~TJTo5 amometos)"
and the "powerful people who coerce the righteous" (96:8). (3: 14), may owe something to Paul's "be blameless (a~E~ TTT05 amemptos)

53 Jerome H. Neyrey, 2 Peter, jude: A New Tramlation with Introduction and Commentary,
52 Collins,jewish Wisdom, 176. AB 37C (New York: Doubleday, 1993) 133, where a number of other parallels are listed.

42 43
 Theosis Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation

... at the coming of our Lord Jesus" (1 Thess 3:13; cf. 5:23; Phil 2:15). There is clearly an intra-Christian fight over who is the true inheritor
The words are formed from different roots, but they sound similar and of the apostolic tradition, who presents "the way of truth." To claim to be
have similar meanings. Peter is certainly to make an authority claim. 58 Second Peter attacks the
Not all apparent connections to Paul, however, are certain. The image notion that "scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation" (1:20). He
of "body" as "tent" (2 Pet 1:13-14: TO aK~vcuIlCX; cf. 2 Cor 5:1, 4: TO is attempting to foreclose interpretation by some people, equating "false
aK~voS") occurs as a metaphor in Greek (Hippocrates54 and Hermeticism55 ) prophets" of the past with "destructive opinions" in the present (2: 1).
and Hellenistic Jewish literature (Philo 5G and Wisdom 9: 15 57). Everything is at stake in interpretation; wrong interpretation leads to
But Second Peter does have connections to Pauline terminology. The destruction (3: 16).
term "participants" (KOI vcuvol koinonoi; 2 Pet 1:4) is common in Paul:
"ye are partakers (KOI VCUVOI koinonoi) of the sufferings" (2 Cor 1:7 KJV);
"you share (auYKol vcuvouS" sygkoinonous) in God's grace" (Phil 1:7). There Knowledge of Christ
is a conceptual, but not terminological, connection between taking on
God's nature (2 Pet 1:4) and believers being "conformed (aulllloP<P0US" The prime religious value in Second Peter, the key to spiritual
symmorfous) to the image of his Son" and "conformed to the body of his transformation, is "knowledge of Christ." The principal summarizing
glory" (Rom 8:29 and Phil 3:21, respectively), and to "this mortal body passages all say something about knowledge. In 2 Pet 1:2, the author
put[ting] on immortality" (1 Cor 15:53). Although Paul is largely referring wishes "the knowledge (ErTIYVCUOlS" epignosis)59 of God and our Lord Jesus"
to the afterlife, he does see the process beginning in this lifetime: believers on his readers. E TTIYVWOIS" was the word used in Hos 6:6 LXX for what
reflect "the glory of the Lord," and are "being transformed into the same God most desires-knowledge of God, the loss of which is deadly (Hos
image from one degree of glory to another" (2 Cor 3: 18). Christians "have 4:1,6).
the mind of Christ" (1 Cor 2: 16), or need to have it (Phil 2:5). They can Knowledge (YVWOIS" gnosis) is in the middle of Second Peter's virtue
discern the will of God when they are "transformed by the renewing of list, which begins with faith (1:5) and ends with love (1:7). Lack of these
your minds" (Rom 12:2). virtues means one is "near-sighted and blind" (1 :9); such people "are like
Second Peter says that the ignorant do not correctly understand Paul, irrational animals [who] do not understand" (2:12). Christians "have
"to their own destruction" (3: 16). Those who "exploit you" (2:3) were escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge (ETTIYVWOIS"
formerly on "the straight road" (2: 15), and knew "the way of righteousness" epignosis) of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2:20). Escaping the
(2:21), but now, "many will follow their licentious ways, and because of corruption that is in the world is the primary religious need. For Second
these teachers the way of truth will be maligned" (2: 1). In Second Peter's Peter, divinization means escaping such corruption, and taking on a Godly
opinion, these apostate Christians are sexually immoral, and are bringing character.
the Christian message into disrepute. Though not assimilationist, Second This does not take place in a protected environment, but in treacherous
Peter is sensitive to what outsiders think of Christians. waters. "Knowing Christ" requires successful navigation past "cleverly
devised myths" (1: 16) and "deceptive words"GO (2:3), linked with a strange
54 Aph. 8.18; from Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second sensualist religiosity (2: 10-19; 3:4) and with a distortion of Pauline teaching
Epistle o/St. Paul to the Corinthians. ICC (Edinburgh: T. & 1'- park, 1915) 142.
55 CH. 13.12,15; David E. Aune, ''Anthropological Duality in the Eschatologyof2 Cor 58 Charles tries to downplay the fact (Virtue amidst Vice, 35, 86).
4: 16-5: 10," in Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide, ed. Troels Engberg-Pedersen 59 Thisword is used by Paul for "acknowledging" God (Rom 1:28) and for determining
(Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001) 225 and 312 n.55. what is good, which probably means God's will (Phil 1:9). Bur STTlYVWcrt5 epignosis
56 Using, instead, the term oikos (Somn. 1.20); from Plummer, Second Epistle, 142. dominates Second Peter's discourse; this is not the case with Paul.
57 Aune, ''Anthropological Duality," 225; Plummer, Second Epistle, 142. 60 Or "untrue tales" (NJB), or "stories they have made up" (NIV).

44 45
 Theosis Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation
(3:16). Those who successfully avoid error achieve yvc001S- gnosis of the Deification is linked with sobriety, humility, piety, and morality. There
Lord and Savior (3: 18). Correct knowing and correct behavior go together. is no hint, in Second Peter, of spiritual ecstasy or vision, but only of these
The believer needs to reject corruption, learn about Christ, and take more cautious and communal virtues, similar to those advocated in the
on his virtues. This is a virtue soteriology: one is saved by, and for, virtue., Pastoral Epistles: staying with "the sound teaching that you have followed"
But it is virtue mediated through Christ; salvation and divinization are (1 Tim 4:6; 2 Tim 1:13); being "temperate, serious, prudent" (Titus 2:2);
thoroughly Christological. God gives "life and godliness, through the avoiding "idle talkers" and those with "itching ears" (Titus 1: 10; 2 Tim
knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness" (1 :3). 4:3); rejecting "profane myths and old wives' tales" (I Tim 4:7). Second
These things are given "so that through them you may . . . become Peter and the Pastorals recommend an attitude of humility and teachability
participants of the divine nature" (1 :4). Divinization is progress into greater in community. Virtue includes conformity to the group-as long as it is
moral excellence; the means for achieving it are also a matter of choosing the right group.
moral excellence. Second Peter has more to say about eschatology and epistemology
Virtue is the beginning, the middle, and the end of the process: by than the Pastorals do, but the social message seems the same: stay in the
"goodness," God "called" the believer (1:3); "effort" must be made to orthodox community; cultivate cooperative and conformist virtues. Second
develop virtue (1:5); believers "ought to be ... leading lives of holiness Peter, however, places more emphasis on right perception or recognition
and godliness" (3: 11); and God will create a world "where righteousness (epignosis). This focus on knowledge of God places Second Peter in
is at home" (3:13). continuity with the prophetic (Num 24:16; Hos 4:6; 6:6) and wisdom
Doctrinal correctness is itself a virtue: not interpreting Scripture (Prov 2:5; Eccl 2:26) traditions, and with the Pauline understanding of
I. according to "human will" (1:21), not listening to "enticing" and Jesus as the doorway to knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6), and of such
"adulterous" religious teaching (2: 14), being able to recognize "bombastic knowledge as the gateway to deification:
nonsense" and "error" (2: 18). There seems to be a clearly sociological
corollary to all this cognitive advice, namely: stay in the group, stay on To know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may
"the straight road" (2: 15). "Faith" can mean staying on the path, so correct be filled with all the fullness of God. (Eph 3:19)
membership, correct belief, and saving virtue go together: "support your
faith with goodness, and goodness with knowledge, and knowledge with It is in such matters that Second Peter looks very close to the Pauline
self-control" (we mentioned that EYKpaTEla egkrateia was a principal tradition: "knowledge of the Son of God" leads to "maturity," growing up
value among Hellenist philosophers of all stripes, but it also was for Paul "into Christ," and being able to resist wrong doctrine (Eph 4: 13-15).
[Gal 5:23; 1 Cor 9:25; Acts 24:25]). Everything Hellenistic, however, is One becomes like a new person; in fact, "the new self ... is being renewed
here Christianized. The values and the terms resonate with Hellenistic in knowledge according to the image of its creator" (Col 3:10). I think
philosophy, but attaining these values requires loyalty to and "knowledge" that deification in Second Peter finds its closest intellectual relatives in
o£ Jesus, the Messiah, the Savior, the revelation of God. Ephesians and Colossians. In these three letters, deification means growing
How does divinization begin, for Second Peter? The necessary pre- up into the likeness of Christ, although this is spelled out more clearly in
conditions are ethical character and proper belief. When these are present, Ephesians and Colossians than in Second Peter.
divinization commences, which then results in enhancement of one's ethical What Second Peter emphasizes is Jesus as Savior, a title that occurs
character, and establishment of one in proper beliefl The means and the five times, from the first to the last verse of the epistle, including that
destination are quite alike. climactic advice to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and
Savior Jesus Christ" (3:18; cf. 1:1, 11,2:20; 3:2). Deification is spiritual
growth directed by the Savior toward the inculcation of "the divine nature"
,

46 47
 Theosis Second Peter's Notion ofDivine Participation

which seems to mean character values. So what is divinized is one's PSUEDO-PHOCYLIDES (English and Greek): The Sentences ofPseudo-Phocylides: With
character, but also one's "knowledge of God and ofJesus," who "give[s] us Introduction and Commentary. P. W van der Horst. SVfP 4. Leiden: Brill,
everything needed for life and godliness, through the knowledge of him 1978.
who called us by his own glory and goodness" (1 :2- 3) . Jesus and God are TESTAMENTS OF THE TWELVE PATRIARCHS (English): The Old Testament
Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1. Translated by H. C. Kee. Edited by James H.
so blended as to be almost indistinguishable. So also are knowledge and
Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1983.
character reciprocally related. To know God is to start becoming like God.
Secondary Sources:
Aune, David E. ''Anthropological Duality in the Eschatology of 2 Cor 4:16-
Abbreviations: 5: 10." In Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide, 215-39. Edited byTroels
Engberg-Pedersen. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001.
CH - Corpus Hermeticum, scripture of a Gnostic, Platonizing religious Bailey, Cyril. Phases in the Religion of Ancient Rome. Berkeley: University of
philosophy California Press, 1932.
LCL - Loeb Classical Library Bauckham, Richard J. Jude, 2 Peter. Word Biblical Commentary 50. Waco: Word,
LXX - The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Jewish Scriptures 1983.
NT - New Testament - - - . "2 Peter." HarperCollins Study Bible. New York: HarperCollins, 1993.
i
Bevan, Edwyn. Stoics and Skeptics. Oxford: Clarendon, 1913.
OT - Old Testament
Charles, J. Daryl. Virtue amidst Vice: The Catalog of Virtues in 2 Peter 1. JSNT
Sup 150. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997.
Collins, John J. Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age. OTL. Louisville: Westminster
Bibliography John Knox, 1997.
Edelstein, Ludwig. The Meaning of Stoicism. Cambridge: Harvard University
Primary Sources: Press, 1966.
ATHANASIUS (English; two sources) Contra Gentes and De Incarnatione. Edited Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. Paul and the Stoics. Louisville: Westminster John Knox,
and translated by Robert W Thomson. London: SCM, 1971. And The Letters 2000.
ofSt. Athanasius Concerning the Holy Spirit. Translated by C. R. B. Shapland. Holladay, Carl R. Theios Aner in Hellenistic-judaism: A Critique ofthe Use ofThis
London: Epworth, 1951. Category in New Testament Christolog). SBL Dissertation Series 40. Missoula,
DIOGENES LAERTIUS (English and Greek): Lives ofEminent Philosophers, vol. II. Mont.: Scholars, 1977.
Translated by R. D. Hicks. Loeb Classical Library 185. Cambridge: Harvard Horst, P. W van der. The Sentences ofPseudo-Phocylides: With Introduction and
University Press, 1931. Commentary. SVfP 4. Leiden: Brill, 1978.
EPICTETUS (English): The Stoic and Epicurean Philosophers. Edited and translated Jervis, L. Ann. "Becoming Like God through Christ: Discipleship in Romans."
by Whitney J. Oates. New York: The Modern Library, 1940. In Patterns ofDiscipleship in the New Testament, 143-62. Edited by Richard
FIRST ENOCH (English): The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1. Translated by N. Longenecker. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
E. Isaac. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1983. Maritain, Jacques. Moral Philosophy. Translated by Joseph W Evans. New York:
PHILO (English; two sources): The Works of Philo. Translated by C. D. Yonge. Scribner's, 1964 (from the French edition, 1960).
Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1993. And (only fQ-rrOpif.:) Philo, vol. 1. Neyrey, Jerome H. 2 Peter, Jude: A New Translation with Introduction and
Translated by G. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker. Loeb Classical Library. Commentary. AB 37C. New York: Doubleday, 1993.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1929. Oakesmith, John. The Religion ofPlutarch. London: Longmans, Green, & Co.,
PLATO (English and Greek): (for Phaedo and Theaetatus) Plato vols. 1-2. Translated 1902.
by Harold North Fowler. Loeb Classical Library. New York: Putnam, 1921,
1923.

48 49
 Theosis
Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of
St. Paul to the Corinthians. ICC. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1915.
Rowe, Christopher. An Introduction to Greek Ethics. London: Hutchinson &
Co., 1976.
Starr, James M. Sharers in Divine Nature: 2 Peter 1:4 in Its Hellenistic Context.
Coniectanea Biblical NT Series 33. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2003.
Sterling, Gregory E. "'Wisdom Among the Perfect': Creation traditions in
Alexandrian Judaism and Corinthian Christianity." NovT 37 (1995) 355-
84.
Wesche, Kenneth Paul. "8E 11I II in Freedom and Love: the Patristic Vision."
In The Consuming Passion: Christianity and the Consumer Culture, 123. Edited
by Rodney Clapp. Downers Grove: IVP, 1998.
Wolters, Al. "'Partners of the Deity': A Covenantal Reading of 2 Peter 1:4."
Calvin TheologicalJournal25 (1990) 28-44. Emergence of the Deification
- - - - . "Postscript to 'Partners of the Deity.'" Calvin Theologicaljournal26
(1991) 418-20.
Wright, N. T. The Resurrection ofthe Son of God. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003.
Theme in the Apostolic Fathers
Vladimir Kharlamov

In the writings of the Apostolic Fathers we do not see specific use of the
terminology that was employed by later Christian writers to communicate
the concept of deification. Nevertheless, this corpus ofliterature introduces
many themes associated with this concept that are destined to receive
fuller development in the theology of Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria,
Origen, Athanasius, and others. By concentrating attention on later
development of the concept of theosis, most scholars generally
underestimate, and even overlook, the role of second century theology.
This essay and the following one, "Deification in the Apologists of the
Second Century," attempt to fill in this gap, and to show the importance
of the formative aspects of the Apostolic Fathers' and Apologists'
contribution, not only toward shaping the basic method of traditional
Patristic theology and Christian spirituality, but also toward the early
" ( development of the concept of deification per se.
That humanity has a special place in the "economy" (household,
salvation history) of God is a commonly assumed notion of Christian
writers. It is one of the central themes of Jewish and Christian scripture.
The Apostolic Fathers, following the New Testament understanding of a

50 51
 Theosis Emergence ofthe Deification Theme in the Apostolic Fathers
transformed God-human relationship, continue to elaborate on this theme. In the period of the Apostolic Fathers, imitation of Christ and
If in the OT, God was interacting with his chosen people and the rest of deification are expressed more in terms of "economy" than of ontology.
humanity through the mediation of the Torah and prophets, God was Later trinitarian and Christological controversies would put more emphasis
still distantly transcendent and hidden. With the coming of Christ, God on ontological aspects. In the Apostolic Fathers, it is best not to read in
reveals himself in human nature, bringing reconciliation to all humankind any theological anthropology that is not explicitly spelled out, and
Reconciliation became possible because of Christ's incarnation, death definitely not spelled out in ontological terms. The aspects of deification
and resurrection. His victory over the consequences of sin and death that are predominant for the Apostolic Fathers are practical: involving
inaugurated a new kingdom of God that already started on earth, but will salvation, morality, and eschatology. The emphasis is not on what happens
only be fully realized at the second coming. Eschatological expectations with human nature when it is deified, but rather on what should be done
are the distinctive feature of this period, which can partially be seen in the to allow deification to take place. Their language of deification is
incipient presence of the concept of deification as the transition from metaphoric, not metaphysical. When the Apostolic Fathers refer to the
corruptibility, destruction, and death to immortality, new creation, and image of God in a human being, this has a more practical than ontological
eternal life. The Apostolic Fathers saw immortality as a gift of God, not a meaning. However, they understand the image of God to entail human
natural property of the human soul. Immortality is connected with the freedom of will, an ability to understand and to know, and an ability to
event of Christ's resurrection, which presages the general resurrection. communicate with God.
The Apostolic Fathers put significant emphasis on the resurrection of the Contrasting images of light and darkness, life and death, corruption
I
i
flesh. As Christ ascended to heaven in the resurrected human body, so and incorruption, perishable and imperishable, theologically introduced
I,":
will we be in the presence of God in a condition similar to his. by the Apostolic Fathers as the supporting terminology of deification,
I' "
Imitation of Christ is another concept that becomes a part of the find congenial use in Christian vocabulary. God becomes more accessible
deification theme. The goal of a believer is to emulate the life and actions because of the incarnation of Christ. It is through Christ that God,
of Christ as much as possible. Human ability to imitate Christ is sealed in according to Clement of Rome, "called us from darkness to light, from
the message of the incarnation, that also reveals the human potentiality to ignorance to the knowledge of the glory of his name."3 This glorified state
incorporate the divine. l Martyrdom is presented as the way to obtain of the entire human being4 in the presence of God ultimately becomes
likeness to Christ and immortality. Especially in Ignatius of Antioch, the goal of salvation in the Eastern Fathers. Some later fathers saw this
imitation of Christ leads to intimate union with the object of imitation, salvific transformation effecting not only humanity but also all creation.
an incorporation into Christ. 2 This can be termed "Christification." It Already the Epistle of Barnabas speaks about the Sabbath, the rest of
would not be long before the divinity of Christ would be firmly established creation, as the eighth day-"the beginning of another world."5
in the Christian community, and the concept of identification with Christ
would imply identification with God. So the concept of Christification
would be substituted for the concept of deification. 3 1 Clem. 59.2; English translations of the Apostolic Fathers are from]. B. Lightfood and
J. R. Harmer, tr., ed., rev., Michael W Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers (Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1989).
4 In spite of some similarity with the Hellenistic concept of the higher part of a human
1 Eph 4:13; 1 John 3:2; 2 Pet 1:4.
" (
person (the soul) having a natural kinship with the divine, Christian authors emphasized
2 Incorporation into Christ, in the broader sense, was admission into the Church, the glorified perfection for the whole of human nature, including materiality. It is not a part
body of Christ. In a more narrow sense, it was participation of the individual in Christ of the human that ultimately reaches the state of deification, but the entire human
both as an intimate personal union and as an eschatological relationship with Christ being.
that continues beyond death. 5 Barn. 15.8-9.

52 53
 Theosis Emergence ofthe Deification Theme in the Apostolic Fathers

Didache present."IO Grillmeier links maranatha of 1 Cor 16:22 with the eucharistic
declaration of Christ's second coming in 1 Cor 11 :26 and the eschatological
The strong belief of the primitive church in the imminent second coming proclamation of Rev 22:20. In all three instances maranatha points toward
of Christ, the parousia, finds expression in early liturgical development as the eschatological future. The penitential aspect of maranatha in 1 Cor
wel1. 6 An example of this can be seen in the exclamation ''maranatha!''7 16:22 comes together with the sacramental (eucharistic) and eschatological
For Aloys Grillmeier, this exclamation signifies evidence of the early aspect of 1 Cor 11 :26 in Did. 10.6. The post-eucharistic prayer in the
worship of Christ as the Lord,8 and marks the transition from regard for Didache 10 lists knowledge, faith, immortality, and the divine indwelling
the "pre-Easter, earthly Jesus" to the "post Easter community." This (10.2) as gifts given by God through Jesus, "your servant" (10.3), who is
transition signifies progress "from lived experience to the preached gospel, "Grace" (10.5), and who can sanctify the church (1004). Finally, there is
the kerygma, then leads further from kerygma to dogma, without implying the prayer for the Lord to come (10.6).
any opposition between them."9 The Christ-figure and Christ-event are The proclamation of the actual presence of Christ the Lord at the
the cornerstones of the Christian message. Eucharist indicates the fellowship of the Christian community as "sharers
The shift to the "post Easter community" has not only christological, in what is imperishable,"ll and the linkage of this with the believer's
but also anthropological and eschatological significance for the reception of knowledge and immortality, has deification implications.
development of the concept of deification. Raised from the dead, Christ Believers will be saved at the resurrection of the dead, and it may be that
not only manifests his divine power over death as the Son of God, but some will accompany Christ in the parousia (16.6-7), which certainly has
also embodies transformed and redeemed human nature as the Son of deification implications.
Man. The conditions of the resurrected human body would later receive
more theological attention. The resurrection of Christ, as an already
fulfilled fact of salvation history, prefigures the general resurrection that is The Epistle of Barnabas
expected by the Christian community at the end of time. Though not
elaborated in any depth, these facets of Christian thought playa very The Epistle of Barnabas is probably the earliest document of the post
important role in the emergence of deification concepts. apostolic periodY The relationship of Christianity to Judaism occupies
Aramaic maranatha is traditionally translated as "our Lord, come," the mind of the author. How should Christians appropriate the prophecies
but it can also be translated "our Lord has come" or "our Lord is now of the OT? This epistle provides one of the first examples of the use of the
allegorical method of interpretation of Jewish Scripture for purposes of

6Did. 9-10. The Didache, or the Teaching ofthe (Lord through the Twelve) Apostles (to the
Nations), was an early work on Christian discipline. It was discovered by P. Blyennios in 10 See, K. G. Kuhn, "Mapava8a" in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed.

1873. Some parts of the Didache's content were alrseady known in such compilations as Kittel, 6:466-72.
the Apostolic Constitutions (7: 1-32) and the Epistle ofBarnabas (18-20). Starting with 11 Did. 4.8; cf. Barn. 19.8.

Eusebius of Caesarea we find a number of patristic references to a writing or writings 12 It seems that this epistle as a whole is the work of one author, who, however, stays

called the "Teaching(s)" of the Apostles wheather was it the same work as Didache or anonymous. Patristic tradition, starting with Clement ofAlexandria, attributes this work
similar works is beyond historic verification. Therefore a datl for Didache varies from as to Barnabas, one of the affiliates of the apostle Paul described in the book of the Acts, but
early as 70 CE to the end of the third century. modern scholarship disputes this attribution. Since the epistle refers to the destruction
71 Cor 16:22; Did. 10.6. of the Jerusalem temple (Barn. 16.3) it was written after 70 CE, but probably before
8 Aloys Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition. VoL 1: From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon 135, when the emperor Hadrian built a Roman temple on the site, because Barn. 16.4
(451) (Atlanta: John Knox, 1975) II. expects the Jerusalem temple to be rebuilt, and certainly before 190-when the first
9 Grillmeier, Christ, 8. indubitable use of this epistle was made by Clement of Alexandria.

54 55
 Theosis Emergence ofthe Deification Theme in the Apostolic Fathers

the Christian community. The letter tries to establish the notion that are called to be "sharers in what is incorruptible" (19.8). They "will be
everything that Christ did was predicted in the OT. It points to the pre- glorified in the kingdom of God" (21.1).
existence of Christ, his participation in the process of creation of this
world,13 and to the necessity of the incarnation as an example of righteous
life. 14 The divinity of Christ is entailed in the statement that he is the Son Clement of Rome (First Clement)
of God. 15 Christ's death was not only predicted, but necessary for the
forgiveness of sins, redemption,16 and destruction of death through the The theme of the resurrection of Christ as leading the way for the
resurrection. I? The concepts of "life" and "death" are particularly interesting resurrection of all the faithful, composes an important kernel in Clement
for us, as they provide the background for the entire letter. They are aimed of Rome's Letter to the Corinthians, or First Clement. 2o Examples of
at the notion of the regenerated and fruitful eternal life of the eighth day resurrection can be seen through nature: the change of day and night, the
of creation-an eschatological fulfillment of the whole of creation that decay of seed in the soil, the consequent bearing of fruitY As a sign of
had already begun with Christ's resurrection. The incarnation was like resurrection, Clement uses the mythological srory of the Phoenix bird,22
the beginning of a new creation. God "will create the beginning of an an interesting interaction of developing Christian and existing pagan
eighth day, which is the beginning of another world."IB The "eighth day" cultures. 23 These images of transition from darkness to light and from one
signifies Christ's resurrection and ascension. 19 ontological condition to another, show that the fulfillment of God's will
Barnabas does not specifically bring up the issue of deification. This benefits the believer with "life in immortality, splendor in righteousness,
epistle does, however, point to one aspect of Christ's incarnation that is truth with boldness, faith with confidence, self-control with holiness! And
important for theosis: its connection to the divine indwelling. Precisely
because of incarnation, Christ can "dwell in us" (6.14). Thus does he
20 The epistle is normally dated to the end of the reign of Do mit ian (95 or 96 CE). In ca.
make "a holy temple" out of "this little house, our heart" (6.15). In this 150, Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, wrote to the Roman bishop Soter, that the epistle
"little house ... dwells God" (16.8). The incarnation and the divine sent by Clement was still being read periodically during the Christian service (Eusebius,
indwelling are also the promise of that future goal "when we ourselves are Hist. EccL 4.23). Eusebius also mentions that Clement's letter was read in the worship
so perfected as to become heirs of the Lord's covenant" (6.19). services in many churches, in his own time (Hist. Ece!. 3.16). Irenaeus speaks very
In Christ, believers have this "hope oflife, which is the beginning and favourably of this letter and summarizes its first chapters in Haer. 3.3.3. The epistle is
frequently utilized by Clement of Alexandria (Paedagogus 1.91.2 and in Stromata). The
the end of our faith" (1.6), and the epistle ends with a confrontation popularity of First Clement certainly contributed to assigning to Clement of Rome the
between the way oflightllife and the way of darkness/ death, between the anonymous works known as the Clementines (KATH1EvTla), including 2 Clement, two
power of "light-giving angels of God" and "angels of Satan" (18.1). The epistles De virginitate, the Apostolic Constitutions, the Clementine Homilies, the Clementine
"Two Ways" section of this letter is the largest and the most influential Recognitions, and Epitomes. That Clement of Rome was the author of 1 Clement was the
piece of tradition in Barnabas, and again it comes dose to theosis: Christians unanimous opinion of the ancient church (Hermas, Vis. 2.4.3; Irenaeus, Adv. Haer.
3.3.3; Eusebius, Hist. Ece!. 4.22.1,4.23.11).
21 1 Clem. 24.3-5.

22 1 Clem. 25.
13 Barn. 5.5. 23 The hypothesis that Clement confuses <polvlS as a bird with <POl VIS as the palm tree
14 Barn.
15 Barn.
5.10.
5.11; 12.10.
.. (
seems to be not applicable in this instance. It is not the only occasion when Clement, as
many other Christian authors, looks for examples from pagan history or life that could
16 Barn. 5.1, 11; 6.7. support the Christian cause (see 1 Clem. 55.1). However, this reference to the ancient
17 Barn. 5.6. mythology seemed to be embarrassing for Clement of Alexandria as he omits reference
18 Barn. 15.S. to the phoenix bird of 1 Clem. 25 and the virtuous pagans of 55. 1. Later Photius directly
19 Barn. 15.9. questioned the orthodoxy of this letter (Bibliotheca 126, PC 103:40SA).

56 57
 Theosis Emergence ofthe Deification Theme in the Apostolic Fathers
all these things fall within our comprehension."24 The comprehensive Second Clement
character of divine salvific knowledge is available to all. 25 This knowledge,
revealed through Christ, enlightens our darkened minds, makes us capable The divinity of Christ is firmly confirmed in the opening statement of
of penetrating the "heights of heaven," seeing Christ "as in a mirror, his Second Clement,32 perhaps in reaction to Christian Gnosticism. 33 The
faultless and transcendent face."26 Knowledge of Christ makes us capable document maintains, similar to other writings of the Apostolic Fathers,
of seeing God! an eschatological perspective, which runs throughout the entire sermon.
Clement lays the groundwork for many important themes of later Christ's second coming is imminent, but Christians still live in two worlds,
mystical theology, such as union with God and vision of God. The concept which are in conflict. One is the world of "adultery and corruption and
of illuminative light, the source of which is God, shows us the knowledge greed and deceit,"34 while the age to come is the kingdom of God. 35
of everlasting things, bringing us into direct contact with God himself. It Repentance is necessary in order to obtain the eternal reward. 3G There is a
is God's will "that we should taste immortal knowledge" and divine glory.2? strong emphasis on the bodily resurrection. Salvation of the Christian
Salvation is understood primarily in terms of direct participation in the takes place in the flesh following the example of Christ's incarnation: "If
new life of Christ. Christ . . . became flesh . . . so also we will receive our reward in this
An example of such faithful following of God's will is Enoch, who, flesh,"3? and the flesh receives immortality from the Holy Spirit. 38
through his obedience to God, did not experience death. 28 The scriptural In passing, the author affirms the spiritual, not material, pre-existence
characters of Enoch and Elijah have a prominent place in the development of Christ prior to incarnation. 39 The pre-existence of Christ is linked to
of the concept of deification. The two figures present an exception to the the pre-existence of the church, "created before the sun and moon. "40 The
prevailing consequence of sin, which is death. Both are taken directly to incarnation of Christ is related to the embodiment of the church on earth,
heaven, into the presence of God, without experiencing death. At the "For she [the church] was spiritual, as was also our Jesus, but was revealed
opposite pole, "any who do anything contrary to the duty imposed by his in the last days in order that she might save US."4l This movement from
[God's] will, receive death as penalty."29 Here again, we see the theology spiritual to material, and the close linear interconnection between the
of two ways. However, in Clement, we find a more mystical and two, are important elements of the sermon.
epistemological emphasis: "Let us see him in our mind, and let us look
with the eyes of the soul."30 "We have been considered worthy of greater 32
2 Clem. 1.1.
knowledge."3l 33 Helmut Koester suggests that 2 Clement could be an anti-Gnostic sermon from
mainstream Christianity in Egypt (Introduction to the New Testament. Vol. 2, History and
Literature ofEarly Christianity [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984J 233-36). The genre and
content of this work supports an assumption that it is rather a sermon of unknown
presbyter (2 Clem. 17.3) than the epistle (Michael Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers 65).
This sermon dates approximately from 140-60 CEo
34 2 Clem. 6.4.

24 1 Clem. 35.2. 35 Reminiscent of two ways theology of Epistle ofBarnabas 18.1-2.

36
25 This could be a response to the elitist notion of knowledge available only to the Gnostic. 2 Clem. 6.6-7; 8.1; 9.7; 13.1.
37
26 1 Clem. 36.2. 2 Clem. 9.5.
27 Again, 1 Clem. 36.2.
" (
38
2 Clem. 14.5.
28 39
1 Clem. 9.3. 2 Clem. 9.5.
40
29 1 Clem. 41.3. 2 Clem. 14.1.
30
1 Clem. 19.3. 412 Clem. 14.2.

31 1 Clem. 41.4.

58 59
 Theosis Emergence ofthe Deification Theme in the Apostolic Fathers

The plan of salvation that existed in the mind of God from eternity is The language Ignatius uses is bold and explicit. Death for Christ is
unfolding now in the created world and does not deny the world's the justification of his pos~tion as a bish~p, the c~imax of his ~al~at~on.
materiality, but rather regenerates it. This process of transformation started This imitation of the Lord IS not only chnstocentnc, but also TnnItanan:
with Christ's incarnation (whose divinity is affirmed), continued with the it is "constant communion with God" (Eph. 4.2); it is doing everything
establishment of the church, and culminates in the coming resurrection "in the Son and the Father and the Spirit" (Magnesians 13). I

of the flesh. The human body is "a temple of God"42 and the vehicle All Christians are called to be imitators and carriers of Christ (xPI0TO¢OPOI
through which spiritual transformation of the soul becomes apparent. 43 christoforoi) , of God (8EO¢OpOI theoforoi) , and of holiness (aYI¢opol
hagiforoi).49 The example of Ignatius himself in this process of imitation
earns him the title 8EO¢OpOS" theoforos, which he does not hesitate to use in
Ignatius of Antioch the prefacing address of all his letters. The process of salvation is expressed
in terms oflife and death 50 and is closely related to the incarnation. Christ's
The letters ofIgnatius ofAntioch (perhaps not without later redactions and incarnation, death, and resurrection are aspects of realized eschatology for
51
interpolations) offer the most extensive contribution to the period of the Ignatius, though future consummation still awaits. .,
Apostolic Fathers. Seven letters44 were written by Ignatius early in the second Christ is "the new man" and the divine plan of salvatIon Includes our
century (traditionally ca. 110 CE) on his way to martyrdom in Rome. The "faith in him and love for him, his suffering and resurrection."52 "There is
concept of martyrdom, therefore, is one of the central themes, and signifies only one physician, who is both flesh and spirit, born and unborn, God
not only his extraordinary heroism and passionate love with a willingness to in man, true life in death, both from Mary and from God, first subject to
die for Christ,45 but this rhetoric provides an interesting insight into Ignatius' suffering and then beyond it, Jesus Christ our Lord."53 Ignatius's
understanding of union with Christ. Martyrdom is an opportunity to imitate christological formulas present important elements for the development
the passion and death of Christ, to become God's true disciple. 46 Achieving of the doctrine of Christ and the Trinity in later Patristic thought, like
martyrdom, for Ignatius, proves that he could reach not only the full measure "born and unborn (YEVVT]TOS" KCXt aYEVT]T05 gennetos kai agenetos),"
of Christian discipleship, but a somewhat sacramental and sacrificial which are key terms in the Arian controversy. However, Ignatius' "God in
identification with Christ himself. In his passion mysticism, Ignatius man," under the influence of the Apologists, becomes supplanted by
identifies himself with the "pure bread of Christ" and a "sacrifice to God."47 "Logos-sarx (Logos-flesh),,; nevertheless, Ignatius' term played an
Here, to portray his martyrdom, Ignatius uses language that was traditionally important role during the Council of Chalcedon.
applied to the Eucharist and the salvific ministry of Christ. Martyrdom is In Magn. 5.1 Ignatius lays out what is standard theology for the
the culmination of a new birth48 into the likeness of Christ, where the believer Apostolic Fathers: the two ways, "death and life." To believe in Christ's
experiences the process of Christification, and becomes a full replica of Christ.
422 Clem. 9.3. 49 Eph. 9.2. See also Eph. 1.1; 10.3; Trail. 1.2.
43
2 Clem. 12.2--4. 50 Magn. 5.
44 There are three recensions of his letters. The long recension was originated in the 51 Eph. 19.3; Philad. 9.2.
fourth century and has six spurious letters. The short recension is a Syriac abridgement 52 Eph. 20.1.
of the letters to Ephesians, Romans, and Polycarp. The middle recension, known to 53 Eph. 7.2. Ignatius frequently mentions the historicity of Christ's bodily incarnation
Eusebius, is generally accepted as authentic. " ( from Maty, his death and resurrection (Eph. 18; 20.2; Magn. 11; Trail. 9; Philad. 9.2;
45 Rom. 7.2. Smyrn. 1-3). As God the Father raised Christ from the dead "in the same way [it] will
46 Eph. 1.2; 3.1; Rom. 3.2; 4.2; 5.2. likewise also raise us up in Christ Jesus who believe in him, apart from whom we have no
47 Rom. 4.1-2. true life" (Trail. 9.2).
48 "The pangs of birth are upon me" (Rom. 6.1). 54 Trail. 2.1.

60 61
 Theosis Emergence ofthe Deification Theme in the Apostolic Fathers
death is the way to escape death. 54 Christ's suffering" is our resurrection. "55 'ust pointed to God, bur Christ "is the door of the Father" through which
With its heavy emphasis on the salvation of the faithful, the soteriological ~verybody, including patriarchs and prophets, have entered "in God's
perspective in Ignatius has both terrestrial and celestial dimensions; not unity"; all the prophets "preached in anticipation of him ... the gospel is
only humanity, bur also celestial beings, are subjects of divine judgment the imperishable finished work."64 Here again, his motif of realized
and condemnation based on their belief or disbelief in the efficacy of the eschatology plays a decisive part. Christ, who is High Priest, supersedes
blood of Christ. 56 the priests. G5 This approach, subordinating Judaism, and for that matter
An important aspect ofIgnatius' theology is a concept of "a union of Judea-Christianity, to Christianity, would receive extensive development
flesh and spirit that comes from Jesus Christ."57 He even talks about "the in the work of Christian Apologists of the second century and later.
blood of God."58 Flesh and spirit are not only complementary This subordination can be seen in his conception of the ecclesiastical
characteristics of the Incarnate God, Jesus Christ, but also significant structure of the church, possibly a fusing of a Jewish-Christian system of
characteristics of redeemed humanity. Apart from necessary care for bodily elders with a gentile-Christian system of overseers and deacons. GG Ignatius'
needs,59this union of flesh and spirit has at least two dimensions: first, the threefold model consists of a bishop (overseer), presbyters (elders), and
full integrity of human nature that participates in salvation and eternal deacons, with monarchical authority in the bishop's hands. He does not extend
life; second, conformity between Christian teaching and practice. The the ecclesiastical authority above the level of the local bishop. His strong
salvific unity of flesh and spirit is paralleled by the unity of doctrine and emphasis on obedience to the bishop is remarkable. This obedience safeguards
practice. GO All of human nature is called to be a bearer of God. It is sin, the church's harmonic unity with God. 67 As Christ "is the mind of the Father,
not materiality, that brings separation between humankind and God. just as the bishops appointed throughout the world represent the mind of
Fleshly things become spiritual through Christ when enacted by those Christ."G8 Even more, "the bishop presides in the place of God."G9 The bishop
who are spiritual. G1 is the representation of God in the church, nothing could be done without
While the Epistle ofBarnabas still deals with controversies of the NT the consent of the bishop.70 The bishop seems to be subject only to God,71
period, and attempts to reinterpret Christianity in terms of the OT in a and even more, this unity "with the bishop and those who lead" in the church
way satisfactory to Christian mentality, Ignatius adopts a stricter dividing has an everlasting effect "as an example and a lesson of incorruptibility."72 It
line between these religious traditions. In the letter to the Magnesians he is the first example in Christian theology of institutional deification.
writes, "For if we continue to live in accordance with Judaism, we admit
that we have not received grace,"62 and later in the same letter, "It is utterly Christianity to be associated with the Jewish uprisings against Rome in the reign of
absurd to profess Jesus Christ and to practice Judaism. For Christianity Trajan. Ignatius wants to be sacrificed as a disCiple of Christ, but not as a Jewish rebel. 1
did not yet believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity."63 The OT Pet 2: 19-21; 4: 15 had already said that Christians did not do anything wrong or illegal,
but always suffered innocently like Christ, and this would also be highlighted later by
55 Smyrn. 5.3. the Apologists.
56 Smyrn. 6.1. 64 Philad. 9.1-2.
57 Magn. 1.2; also Magn. 13.1; Rom. preface; Smyrn. 12.2; 13.2; Polye. 1.2; 2.2. 65 Philad. 9.1.
58 Eph. 1.1. 66 cf. Paul's Phil 1: 1.
59 Po lye. 1.2. 67 Eph. 5.1; 6:1.
60 See J. P. Martin, "La pneumatologia en Ignacio de Antioquia," Salesianum 33 (1971): 68 Eph. 3.2.
379--454. " (
69 Magn. 6.1. Ignatius returns to this metaphoric "deification" of the episcopal seat in

61 Eph. 8.2. Trall.3.1.

62 Magn. 8.1. 70 Magn. 7.1; Smyrn. 8; PolyeA.1.
63 Magn. 10.3. See also, Philad. 6.1. Some political issues of the time could contribute to 71 Po lye. 4.1.
such a very negative and aggressive approach to Judaism by Ignatius. He does not want 72 Magn. 6.2.

62 63
 Theosis Emergence ofthe Deification Theme in the Apostolic Fathers

"Deification" of the episcopal office is directly connected With polycarp of Smyrna

participation in God. Believers cannot be in union with Christ if they are
not in total harmony and unity with the bishop. Later, with the concept of The figure of Polycarp of Smyrna is noteworthy in the early post-apostolic
apostolic succession developed by Irenaeus, special institutional grace would church. A friend of Bishops Ignatius and Papias, Polycarp was directly
be conferred upon certain offices in the ecclesiastic hierarchy. Similarly, the appointed bishop by the apostles, according to Irenaeus, who met him
efficacy of the sacrament, the special grace related to this sacrament, would personally in his early youth.?8 He died as a martyr, as recou~ted i~ the
depend on ecclesiastical office. The doctrine of papal infallibility could letter written from the church of Smyrna to the church of PhllomellUm,
represent a later development of this institutional deification. However, it known as The Martyrdom of Polycarp (Martyrium Polycarpi). Polycarp
should be noted that in Ignatius, the personality of the individual who himself wrote a letter to the Philippians, displaying a caring, pastoral style,
holds the office is very important; there is no special grace independent of but devoting very little attention to deification related themes. He affirms
the character of the person. It seems fair to agree with the suggestion made Christ's incarnation, resurrection, and second coming.?9 The faithful will
by Schoedel that Ignatius' unrelenting call for unity in the churches, and be raised from the dead 80 and will reign with Christ in his kingdom. 8!
obedience to the bishop, is simultaneously a call for personal recognition
and support for the ratification of his own merit.?3
The concept of ecclesiastical unity in Ignatius is connected with the Conclusion
theme of sacramental unity. As Ignatius writes to the Philadelphians, "Take
care, therefore, to participate in one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of Our As we can observe, in the Apostolic Fathers we do not yet have explicit
Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup which leads to unity through his blood; language of deification; at the same time, this corpus ofliterature introduces
there is one altar, just as there is one bishop, together with the presbytery a number of themes that later will be associated with theosis. With their
and the deacons."74 In the Eucharist we participate in "incorruptible love"75; exhortational rather than dogmatic theology, the Apostolic Fathers offer
it is "the medicine of immortality."?6 The last phrase, apparently coined by an "economic" model of deification,82 closely linked to soteriology. The
Ignatius, became the key description of the Eucharist in Patristic literature. imitation of Christ plays an important role in the Apostolic Fathers. To
The collective unity of believers as the body of Christ, through the be saved is to be like Christ as much as possible. Martyrdom, especially as
unity of the Eucharist and obedience to the bishop, is combined with the it is presented in Ignatius, is the culminating point of such imitation; it
personal unity of each individual with God through Christ. The apogee obtains some form of identification with Christ. However, this
of christo-affiliation is martyrdom, which brings a person to identification identification with Christ, or christification, is not spelled out in an
with Christ. For Ignatius, the imitation of Christ, as Norman Russell ontological sense. Rather, the goal is to imitate Christ's virtuous, sinless
writes, "is not a metaphysical spirituality of the soul's escape and ascent, life and suffering. Nevertheless, deification as christification, with its climax
but an internalized eschatology, a literal assimilation to the resurrected in the theology of Ignatius, lays the groundwork for more explicit future
life of Christ."?? discourse of direct participation in God. Eschatological expectations, with

73 William R. Schoedel, Ignatius ofAntioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of

Antioch (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 10-14.

74 Philad. 4.1.
.. (
78

79
Adv. Haer. 3.3.4 .
Polyc. 1.2; 2.1; 6.3; 7.1.
75 Rom. 7.2. 80 Polyc. 2.2.

76 Eph. 20.2. 81 Polyc. 5.2.

77 Norman Russell, "The Concept of Deification in the Early Greek Fathers" (Ph.D. 82 Having to do with the oikonomos, the "household" of faith, or the relational aspect of

diss. Oxford University, 1988) 169. spiritual life.

64 65
 Theosis
a more holistic approach to anthropology, the meaning of the Eucharist
the role of the bishop, proper knowledge of God: all these aspects, i~
christo centric contextualization, introduce a number of deification themes
to Christian theology. Christ is the revelation of God: "The faithful in
love bear the stamp of God [xapaKTRpa 8wu charaktera theou] the Father
through Jesus Christ" (Ignat. Magn. 5.2). "We have been created anew':
(Barn. 6.14). From the beginning deification appears as one of the most
complex, and at the same time fascinating, issues in Christian theology.

Deification in the Apologists of

the Second Century
Vladimir Kharlamov

The work of the second-century apologists reflects a different style of

theological discourse from that of the Apostolic Fathers. The expansion
of Christianity throughout the Roman Empire and the contact of new
Christian communities with Greco-Roman culture challenged the
apologists to defend, interpret and reconcile their developing Christian
subculture to the surroundings. The significant part of this endeavor was
both to explain and to appropriate Christian beliefs in terms
understandable for that culture. Instead of the esoteric spiritualism of
Gnostic communities, the apologists appealed to philosophic reasoning.
It was a period when Christian theological terminology took its first
shape, and in Robert Grant's words "the basic method of traditional
Christian theology" was created. 1 As a result of this apologetic work,
Christianity began to emerge not simply as a subculture in the Greco-
.' (
Roman world, but received its intellectual contours suitable to the
standards, and expressed in terms of, Hellenistic civilization.

IRobert M. Gram, Greek Apologists of the Second Century (Philadelphia: Westminster,

1988) 11.

66 67
 Theosis Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century
Justin sets the stage for this task. His Apologiae and Dialogus curn Justin Martyr
Tryphone became foundational treatises that provided focal lines of
argument with Greek and Jewish counterparts. His influence by far In Justin we do not find technical vocabulary for the concept of deification.
supersedes not only other writers of the second century, but has far reaching He, as noted by Norman Russell, "does not use 8EOITOIEW" [and we can
effect on subsequent generations of Christian writers as well. However, in add, other Greek words that communicate this notion] even in his
his case, more than with other Apologists of the second century, the key discussion of pagan deification."5 For him, as for the Apostolic Fathers,
focus of the discourse seems to be oriented more toward Christian the notion of deification is similar to the achievement of immortality,
communities themselves, rather than to the task of converting new incorruptibility, and eternal life in the presence of God. G
believers. Justin wants to strengthen the followers of Christ in matters of Appropriating a term from the discourse of divinization in mythology
faith by equipping them with arguments that would serve as a manual for and in the cult of the Roman emperors, Justin uses aITCX8CXVCXTISW
reaffirming and deepening their own convictions. apathanatizoJThe process of immortalization for Justin is not ontological,
Justin, more than any other apologist, makes use of the soteriological but rather moral: "we have learned that those only are deified [literally,
significance of the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. The "immortalized"-aITcx8cxvCXTISE08cxl apathanatizesthai] who have lived
other apologists prefer not to speak about the incarnation-the most near to God in holiness and virtue."8 Every human being is created capable
controversial tenet of Christian theology for Hellenistic culture. Some of of reasoning and of contemplating God, with free determination to choose
them do not incorporate the meaning of this event into their discourse at to follow divine commandments or not. People are responsible for their
all. All of them, however, would view Christian teaching as deeply rooted actions. 9 Only by imitating the divine goodness may people participate in
in antiquity, preceding all other ancient traditions. The apologetic value the incorruption of the Logos and enjoy fellowship with God. 1o Like the
of this argument is to refute one of the accusations justifying persecution Apostolic Fathers before him, Justin is more interested in the moral, than
of Christians, that Christianity presents innovation and does not respect in the ontological, aspects of immortalization. For Justin it is more
the old ways. Apologists try to turn the tables around and argue to the important to point out what should be done in order to obtain immortality,
contrary. Starting with Justin, they argue that if anything good can be than what happens with human nature when it becomes immortalized.
found in other religions and in Greek philosophy, it comes from Moses This can be termed the "economic" (practical) type of deification.
and the Old Testament prophets. Non-Christians just borrowed this truth Justin does not see the human soul as immortal by nature. If it were
of the scriptures without acknowledging the source of their wisdom, and immortal, that would make it unbegotten and equal to God, and we would
often simply distorted it. 2
The predominantly non-ecclesiastical orientation of the apologists' 5 Norman Russell, "The Concept of Deification in the Early Greek Fathers" (Ph.D. diss.
discourse contributes to their treatment of deification themes, which do Oxford University, 1988) 170.
61 Apol. 8.2; 10.2.
not receive significant attention. Nevertheless, the notion of deification
7 1 Apol. 21.3. Even though eXTTa6avaTlSw apathanatizo first was found in Plato,
occasionally occurs in their discourse. With a few exceptions in Justin 3 Charmides 156d, the emphasis on virtuous life in order to gain immortality that Justin
and Theophilus,4 it is embedded within an elaborate philosophical, rather follows here was introduced by Philo, Con! Ling. 149. See Russell, "Concept of
than scriptural, setting. Deification," 171-72.

2
.. {

Justin, 1 Apol. 23,44,54,59-60; 2Apol. 13; Dial. 7, 69-70; Tatian, Drat. 31, 35-41,
8 1 Apol. 21.6; Justin, Apologiae Pro Christianis, Patristische Texte und Studien, Bd. 38,

ed. Miroslav Marcovich (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1994) 64. These two occasions where Justin
Theophilus, Ad Autol. 2.30, 2.33, 3.26, 3.29; and throughout Athenagoras' Legatio,
where he vigorously refutes the charge of Christianity with atheism.
s
uses eXTTa6avaTi w apathanatizo in 1 Apol. 21 are translated as "deification" and "to
deify" in ANF 1: 170.
3 Dial. 124. 91 Apol. 28.
4 AdAutol. 2.24. 10 1 Apol. 10; 2 Apol. 4; 11.7-8. Cf. 1 Apol. 39, Dial. 88.5.

68 69
 Theosis Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century
end up with many eternal god-like beings that would contradict the aseity participating in God through what Justin calls, using the Stoic term, logos
of the only one true God. ll The soul does not exist on its own, but spermatikos. 16 Because of this seed of the Logos, divinely implanted into
according to the will of God, who is the life giver and life taker. 12 This every human being, humanity can be edified with knowledge of God.
leads Justin to make a distinction between the object of participation and Here Justin sees a fundamental harmony between Christianity and the
the subject that participates. The subject that participates does not become good of Gree~ phi}osophy, "those who lived reasonably [according to the
equal or identical with the object of participation. As Norman Russell Logos-IlETa I\oyou meta Logou] are Christians."I? This list would
summarizes, "Participation in Justin implies a unity-with-distinction, a include Socrates, Heraclitus and others like them. "Whatever things were
similarity through moral likeness of beings which are dissimilar rightly said among all men, are the property of us Christians."18 The
ontologically."13 From Justin's interpretation of the soul's participation in diversity of opinions among pagans is an indication that, in spite of their
the principle of life, which resembles the dialectic of Plato's Parmenides, capacity to receive some divine knowledge through the seed of the Logos,
we can draw an analogy that will be very important for a better they were not getting full knowledge. The fulfillment of knowledge comes
understanding of the later development of the concept of deification as only through Christ, who is the incarnation of the entire Logos, "For the
human participation in God. As the" [soul] lives not as being life, but as seed and imitation imparted according to capacity is one thing, and quite
the partaker of life; but that which partakes of anything, is different from another is the thing itself, of which there is the participation and imitation
that of which it does partake";14 similarly, participation of the human according to the grace which is from Him."19 This wisdom is granted to
individual in the divine nature 15 never brings this person to the identical Christians who try to live in accordance with God's commandments,
status as that with which he or she participates. revealed in Christ. The mind of a person cannot see God, unless instructed
However, it would not be correct to conclude that human immortality by the Holy Spirit. 20
does not have any ontological implications for Justin. First, such The significant aspect of knowing God is expressed in the rite of baptism
implications can be seen in his epistemology. He does not deny the and the Eucharist. Baptism, as the second birth and "regeneration,"21 is
ontological bridge between uncreated God and created human being. "the water of life" and bath of "repentance and knowledge."22 In the
Human nature is originally good and every human being is capable of Eucharist, Christians, by partaking of bread and wine, participate in the
body and blood of Jesus Christ. Justin is interesting by presenting the
ritual of the Eucharist in the early church;23 however, theologically, in
11 Dial. 5.
12 Dial. 6. Dia!. 5-6 might imply that Justin believed in the temporality of the soul's relation to the notion of deification, except for the element of
existence that would correspond to the temporality of divine punishment. Death of the "transmutation" (IlETa~oA~v) and the importance of the Eucharist "for
soul, however, does not coincide with death of the body but is the result of God's will. our salvation,"24 he does not elaborate significantly on this aspect of
Only "some which have appeared worthy of God never die" Dia!. 5.3 (Justin, Dialogus
Cum Tryphone, Patristische Texte und Studien, Bd. 47, ed. Miroslav Marcovich [Berlin:
16
de Gruyter, 1997J 79-80; ANF 1: 197). At the same time, in 1 Apo!' 21 he speaks about 2 Apo!' 8.3; 13.3. Cf. 1 Apo!' 46.2.
"everlasting fire" of punishment for not repented sinners. Justin's argumentation in Dial. 17 1 Apol. 46.3; Marcovich, Apologiae Pro Christianis, 97; ANF 1: 178.
18
5-6, ambiguous as it might look, does not necessarily give a reason to suggest that Justin 2 Apol. 13.4; Marcovich, Apologiae Pro Christian is, 157; ANF 1:193. Even Plato was
denies eternal punishment; rather, he emphasizes that the soul does not exist on its own, inspired by Moses (I Apol. 44).
19
but according to God's will. Here he agrees with Ireneaus H¥; 2.34 and opposes Plato's 2 Apo!' 13.6; Marcovich, Apologiae Pro Christianis, 157; ANF 1:193.
concept of the soul's reincarnation. About the eternal character of punishment, Justin 20 Dial. 4.1.

also clearly speaks in 1 Apo!' 8, 28 and Dial. 130. 21 1 Apo!' 61.

13 Russell, "Concept of Deification," 175. 22 Dial. 14.1.

14 Dial. 6.1; Marcovich, Dialogus Cum Tryphone, 81-82, ANF 1:198. 23 1 Apol.65-67.

15 2 Pet. 1:4. 24 1 Apo!. 66.2.

70 71
:
','

Theosis Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century

sacramental theology. The mystical aspect of incorporation into Christ The Holy Spirit reproaches men because they were made like [o~ol cus-
through baptism, or participation in the "medicine of immortality" through homoios] God, free from suffering and death, provided that they kept
the Eucharist is not developed by the apologists to the same extent as by His commandments, and were deemed deserving of the name of His
Paul and Ignatius. sons, and yet they, becoming like Adam and Eve, work out death for
Another ontological implication related to human immortality is themselves; let the interpretation of the Psalm [LXX 81 :6-7] be held
resurrection of the dead. He explicitly correlates the resurrection of the just as you wish, yet thereby it is demonstrated that all men are deemed
dead with attainment of incorruptibility and immortality.25 A propensity worthy of becoming gods [OTI 8EOI KaTllSlcuvTat YEVE08at hoti theoi
toward immortality and freedom from suffering is the telos (goal) of human katexiontai genesthai] , and of having power to become sons of the
existence that will be realized at eschaton. The human soul is not immortal Highest; and shall be each by himself judged and condemned like Adam
by nature, but in the resurrection, immortality becomes an ontological and Eve. 30
property of renewed human nature. 26 Resurrection of the dead is only
possible because of Christ, "God will raise us up by his Christ, and will Freedom of the will and natural human predisposition to divine grace
make us incorruptible, and undisturbed (cma8EIS' [free from suffering]), are important elements in this process. In addition to that, the process of
and immortal."27 As the result of Christ's incarnation, death, resurrection, becoming gods is closely connected with adoptive divine filiation. The
and ascension, humanity received the gift of salvation and eternal full realization of this process is accomplished in resurrection, when we
inheritance in the Kingdom of God. 28 Christ's salvific work marked a new "should in God's appointed time rise again and put on incorruption."31
beginning for humankind as a symbol of the eighth day, "Christ, being Blessings for those saved will be enjoyed, according to Justin, in two stages.
the first-born of every creature, became again the chief of another race First, the righteous will participate in the Millennial Kingdom, which
regenerated by himself through water, and faith, and wood, containing will be a prelude to God's final reckoning and retribution. 32 Here, Justin
the mystery of the cross."29 shares the chiliastic expectations of some Christian communities of his
Toward the end of Dialogus cum Tryphone, Justin offers his only explicit time, but he acknowledges that there are others who are of "the pure and
statement on deification. In this passage, to communicate the idea of pious faith, and are true Christians" who "think otherwise."33 Aside from
deification, he uses 8EaS' YIYVOllat theos gignomai (to become a god), chiliastic expectations, that were not universally shared by all Christians,
which is the first time in Christian tradition such semantics are used. It is restoration of the universal divine order, reconciliation of humanity with
a common phrase in patristic literature henceforward. Justin employs 8EaS' God, and immortal life in the glory of God free of corruption and suffering,
Yl yvolla I theos gignomai in the context of his interpretation of Ps. 81:6 are the elements of deification in Justin that apply to every Christian. The
(LXX). In this instance, he is also the first among Christian writers to use whole goal of Christ's voluntary incarnation was to proclaim divine
this biblical text in relation to deification. For him every human being is teaching "for the conversion and restoration of the human race."34 The
responsible for personal sins and was created capable of becoming a god: Logos became man and "a partaker of our sufferings, [that] he might also
bring us healing."35 The world was created for people's sake, that some of

,(' (
30 Dial. 124.4; Marcovich, Dialogus Cum Tryphone, 285, ANF 1:262.
31
25 1 Apol. 19.4; 52.3, Dial. 45.4. 1 Apol. 19.4; Marcovich, Apologiae Pro Christianis, 60; ANF 1:169.
26
1 Apol. 19. 32 Dial. 80-8l.

27 Dial. 46.7, Marcovich, Dialogus Cum Tryphone, 146, ANF 1:218. See also Dial. 117.3. 33 Dial. 80.2; Marcovich, Dialogus Cum Tiyphone, 208; ANF 1:239.

28 Cf. 1 Apol. 46, Dial. 139.5. 34 1 Apol. 23.2; Marcovich, Apologiae Pro Christianis, 66; ANF 1: 171.
35
29 Dial. 138.2, Marcovich, Dialogus Cum Tryphone, 308, ANF 1:268. 2 Apol. 13.4; Marcovich, Apologiae Pro Christianis, 157; ANF 1:193.

72 73
If'

Theosis Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century

them, who through "their works show themselves worth! o~ thi: his design, Greek mythology to support his premise. 42 He never even uses the word
they are deemed worthy, and so we have r.eceived-of r~lgn~~~ m company "Christ;" however, he speaks about generation of the Logos and his
I!
I:
I
with him, being delivered from corrupnon and suffenng. participation in creation. 43
Tatian has a peculiar tripartite anthropology. For him, human nature
has bodylflesh, and two types of spirit. The first spirit is material or created
Tatian spirit,44 which corresponds to the human sou1,45 and is not limited only
to human beings. It is found in the whole of creation: luminaries, angels,
Tatian was a student of Justin in Rome. As was his teacher, Tatian was a people, animals, plants, and waters. The nature of material spirit is one
convert to Christianity after searching for truth in Greek philosophy and and the same, although "it possesses differences within itself."4G This
then in the Christian Scriptures. Whereas Justin was searching for the differentiation in each particular thing resembles entelecheia (inner
elements of truth in pre-Christian philosophy, Tatian despises Hellenistic substance of the thing) of Aristotle. Material spirit in created entities
culture. However, he follows Justin's argument that if Greeks had any functions as the ontological principle forming their shape and existenceY
knowledge whatsoever, they received it from Moses without acknow:edging Therefore, to worship pagan gods is to worship material spirit. 48
their source. 37 The only time that Tatian speaks of people as gods, 1S when The human soul is the animating principle of the body. It is inseparable
he criticizes the pagan idea of divinization. 38 He uses theopoieo only ~n.ce, from the body and does not have independent existence. The whole idea
metaphorically, when he argues against those who trust hum.an med1cme that the soul can benefit from separation from the body seems ridiculous
and "deify the objects of nature," namely drugs, over t~e healmg help that to Tatian. 49 Therefore, the soul is as mortal as the body; both are born, die
comes from God. 39 Tatian is resistant to the whole 1dea of any human and dissolve at the same time, and then at the end of the world resurrect
transformation in the Hellenistic context,40 although he acknowledges for the final judgment. 5o
human ability to advance "far beyond his humanity towards G.od The second spirit is called perfect, divine, heavenly, or spiritual spirit.
himself."41 However, this human advancement seems to be more hke It is higher than the soul, and it functions as the receptacle of the image
regaining its original condition than in any sense a transfiguration of and likeness of God. 51 The divine spirit both comes from God and is the
human nature. mode for communication with God. 52 Identifying human spiritual spirit
The incarnation of Christ does not occupy the central position in his with the image and likeness of God instead of with a human's rational
discourse. He alludes to it only once, when he attempts to demonstrate
that such a notion as to declare, "that God has been born in the form of
man," is not uniquely Christian, and then he points to examples from 42 Grat. 21.1. Whittaker, Oratio Ad Graecos and Fragments, 42-43.
43 Orat. 5. Cf. Orat. 7.1.
44 Tatian is notorious for a semi-materialistic approach to reality. Even heaven in his
perspective has boundaries (Orat. 20.2). Everything which is created has materiality,
361 Apol. 10.2; Marcovich, Apologiae Pro Christianis, 45---46; ANF 1:165. nevertheless this materiality, for example in angels, is spiritual (Orat. 15.3).
37 Orat. 40.1; this is the Oration to the Greeks. . 45 Grat. 12.l.
38 Orat. 10.2; 12.4. Also in Orat. 3.2 he makes reference to an unfortunate expene~ce of 46 Grat. 12.5. Whittaker, Oratio Ad Graecos and Fragments, 24-25.
Empedocles who proclaimed himself a god and to prove his divine status jumped mto a 47 Grat. 12, cf. Orat.4.2.
volcanic crater, which ended his divinity. ,(' ( 48 Grat. 4.2.

390rat. 18.2. 49 Grat. 16.l.

40 Orat. 10.1. 'h .. n d 50 Grat. 13.1, 15.1, cf. Orat.6.2.

41 Orat. 15.2; Tatian, Oratio Ad Graecos and Fragments, Oxford Early C nst/an exts, e . 51 Grat. 12.1.
Molly Whittaker (Oxford: Clarendon, 1982) 30-31. 52 Grat. 13.1-3.

74 75
»

Theosis Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century

faculty (nous) is, in Finch's opinion, "Tatian's most distinctive and return to God is described in terms of moral and intellectual perfection
influential contribution."53 rather than ontological transformation. 6l It requires effort from human
The divine spirit is intimately connected to the SOUP4 It is through beings, and it is a gift from God. It is the return to humankind's true
this connection of the human soul with the divine spirit, that the human destiny, which is culminated in the general resurrection.
being can participate in God and obtain immortality and incorruptibility.55
However, this immortality is conditional, not ontological. Neither angels
nor humans possess goodness as an ontological characteristic of their Theophilus of Antioch
nature, but have free predisposition toward both good and evil. The misuse
of free will caused separation from God. The concept of the human fall is Theophilus of Antioch is less critical of Greek culture than Tatian; his
an important aspect ofTatian's theology, however, it is presumed by him theology is closer to Justin's. However, recognizing some validity of
rather than explicitly stated in a biblical context. He never mentions Adam Hellenistic wisdom, or rather some similarities between Christian and
by name nor makes direct allusions to Genesis 3. 56 Throughout Oratio ad pagan cultures that resulted from dependence of pagan authors on biblical
Graecos emphasis is placed on an angelic rebellion copied by human beings, sources, he attempts to demonstrate Christian revelation as superior to,
and on the intervention of demons in the life of humanity. and more ancient than, the former. 62 Like other apologists of the second
After the fall, the divine spirit left human beings, and people lost the century, Theophilus makes use of Logos theology. However, along with
image and likeness of God. However, it did not abandon humanity entirely, Tatian and Athenagoras, he does not correlate it with the incarnation of
at least the souls of some people still retained sparks of the spirit's power. 57 Christ. Salvation of the human being is presented, perhaps as the result of
If the soul chooses to follow the divine wisdom and do just things, it can extensive study of Hebrew Scripture,63 as obedience to God's law and
58 commandments. This he combines with the doctrine of bodily
attract the divine spirit back and regain union with God. This return of
spiritual spirit, closely associated with the work of the Holy Spirit, restores resurrection, as a reward for obedience. G4
60 Human existence, according to Theophilus, is a very dynamic process
our immortality59 and makes us capable of comprehending the Godhead.
Here Tatian follows Justin. from the beginning. A human being, who is the breath of God65 and "the
In Tatian, the soteriological problem is to regain the image and likeness only work worthy of his own [God's] hands ,"66 was created neither perfect
of God through the knowledge and wisdom of God, which restores the nor imperfect, neither mortal nor immortal, but capable of both states. 67
original incorruptibility, immortality, and union with God. The way of Theophilus says, "For God made man free, and with power over himsel£"68
Here Theophilus points to both a human resemblance to, and difference
Jeffrey Finch, "Sanctity as Participation in the Divine Nature According to the Ante-
53 from, God. If Adam were created immortal, it would make him equal to
Nicene Eastern Fathers, Considered in the Light of Palamism" (Ph.D. diss., Drew
University, 2001) 153.
54 Orat. 13.3.
61 Orat. 20.1.
62 AdAutol. 2.30, 33; 3.26, 29.
55 Orat. 7.1.
63 See the introduction to Robert McQueen Grant, AdAutolycum, Oxford Early Christian
56 See Orat. 7, 20.
57 Orat. 13.2-3, cf. 20. In Orat. 15.4 Tatian affirms that everyone has a second chance, Texts (Oxford: Clarendon, 1970) xvii-xix.
is capable of repentance, and can defeat death; and throughSllF Oratio ~d Graecos ~at~an 64 AdAutol. 2.27.

on several occasions confirms that all ages, nations, and genders are admitted to Chnsnan 65 AdAutol. 1.7.

66 AdAutol. 2.18; Grant, AdAutolycum, 56-57.

teaching.
67 But with intent toward immortality: Ad Auto!' 2.24, 27.
58 Orat. 7.1, 13.3, 15.1-2.
68 AdAutol. 2.27. ANF 2: 105. This sentence is omitted from Grant's English translation,
59 Orat. 20.2-3; 19.2.
60 Orat. 16.1-2.
AdAutolycum, 70-71.

76 77
 Theosis
Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century
I' 69
God; ifhe were mortal, God would be responsible for his death. However,
with a human's possibility for restoration, the animal world, that
originally humans were sinless.7° In Theophilus this intermediacy of a
transgresses along with humanity, also receives a chance to be redeemed.76
human being has even spatial significance. God not only created the human
By free will Adam broke the divine law and by the same principle a
person as an incomplete sketch, but also positioned him in paradise, a
human being can be restored, as a gift of God's "own philanthropy and
place between the earth and heaven. . .
mercy," if he chooses to obey the will of God. 77 In the context of this
In connection with this original, human intermediacy, Theophilus offers
passage, we find another explici~ reference to .human ~eification.
one ofthe first explicit early references to human deification in Christian theology:
Theophilus does not use 8EOTTOIEW or other duect deSignators for
deification; like Justin, he employs 8EOS" Yl YVOllal theos gignomai.
God transferred him [human being] out of the earth from which he was
However, if in Justin 8EOS" YIYVOllal theos gignomai is mentioned in the
made into paradise, giving him an opportunity for progress so that by
context of his exegesis ofPs 81:6 (LXX), in Theophilus it is a free standing
growing and becoming mature, and furthermore having been declared
statement: if someone "were to turn to the life of immortality by keeping
a god (8EOS' eXvexoEIX8EIS' theos anadeichtheis), he might also ascend
the commandment of God, he would win immortality as a reward from
into heaven ... possessing immortality.ll
him and would become god (YEVT]TCXI 8EOS" genetai theos)."78
It does not look like deification in Theophilus goes beyond
This intermediacy of the human's condition, with a potentiality of
achievement of immortality and incorruptibility, which is the prerogative
full maturity, becomes a significant element of the soteriology and
of the whole human being, not only of the soul;79 it is not an escape from
anthropology of some later patristic writers.
corporeality. Purity, righteousness, and immortality are the fruit of a healthy
The divine commandment not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge,
human condition, which one can obtain through obedience to God's law,
for Theophilus, was due to Adam's infancy, a notion later picked up in
and through the therapeutic experience of death and resurrection. 80 This
patristic tradition only by Irenaeus.72 As little children are.not capable of
new human condition corresponds with the state of maturity, and
eating solid food, so was Adam "not yet able to acquue kno:vledge
transcends the original one in which Adam was created. A human being
properly."73 Adam disobeyed this commandment and caused hIS own
becomes immortal, attains a vision of God, and will be located in heaven. 81
"expulsion from Paradise" and "acquired pain, suffering, and sorrow: ~nd
Here we have a concept of deification as full human maturity.
finally fell victim of death."74 Death by itself was not the final dlVlne
judgment against Adam, but rather a divine remedy.so that.Adam would
not stay in a sinful state forever; and at the appoInted time, through
resurrection, he would become new and perfect, righteous and immortal.
God "gave him an occasion for repentance an d conreSSlOn.e' logether
"75 'T'

76 AdAutol. 2.17.
69 Ad Auto!' 2.27.
77 Ad Autol. 2.17, 27.
70 AdAuto!' 2.17.
78 AdAutol. 2.27. Grant, AdAutorycum, 70-71. Norman Russell suggests that reference
71 Ad Auto!' 2.24. Grant, Ad Autorycum, 66-67.
to Ps. 81:6 (LXX) is contextually present (The Doctrine ofDeification in the Greek Patristic
72 Adv. Haer. 3.22.4, 3.23.5,4.38.1-2. On this subject see, M. C. Steenberg, "Children
Tradition [Oxford: Oxford Univeristy Press, 2004J 104). Considering Theophilus'
in Paradise: Adam and Eve as 'Infants' in Irenaeus ofLyons,"1rrJournal ofEarry Christian connection to Jewish Christianity this suggestion is very plausible, however, at the same
Studies 12, no. 1 (2004): 1-22. time it is very speculative as Theophilus does not make any direct references to Ps. 81:6
73 AdAutol. 2.25. Grant, AdAutorycum, 66-67.
(LXX) in this passage nor throughout Ad Autorycum.
79 AdAutol. 1.7.
74 Ad Auto!' 2.25. Grant, AdAutorycum, 68-69.
80 Ad Autol. 2.26.
75 Ad Auto!' 2.26. Grant, Ad Autorycum, 68-69.
81 AdAutol. 1.7,2.24-26.

78
79
 Theosis Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century

Athenagoras Christian concept of deification in the two works, we run into peculiar
incongruities, both stylistic and conceptual.
Athenagoras, who is acknowledged as "unquestion~bl~ the most elo~u~nt In Legatio, Athenagoras consistently draws a distinction between the
of the early Christian apologists,"82 demonstrate~ slgn~ficant ~ppreClatlOn eternal and un created God8? and "created and perishable" matter. 88 Here,
for the Hellenistic classical tradition. However, m sp1te of h1s eloquence Middle Platonic ontological dualism between material and spiritual, is
and education, he had practically no influence on patristi~ ~ra~ition.83 presented as the dualism between created and uncreated. Everything that
Athenagoras's two known treatises, Legatio pro Chrt:tzanzs ~nd. De is created is non-being. 89 Not only matter, but also a human being "is
resurrectione mortuorum, argue from the standpoint of ratlonal thmkmg. created and perishable."90 This disposition underlines his main argument
PI t . "84
If his theology of God is "deep Iy in fl uence d b y t h e popuIar. a ~ms.m, in discourse about gods in paganism. Therefore, to speak about a human
his anthropology has a definite Aristotelian stamp,. m~lcatmg .a being in terms of god is inconceivable. 91 Even such vocabulary as 8E05
sophisticated knowledge of philosophical sources. H1s d1sc?urse 1S Ylyvollcxt theos gignomai92 and 8EorrolEcu,93 that we can find in Legatio,
philosophic rather than historic/biblical. Athe~agoras c~uld be v1ewed as is always used in the context of pagan criticism.
one of the first Christian philosophic theolog1ans. Chnstology does not However, in spite of the substantial ontological difference that exists
play any significant role in his writing ..Except ~or one obscure remark in between God and the created realm, a human being does have the capability
Res. 21.4, he avoids speaking about the mcarnatlOn. He does demonstrate to know God through mind and thought, through mind and thought
for us how elements of Hellenistic culture and Greek philosophy could be alone (vu;3 llovU? Ka I "AoyU? no mono kai logo). 94 A human being has some
appropriated to a new context of Christian discourse and have a different "affinity with the divine,"95 the human soul is naturally immortal,96 and
meamng. . in the divine design a human being is destined to another heavenly life
Authorship of his second treatise, De resurrectlOne, was recently where "we may then abide with God and with his help remain changeless
disputed.85 However, even if this work does not belon? t~ A~~ena~oras, ~s and impassible in soul as though we were not body, even if we have one,
William Schoedel points out, in addition to other slm1lantles, there 1S but heavenly spirit."9? This heavenly life in bodily form is depicted in
apparently no fundamental difference between the vocabulary and style rather Platonic spiritualistic terms, contrary to a strong emphasis in De
of the two treatises and the fact that near the end of the Plea (37.1) resurrectione, his other treatise, on anthropologIcal unity of the soul and
Athenagoras sets aside the problem of resurrection-presu~ably for some the body, and virtual silence about the spirit and human heavenly destiny.
other occasion."86 Nevertheless, when we try to trace eV1dence for the In De resurrectione, we not only have a more holistic approach to the
structure of the human being, who is always, in order to be human, both

82 Joh annes Q uas t en, p.'ntro'o'O'lI

u I, 6./ ('VTestminster
WI •• Christian Classics, 1993 [1950])
, Md·

87 Leg. 30.3.
1:229. ,I: dE I Ch ..
83 See the introduction to Athenagoras, Legatio and De Resurrectione, OXjor: any rzsttan 88 Leg. 4.1.
Texts, ed. William R. Schoedel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) ix-xi. 89 Leg. 4.2.

84 Grant, Greek Apologists of the Second, 106. . . 90 Leg. 8.3.

85 See, R. M. Grant, "Athenagoras or pseudo-Athenagoras," Harvard Theological Rev:ew 91 Leg. 20.5-21.1, 22.6-12,28.8,29.4.

47 (1954): 121-29. However, some other scholars find Grant~ argument~ n.ot conclusive. 92 Leg. 20.1. C£ 18.3,29.4.
S J L Rauch Greek Lomc and Philosophy and the Problem of'Authorshtp m Athenago ras 93 Leg. 22.9, 10, 12.

(;~. diss., U~iversity;fChicago, 19~8); B. P~ud~r.o.n, 'Tal~t~enticite du trait~ sur l~

D. 94 Leg. 4.1.

resurrection attribue a l'apologiste Athenagore, Vtgtltae Chrzsttanae 40 (1986). 226 95 Leg. 4.1; 25.3.
44. See also, Schoedel, Legatio and De Resurrectione, xxv-xxxii. 96 Leg. 27.2. C£ Res. 13.1, 15.2-8.

86 Schoedel, Legatio and De Resurrectione, xxv-xxvi. 97 Leg. 31.4. Schoedel, Legatio and De Resurrectione, 76-77.

80 81
?

Theosis Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century

soul and body,98 but the resurrected body itself obtains characteristics of to turn toward, or away from, God. The achievement of perpetual duration

immorta11ty· aki n to t h e so ul .99 .... 100

is the resul t of moral obedience. A human being is capable of making rational
The human being as a rational creature, mvested wlth mtelhgence, moral decisions. Rationality, another ontological human quality, has some
and a carrier of the image of God, 101 was not created for the sake of God affinity to the divine, but nevertheless is a human attribute. Athenagoras,
himself, who needs nothing, but for the human's own ,sake, for never unlike other apologists, does not correlate human ability to reason with the
ending life in eternal contemplatio~ of Go~~:02 T~us, the TEf..OS- telo~ (?oal) Logos theology. By making "God's majesty and universal wisdom" the objects
of human destiny is perpetual eX1stence, whtch can only be ach1eved of "eternal contemplation," a human being is guaranteed "eternal survival." 107
through the resurrection of the body. 104 The rationality realized in eternal contemplation of God constitutes ultimate
With these two premises-natural immortality of the soul and perpetual union with God. l08 This language of contemplative union with God
existence of the entire human being, who consists of soul and body- represents more definitively an early foundation for speculative mysticism
Athenagoras links together the Greek n~tion of nat~ral immortality ~f the than it promotes the Christian idea of deification.
soul with the Christian doctrine of bod11y resurrectton. Both prop~rt1es of
human composite nature should perpetually exist, accordi~g to the1r form.
Human "survival guarantees his resurrection, without whtch he could not Epistle to Diognetus
survive as man."105 Both the soul and the body are subjects of the moral
order. They both carry the responsibility for what was performe~ by t~~6m In Epistula ad Diognetum we do not find the technical language of
in cooperation. Therefore, they both sh~uld be rewa~ded or pUn1s~ed .. deification, however, this elegant piece of Christian literature introduces
In Athenagoras, as in other apolog1sts before h1m, the sotenol~glcal several theological themes that will be important in later development of
goal is realized in immortality and incorruptibility, which are the attnbutes theosis. Christians in this apology are introduced as citizens of heaven
of God himself. However, Athenagoras is very clear that any god-language waiting for incorruptible life. They collect~ constitute the soul of the
is inappropriate to a human being. Immortality and incorruptibility of the world. 109 The soul as an entity is already understood in Platonic terms as
soul are innate and ontological attributes of human nature; however as creat~d immortal and encased in the captivity of the body.llo At the same time, as
being they only resemble, but do not parallel, God's q~alities. Unli~e Justm, the result of transgression, human nature is not capable of obtaining eternal
in Athenagoras the human soul never loses immortal1ty. Immortal1ty of the life outside of the grace and mercy of God. III The incarnation of God in
body is the result of the transformation of hu~an n~ture through Christ not only reveals proper knowledge of God himself, but also, through
resurrection, by the creative power of God. The chnstol~gl~al context of faith, makes a human being capable of seeing God.112 True life and true
this transformation is absent in his writings. From the begmnmg, a hu~~n knowledge are essentially connected. One is impossible without the other.
being was created with some autonomy from God, and with natural ab1hty This was already depicted in the story of two trees in Paradise, the tree of
knowledge and the tree oflife. 113 Imitation of the life of Christ constitutes
the proper ground for the imitation of God. As we read,
98 Res. 10.5,13.1,15.2,15.8,18.4,21.5.
99 Res. 3.2, 10.5-6.

100 Res. 12.6, 13.1.

101 Res. 12.6.

102 Res. 13.2; 25.4.

. (
107

108
Res. 13.2.
Res. 25.4.
109 Diogn. 5-6.

110 Diogn. 6.
103 Res. 12.
111 Diogn. 9.
104 Res. 16.2.
105 Res. 13.2. Schoedel, Legatio and De Resurrectione, 120-21. Cf. Res. 25.3. l12 Diogn. 8, 10.

113 Diogn.12.
106 Res. 18-23.

82 83
 Theosis Deification in the Apologists ofthe Second Century
When you love him, you will be an imitator of his goodness. And do paralleled with divine filiation; in Theophilus, with full maturity that
not be surprised to hear that a man can become an imitator of God. He supersedes a human's original state.
can, because God wills it. To be happy does not, indeed, consist in The apologists do stress contemplation and the vision of God as natural
lording it over one's neighbors, or in longing to have some advantage human ability to know God. They do not directly associate contemplation
over the weaker ones, or in being rich and ordering one's inferiors about. of God with deification, but their contribution is important for the
It is not in this way that any man can imitate God, for such things are founding of speculative mysticism, which itself becomes an integral part
alien to his majesty. But if a man takes his neighbor's burden on himself, of the notion of deification. Similar to the Apostolic Fathers, the apologists
and is willing to help his inferior in some respect in which he himself is have a holistic approach to human nature; however, they incline toward a
better off, and, by providing the needy with what he himself possesses Platonically oriented view of the natural immortality of the human soul.
because he has received it from God, becomes a god to those who receive Eschatological expectations are not as significant as for the Apostolic
it-then this man is an imitator of God. 114 Fathers; nevertheless, spiritual other-world-ness is more prominent,
especially in Epistula ad Diognetum.
It is the imitation of God that makes us act similarly to God, however, Deification is really a cluster of related concepts present in Christian
there is not even any implicit indication in the letter that this similarity is theology from the beginning. It grows out of practical soteriological aspects
ontological in any sense. Here, we have a combination of Christian ca~e of Christian spirituality. It is implicitly present in the background of most
for the poor, with the Hellenistic view that benefactors are gods to their of the theological controversies. However, it does not get significant
beneficiaries. I 15 It is a christo centric imitation of God in everyday life that treatment as an independent theological issue in the early patristic writers,
corresponds to moral and virtuous living. and yet it is never entirely absent. It exists in early patristic theology
predominantly in a contextualized form.

Conclusion

Theological discourse in the apologists, with the exception of Justin, is

less christo centric and ecclesiastic compared to the Apostolic Fathers. They
have more emphasis on speculative reasoning, that lays the groundwork
for what would become traditional methodology of Christian theology.
The prominence of philosophic argumentation, along with the appeal :0
historic antiquity, serve to legitimize Chri~tian truth in the eyes ofHellelllst
culture. It also introduces several theological themes that would playa
more significant role in later developments in the concept of deification.
Deification in the Apologists only occasionally goes any further th~n t~e
attainment of immortality and incorruptibility. In Justin, deification IS
" (

114 Diogn. 10.4-6 (Early Christian Fathers, tr. Cyril C. Richardson. Library of Christian
Classics 1 [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1953] 221).
115 Russell, Doctrine ofDeification, 101.

84 85
~i
Ii

Irenaeus on the Christo logical Basis ofHuman Divinization

by the union of human nature with divine nature through the incarnation,
life, death, and resurrection of the Eternal Son, appropriated existentially
as adoption by God and infusion by the Holy Spirit, and finally perfected
eternally through the face to face vision of God.
Harnack and Bousset, among others, find in this soteriology the
Hellenistic subversion and corruption of the Gospel.5 Martin George, 6
while acknowledging that Irenaean formulations can bear a rhetorical
similarity to the apotheosis of pagan antiquity, believes it is more reasonable
: : to conclude that the idea of Christian divinization implicit in the passage
quoted above is most appropriately and accurately attributed to several
distinctively biblical themes.?

Irenaeus on the Christological

Theological Anthropology: Image and Likeness Recapitulated
Basis of Human Divinization
Given that Irenaeus "organized his synthesis around the theme of the
Jeffrey Finch image and likeness,"8 it is significant that he was somewhat conflicted on
what, precisely, constituted the original image and likeness of God in
Adam and on whether or not there was a meaningful distinction between
Irenaeus' acclamation of "our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His the two. 9 On a number of occasions, Irenaeus seems to presuppose a perfect
transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be synonymity between image and likeness. lO Frequently, when writing of
even what He is Himself"l provided the most compelling and often- the redemptive recovery of the image and likeness, Irenaeus implies that
repeated form of the perennial cur Deus hom0 2 question for generations to
come, even until today. Although he never employed the language of
5 Harnack, History of Dogma, 2:10-11, 240; Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christos (trans.
theopoiesis or theosis,3 already present in the theology ofIrenaeus are all John E. Steely; 1913; repr., Nashville: Abingdon, 1970) 432.
the essential elements of what would come to be regarded as the 6 Martin George, "Vergotdichung des Menschen. Von der platonischen Philosophie zur
characteristically patristic understanding of sanctification as divinization: Soteriologie der griechischen Kirchenvater," in Die "Weltlichkeit des Glaubens in der Alten
restoration of prelapsarian4 likeness to God and\\ncorruptibility, initiated Kirche: Festschriftfur Ulrich Wickert zum siebzigsten Geburtstag, ed. Dietmar Wyrwa et al.
(Berlin: de Gruyter, 1997) 135-37.
7 For instance, creation of humanity in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26-27);
1 Adversus Haeresis (hereafter AN) 5.pref. (All translations, unless otherwise no.te~, .al:e adoption to divine sonship (Gal 3:26,4:5; John 1:12-13); the vocation of the Christian
taken from ANF 1. Greek and Latin texts of AH are from PG 7 and that of Epldelxls IS
to perfection by imitating the perfections of God revealed in Christ (Matt 5:44-48; 2
from SC 406.) Of this dictum, Hastings Rashdall, The Idea ofthe Atonement in Chris~i~n
Cor 3:18; Phil 2:5-11); and a vision of God in the future life, in which the resurrected
Theology (London: Macmillan, 1925) 240, writes: "Here we have the charactenstlC
will be made incorruptible (1 Cor 13: 12; 15:53; 1 John 3:2).
thought of almost all subsequent Greek theology." " ( 81. H. Dalmais, et al, "Divinisation," in Dictionnaire de spiritualite ascetique et mystique,
2 "Why did God become human?"
eds., M. Viller, et al. Vol. 3 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1957) 1377.
3 GustafWingren, Man and the Incarnation: A Study in the Biblical Theology ofIrenaeus,
9 Jacques Fantino, L'homme, image de Dieu, chez saint Irenee de Lyon (Paris: Cerf; 1986)
trans. Ross Mackenzie (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1959) 209 n. 78. 106.
4 "Before the Fall."
10 AH3.18.1; 5.12.4. Cf. AH 3.21.10; 4.pref.4; 4.20.1; 5.1.1.

86 87
 Theosis Irenaeus on the Christo logical Basis ofHuman Divinization
Adam's likeness was lost as a consequence of sin, resulting in the departure possession of their own created spirits. GustafWingren considers this to
of the indwelling Spirit. Through Christ's incarnation, however, "He both be the "central point at issue" with respect to whether or not Irenaeus had
I
I. showed forth the image truly, since He became Himself what was His adopted a Hellenistic (interior divine spark) view of deification .
image; and He re-established the similitude after a sure manner, by . h' , arguIng
that wit In Irenaeus' tripartite anthropology of body s I d ..
" .' . , ou, an SpIrIt,
assimilating (synexomoiosas) man to the invisible Father through means of t~e. SpIrlt throug~?~t IS G~d's own Spirit, not some kind of 'gift' of the
the visible Word."ll In another context, Irenaeus contends (against the Sp~r~t, but the SpIrlt ItSelf, I.e., God or Christ Himsel£"!7 Hence, if the
Gnostics) that the human body and soul inseparably together constitute SpIrIt departs, as he did as a consequence of the fall , "m ans" man l'Iness, IS
.
.
the image of God, whereas the infused Spirit establishes the likeness. 12 thereby Incomplete."!8 The acquisition of the Spirit in the Christian
On the basis of AH 5.6.1; 5.16.2, it has become something of a economy, then, does not make the redeemed other than human or supra-
scholarly convention to assume that Irenaeus clearly distinguished between hun:a~, but truly a~d fully human, because "it is part of man's nature to
the image and likeness of God in the human person. 13 But his be dIVIne, and also lrttle by little to become that which he rightl i I
interchangeable use of "image" and "likeness" as well as his concept that d "!9 Th I Y s, name y,
Go. . e so e text upon which Wingren founds his thesis is one in
the only true and full Image of God is the Son, "after whose image man whIc~ Irenaeus expands on his rather enigmatic assertion that the innate
was made,"14 would seem to weigh against finding in Irenaeus any decisive ~apacity of huron an flesh for incorruption is "given by the Spirit," whereas
differentiation between a natural image and a supernatural likeness. In Its equal capacIty for death and corruption is given "by the breath."
any case, Irenaeus stressed salvific human participation in God. Thus, it
was not in Adam's aspiring to live a divine life, to be God-like, that he For th~ breath of life, which also rendered man an animated being, is
sinned, but in his succumbing to the temptation of egoism, that is, in one thmg, and the vivifYing Spirit another, which also caused him to
attempting to acquire the glory of immortality and incorruptibility as his become Spiritual. ... telling us that breath is indeed given in common
own autonomous possession rather than as a gift received from Another. IS to all people upon earth, but that the Spirit is theirs alone who tread
The divinely imposed sentence of death, Irenaeus avers, was a remedial down earth~y d~sires .... Thus does he 20 attribute the Spirit as peculiar
rather than retributive punishment, intended so that the opportunity for to God, ~h1ch m the last times He pours forth upon the human race by
sin would die with the body.16 the adop~IOn of sons; but he shows that breath was common throughout
A closely related ambiguity in Irenaeus' theological anthropology is the creatIOn, and points it out as something created. 21
whether he understood the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit to be
the third component of the fully human person or whether humans are in . Kle?ba and Meyendorff understand Irenaeus to have thought the
IndwellIng Holy Spirit a natural component of the first humans. 22 Gross,
11 AH5.16.2. \.
12 AH5.6.1. 17 Man and the Incarnation, 208.
13 See E. Klebba, Die Anthropologie des hI. Irenaeus (Munster-en-Westphalie, 1894) 34ff; 18 Man and the Incarnation, 208.
John Lawson, The Biblical Theology o/St. Irenaeus (London: Epworth, 1948) 209ff. . 19 Man d h 1. .
.an t. e n:arnatton,. 209 .. On p. 211, Wingren Contrasts Irenaeus' soteriological
14 Epid. 22 (trans. ]. A. Robinson in St. Irenaeus [London: SPCK, 1920] 90). ThiS
hu~ailIsm to the Idea of. deIfication
claim b hid' . .
found in Methodius and Athanasius Th I
" . . e atter, e
h
distinction between the Image Himself and those only created according to the Image s, y 0 mg out vlrgmlty to be the hIghest expression of the Christian life" have
(kat' eikona) will be utterly crucial in the Christology and s6teriology of Athanasius, but sou~~ed .the. charac~e:istical~y. Hellenistic note on deification by implyin~ that
is not of great moment for Irenaeus. partiCipation In the dlvme anmhllates what is most truly human.
15 AH 3.23.1. See M. Aubineau, "Incorruptibilite et divinisation selon Irenee," Recherches 20 Isa 57: 16.

de Science Religieuse 44 (1956): 37. 21 AH 5.12.2.

16 AH 3.23.6.
22 C£ Klebba, Die Anthropologie des hI. Irenaeus, 181 fE; Meyendorff, Byzantine Theology, 138.

88 89
 Theosis
Irenaeus on the Christo logical Basis ofHuman Divinization
on the other hand, points to a number of passages in which Irenaeus
seems to have in mind a created human spirit which, once purified by its nature was aboriginally endowed with the capacity for change,
:; ,
participation in the Holy Spirit, renders the person spiritual. For example, improvement, and promotion to adopted divine sonship.
contra the Gnostic doctrine of the transmigration of souls, Irenaeus writes
of the resurrected as "having their own bodies and having also their own
souls and their own spirits. "23 Gross concludes that Irenaeus has anticipated God Partakable
the much later scholastic distinction between un created and created grace
by finding in our prelapsarian archetypes "a 'spirit of man,' which is to say Although Irenaeus understood the human person to have been ordered
a spiritual gift, distinct from the divine Holy Spirit, but produced by by the economy of creation toward sharing God's own life and to have
Him and inseparable from Him."24 been endowed with the created capacity to do so, he was careful to insist
Created, ordered, and equipped though they were to be children of at the ~a~e time, against the connatural theological anthropology of his
God, participants in the divine nature, and temples of the Holy Spirit, Vale~t1il1an ~n~~tic ne~esis, that "man should never ... suppose that
the creatureliness of the first humans already connoted an inherent the mcorrupt~blhty which belongs to him is his own naturally and by
weakness to Irenaeus and meant that they were necessarily in possession thus not holdmg the truth, should boast with empty superciliousness, as
of only a dependent, relative, and dynamic perfection. Against the Gnostics' if he were naturally like to God. "29 So Irenaeus' bold affirmations of the
determinism, Irenaeus vigorously affirms free will as one aspect of Adam's heights to which Christian salvation transports the human person must
having been created after the image and likeness of God,25 a fact which be read in light of his frequent reminders that there always remains a
exonerates the Creator for the sin and disorder of the world. Irenaeus much more foundational, unbreachable, ontological gulf between the
Creator and His creatures. 30
anticipates another Gnostic assault on the goodness and competence of
the Creator when he asks rhetorically: "What, then? Could not God have As an alternative to the spirit-matter dualism of the Gnostics, therefore,
exhibited man as perfect from the beginning?"26 His answer is an Irenaeus a~vanced a C:eator-creature duality. God alone, he repeats
unequivocal 'no,' not because of any weakness, aloofness, or selfishness ~requently, I~ un created, mcomprehensible, invisible, eternal, unbegotten,
attributable to the Creator, but from the finitude of creatures who "must Inscrutable, meffable, perfect, and incorruptible by His very nature, which
be inferior to Him who created them, from the very fact of their later seems to be a circuitous way of saying that God alone is infinite. 31 The
origin."27 As a mother is prudent not to make full use of her power to give Gnostic theory of emanations from the unknowable One, Irenaeus
solid food to her infant, "so, in like manner, God had power at the complains, is logically nonsensical at least in part because, in their solicitude
beginning to grant perfection to man; but as the latter was only recently to "g~ard against attributing want of power to Him" by protecting Him
created, he could not possibly have received it."28 The instability which from mvolvement with the created (dis)order, they have constructed an
permitted Adam to sin, then, is not due to any deficit in the Creator's anthr?~omorphized God whose mutability, "affections and passion," are
beneficence, but attaches to the dynamism of the finite creature, whose . the.dIstlnctive earmarks of creatureliness. If they had only consulted the
Scnptures, they would have learned that "God is not as men are' and that
23 AH 2.33.5. See also AH 3.17.3; 4.39.2; 5.6.1. His thoughts are not like the thoughts of men. For the Father of all is at a
24 Jules Gross, La divinisation du chretien d'apres Les peres grecs: Contribution historique a
La doctrine de lagrace(Paris: J. Gabalda, 1938) 156. ,{ ( 29 AH 3.20.1. Cf. AH 2.34.2., 5.3.1. See Aubineau, "Incorruptibilite et divinisation

25 AH 4.37.4. Cf. AH 4.4.4; 4.38.4.

selon Irenee,
" " 28 ,wh0 remm . dsus that Irenaeus cannot be understood without reference
26 AH 4.38.1. ~~ the Valentinian Gnostics against whom AH was directed.
27 AH 4.38.1. AH3.8.3.
28 AH 4.38.1. Cf. 1 Cor 3:12. 31 ~~;24.2; 2.34.2; 3.8.3; 4.38.3. See Aubineau, "Incorruptibilite et divinisation selon
Irenee, 32-33; Gross, 157; Dalmais, "Divinisation," 1377.

90
91
 Theosis Irenaeus on the Christo logical Basis ofHuman Divinization

vast difference from those affections and passions which operate among of divine ~ife or eternallife,37 Irenaeus also customarily uses incorruptibility
men."32 God alone is known to be the immutable ground of the entire (aphtharsta) as shorthand for the whole gamut of divine virtues or perfections
world of becoming not merely in spite of His involvement with it, but which creatures may possess by gratuitous participation. Butterworth's
precisely because He is its eternal Creator: "He who makes is always the protestations notwithstanding, at least aphtharsia certainly means much more
to Irenaeus than mere survival of the soul after death. 38 Indeed, Irenaeus
same; but that which is made must receive both beginning, and middle,
and addition and increase."33 affirmed in opposition to the Gnostic doctrine of the transmigration of
I used the phrase "Creator-creature duality" advisedly, for Irenaeus souls, that the soul of the rich man who had neglected the beggar Lazarus
would not have the Uncreated as opposed to the created as the corporeal retained its individuation in "the form of a man" after the death of his body,
is to the spiritual or as the unknowable Pleroma is to the Demiurge in the but was not among the redeemed and did not, therefore, enjoy a share in
the divine incorruptibility.39
strict dualism of the Gnostics. What Irenaeus adds is a keen sense of the
Father's constitutive self-donating love. And that love is expressed by How, if at all, did Irenaeus understand God's life and incorruptibility
to be partakable by creatures while at the same time remaining singularly
Irenaeus in terms of gratuitous human participation in the God who is by
nature radically other and inaccessible. Ysabel de Andia goes so far as to His own? Are they somehow external to His "totally inaccessible" essence,
suggest that what separates the Christian soteriology of Irenaeus most as the neo-Palamite school of thought insists?40 Such a solution is
clearly and decisively from that of the Gnostics is Irenaeus' constant insupportable from the textual evidence, at least in part because Irenaeus
affirmation that salvation entails the creature's participation in God. 34 The writes just as readily of human participation in God Himself41 and in the
metaphysics of the Gnostics, wherein "the only relation which can exist Holy Spirit42 and in the Son43 as he does of human participation in God's
between substances or natures is a relation of consubstantiality,"35 foreclosed perfections, such as incorruptibility, freedom, light, glory, life, salvation,
the possibility of the participation of our own created, corporeal nature in and wisdom. 44 As appears to be the case with Pau1,45 Irenaeus understood
the incorporeal or spiritual nature of God. The Gnostics understood the what de Arldia identifies as God's "five divine attributes: power, life, eternity,
spiritual to be the one and only salutary nature, they also thought salvation light, glory," along with each of His other virtues, to be "perfections of
to require that all psychic and corporeal natures be vanquished and the divine essence";46 the Basilidean Gnostics were wrong, for instance, to
supplanted. For Irenaeus, however, the alienation and corruption of fallen
creatures is resolved neither by annihilation nor by pantheistic absorption, 37 See alsoAH1.10.1; 5.3.3; 5.12.6; 5.13.3. See Aubineau, "Incorruptibilite et divinisation

but by assimilation and participation. selon Irenee," 50.

38 Contra G. W Butterworth, "The Deification of Man in Clement of Alexandria" 162
For instance, in an analogy redolent of the Johannine eternal life motif,
39 Luke 16:19-26; AH2.34.1. ' .
Irenaeus reasons that just as the human body is differentiated from and
40 Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology ofthe Eastern Church (London: James Clarke,
dependent upon the soul because it "has fellowship/(folrticzpatur) with the 1957; reprint, Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1998) 67.
soul as long as God pleases," so also "the soul herself is not life, but partakes 41 e.g.: AH 4.28.2, "participes Dei"; AH 4.20.5, "tou Theou metechontes."

in that life bestowed on her by God. "36 In addition to this Johannine theme 42 AH5.7.1.
43 AH3.17.2.

44 Incorruptibility: AH 3.18.7; 3.19.1; 5.3.3; 5.7.2; Epid. 31,40; Freedom: AH 3.19.1;

AH2.13.3. 4.18.2; 4.34.1; Light: AH 4.14.1; Glory: AH 4.14.1; 4.16.4; 4.39.2; Life: AH 3.2.1;
32

33 AH 4.11.2.
" (

4.~8.5; 4.20.5; 5.3.2; 5.4.2; 5.5.1; Salvation: AH3.18.2; 4.33.5; 5.6.2; 5.14.1; 5.19.2;
34 Ysabel de Andia, Homo vivens: Incorruptibilite et divinisation de l'homme selon Irenee de WIsdom: AH 5.3.2. See de Andia, Homo vivens, 169-70.
Lyon (Paris: Etudes Augustiniennes, 1986) 325. 45 See 1 Tim 6: 16, where he writes that God "alone has immortality (monos echon
35 de Andia, 169. Cf. de Andia, 223. athanasian)." Cf. Rom 1:23; 1 Corinthians 15.
36 AH2.34.4; PG 7:837. 46 Homo vivens, 29.

92 93
2
Irenaeus on the Christological Basis ofHuman Divinization
Theosis
His vanity needs to be fed by our subservience, but because "man stands
conceptualize life (zoe) as an emanation subsequent to or derivative of the
in need of cor:;m.uni?n. with God," therefore His purpose for sending the
divine essence because Son was that H1s dIsc1ples should share in His glory."5!
. . ~ere Irena~us has .turned Hellenistic emanationism on its head by
God is life and incorruption and truth. And these and such like attributes
m~ls:mg on.the 1mmed1acy of God's presence to His creation, even though
have not been produced according to a gradual scale of descent, but
th1s 1mmed1acy does not render Him comprehensible or vulnerable to be
they are names of those perfections which always exist in God .... For
"me:s~~e or handled," which seems to be the point of his foreclosing the
with the name of God the following words will harmonize: intelligence,
poss1btl1ty of human knowledge "with regard to His greatness, or with
word, life, incorruption, truth, wisdom, goodness, and such likeY
regard to His essence."52 In other words, it does not appear that Irenaeus
was here suggesting that God has withheld a distinct mode of Himself-
Unlike the NollS, Aletheia, Ennoea, and the other hypostasized
His e.ssence-from His otherwise immediate presence and generous
properties of the Gnostic Bythos that lie outside the latter's reductively
self-d1sclosure to the world. It is precisely the Christian God's ubiquitous
transcendent essence, the Father of Jesus Christ, according to Irenaeus,
presence to, and active providence over, the world that demonstrate and
"is a simple uncompounded Being, without diverse members, and
· If "48 prove His transcendence:
altogether Iike an d equaI to H1mse. ,. . . .
Irenaeus rather forcefully denies, then, that God s aCtlV1tleS, perfectlons,
As regards His greatness (secundum magnitudinem), therefore, it is not
or attributes are external to His essence and therefore somehow more
possible to know God, for it is impossible that the Father can be measured
communicable or participable to creatures than is God Himself in His
(mensurari); but as regards His love (secundum autem dilectionem eius)-
essence. God doesn't merely possess His virtue; He is his virtue. God is what
for this it is which leads us to God by His Word-when we obey Him
He has. Therefore, as Irenaeus understands salvific human participation in
we do always learn that there is so great a God. 53
God, the life and light and incorruptibility that are intern~l to the di-:ine
Being must be differentiated clearly from those c~rrespondm,~ perfect1~n~
which are the gifts of God. As de Andia contends: The terms l~mortahty
Irenaeus refuses to designate a distinct part or mode of God as intrinsically,

and 'eternity,' like 'incorruptibility,' in so far as they are t~e glftS o~ ~~d,
eternally unknowable, for God is unknowable only insofar as "no man
has searched out His height."54 His point seems to be that the God who
designate human participation in divine life, eternity, and mcorruptlb1hty,
has given H.i~self ~n an act of love to be known and participated in,
but not the divine eternity or incorruptibility as such."49
because He ~s mfimte, cannot be participated in exhaustively or known
Yet it is clear that Irenaeus believed those essentially divine virtues of
co~prehens1vely. The Gnostic error which Irenaeus was addressing in all
which zoe and aphtharsia are frequently emblematic i~ his l.exicon. truly to
~h1s, as he sees it, was to have thought the Creator, by virtue of His
be communicated through the self-donating gen<::rOSIty w1th wh1c~ God
~nvolvement with the mate~ial world of change, to have been entirely
grants His adopted children a created share in His o~n uncreated v1rtueS,
for, as he says, "it is not possible to live apart from hfe, and th~ means of
Immanent and .comprehens1ble, from which misconception they made
~he. fu.rther m1stake of imagining a reductively transcendent and
life is found in participation in God; but to participate in God 1S to know
mtnnstcally unknowable Pleroma beyond the Creator. 55 Such a bifurcated
God and to enjoy His goodness."5o God commands obedience not because
" (
51 AH 4.14.1. Cf: AH3.20.2.
47 AH 2.13.9, emphasis added. CE. 2.28.4, 2.34.2, 4.11.2. 52AH3.24.2. C£AH4.19.2.
48 AH2.13.3. 53 AH 4.20.1. See also AH 2.6.1.
49 de Andia, Homo vivens, 30. - ·t· 54AH4.20.4
50 AH 4.20.5: Subsistentia autem vitae de Dei parti~ipatione (= meto~hes, .G~) eve~~s:
55 AH 4.19.3.
participatio autem Dei (= metoche de Theou, Gk) est vtdere Deum et frUt bentgnttate et

95
94
 Theosis Irenaeus on the Christo logical Basis ofHuman Divinization

view of God is incompatible with the Christian faith because it wants to through the Son that adoption which is by Himself" is equivalent in
collapse the uniquely Christian theandric (divine-human) mystery into Irenaeus' mind to receiving "from Him the greater glory of promotion ...
transcendent and immanent components. In other words, the Gnostic that He might call man forth into His own likeness, assigning him as
solution is unacceptable because it attempts to ground the transcendence/ imitator to God and imposing on him His Father's law, in order that he
immanence dialectic in a real, ontological distinction or differentiation may see God, and granting him power to receive the Father (capere
within the divine realm rather than in the eternal difference between the Patrem)."Gl To be made a participant in the divine nature is to be united
immeasurable Un created and finite creatures. According to Irenaeus, to the Father by configuration to the created humanity which His divine
therefore, the opposition between Exod 33:20 ("no man shall see God Son assumed from the Virgin, took to the cross, raised from the dead,
and live") and Matt 5:8 ("Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see glorified in Heaven, and now feeds to His disciples. Already implicit in
God") is not resolvable by attributing the former reference to God's Irenaeus' correlation of adoptive sonship with participation in divine
I,
eternally invisible essence and the latter to His visible .en.ergies. Inste~d, incorruptibility is the trinitarian dimension of human salvation. G2
I,

Irenaeus attempts to reconcile this apparent contradictIOn by makmg

appeal to Luke 18:27: "For those things that are impossible with men are
Christ the Head
possible with God."56 . ' .,
Irenaeus established the metaphYSical pOSSibility of human
participation in an ever transcendent God on the christo logical distinction As I have begun to show above, the principal redemptive-economic act by
between the uncreated, eternal Son and the created humanity to which which Irenaeus understood our primordial likeness to God and native
He was united by the Holy Spirit through the flesh assumed at the capacity for sharing His life to have been restored was the incarnation of
incarnationY Jesus Christ is at once Himself the union between God and the Logos, in which a "communion of union"63 was forged between God
58 and the human race. Perhaps the basic structure of this conception is best
creation and also our own way to union with God. What distinguishes
the New Covenant from the Old, therefore, is not a different, now captured in the sentence with which Irenaeus concludes Adversus Haeresis
immanent God, as the Gnostics want to believe, but a different kind of and which Normann calls "a synopsis of Irenaeus' theology."G4 Therein,
human relation to God, one in which "the faith of men in God has been Irenaeus writes of the Father's will
increased, receiving in addition the Son of God, that man too might be a
that His offspring, the First-begotten Word, should descend to the
partaker of God."59 . '
As will be the case for Athanasius and Augustme, then, Irenaeus creature (jacturam), that is, to what had been molded (plasma), and that
christocentric doctrine of divinization is virtually coextensive with his it should be contained (capiatur) by Him; and, on the other hand, the
understanding of adoptive divine filiation. GO And ;:he grace of "receiving creature should contain (capiat) the Word, and ascend to Him, passing
beyond the angels, and be made after the image and likeness of God. 65

56 AH 4.20.5. h' h 61 AH 3.20.2.

57 See de Andia, Homo vivens, 164-68. By insisting that this is the sole basis on w 1C
Irenaeus establishes the possibility of human union with God, she correctly excludes an 62 AH5.16.2.
63 See Epid. 31 (Robinson, St. Irenaeus, 97-98), SC 406: 126.Cf. Epid. 6; AH 4.34.4.
essence-energies differentiation of the Palamite type in Ireqa~us.
Torrance, The Doctrine o/Grace in the Apostolic Fathers, 76 n. 4, suggests that this phrase
58AH 4.13.1.
recalls Ignatius of Antioch.
59 AH 4.28.2. bl' I 64 Friedrich Normann, Teilhabe, ein Schliisselwort der Vatertheologie (Munster: Aschendorff,
60 Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 423, citing AH 3.6.1; 3.19.1; 4.38.4. Lawson, The Bi :ca

Theology o/St. Irenaeus, 158-59, citingAH 4.33.4. Cf. Wingren,Man and the Incarnatzon, 1978) 95.
65 AH 5.36.3.
161; Harnack, History o/Dogma, 2:241, 273 n.1.

96 97
 Theosis Irenaeus on the Christo logical Basis ofHuman Divinization
It is within this descending and ascending movement that the been united to incorruptibility and immortality. But how could we be
participatory exchange between God and man is perfected, but in such a joined to incorruptibility and immortality unless, first, incorruptibility
way that man may only receive (capere) what he cannot take to himself at and immortality had become that which we also are, so that the
his own initiative nor under his own strength. corruptible might be swallowed up by incorruptibility and the mortal
In refuting the Gnostics' docetic denial of the incarnation, Irenaeus by immortality, that we might receive the adoption of sons?68
proffers a nascent two-natutes Christology, grounding his commerciurn
soteriology entirely in the freedom and mercy of God: It is worth noting at this juncture that in both of these lengthy
quotations, long before Arius appeared on the scen~ to ~ropose a c:eated
Therefore, as I have already said, He caused human nature to cleave to savior, it is evident that Irenaeus has already seen and Identlfied the eXIgency
and to become one with God .... And again, unless it had been God which both Athanasius and the Cappadocians will exploit in developing
who had freely given salvation, we could never have possessed it securely. their cases against Arius and Eunomius respectively, to wit, that for the
Ii And unless man had been joined to God, he never could have become a final beatitude of human salvation to be secure eternally (unlike Adam's
partaker of incorruptibility (metaschein tes aphtharsias). For it was "infantile" and capricious possession of the same), it must involve a
incumbent upon the Mediator between God and men, by His participation in or union with the immutable, eternal God. Again in
relationship to both, to bring both to friendship and concord, and present response to the Ebionites, Irenaeus asks rhetorically:
man to God, while He revealed God to man. For in what way could we
be partakers of the adoption of sons, unless we had received from Him Or how shall man pass into God (chiiresei eis Theon) unless God has first
through the Son that fellowship which refers to Himself, unless His passed (echiireth2) into man? And how shall he escape from the generation
word, having been made flesh, had entered into communion with US?66 subject to death if not by means of a new generation .... Or how shall
they receive adoption from God if they remain in this kind of generation
Against those proto-Arians (Ebionites) who, on the other hand, "assert which is naturally possessed by man in this world?69
that He was simply a mere man, begotten by Joseph,"67 Irenaeus marshals
the text ofPs 82:6-7 ("I said, You are all the sons of the Highest, and gods; Irenaeus does not specifY how human nature has been united with
but you shall die like men"), claiming that when Jesus quotes it to those the divine nature of the Logos in the person of Jesus Christ, nor does he
who accused him of blasphemy, as recorded in John 10:34, he address the manner in which the hypostatic divinization of Christ's human
nature is extended to humanity as a whole,l° except to say that the Logos
speaks undoubtedly these words to those who have not received the gift
of adoption, but who despise the incarnation of t~ure generation of 68 AH3.19.1, PG 7:939. Cf. AH3.6.1, where Irenaeus attempts to demonstrate with Ps
the Word of God (and) defraud human nature of promotion into God. 82: 1 that the Psalmist refers to the Son as well as to the Father as God.
69 AH 4.33.4 .
. . . For it was for this end that the Word of God was made man, and He
70 Emile Mersch, Ie corps mystique du Christ (2nd ed.; Paris: Desclee de Brouwer, 1936),
who was the Son of God became the Son of man, that man, having 1:340 (E.T. The Whole Christ: The Historical Development o/the Doctrine o/the Mystical
been taken into the Word (ton Logon chiiresas), and receiving the Body in Scripture and Tradition [London: Dennis Dobson, 1938]), finds the most
adoption, might become the son of God. For by QO( other means could vulnerable weakness of Irenaeus' theory of recapitulation in its failure to distinguish
we have attained to incorruptibility and immortality, unless we had "what pertains to the humanity of Christ and what is proper to His divinity in the work
of our incorporation in Him," as does Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 433-34, who concludes
that Irenaeus' Christo logy was developed entirely in service to his soteriology: Christ
66 AH3.18.7, PG 7:937. See Gross, 15I. was the manifested God (epiphanes Theos) who made immortality visible so that the
67 AH3.19.I. human race could share in it.

98 99
 Theosis Irenaeus on the Christological Basis ofHuman Divinization

"commenced afresh (in seipso recapitulavit) the long line of human beings, as the devil defeated Adam, so did Christ assume Adam's particular bodyB0
and furnished us, in a brief, comprehensive manner, with salvation; So ("Summing up all things in Himself")8! in order to defeat Satan. 82 Although
that what we had lost in Adam-namely, to be according to the image Irenaeus first makes allusion to recapitulation with reference to Eph 1: 10,
and likeness of God-we might recover in Christ Jesus."7! Correlated writing that Christ will return at the end ofhistOlY "to gather all things in one
with the recapitulation concept, but, alas, not much more enlightening as (anakephalaiosasthai ta panta),"83 more often he places the event of
to the precise mode of divine-human union, is his often repeated idea in recapitulation not at the parousia, but at the incarnation. 84
Adversus Haeresis that the purpose and effect of the incarnation was at The christological or incarnational basis Irenaeus finds for human
least in part to habituate human nature for supernatural participation in participation in God, however, is at once pneumatological. The redeemed
God. The eternal Logos "dwelt in man and became the Son of man that are incorporated into the Son's economic relation to the Father only through
He might accustom (assuesceret) man to receive God, and God to dwell in the Son's economic relation to the Holy Spirit. However ambiguous may be
man, according to the good pleasure of the Father."72 The Holy Spirit Irenaeus' pneumatological Adamic anthropology, he clearly sees human
descended on the man Jesus for the purpose of "becoming accustomed assimilation to and participation in God, or the recovery and perfection of
(assuescens) in fellowship with Him to dwell in the human race, to rest that divine image and likeness according to which we were created, to be
with human beings, and to dwell in the workmanship of God."73 So also effected primarily by the infused presence of the Holy Spirit, which is
in baptism "we do now receive a certain portion of His Spirit, tending dependent upon our union with the God-man: "Christ recapitulated
towards perfection, and preparing us for incorruption, being little by little everything in Himself; uniting man to the Spirit and causing the Spirit to
accustomed (assuescentes) to receive and bear God."74 dwell in man, He is Himself made the head of the Spirit, and gives the Spirit
Bousset only slightly overstates the case when he writes that "the whole to be the head of man, for it is by the Spirit that we see, hear, and speak."85
doctrine of recapitulation in Irenaeus is thoroughly anti-Gnostic in If the basis for our participation in God does not lie in a partitioning
orientation."75 Against the Gnostic despisers of the material order, Irenaeus of God, it can be found in the "bodily consubstantiality of Christ with
repeatedly returns to the affirmation that the God of creation and the God of humanity"86 largely because his flesh, which Irenaeus insists is not "different
redemption are one and the same; Christ is able to effect the anakephalaiosis, from ours" or "from another substance" than our own,S7 was perfused by
that is, to recreate a human nature which was corrupted and disordered by the Holy Spirit. "The flesh of Christ is the means by which the divine life
sin. 76 Similarly, a constant theme running throughout the work ofIrenaeus is is given to man precisely because the divinization of man begins with the
that the end (redemption) is like the beginning (creation); the Word of God glorification of the flesh of Christ."88 In contrast to the Gnostic false
"was made a man among men that He might join the end to the beginning,
that is, man to God."77 As Adam came from the virgin earth, so did Christ 80 AH5.1.3, PG 7:1123.
come from the virgin Mary/8 as sin was wrought by a/tree, so also redemption/ 9 81 AH3.1S.6, and see Harnack, History o/Dogma, 2:273.
82 AH3.1S.6; 3.23.3; 5.21.1; Epid. 31. Methodius (Symp. 3.4) also holds the first Adam

to have been assumed by the Logos at the incarnation.

71 AH3.1S.1. 83 AHl.l0.1.

72 AH 3.20.2. 84 AH 3.16.6. See also AH 4.6.2; 4.3S.1; 5.19.1.

73 AH3.17.1. 85 AH 5.20.2. See ].-M. Garrigues, L'energie divine et la grace chez Maxime Ie ConJesseur
74 AH5.S.1. (Paris: Beauchesne, 1976) 2SS, who finds here in Irenaeus a precursor to Maximus'
75 Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 437.
" (
doctrine of the created habitus or hexis of grace; Christ gives us the uncreated Spirit only
76 AH3.16.6; 3.1S.1; 4.6.2. through his own created humanity.
77 AH 4.20.4. 86 de Andia, 336.

78 Epid. 32, 33; AH 3.22.4. 87 AH5.14.3.

79 AH5.16.3; Epid. 34. 88 de Andia, Homo vivens, 336.

100 101
 Theosis Irenaeus on the Christo logical Basis ofHuman Divinization

,
alternative between connaturality and annihilation, Irenaeus proposed a It is evident, therefore, that the writings of Irenaeus cannot be
,,
I' !
relationship of communion between the flesh and the Spirit of God, a marshaled to support the neo-Palamite position that the fathers of the
relationship in which they are united while remaining distinct from one Church grounded the possibility of sanctifYing participation in God upon
another, yet united effectively and securely enough so that the flesh comes a real distinction between an intrinsically incommunicable divine essence
to possess created attributes which are essential to the uncreated God. 89 and God's communicable energies. Irenaeus assumes and implies that the
Irenaeus understands 1 Cor 15:49 to consist of configuration to the Son divine persons of the Holy Spirit and the Son are no less communicable
by the operation of the indwelling Holy Spirit, consequent upon the Spirit's than are the divine perfections which Irenaeus clearly locates within what
operation in the incarnate body of the Word. 90 he repeatedly insists is God's entirely simple essence. The divine essence is
Finally, a glance back at Irenaeus' attempted demonstration of the merely unknowable, according to Irenaeus, only in the specific sense that the
relative or dynamic perfection given to human nature by God through the fullness of who and what God is remains incomprehensible, inexhaustible,
economy of creation reveals that he understood this face-to-face vision of and immeasurable. To participate in the divine nature, as he understood
God whereby the redeemed are made participants in His life, incorruptibility, the concept, is to receive adoptive sonship to God the Father, which is to
and immortality to have been fully attainable only after the death and be assimilated to God the Son through incorporation to the humanity He
glorification of the body in the general resurrection. Just as Adam was not in assumed, recapitulated, sanctified, and suffused with the Holy Spirit at
possession of a fixed perfection, so also the redeemed in this life progress the incarnation. It is to attain one's divinely ordained created perfection
only gradually toward the fullness oflikeness to God: "But we do now receive through the noetic and obediential reception of God's un created self-gift.
a certain portion of His Spirit, tending towards perfection, and preparing us
for incorruption ... which also the apostle terms 'an earnest."'91 God's "super-
eminent kindness" is revealed in His chosen destiny for His creatures to
"reflect the glory of the uncreated One," for even though they are now and
will forever remain mere creatures, "they shall receive a faculty of the
Uncreated (virtutem infecti = dynamin agenetou), through the gratuitous
bestowal of eternal existence upon them by God."92 It was necessary that the
human race pass through the stages of creation, growth, strengthening, and
healing whereby it is "rendered after the image and likeness of the uncreated
God"93 in the course of "ascending towards the perfect, that is, approximating
to the un created One (proximum infecto fieri = plesion tou agennetou
ginomenou) ,"94 toward the final end that one "shOUfd be glorified; and being
glorified, should see his Lord. For God is He who is yet to be seen, and the
beholding of God is productive of immortality (efficax incorruptelae)."95

89 AH5.12.4.
90 AH5.9.3. " (

91 AH5.8.1, quoting Ephesians 1:13.

92 AH 4.38.3, PG 7:1107.

93 AH 4.38.3.
94 AH 4.38.3.
95 AH 4.38.3. Cf.AH 4.14.1.

102 103
 Athanasius on the DeifYing Work ofthe Redeemer
grounds that the redeemed cannot be made participants in the divine life
of the Holy Trinity through incorporation into the Son if the Son himself
had been divine only by gratuitous participation:

And again, if, as we have said before, the Son is not such by participation
(ek metousias), but, while all things originated have by participation (ek
metousias) the grace of God, He is the Father's Wisdom and Word of
which all things partake (metechei) , it follows that He, being the deifying
and enlightening power of the Father, in which all things are deified
and quickened (on to theopoion kai photistikon tou Patros en hota panta
theopoieitai kai zOopoieitai) , is not alien (allotrioousios) in essence from
the Father, but coessential (homoousios). For by partaking of Him, we
Athanasius on the Deifying partake of the Father (toutou gar metalambanontes, tou Patros
metechomen); because that the Word is the Father's own. Whence, if He
Work of the Redeemer was Himself too from participation (ek metousias), and not from the
Father His essential Godhead and Image, He would not deify
Jeffrey Finch (etheopoiese), being deified Himself (theopoioumenos). For it is not possible
that He, who merely possesses from participation (ek metousias) , should
impart of that partaking to others, since what He has is not His own,
but the Giver's. 2
Introduction
A similar line of reasoning is found as the prelude to his most explicit
Athanasius marks a watershed in the development of the Christian
statement on the deifYing effect of the incarnation in his Orationes contra
soteriology because, as Jules Gross could say with the prohibitive weight
Arianos: ''Again, if the Son were a creature, man had remained mortal as
of scholarly consensus in his corner, "for the Alexandrian doctor, the
before, not being joined to God (synaptomenos to theo); for a creature had
divinization of the Christian is not just a more or less secondary or casual
not joined (synopte) creatures to God, as seeking itself one to join
element, as it was for most of the Fathers before him, but is the central
(synaptonta) it; nor would a portion of the creation have been the creation's
idea of his theology."l The divinization of the Christian is the central idea
salvation, as needing salvation itself."3 Then, after lauding the Word's
of his theology largely because Athanasius f6i.lnded his argument against
assumption of the flesh and his conquest of the Serpent on our behalf
the Arians for the fully divine identity oEJesus Christ on the soteriological
through the cross and resurrection, Athanasius proceeds immediately to
suggest that the union of God and humanity in the person oEJesus Christ
1 Jules Gross, La divinisation du chretien d'apres lesperes grecs: Contribution historique afa

doctrine de la grace (Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1938) 202. For s;opcurring views, see 1. H. 2 De ?nod. 51, PG 26:784b (Patrologiae cursus eompletus. Series Graeea, vol 26, Opera
Dalmais, "Divinisation," in Dictionnaire de spiritualite, ascetique et mystique (Paris: Omnza, ~d. J .-P. Migne [Paris: Migne, 1887]). All quoted translations of the writings of
Beauchesne, 1954) vol. 3, col. 1380; A. G. Hamman, L'homme image de Dieu (Paris: AthanaslUs are taken from NPNF 2, vol. 4 (Nieene and Post-Nieene Fathers, Second
Desdee 1987) 153; Keith Edward Norman, "Deification: The Content of Athanasian series, vol. 4, eds. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace [Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1994])
Soteriology" (Ph.D. diss., Duke Univ., 1980) 77ff; Basil Studer, Gottund unsere Erlosung unless otherwise indicated.
im Glauben des Alten Kirche (Dusseldorf, 1985) 147-48. 3 Contra Arianos (CA) 2.69, PG 26:293.

104 105
 Theosis Athanasius on the Deifying Work ofthe Redeemer

itself, prior to and logically apart from his self-oblation of the cross, effected critique of Athanasian soteriology can be summarized in three distinct,
a restoration of our prelapsarian likeness to God and, indeed, the deification though interrelated, assertions. First, Athanasius' metaphysical realism fails
of human nature: to distinguish adequately between the humanity that the Logos adopted
or assumed through the Virgin Mary and the humanity of those
For therefore did He assume the body originate and human, that having innumerable individual persons who preceded and followed Christ.
renewed it as its Framer, he might deify it in Himself (en heauto theopoiese; Secondly, divinization is therefore thought by Athanasius to extend
and thus might introduce us all into the kingdom of heaven after His mechanically or automatically to all of humanity, not respecting individual
likeness (kath' homoiotota ekeinou). For man had not been deified if freedom and responsibility. Thirdly, Athanasius is alleged to have taught
joined to a creature (ouk an de palin etheopoiethe ktismati synaphtheis) , that the incarnation itself, apart from Christ's life and sacrificial death,
or unless the Son were very God, nor had man been brought into the was responsible for effecting our salvation and deification, thus failing to
Father's presence unless He had been His natural and true Word who account for a substantial portion of the Pauline corpus.
had put on the body. And as we had not been delivered from sin and the What I propose to do here is to examine each of these allegations in
curse, unless it had been by nature human flesh, which the Word put the light ofAthanasius' writings and to demonstrate that, though legitimate
on (for we should have had nothing common with what was foreign), in some ways, they fail to account fully or adequately for the breadth of
so also the man had not been deified (etheopoiethe;, unless the Word his vision.
who became flesh had been by nature from the Father and true and
proper (idios) to Him. For therefore the union (synaphe; was of this
kind, that He might unite (synapse; what is man by nature to Him who The One and the Many
is in the nature of the Godhead (kata physin tes theotetos), and his salvation
and deification (theopoiesis) might be sure. 4 In response to those who complain that Athanasius' rhetoric of union
with God through the coessential Son's assumption of our humanity is
Such formulations have led one school of historians, apparently "an abuse of Platonic language," Gross proposes that Athanasius should
initiated early in the twentieth century by Adolph von Harnack, but be understood to have conceived human nature "as a concrete reality, as a
including contemporary scholars as well, to complain that Athanasius kind of 'generic man'-to employ an expression from Philo-in which
held to a "physical theory of redemption," which contaminated the Gospel every individual participates, but in a way in which the accidental
with an Hellenistic and excessively realistic metaphysic whereby the human properties-'habits and qualities'6- p lay the role of that which we would
flesh which had become enslaved to corruption and death through sin call the principle ofindividuation."7 Athanasius posits the consubstantiality
was thought to be healed and immortalized~through mere contact with of all humans when he inveighs against those who say "that the Son is a
divinity through the incarnation of the Logos, thus evacuating the need creature" with the retort that the sayings of Christ "I and the Father are
for Christ's atoning death. 5 Hence, what one could call the Harnack one" (John 10:30) and "he who has seen me has seen the Father" (John
14:9) would necessarily mean that the Father is a creature also, according
4 CA 2.70, PG 26:296ab. See J. Riviere, Ie dogme de la Redemption. 3d ed. (Paris: Etude to the following rationale:
theologique, 1931) 147. , (
5 Cf. Adolph von Harnack, History ofDogma, 7 vols. (New York: Dover, 1961) 3:165;J.
Tixerom, History ofDogma, 3 vols. (St. Louis: Herder, 1910-16) 2: 148; M. Werner, The P. C. Hanson, The Search for the Christian Doctrine ofGod: The Arian Controversy, 318-
Formation ofChristian Dogma: A Historical Study ofits Problem (London, 1957) 168; M. 81 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988) 450.
F. Wiles, "In Defense of Arius," Journal of Theological Studies 13 (1962) 346; Aloys 6 De synod. 53.
Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1965) 313-14; R. 7 Gross, 208-9.

106 107
r
!

Theosis Athanasius on the DeifYing Work ofthe Redeemer

Others are equally quick to Athanasius' defense. Dietrich Ritschl
Those to whom we are alike (homoioi) and whose identical nature we maintains that Athanasius' "theory of deification is not a Greek speculation,
share Ven tautoteta echomen touton), with these we are one in essence but the decisive element in the salvific work of Christ, which, through his
(homoousioi). For example, we men, because we are alike (homoioi) and true humanity, is very different from a mechanical restoration."12 E. P.
share the same identical nature (tautoteta echontes), are one in essence Meijering appeals to Athanasius' understanding that the redeemed person
(homoousioi) with each other. For it belongs to us all to be mortal, may become a son of God only by participation, which implies that far
corruptible, capable of change, originating from nothing.
8 from being mechanical or automatic, the sonship of the redeemed is
contingent and mutable: "From this it clearly appears that men can lose
But Gross also joins Harnack's critique, in this respect, when he opines their sonship which they have by participation, and what one can lose
that because Athanasius never drew a fully adequate distinction between one cannot be by nature."13 Kolp also takes exception to what he views as
ousia and hypostasis, he was unable to see as clearly as those who followed a sloppy and misleading interpretation of Athanasius' realism: "Because
him that the divinization of human nature accomplished by the incarnation the Son was incarnate does not mean that each and every man automatically
"does not automatically extend to that of human persons."9 Martin George is deified in due process. The link between the two concepts is much
proposes similarly that Athanasius failed to distinguish sufficiently between more complex-and even ambiguous-than that."14 Along these lines,
the two stages of Christ's adoption of our humanity, which also correspond Dalmais notes that by juxtaposing the admirabile commercium theme with
to the difference between physis and hypostasis. It was not until John of that of revelation, Athanasius forges something of a middle way between
Damascus that the distinction was explicated between the Son's adoption Clement's and Origen's noetic emphasis and the Irenaean preference for
of our human nature considered as a whole at the Annunciation and the the physical theory; the divinization of the human race is brought about
adoption of individual persons or hypostases through baptism and the both by a communion of natures in the divine person of the Logos and by
cooperation of faith. lO Yet, George also believes that the most recent His revelation of the Father. 15 Norman gets even more textually specific;16
historical research has revealed the Harnack school's critique to be a in one of the many instances on which he quotes 2 Pet 1:4, Athanasius
shortsighted "reduction" of the patristic doctrine of divinization to the asserts: "For He has become man that He might deifY (theopoi"ese) us in
acquisition of incorruptibility (aphtharsia) only. He further objects to the Himself, and He has been born of a woman and begotten of a Virgin in
false dichotomy between the ontological and the moral dimensions of order to transfer (metenegke) to Himself our erring generation, and that
salvation which Harnack's epithet "physical redemption" assumes and we may become (genometha) henceforth a holy race and 'partakers of the
implies, observing that Athanasius in particular, along with all the Eastern divine nature (koinonoi theias physeos)."'17 By his use of the present middle
fathers, refused to separate the two, but strove to include every aspect of subjunctive (genometha) in a purpose clause, Norman thinks that
the human person in the transforming work of r~demption, not only the
will or behaviorY Athanasius: Versuch eine Interpretation (Zurich: EVZ, 1964) 43.
12

13Orthodoxy and Platonism in Athanasius: Synthesis or Antithesis? (Leiden: Brill, 1974)

8 Ad Serap. 2.3, tr. Shapland, The Letters o/Saint Athanasius Concerning the Holy Spirit 144--45, citing De synod. 53.
(New York: The Philosophical Library, 1951) 154-55; PG 26:612b. 14 Alan Lee Kolp, "Participation: A UnifYing Concept in the Theology of Athanasius"
9 Gross, 210. • ( (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1976) 251.
10 Marrin George, "Vergottlichung des Menschen. Von der platonischen Philo sophie zur 15 Dalmais, "Divinisation," 1381, citing the thought that follows immediately upon the

Soteriologie der griechischen Kirchenvater," in Die Weltlichkeit des Glaubens in der Alten enenthropesenltheopoiethomen phrase from DI 54 quoted above: "and He manifested
Kirche: Festschrift fur Ulrich Wickert zum siebzigsten Geburtstag, ed. Dietmar Wyrwa et al. Himself by a body that we might receive the idea of the unseen Father."
(Berlin: de Gruyter, 1997) 145, citing John Damas., De fide orth. 61.3.17; 86.4.13. 16 "Deification," 104.

11 George, "Vergottlichung," 119.

17 Ep. adAdelph. 4.

108 109
 Theosis Athanasius on the Deifying Work ofthe Redeemer
Athanasius betrays his tacit understanding that the incarnation did not industry."21 Although the same certainly cannot be said of Athanasius, a
automatically or mechanically divinize the human nature of which every firm resolve on the part of believers to live their lives after the pattern of
individual is an instantiation, but gave to every member of the human their theandric exemplar is essential if they are to have a share in the
race only the potential to be divinized, as Athanasius more explicitly sonship He gained for them. Above all, it is by the patient and merciful
indicates elsewhere when he writes that God prepared for the Logos a manner of His suffering that Christ has provided a model for believers to
created body "that in Him we might be capable of being renewed and follow in order to become virtuous with the virtue which is Him: "That
deified (hin' en auto anakainisthena kai theopoiethenai dynethomen)."18 not only should we bear His image, but should receive from Him an
p. Galtier also considers and rejects the proposal that Athanasius believed example and pattern (formam exemplumque) of heavenly living; that as
the Logos to have assumed the collective human race at the incarnation, He has begun, we should go on, that suffering we should not threaten,
this on the grounds that Athanasius repeatedly affirmed that only baptized being reviled, we should not revile again. . . . For those who are thus
believers are joined to God through Christ. 19 disposed and fashion themselves according to the Gospel, will be partakers
of Christ (particeps Christi). "22 Whereas the essential Son possesses these
virtues from the Father kath ousian, the Father's adopted sons must strive
Human Cooperation and Appropriation to acquire them by co-operating with God's operations through the exercise
of the will; the Son's "likeness (homoiosin) and unalterableness (atrepsion)
Athanasius is not nakedly vulnerable to the aforementioned allegations was different from such copy (mimesin) of the same as is ascribed to us,
that his soteriology is another instance of the so-called physical theory of which we acquire from virtue on the grounds of observance of the
the atonement and is a mechanical, magical, or "automatic and passive" commandments."23 From the Gospel parable of the talents (Matt 25:23)
process whereby mere contact with the divine nature of the Logos suffices Athanasius draws the following conclusion: "our will ought to keep pace
to divinize the whole of human nature also because he insisted at every with the grace of God, and not fall short; lest while our will remains idle
turn that the divine-human exchange of the incarnation must be the grace given us should begin to depart."24 '
appropriated to each individual through the obedient imitation of Christ, Yet, it must be emphasized that Athanasius was not flirting with a
ascetical practices, and reception of the sacraments. 20 latent form of Pelagian ism here. In the C4 3: 19-23 discourse treated above
First of all, Athanasius clearly believes and teaches that the grace of and in similar passages where Athanasius disputes the Arian account of
divinization must be acquired by an intentional human effort at how creatures may come to be merciful like God,25 Athanasius is not
reproducing the life and virtues of God Himself through discipleship and "attempting to prove that men can earn their condition as sons," as
imitation. It is well known and documented how central a role the imitation ]. Roldanus reads it, for "adoption remains a grace, but, for man, faith
of God played in Plato's soteriology and in that~of-the Middle Platonists and virtue are the indispensable conditions for the continuation of the
and Neoplatonists who followed in his wake, as well as in the Greek mystery
religions. "According to the Hellenistic philosophies," one author aptly E. Kantorowlcz,
. "D eus per naturem, ueus
21
per gratzam, Harval<d T,'h eo logical Review 45
J . "

summarizes, "it was an act of man's own virtue to become god-like and be (1952) 276.
the god's perfect imitator; it was an act of purely human effort and human 22 Ep.Jest. 2.5; c£ 10.7.

23 De decret. 20.
" (

24 Ep. Jest. 3.3. See also Ep. fest. 10.4: "For through virtue a man enters in unto God ...
18 CA (ContraArianos) 2.47. but through vice a man goes out from the presence of the Lord." C£ Ep. Jest. 13.2:
19 P. Galtier, "Saint Athanase et l'ame humaine du Christ," Gregorianum 36 (1955) 557- because God "is good and philanthropic, He distributes to each a due reward according
63. to his actions."
20 Kolp, "Participation," 272-73. Cf. Gross, 213; CA 3.19-22. 25 Ep. Jest. 2.2; 10.7-8.

110 111
 Theosis Athanasius on the DeifYing Work ofthe Redeemer

inhabitation of the Holy Spirit in him."26 Indeed, much like Augustine's didactic grace of Christ if they hope to have a divinizing share in Him:
dispute with the Pelagians, one of the central issues in contention between "Let us keep our whole mind from guile ... so that, being altogether
Athanasius and Arius is whether or not the salvation and deification of pure, we may be able to partake of the Logos (possimus fieri Verbi
participes). "32
persons could be accomplished on the strength of obedience, imitation
and willful effort alone. In the case of Antony, for example, Athanasius i~ Secondly, in addition to the obedient imitation of Christ, believers
at pains to demonstrate that ''Antony's holiness is not achieved, it is must cooperate with the grace of divinization by mortifYing their flesh
received" and that "the monk's deeds are not, strictly speaking, his own."27 throug~ asc~ticism. The ascetical practices which Athanasius enjoined for
When Athanasius begins to speak of ''Antony's first struggle against the the punficatlOn of the soul from its aboriginal idolatry of creation in Adam,
devil," as though to forestall whatever Pelagian-like conclusions the reader although po.ssibk still tai~ted with a certain mea~ure of Hellenistic spirit-
might be tempted to draw from the coming discourse on Antony's ascetical matter dualIsm, are entIrely ordered toward thIs end of preferring God
heroism, he quickly adds "or rather this victory was the Savior's work in to ~ll created things. 34 Just as the first humans fell into sin by spurning
Antony."28 Antony was able to overcome the temptations of the flesh only theIr utter dependency on participation in the uncreated Logos in favor
because "the Lord was working with (synergei) Antony-the Lord who of a virtual apotheosis of the sensible, created world, so likewise "our
for our sake took flesh."29 increase is no other than the renouncing things sensible (aestheton) and
In another context, Athanasius exhorts his flock to "imitate the deeds coming to the Word Himself."35 This ascetical elixir to the first humans'
of the saints," but warns immediately thereafter that "when we render a idolatrous turning away from the contemplation of God toward creatures
recompense to the Lord to the utmost of our power ... we give nothing as ends .in themselves is exemplified most fully in Antony, whose life
of our own, but those things which we have before received (accepimus) AthanaslUs regards as corresponding with and, in some sense, recapitulating
from Him, this being especially of His grace, that He should require, as that of the pre-Iapsarian Adam. Far from being elevated to some ethereal,
from us, His own gifts."30 What we have received by grace is necessary for supra-human mystical ecstasy, Antony "was altogether even as being guided
our salvation, but not is such a way as to obviate the equally critical necessity ~Y reason, and abiding in a natural state."36 Indeed, Athanasius is obviously
of human response. Athanasius even views Christ's exhortations to the mtent here upon emphasizing the genuinely human character of true virtue:
imitation of God as acts of grace themselves: "For we too, albeit we cannot
become like God in essence (homoioi kat' ousian) , yet by progress in virtue But fear not to hear of virtue (ardi), nor be astonished at the name. For
imitate God (ex aretes beltioumenoi mimoumetha ton Theon), the Lord it is not far from us, nor is it without (exothen) ourselves, but it is within
granting us this grace in the words 'Be ye merciful as your Father is merciful' us and is easy if only we are willing .... For the Lord said, 'The Kingdom
and 'Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect.'''31 Far from being of heaven is within you' (Luke 17:21). Wherefore virtue has need at our
incorporated into the Logos automatically or me9mnically, then, believers hands of willingness (thelein) alone, since it is in us and is formed from
must be vigilant over the conduct of their lives by cooperating with this us. For when the soul (psyches) has its spiritual faculty (noeron) in a
natural state, virtue is formed. And it is in a natural state when it remains
as it came into existence. 37
26 Le Christ et l'homme dans la theologie d'Athanase d'Alexandrie (Leiden: Brill 1968) 151.
27 Robert C. Gregg and Dennis E. Groh, Early Arianism: A View;f,Salvation (Philadelphia:
32 Ep.fest. 5.5. C£ CA 1.45; 2.70; 3.38; DI57.
33 Roldanus, 258.
Fortress, 1981) 147-48.
34 Roldanus, 300.
28 VA 7.
35 CA 3.52, PG 26:432.
29 VA 5.
36 VA 14, PG 26:865.
30 Ep. Jest. 5.4.
37 VA 20, PG 26:873. C£ VI134.
31 AdA/ros 7.

112 113
 Theosis
Athanasius on the Deifying Work ofthe Redeemer
Yet, even in Vita Antoni, his most sustained treatment of the ascetical
life, Athanasius is careful to subsume all human striving under the in a strictly typological sense, however, he is careful to admonish: "we, my
omnipotent grace of God; at the end of the day, Antony was enabled to beloved, .the shadow having received its fulfillment and the types being
defeat the wiles of the devil not on the strength of his own powers of accomplIshed, should no longer consider the feast typical," for Christ was
obedience, but only also because Christ "took flesh and gave the body "changing the typical for the spiritual" and therefore "promised them that
victory over the devil, so that all who truly fight can say, 'not I but the they shoul~ no l~n~er eat the flesh of a lamb, but His own, saying 'Take,
grace of God which was with me."'38 eat and dnnk; thIS IS My body and My blood."'45 In another Eucharistic
Thirdly, salvific participation in God's nature is appropriated to the allusion, Athanasius concludes one movement of his araument for the
individual by the grace of God conferred through the sacraments, especially divinity o~ Christ addressed to the philosopher Maximus by stating: ''And
those of baptism and the Eucharist. Baptism is regenerative and recreating we are deIfied not by partaking (metechontes) of the body of some man
for Athanasius because it is the sacrament through which the indwelling but by receiving (lambanontes) the Body of the Word Himself."46 It i~
Holy Spirit is initially given: 39 "For He has bid us to be baptized ... into through communion with His sacramental body and blood, among the
the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, for with such an initiation we other means we have been discussing, that the redeemed are "able to partake
are made sons (huiopoioumetha) verily."40 By being "regenerated from above of t~e Logos (fieri Verbi participes) ,"47 but only on the condition that they
of water and the Spirit (anothen ex hydatos kai pneumatos anagennethentes)," are ?,repared to. dra,,: near to the divine Lamb and to touch heavenly
we are "made Word (logotheistes)."41 Recalling that the Son is invoked food by the punficatlOn of their bodies and minds from "lusts" and false
.
doctnnes. 48 H ence, t h e Euchanst
. seems for Athanasius not to be a means
during the rite of baptism, Athanasius argues against his Arian interlocutors
that it would be futile for us to be baptized "into a creature," since the by which our participation in God is effected in the first place, but rather
purpose of baptism is "that we might be joined to the Godhead strengthened and made more stable. 49
(synaphthomen te theoteti)." The assistance of a created son would be
superfluous because "God who made Him a Son is able to make us sons
(huiopoiesai) also."42 By the Incarnation Alone?
The Eucharist receives far less attention from Athanasius than his so-
called "physical theory of redemption" might lead one to expect. 43 Even :et, it is whe.n Athanasius speaks of divinization or human participation
in his Festal Letters, Athanasius writes more often of the Eucharist as "an 1~ God outSIde th~ context of the incarnation that the imputations to
earnest of that heavenly feast" than in accordance with the realistic tones hlll~ .of a mechamcal or automatic conception of salvation fall most
of his Logos-sarx christology.44 Lest this language of promise be interpreted declslvel~ sho~t. The admirabile commercium did not end simply with the
hypostatic umon of the God-man forged at the incarnation, but extended
38VA 5, quoting 1 Cor 15:20. to the entirety of Christ's life and, especially, to the events of his cross and
39Roldanus, 151. See also Gross, 214, who cites CA 1.34; 2.41; DI 14; and Ad Serap. resurrection.
1.22 as instances in which Athanasius links baptism with divinization.
40 De decretis 31.
-:Vthough Athanasius may not have integrated the atoning death of
41 CA 3.33, PG 26:383.
Chnst on the cross with his doctrine of divinization as fully as he could
42 CA 2.41. Cf. 1.34, where Athanasius writes that through baptism in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, "we too, being numbered among works, are made sons."
43Harnack, History a/Dogma, 4:291. See also Gross, 214, n. 7: "Saint Athanasius seems to 45 Ep. Jest. 4.4. ,
have seen in the Eucharist a means for preserving and strengthening the grace of deification. 46 Ad Maximum 2, PG 26:1088.
47 Ep. Jest. 5.5.
Bur, as the passages where he speaks of it are very obscure, it is preferable not to rely on it."
48 Ep. Jest. 5.5.
44 Ep. Jest. 6.1.
49 Cf. N orman, " D ' f i ' " 126.
el lcanon,

114
115
 Theosis Athanasius on the Deifying Work ofthe Redeemer
have done,50 he does repeatedly aver that the cross was both necessary to The indispensability of the cross and resurrection to his soteriology of
fulfill the sentence of death imposed on humanity in the persons of Adam divinization is made most explicit perhaps when Athanasius addresses the
and Eve and efficacious to deliver the whole of the human race from it. 51 cur Deus homo question forthrightly in De decretis, answering that "the
Because death and corruption had gained a strangle hold on both the Word was made flesh in order to offer up (prosenegke) this body for all and
human race and the whole of creation through Adam's sin and because he that we, partaking (metalabontes) of His Spirit, might be deified
was "unable to bear that death should have the mastery-lest the creature (theopoiethenai dunethomen), a gift which we could not otherwise have
should perish and His Father's handiwork in men be spent for nought," gained than by His clothing Himself in our crea~ed bod.y. "55 ~he
Christ was not content "merely to appear," but fashioned for himself a incarnation here does not stand aloof as though everythlllg else III the lIfe,
human body in the virgin Mary and death, and resurrection of the incarnate Word were a mere artifact of the
initial act of redemption by hypostatic union, but is internally ordered to
makes it his own (idiopoioumenou) as an instrument (organon) . ... And self-oblation of the Son on the cross by virtue of the death-bound condition
thus taking from our bodies one of like nature, because all were under of the flesh He took. Indeed, Gustaf Aulen notes that although Athanasius
penalty of the corruption of death, He gave it over to death in the stead of "makes less mention of the devil than almost any of the Fathers," and at
all (anti panton) and offered it to the Father (prosege to Patri) ... to the times seems to downplay the significance of sin (in DI7, he suggests that
end that, firstly, all being held to have died in Him, the law involving the if death and corruption had not been consequent upon sin, mere
ruin of men might be undone (inasmuch as its power was fully spent in repentance would have sufficed to save humanity), the fact is that in
the Lord's body, and had no longer holding-ground against men, his peers), contrast to Anselm's "isolation of the death of Christ," Athanasius saw sin
and that, secondly, whereas men had turned toward corruption, He might and death as an integrated whole, the power of which could be broken
turn them again toward incorruption and quicken them from death by only by both the incarnation and the sacrificial atonement together: for
the appropriati<;>fi of His body and by the grace of the Resurrection. 52 Athanasius, as for all of the fathers, "The work of Christ ... is a victory
over death because it is a victory over sin."56
The cross was required for the salvation of the human race, Athanasius As with the whole of his soteriology, Athanasius' theologia crucis turns
continues, because "no otherwise could the corruption of men be undone on the difference between the divine person of the Word of God and the
save by death as a necessary condition."53 So, in order to suffer the humanity he assumed, which is not other than our own. The "exalted" of
consequences intrinsic to Adam's sin, the Logos, who is by nature impassible Phil 2:6, Athanasius inveighs against the Arians, refers not to the person
and incorruptible, freely "takes (lambanei) to Himself a body capable of of the Logos, but to the resurrected human nature he adopted and offered
death, that it, by partaking (metalabon) of the Word Who is above all, to the Father on the cross:
might be worthy to die in the stead of all (anti panto), and might, because
of the Word which was come to dwell in it, remain incorruptible."54 Since, then, the Word, being the Image of the Father and immortal,
took the form of the servant and as man underwent for us death in his
50 Gross, 213. flesh, that thereby He might offer (prosenegke) Himself for us through
51 Cf. J. Riviere, Ie dogme de fa Redemption, 151. death to the Father; therefore also as man He is said because of us and
52 DI8, PG 25: 109. Cf. CA 3.33.
53DI9. "
54 DI9. Here, as whenever Athanasius discusses the incarnation, the word translated
55 De decretis 14.
with "participation" (metalabon) cannot have a merely analogical meaning; the ~uman 56Gustaf Aulen, Christus Victor: An Historical Study o/the Three Main Types o/the Idea 0/
body of Jesus could be rendered "worthy to die in the stead of all" only by becommg the the Atonement, tr. A. G. Herbert (New York: Macmillan, 1969) 43-44. Cf. Roldanus,
body of the Logos or, at the very least, by receiving the Logos into itself. 168ff.

116 117
 Theosis Athanasius on the Deifying Work ofthe Redeemer
for us to be highly exalted, that as by His death we all died in Christ, so then, because the sacrifice of the cross is an integral element in the salvific
again in the Christ Himself we might be highly exaltedY commercium of the Word's mission, Athanasius is able to call the death of
Christ "the first cause (aitia prote) of the Savior's being made man"61 and
Likewise, byway of reaffirming the irreducible mystery that the Word "the sum (kephalion) of our faith."G2
suffered in the flesh and yet remained impassible, Athanasius does not Neither is it only the incarnation and Passion of the cross by which
take recourse to anything like a distinction between the impassible essence this marvelous exchange has been effected, but also by the entire human
and the passible hypostatic energies. Instead, he writes: life of Christ, most especially by the essentially impassible Word's adoption
of human Passion. Jesus underwent anxiety and sorrow at the betrayal
For what the human body of the Word suffered, this the Word, dwelling and death of his friends not because he was a mere creature and was
in the body, ascribed to Himself (synon auto), in order that we might be therefore necessarily subject to the vagaries of human emotion, but "that
enabled to be partakers of the Godhead of the Word (tes tou Logou in the flesh He might suffer and thenceforth the flesh might be made
theotetos metaschein dynethomen). And verily it is strange (paradoxon) impassible and immortal (apathes kai athanatos)."G3 Athanasius understands
that He it was Who suffered and yet suffered not .... But this He did, 1 Pet 4: 1 ("Since, therefore, Christ suffered in the flesh") to apply to hunger,
and so it was, in order that Himself taking (dechomenos) what was ours thirst, fear, exhaustion, and every other properly human passion, as well
and offering it as a sacrifice (prosenegkon eis thysian) , He might do away as to the cross.
with it, and conversely might invest us with what was His. 58 And while He Himself, being impassible in nature (apathes ten physin) ,
remalllS
In these several representative passages,59 Athanasius quite clearly gives
the very explanation for which Hanson claims to be at a loss: the cross is as He is, not harmed by these affections, but rather obliterating and
a necessary and integral part of the salvific commercium of the Word destroying them, men, their passions as if changed (metabanton) and
because the humanity he'assumed at the incarnation for the purpose of abolished (apeteimmenon) in the Impassible, henceforth become
saving it by uniting it to himself was "under the penalty of the corruption themselves also impassible and free from them forever.... For as the
of death." It was specifically and only because the human race had become Lord, putting on the body, became man, so we men are deified
"wanting through the transgression and dead by sin" that "the perfect (theopoioumetha) by the Word as being taken to Him (proslephthentes)
Word of God puts around Him an imperfect body and is said to be created through His flesh, and henceforth inherit life everlasting. 64
'for the works,' that, paying the debt in our stead (ophei!en apodidous) , He
might, by Himself, perfect what was wanting to man."60 All of his treatises,
even those in which his primary concern is to define the essential divinity
of the Son both prior to and after the incarnation, are imbued with
references to the substitutionary theory of the atonement, which Athanasius
61 DIlO, citing 2 Cor 5:14; Heb 2:9,14; Gal 6:17; 1 Cor 15:21; 1 Tim 6:15.
treats with as much matter-of-fact, sanguine assurance as he does the 62 D119.
principle that salvation entails participation in God's nature. For this reason, 63 CA 3.58.

64 CA 3.34. C£ CA 3.53, where Athanasius reasons that because it was the second Person

of the impassible Godhead who was raised from childhood as Jesus of Nazareth, he
57 CA 1.41. "advanced in the flesh" strictly according to his "manhood" which was "deified," that is,
58 Ad Epictetum 6, citing 1 Cor 15:53. progressively assimilated to the divine Person who inhabited it. This growth was
59 See also CA 1.43,48,51,60; 2],13,65; 3.57-58.
undertaken so that "man's advance might abide and fail not, because of the Word which
60 CA 2.66.
is with it." See also Gross, 213.

118 119
 Theosis Athanasius on the DeifYing Work ofthe Redeemer
Beyond what Christ accomplished for us and without us, Athanasius works," which the context makes clear are the created works of the created
also finds an exemplary and didactic dimension to the divinizing effects flesh He assumed. 70
of the Word's incarnation, one which cannot be dismissively attributed to We can conclude, then, that although Athanasius was less precise than
a naively realistic Platonism: "by the works of His body (somatos ergon) he could have been about the nature of the incarnation, as was true of
He teaches them" who failed to learn of God "from His Providence and every Church father prior to the Council ofChalcedon, his soteriology of
rule over all things."65 Here Athanasius reveals the works of the Word's deification, or participation in the divine nature, was no crudely physical
body, which we might call God's created energies, to be most decisive in or mechanical theory as Harnack et al. dismissively characterized it, but
reversing the stultifying consequences of the sin of concupiscence by was a development and explication of the Pauline and Johannine emphasis
restoring the possibility of human knowledge of God. Like "a kind teacher" on salvation as adoptive sonship to God the Father through incorporation
who condescends to the epistemic level of his students, the Logos, seeing by grace into God the incarnate Son. For, at the end of the age our
that the human race "were seeking for God in nature and in the world of humanity will be "perfected in Him and restored, as it was made at the
sense ... takes to Himself (lambanei) a body" so that "they who think that beginning, nay, with greater grace. For, on rising from the dead, we shall
God is corporeal may from what the Lord effects by His body (ho Kyrios no longer fear death, but shall ever reign in Christ in the heavens."71
ergazetai dia ton somatos ergon) perceive the truth, and through Him
recognize the Father."66 Thus it was primarily through the created works
of the essential energy rather than through manifold uncreated energies
of God that He made Himself known in Christ: "the Word disguised
Himself by appearing in a body, that He might ... persuade them by the
works (ergon) He did that He is not Man only, but also God."67 The two
"works oflove" accomplished by the incarnation were "putting away death
from us and renewing us again" and "s~condly, being unseen and invisible,
in manifesting and making Himselfknown by His works (ergon) to be the
Word of the Father."68 Athanasius also writes that one of the two purposes
of the incarnation (the first being "putting away death from us and
renewing us again") consists in the "unseen and invisible" Logos
"manifesting and making Himselfknown by His works (dia ton ergon), to
be the Word of the Father, and the Ruler and King of the universe."69
Moreover, immediately following the DI 17 definition in question,
Athanasius returns to the principle theme of thTsparticular movement of
the treatise and clarifies that the Logos is "known from the body by His

65 DIl4. .. (

66 DIl5.

67 DI16.

68 DIl6.
70 DI 17.
69 DIl6.
71 CA 2.67.

120
121
 'I
'I
,:
Augustine's Conception ofDeification, Revisited
6 or Mainz 13. Augustine supplies an extended meditation in Dolbeau 6
on a subject so seldom mentioned elsewhere. In what is a homiletic
exposition of Psalm 81, he gives voice to a rich theological anthropology.
In so doing, he connects the concept of a "deifYing God" (deificatorem
deum) to the soul's spiritual warfare, the biblical vision of salvation history,
and the gathering of members of the ecclesial "Body of Christ."

The Principal Passages

Bonner cites only fifteen examples of the words DEIFICARI and DEIFICATUS
Augustine's Conception of (and seven of these, he argues, are "irrelevant" to the theology of
deification). Among the "relevant" passages he includes:
Ep. 10.2: Augustine laments to his close childhood friend, Nebridius,
Deification, Revisited that "amid uproar and restless comings and goings" a person cannot
"achieve the familiarity with death that we are seeking. For in leisure ...
Robert Puchniak [one] would be permitted to become godlike" [in contemplationV This
letter, written ca. 388-91, dates to the period after his conversion and
baptism, but before his ordination as a priest in Hippo. An echo of the
The theology of Augustine of Hippo, a veritable font for religious thought youthful Augustine's Neoplatonic yearning for the fulfillment of the
in the Latin West for the past 1600years, rarely dwells on the subject of philosophical life can be heard here.
deification. Certainly in comparikon to its prominent place in Eastern Enarrat. In Ps. 49.2: Here we find multiple references clustered
Christian thought, the language of deification scarcely enters Augustine's together: (i) In reference to Psalm 81, he says, "It is quite obvious that
mind (if we take the surviving literary works as evidence). The careful God called human beings "gods" in the sense that they were deified by his
evaluation of Augustine's limited use of this concept has been undertaken grace, 4 not because they were born of his own substance." (ii) " .... He
by Gerald Bonner; his is the definitive statement. 1 Since the publication alone deifies who is God of himself, not by participation in any other."5
of Bonner's article in 1986, however, we have been privy to the unexpected (iii) "Moreover he who justifies is the same as he who deifies, because by
discovery of new sermons of Augustine. 2 Thanks to these new findings, justifYing us he made us sons and daughters of God ... " (iv) "If we have
we can now supply a modest adCfendum to Bonner's work, given that been made children of God, we have been made into gods; but we are
deification is the key idea in one of these letters, the one known as Dolbeau such by the grace of him who adopts US."6 This enarratio (explanation)

I Gerald Bonner, "Augustine's Conception of Deification," Journal o/Theological Studies,

3 Letters1-99. The Works o/Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, vol. III 1,
n.s. 37 (1986) 369-86. .- (
rr. Roland Teske, S.J. (Hyde Park, N.Y.: New City, 2001) 34.
2 See Francois Dolbeau, "Nouveau sermons de saint Augustin pour la conversion des
4 My italics.
paiens et des donatistes (V)," Revue des Etudes Augustiniennes 39 (1993) 57-108; and
5 Bonner, "Augustine's Conception," 384.
also The Works 0/ Saint Augustine: Newly Discovered Sermons, tr. Edmund Hill, O.P.
(Hyde Park, N.Y.: New City, 1990).
6Expositions 0/ the Psalms (33-50). The Works o/Saint Augustine (same series), vol. III/
16, tr. Maria Boulding, O.S.B. (Hyde Park, N.Y.: New City, 2000) 381.
I
I,
I'

122
123
 Theosis Augustine's Conception ofDeification, Revisited

exhibits special affinity with our sermon in question, Dolbeau 6; the use (3) Augustine's understanding of the unity of Christ and His church
of deificatio is sustained and is applied to the Christian mysteries. is closely associated with his use of deification: the elevation of humanity
Enarrat. in Ps. 117.11: Commenting on "The Lord's right hand has as adopted sons and daughters involves not only individual believers, but
proved its might," Augustine writes, "Great might is needed to raise up the whole church. 14 Moreover, deification is, in Augustine's thought, "a
the lowly, to deify a mere mortal, to make the weak perfect, to grant glory state which will be attained only in the life to come." There can be no
through abasement and victory through suffering."? claims to final perfection in this life; deification in its fullness is
Serm. 126.14: "And there he stood, in front of the eyes of a servant, eschatological.
in the form of a servant, saving the form of God for deified eyes, and he (4) Though the use of the term, deificatio, is scarce, "Augustine was
said to him, Am I with you all this time, and you do not know met'S (dated apparently prepared to equate justification and deification, regarding both
to 417 AD). as the consequence of man's adoption." Bonner refers to the same Enarrat.
Serm. 166.4: "God, you see, wants to make you a god; not by nature, In Ps. 49, cited above: "For He justifies, who is just of Himself and not of
of course, like the one whom he begot; but by his gift and by adoption"9 another; and He deifies, who is God of Himself and not by participation
(dated to after 410 AD). in another. Now He who justifies, Himself deifies, because by justifying
From the limited evidence, Bonner drew several astute conclusions: He makes sons of God."
(1) Augustine "believed his teaching on deification was based on (5) Further, Bonner argues that deification is a matter for consideration
Scripture"lo and he rejected the Plotinian idea that deification could be within "dogmatic" theology rather than "contemplative" theology, because
achieved by the independent efforts of a philosopher, unaided by grace; "it describes the consequences of the saving work of Christ rather than a
deification was possible only "from a participation in God made possible mystical state enjoyed by a contemplative." In response to this assertion,
by divine initiative."I! one may reasonably question, however, whether such a distinction between
(2) The "christo centricity" of Augustine's thought was integrated into "dogmatic" and "contemplative" types of theology would have been made
his understanding of deification; Augustine says clearly that "adoption by by Augustine himself It can be argued, moreover, that when Augustine
grace" is impossible without the mediation of the God-man. Augustine spoke, in either catechetical or polemical tones, his threefold aim was to
does, like the Greek Fathers, use the language of "participation" in God,12 teach, to persuade and to delight (and the first of these was paramount).
and he was in agreement with the theologies of both Irenaeus and All of his work he wished to be edifying, for his teaching "with the help of
Athanasius!3 (Bonner cites Serm. 192.1: "To make gods those who were the divine testimonies" aimed to "induce belief" by garnering obedience
men, He was made man who is God"). to their authority. IS The delineation between dogmatic and contemplative
tasks is ours, and not Augustine's. For him, all theology ought to be both
\ dogmatic (insofar as it is sound in its articulation) and contemplative
(insofar as it coaxes the deepening of faith).
7 Expositions o/the Psalms (99-120). The WOrks, vol. IIl/19, tr. Maria Boulding (2003)
Bonner's understanding of deification in Augustine's thought does
337.
8 Sermons (94A-147A) On The New Testament. The WOrks, vol. III/4, tr. Edmund Hill, indeed ring true in light of our "new" sermon ofAugustine. Dolbeau 6has
O.P. (1992) 278. for its focus Psalm 81: "God has stood up in the synagogue of gods," and
9 Sermons (148-183) On The New Testament. The WOrks, yoJ. IIII5, tr. Edmund Hill it begins with a remarkably dense catechetical passage (6.1) on the dynamics
(1992) 209.
10 Bonner, ''Augustine's Conception," 371.
11 Ibid., 372.
14 Ibid., 375-76.
15 On Christian Teaching, IY.146; tr. R. P. H. Green (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
12 Ibid., 373-74.

13 Ibid., 376.
1997).

124 125
 I
'I

I
I' , Theosis
Augustine's Conception ofDeification, Revisited
of deification. "We carry mortality about with us, we endure infirmity,
When one worships the product of one's own hand, he warns, one loses the
we look forward to divinity. For God wishes not only to vivifY, but also to
chance to become a god; the crafting of idols amounts to a "falling away"
deifY us." (Gerimus mortalitatem, toleramus infirmitatem, exspectarnus
and lost opportunity (6.3).
diuinitatem. Vult enim deus non solum uiuificare, sed etiam deificare nos.)
Augustine asks, so what do people want: to become gods, or to make
Augustine reassures his audience that it is "God's promise" that persons
ods? (Quid ergo uolunt homines: dii fieri, an deos focere?) (6.3). One can
will be made gods. In true Athanasian fashion, he repeats the age-old
;ens e the word play of a master rhetorician coming to the fore. He calls
axiom of Christian hope: "The Son of God became a son of man, in order
u on his audience to worship not "what you have made" but instead "the
to make sons of men into sons of God." (Filius deifoctus est filius horninis, P who rnad
one " Th"
e you. e go dl ess "f:as h'IOn an Image
. "and sIap a name on
ut filios hominum foceret filios dei.) Augustine tells of a forward-looking
it" (imponere illi nomen). He makes an appeal to the self-respect of those
vision: what has begun with the incarnation will be completed in the
in the crowd: "It is an insult to you (iniuria tibi est) that you should be
future, will be made manifest at a definite time (certo tempore apparebit).
like the one you have made" (6.5). The creation of the human person as
The promise of God is that He will make human persons "gods not by
imago Dei bestows dignity on all individuals. That someone would hope
nature but by adoption, by grace." The "true God," he proclaims, is a
to be like an idol should arouse an indignant response, he insists. Why?
"deifYing God" (deificatorem deum), a "god-making God" (deificum deurn).
Because an idol cannot do justice to the depth of "your inner self"
There is abundant optimism in this opening section, wherein
(interiorem hominem tuum). Augustine calls upon people to use their
Augustine accentuates the end and goal of Christian hope.
intelligence "to see the truth" (uis uidere ueritatem). The inner self, he tells
them, was bestowed with "all the senses," and these ought to be used to
recognize the dignity of the human person, not to "become like the
Augustinian Polemic
caricature, the idol" (simulacro).

On this day, however, we find Augustine in a fighting mood. His catechesis

If the inner self becomes somehow or other insensitive, stupid, he
and spiritual guidance were laced with polemical concern. He set the stage
becomes in a certain manner like an idol, and having ruined in himself
for an argument with his initial comments: the gods that are made by the
the image of the one by whom he was made, he wishes to take on the
hand of a craftsman are not like the gods made by the "true" God. "Our
image of the one which he has made [si fiat insensatus quodammodo
God," he says, makes us into gods, but "they worship gods they make" (VtJs
homo interior, fit ad quendam modum similis simulacro et, perdita in se
adoratis deum, qui uos focit deos; illi autem adorant deos, quos fociendo et
imagine eius a quo factus est, eius quem flcituult capere imaginem]. (6.5)17
adorando perdunt ut ipsi dii fiant) , thus criticizing pagan practices of idol
worship, which must have been, given his a~ention to the matter, still very
prevalent in the North Mrica of 404, when this sermon was delivered. 16 catastrophes. Pagan complaints during the 'tempora christiana' abounded. Amidst the
provocation and counter-provocation, we find Augustine appealing to unusual language,
"un terme inhabituel," as Dolbeau says, deificatio (Revue des Etudes Augustiniennes, 39
16 Francois Dolbeau has argued, regarding the circumstances of the delivery of this sermon,
[1993] 57-108).
for the likelihood that Augustine was not in a rural township but in a town or city where
17 Would some of the people in his audience be familiar with Augustine's own story of
some people in his audience understood Greek (see para. 2). He further places the sermo~,
how he had long sullied the image of the one who made him? It had been six yea~s or
along with Mainz 12, in Carthage in the winter of 403-404: Augustine was en~aged III
more since the writing of his Confessions. Augustine had admitted that he remamed
an ongoing refutation of the pagan religious practices alive in North Mrica, a reglOn that
'ignorant' of what it meant to be created in God's image, and that he even 'insulted and
had received many lavish imperial monuments to the gods, dating back to the Severan
opposed' the idea, being 'deceived with promises of certainty' by the Manichees as well
dynasty. Bur now, legal interdiction against the pagan cults, which took force in the late
as his own 'childish error and rashness' (Confessions, VLiv [5]' trans. Henry Chadwick
fourth century, was blamed for the multiplication of civil troubles and for natural
[Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991]).

126
127
 Theosis Augustine's Conception ofDeification, Revisited
With the aid of the "spirit of God," he continues, it is possible to the inherent dignity of persons created in the image of God, Augustine
discern properly, and to see one's unlikeness to the simulacrum of the echoes some of the concerns of The Trinity, which he had begun in 400
idol. He laments those who lack such discernment, but their lack of and would not complete until 416, thus placing Dolbeau 6 (dated to 404)
discernment, he reassures, is no loss of "God's work in themselves," which in the midst of his meditations on the three Persons of the Godhead. In
can never be killed (6.7). Augustine further chides those who trust in the The Trinity, he implores his reader: "With the example of the Image [Christ]
impotency of idols, and he warns of the power of "our God" to cast demon before us, let us also not depart from God. For we are, likewise, the image
worshippers "into the eternal fire" (6.9). (He equates the numina of the of God, not indeed an equal image, since it was made by the Father through
idols with demons.) He cautions his audience against the temptation to the Son, not born of the Father as that is" (V1I.3.5).lS (Hence Augustine's
seek counsel from diviners or soothsayers (6.10). He equates such distinction in Dolbeau 6 that one is made a "son of God" not in substance
superstitious action with "seeking the society of demons" (socius or by nature, but rather by grace.) The human person is an image of the
daemoniorum) and the forfeiture of a divine inheritance as an "associate of Image, and is called to imitate the Image by "striving." Further, he writes,
Christ" (socius Christi). Those who heard him, he assumes, were "under "For the true honor of man is to be the image and the likeness of God
enormous pressures" (6.11), affected by illness and strife, and thus which is preserved only in relation to Him by whom it is impressed"
vulnerable to the balm of the diviners. Augustine, as bishop, appears keenly (XII. 1 1.16). Contrariwise, man's "likeness to the beasts is his disgrace"
aware of the quoditian tribulations of the parvuli (little ones), whose faith (XII. 1 1.16). The best possession of the immortal soul is the "image of
he cared for. God its Creator," something that will not cease to be (XIY.2.4). We look
Mter this excursus into condemning idolatry, he returns to the matter into a mirror to see an image, he writes, and by looking through our own
of deification. He reminds his listeners that Christians were not called to image we may catch a glimpse of "Him by whom we have been made."
lives of comfort and luxury, and that they must endure their hardships Augustine cites 2 Cor 3.18: "But we, with face unveiled, beholding the
lferto condicionem tuam). Such suffering is part and parcel oflife after the glory of God, are transformed into the same image ... " Human persons,
Fall: "Indeed, it was our very nature that first sinned, and we derive from as the imago Dei, share in God's glory (XV 8.14). Being the image of the
there what we are born with" (6.11) (Etehim ipsa natura nostra prima blessed Trinity, human persons are endowed with memory, understanding,
peccauit, et ducimus inde quod nascimur). The endurance of suffering will and will, which are themselves intended for remembering, seeing, and
lead to the immortal possession of deification, he assures. The divine loving God (XV20.39). In Dolbeau 6, Augustine is especially keen on
initiative is directed at sufferers who will be "recreated" into blessed insisting that the sacred image of God within the human person not be
immortals (Dicit creator: "Recreabo uos"). Deification does not occur in defiled by the worship of corrupt idols. That which is worshipped ought
the isolated peace of the quiet, contemplative-life, or in the seclusion of to glorify and not debase the image of God within. The intimate
retreat, but rather it begins in the "craftsman's furnace" lfornax artificis), relationship between worship and theological anthropology seems never
in this "world full of scandals, iniquities, corruption, oppression" (6.12). far from Augustine's mind, as he implores his audience to remember their
He tells his flock that they find themselves in the age of the "oil press" and created dignity.
the screws are being tightened so as to separate the oil from the dregs Many of the above theological ruminations were made audible in the
(6.15). He speaks not to a spiritual elite who have chosen Mary's "better living church addressed by Augustine in 404. The concerns voiced in
part," but instead to many Martha's who cannot bu} relp find themselves Dolbeau 6 fit a particular historical context; they reveal Augustine engaged
engaged in worldly toil. . in battle, yet again. As Peter Brown has remarked, in a new addition to his
This sermon, Dolbeau 6, offers us a concrete example of Augustme
the theologian translating core ideas of more detailed and targeted do~trinal
18 The Trinity, tr. Stephen McKenna, C.S.S.R. (Washington: Catholic University of
works into the pastoral concerns of Augustine the bishop. In appeahng to America Press, 1963).

128 129
 Theosis Augustine's Conception ofDeification, Revisited
[in ., .
classic work, Augustine ofHippo: A Biography, we find "an Augustine however, that while A
Kalends festival
was with the spiritual dugustme sfPreocc.upatlon during the
404J struggling with all the rhetorical and didactic resources at his disposal angers 0 pac-amsm ,eh d'd l .
1 not e ect to mcorp orate
the "dei.{;ca"· "l . fD n b
to keep the Christ ian congregation from being absorbed back into a world 'j£ ./0 oglc 0 otoeau 6.
high
in which Christ ianity had by no means yet captur ed the cultural
compl ete at this
ground."19 The "trium ph" of Christ ianity was in no way
same
point in North Africa's history. Anoth er sermon from earlier in the Infrequency of Deification Imagery
ry
year (Dolbeau 198; Mainz 62), delivered on the Kalends feasto fJanua
1, 404, serves to illustrate this point and merits brief comparison, given It is worth asking why A ' I
I ugustme so rare y turned to the use of the concep t
the of deification 0
its many comm on themes. Augus tine faced his audien ce then on " . ne c ue to an answer may be found in his "
"festival of the nations," when people indulg ed in "the joys of the world us m
oPd , .The City ofGod, wherein deification is discussed in its p aganmagnu context'
He an WIth un f avora bl e CrItlcl '" sm H
and the flesh, with the din of silly and disgraceful songs" (198.1). A '.
(198.2) , displeasure with the practice of d'eify~~eg_ugdusthIne vOlcehs. ~is intens e
warned that mixing with non-Christians was "not safe and sound" an t en wors lpmg
the . -men ;
if it led to the corrup tion of virtue: "Are you going to join today in one such example being that of Diome de h
after being credited with foundi n . ' w was turned mto a god
celebration of good luck presents [on the feast of Fortuna] with a pagan,
0

going to play at dice with a pagan, going to get drunk with a pagan?
" culture into Italy.21 This sort of deifi~a::~~:: ~::n:i::d sprea~ing Greek
(198.2) Augus tine called upon his people instead to fast, as they wrestle
d and amoun ts to the worshi p oHalse god I d P. 'hAu~~s~me argued,
I d" I s. nso omg, t e hvmgG od" is
(he would hope) with their consci ences. He knew there was great d
neg :cte ; temp es, altars, sacrifices and priests" become d evote d to "d ea
tempta tion for Christians to join in the "frivolities," "extravagant pleasur
es," men (XVIII 18) . tead of their rightful recipient 0
. InS
"unrestrained drunkenness," and gamb ling-i t was a time of great excess from "the city of this world" and advance in fal'th', h enewarns cann~t escape
. h . If one l'
,s
(198.8). Augus tine was aware that engaging in such activity was morally captlve to t e practlces of "Bab 1 " G' h
reprehensible, and further, defiled one's interio r life. He urged people
to Greeks and Roman s to deify an~ on. h' lvehn ~ e eagernecan ss of the ancien t
sup h
. wors lp t eIr own We pose t at
protec t the "templ e of prayer" which is die heart; to keep one's "inner Augustlne Was especially Cautl'o ' . the langu' f d'fi . .
us m USInc- age el lcatlOn In
, h . 1 d 0
room" guarde d agains t "bodil y allurem ents" (198.1).20 It is curious lest
Christi an church b. .
the .
, e mlS ea some Into lmagin ing th at Ch' nstlans
thems elves become equals of G d AI . h
alwa . 0 mIg ty. Moreover, Augus tine was
19 Peter Brown, Augustine 0/ Hippo: A Biography, new ed. (London: Faber
and Faber,
"G dysbwary to s,~ate unambIguously that the deified faithful do not bec orne
ne in 404 were nothing less o y nature but rather "g d b " A '
2000) 457. Brown adds, "The sermons preached by Augusti 0 sh y grace. ugustlne achieves in Dolbeau
between God and man" 6 a remarkable h '1'
than a series of master classes on the nature of true-t:e!ations oml etlc move- e can on th h d d
(458). pagan use of idols and, on the' ' . e o~e an , econst ruct the
for though t on the interio r life ~;~~ :ar~;lde hIS own congregants
20 Regarding the venerati on of idols (a subject
closely associated with an inability to food
on), Augustine's
discern the image of God in humani ty and the Christian hope of deificati
to pagan idols, but also that Henry Chadwick, in his comm ents 0 n t h Id'
problem was not merely that Christians had bowed down h e new y IS covered sermons '
s or the stones of buildings has remar ked" to b [. h
Christians had engaged in unacceptable "adoration of column , two t emes appear e recurre nt m t ese sermons of
(Serm. 198.16) . Some 'educated 404] Th fi . h ....
in holy places, or even of pictures" in their own churches
criticize d their (pagan) image seco~d e lrs.t IS t aht true ~ehglOn IS mward and a matter of the heart ... A
pagans' had, it seems, begun to challenge Christians who promm ent t erne IS that tr f:' h WI'11'Issue m.
phyfiC'al holy places. Augustin e . fi ue alt a reformed moral
venerat ion-Ch ristians too were venerating icons and life "22 A
was at pains to clarifY that what ought to be worship ped is not the thing itself, but what . ugustlne was Irst and foremost a bishop ' a teacher an d caretak er
craftsman with
it signifies. He wanted Christians to search for the image of the divine
itself, wrapped up in sin, "stands in The City ol'God, XVIII '16fif
the eyes of the mind (198.31), though the mind 21
n"N ~ .
need of purification" (198.37). ew Sermons of A ." T
ugustlne, Journal o/Theological Studies, n.s. 47 (1996) 69-91.

130 131
 Theosis
Augustine's Conception ofDeification, Revisited
of souls, who would consistently remind those in his care of the loftiest
through the church's sacramental life. Only there could one find a haven
aspirations, for adoption by the hand of the divine architect, which, he
against the many snares that populated Augustine's spiritual imagination. 26
would also declare, is not fully knowable in the present life for human
persons tainted by sin. He spoke instead of the possibilities of human life
while not forgetting the present human condition of alienation from God. 2;
As a champion of a theological view that wholly rejected the immodest
Pelagian confidence in human ability to achieve perfection in this life,
Augustine was loathe to overemphasize human striving independent of
divine assistance; deification was not an accomplishment but a gift. All
mention of deification in Dolbeau 6 is careful to underscore God's
providential action: the divine agent acts upon the human recipient, and
does so within the protective confines of the church. The faithful together
await, with restless longing, the consummation of history which finds the
members of the "body of Christ" transfigured into "gods." Augustine
reminded people that deification was a divinely granted possibility, ecclesial
in its dimensions, and the telos of present aspirations.
Lastly, it is essential to be reminded that the proper location for the
language of deification was the sacramental life of the church community.
It is no mistake that we find Augustine delivering the message of deification
within a liturgical setting. He did not understand the transfiguration of
humanity into "gods" to be a private affair. The piety of every individual
was, Augustine believed, nurtured withil1 the "cultus," within sacred
liturgical celebrations. 24 The community was bonded together by the
sacraments and unifYing participation was most often felt in the shared
Eucharist-itself a constant reminder of the Christian mysteries, of God's
active presence in their midst, working a transformation among them.
Augustine, as spiritual father, sought to cQ~unicate an understanding
that "our present passage from death to life, which takes place through
faith, is accomplished in the hope of the future resurrection and glory in
the end."25 A foretaste of the eschatological deification was offered in and

23 On the subject of Augustine communicating 'possibilities,' see Eugene TeSelle, Augustine

the Theologian (New York: Herder and Herder, 1970) 68.
24 See Frederick Van der Meer's classic work, Augustine the BisJJop: Church and Society at
the Dawn ofthe Middle Ages, trans. Brain Battershaw and G. R. Lamb (New York: Harper,
1961) 277ff.
25 Ep. 55, trans. Roland Teske, S. J., in The Works ofSaint Augustine: Letters 1-99, vol. III
26 A debt of gratitude is owed to Rev. Gabriel Coless, O.S.B. for his illuminating remarks
1 (Hyde Park, N.Y.: New City, 2001).
offered in response to early drafts of this work.

132
133
 Divinization and Spiritual Progress in Maximus the Confessor

the Creator of nature himself ... has clothed himself with our nature,
without change uniting it hypostatically to himself, in order to check
what has been borne away, and gather it to himself, so that, gathered to
himself, our nature may no longer have any difference from him in its
inclination. In this way he clearly establishes the all-glorious way of
love, which is truly divine and deifYing and leads to God. 2

Thus, the Confessor rejoices in the incarnation as the opening up of

previously hidden ways by which the human being may finally arrive at
the fullness of God, Himself Maximus is acutely aware, nonethless, of
Divinization and Spiritual Progress the reciprocal responsibility on the part of the human being. He avers
with confidence that "our salvation is contingent upon our will,"3 and
in Maximus the Confessor "the mystery of salvation belongs to those who desire it, not to those who
are forced to submit to it."4 The Confessor's deepest conviction has "God
provid[ing] equally to all the power that naturally leads to salvation, so
Elena Vishnevskaya
that each one who wishes can be transformed by divine grace. "5 The
appropriation of divinization is in direct correlation with one's degree of
spiritual appreciation and discernment. By realizing his or her natural
The intellectual output of Byzantium's Maximus the Confessor (588- freedom, the human being
620) presents an unparalleled balance of theology and philosophy, with
faith as the moving force of all reflection. The Confessor's spiritual might become [a child] of God and divine by grace through the Spirit.
experience leads him to extraordinary heights of mystical knowledge, which For a created [human] could not be revealed as [a child] of God through
is the guiding light for all his intellectual endeavors. This mysticism is deification by grace without first being born by the Spirit in the exercise
brought to prominence in his doctrine of divinization. of free choice, because of the power of self-movement and self-
determination inherent in human nature. 6

The Fundamentals of Divinization Hence, in Maximus's view, God will recognize and divinize His own,
that is, those who willfully employ their true nature. An intense yearning
For the Confessor, the essential conditions for fulfilling the divinizing for relationship with the Creator, as well as an ability to fulfill it, was
process are the magnanimous divine initiative and willing human
cooperation. Maximus unceasingly glorifies divine love expressed through 2 Epist. 2 (PC 91:404BC; MC91).
grace, which "out of human beings makes us gods. r ( . Nothing is more 3 Liber ascetic. 42 (PC 90:953B).
truly Godlike than divine love, nothing more mysterious, nothing more 4 Grat. Dom. (PC 90:880B; CWS 104). Maximus may be seen as proposing universal

apt to raise up human beings to deification."! The greatest testament to salvation in Amb. 7,10 (PC 91:1084D, 1165D); Ad ThaI. 47 (PC 90:429C); Expositio
in Psalmum 59 (PC 90:857A); Mystag. 7 (PC 91:685BC).
love of God for humankind is the incarnation, whereby 5 Amb. 10 (PC 91:1144A; MC 118).
6 Amb. 42 (PC 91:1345D; PPS 93).
1 Epist. 2 (PC 91:393BC; MC 85). See the list of abbreviations at end of article.

134
135
 TheoSls Divinization and Spiritual Progress in Maximus the Confessor
His
bestow ed upon the human race by God Himse l£ who ever moves For he did not come to debase the nature which he himself, as God and
ent in us an insatiable
creatio n toward its end in Himself: "He sets in movem Word, had made, but he came that the nature might be thoroughly
and
desire for himsel f who is the Bread of Life, wisdom , knowle dge, deified which, with the good pleasure of the Father and the co-operation
the lower
justice."? Unceasingly, God transpo ses willing human ity "from of the Spirit, he willed to unite to himselfin one and the same hypostasis. 13
to the greater," "from glory to glory,"8 to diviniz ation:
rise
Divine essence remain s inaccessible,14 but human ity is able to
He leads us finally in the supreme ascent in divine realities to the Father "above nature ," into a new mode of existence, 15 that is, the human
being
oflights wherein he makes us sharers in the divine nature by participating inherits by grace that which belongs to God by nature :
in the grace of the Spirit, through which we receive the title of God's
children and become clothed entirely with the complete person who is We shall become that which in no way results from our natural ability,
the author of this grace, withou t limiting or defiling him who is Son of since our human nature has no faculty for grasping what transcends
God by nature. 9 nature. For nothin g created is by its nature capable of inducin g
deification, since it is incapable of comprehending God. Intrinsically it
to
Accordingly, to know God is to seek His face withou t ceasing, is only by the grace of God that deification is bestowed proportionately
us
attain progressively to the divine vision which penetr ates the lumino on created being. Grace alone illumin ates human nature with
n
darkness. Still, Maxim us does make an ontolo gical distinc tion betwee supernatural light, and, by the superiority of its glory, elevates our nature
in bodily form the
Christ and creatur e: in the former , "there dwells above its proper limits. 16
of deity
compl ete fullness of deity by essence," while "in us the fullness
virtue and
dwells by grace whene ver we have formed in ourselves every Hence , diviniz ation involves the mode of nature , or tropos, rather than
sor,
wisdom ... in faithful reprod uction of the archety pe." 10 For the Confes its govern ing princip le, or logos. Huma n nature is taken to extrao
rdinary
ing the logos
the union of God and the believe r is fulfille d while preserv heights throug h a new, divine, mode of being which sustain s the
ous to the sustain ed
differences betwee n the two distinc t natures , 11 analog proper to created nature: 17
in the
integri ty of the two nature s-and the energies issuing from them-
God, human
person of Christ. Hence , althou gh created in the image of God becomes to the soul (and through the soul to the body) what the
of
nature has yet to be fulfilled throug h the hypost atic union (union soul is to the body, ... so that the soul receives changelessness and the
12 ~~
natures ) realized in the Logos incarna te: body immortality; hence, the whole man ... is divinized .... He
remains wholly man in soul and body by nature, and becomes wholly
God in body and soul by grace and by the unparalleled divine radiance
of blessed glory. 18
7 Orat. Dom. (CCSG 23:70, 769-71 ; CWS 118).
8 Amb. 48 (PG 91: 1364A). Here, Gregory of
Nyssa's influence can be noted.
9 Orat. Dom.

(CCSG 23:70, 774-80 ; CWS 118). 13 Opusc. 7 (PG 91:77C; MC 185).

10 CT2.21 (PG 90:1133 D; CWS 152). Cf.
"Participated di7~ne existence can only be a 14 Amb. 34 (PG 91:1288B).
free gift from God .... This God-giving-Him selfis the divine 'energy'" (John Meyendorff, Vision o/St. Maximus the Confessor (Crestwood,
15 Lars Thunbe rg, Man and the Cosmos: The

Byzantine Theology : Historical Trends and Doctrin al Themes, rev. 2d ed. [New York: N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1985) 88.
Fordham University Press, 1983]1 87). 16AdThal. 22 (CCSG 7:141, 90-98; PPS ll8).
11 Opusc. 8 (PG 91:97A). 17 Amb. 36 (PG 91:1289 CD).
12 Amb. 36 (PG 91:1289 BC). 18 Amb. 7 (PG 91:1088C; PPS 63).

136 137
 Theosis
Divinization and Spiritual Progress in Maximus the Confessor
Maximus understands divinization as involving the human
constitution in its entirety.19 In the final act of homecoming, both soul Maximus defines passions "as a movement of the soul contrary to nature
and body will be granted resurrection, that is, the psychosomatic whole either toward irrational love or senseless hate of something."26 Passions
of the human being will be reinstated in its relationship with God. spring up as a result of the disoriented will that chooses the sensible over
Meyendorff says Maximus does not pose "an absorption into God's the spiritual; "and precisely in the quality of being falsely preferred the
essence,"20 nor even "contemplation of divine essence (which is sensual or visible becomes sinful, dangerous, venomous, evil."27 Passions
inaccessible), but communion in divine energy, transfiguration, and have to be eradicated at the root level, that is, in the domain of the will,
transparency to divine action in the world"; humanity's own energy, when whereby sin has entered the human arena. Human will needs to be
in tune with the divine, propels it toward life in the Logos, that is, reoriented toward divine will, for "only God is good by nature, and only
realization of God's primordial design in divinization. 21 the one who imitates God is good by his will."28 The Spirit is able to
Faith is instrumental to divinization, for it enables one's filial adoption convert those who are willing to cooperate with the plan of deification.29
as a child of God, which is a spiritual birth,22 but "faith without love does In addressing the problem posed by passions, Maximus relies on
not bring about the illumination of knowledge in the soul."23 Maximus apatheia,30 or detachment, that is, "a peaceful state of the soul in which it
brings faith and love together in his allegorical interpretation of Peter and becomes resistant to vice."3l Unassisted byapatheia, the mind-which
John. The character of Peter represents unshakable faith and a life ofpraxis, the Confessor identifies with "the inner man"32-easily loses its spiritual
or practical life; John stands for perfect love and a life of theoria, or focus, like "a little sparrow whose foot is tied tries to fly but is pulled to
contemplation. Both men, who are portrayed rushing to the tomb of Christ, earth by the cord to which it is bound."33 Along with Evagrius, who praises
symbolize two different yet converging spiritual modes of existence. 24 detachment as "the flower of practical activity" and credits it with
"engendering love,"34 the Confessor espouses apatheia as spiritual liberation
that opens one up to a direct divinizing relationship with God.
Ascetic Practice and Contemplation Apatheia is effective only when coupled with an active doing of good,
the practice of virtues. 35 Love is really the bedrock of the edifice of divinizing
36
Maximus is drawing on his experience of monasticism, whose tradition virtues. Humans are called to practice the virtues, particularly love-
of praxis and theoria is a paradigm of divinizat~on or "~ife in C~ri~t,"25
which is also relevant for the entire Body of Chnst. PraXlS and theorza are 26 CC2.16 (PG 90:988D-989A; CWS 48).
mutually interdependent, and, in their correlatio~ represent the fruit!on 27 Georges Florovsky, Collected Works, vol. 9, The Byzantine Fathers ofthe Sixth to Eighth

of spiritual life. Praxis acquires, in the Confessor, a ~ouble persp~ctlve, Century, ed. Richard S. Haugh, trs. Raymond Miller, et al. (Vaduz: Biichervertriebsanstalt,
1987) 239.
including both purification from passions and attamment of vlrtues. 28 CC4.90 (PG 90:1069C; CWS 85).

29 Ad Thai. 6 (CCSG 7:69, 21-23; PPS 103-4).

19 While still preserving the legacy of his ascetic teacher, Evagrius, Ma:.:imus see~ t? 300riginally a Stoic concept, it was introduced into the Christian milieu by Clement of
correct his Origenistic proclivity; Evagrius was concerned, above all, With the mmds Alexandria.
state of pure prayer. 31 CC 1.36 (PG 90:968AB; CWS 39).
32 CC4.50 (PG 90:1060AB; CWS 80-81).
20 Meyendorff: Byzantine Theology, 72.

21 Meyendorff, Byzantine Theology, 133. .. ( 33 CC 1.85 (PG 90:980C; CWS 44-45) .

22 Amb. 42 (PG 91:1348C; PPS 94).
34 Capita praktika ad Anatolium (PG 40: 1221 B)

23 CC 1.31 (PG 90:968A; CWS 38). 35 Maximus's exposition of virtues bears a strong resemblance to that of Evagrius, who
24 Amb. 57 (PG 91:1380D). presents it in his Capita praktika ad Anatolium (PG 40: 1221 BC). Note Evagrius's
25 Thunberg, Man and the Cosmos, 22. dependence on Clement of Alexandria, Strom. 2.6.
36 Epist. 2 (PG 91 :396B; MC 86).

138
139
 Theosis Divinization and Spiritual Progress in Maximus the Confessor
"one and the same universal: owed to God and attaching human beings and in figure."43 Thus, for the Confessor, "liturgy reflects the exalted
to one another."37 While passions and vices fracture the unity of human moments of divinization which belong to future life," offering a preview
nature,38 love and other virtues restore being and, thus, prove salvific: of the longed-for beatitude, here and now. 44
"Nothing is either so fitting for justification or so apt for divinization ... The Confessor views the sacraments of the Eucharist and baptism as
as mercy offered with pleasure and joy from the soul to those who stand divinizing media which impart divine grace to those who are immersed in
in need." Christ Himself walked the path of forbearance and suffering; the life of the Church. He identifies the Eucharist as "holy communion
hence, "the one who can do good and who does it is truly God by grace of the spotless and life-giving mysteries," whereby "we are given fellowship
and participation."39To partake of the virtues is to partake of God Himself, and identity with [God] by participation in likeness, by which man is
who is the most perfect embodiment of them all: deemed worthy from man to become God."45 The Eucharist, as the center
of liturgy, discloses that Christ will take away "the marks of corruption
Whoever by his choices cultivates the good natural seed shows the end and will bestow on us the original mysteries which have been represented
to be the same as the beginning and the beginning to be the same as the for us through symbols here below."46 God also inhabits the believer and
end .... The goal of everything is given in its beginning and the end of communicates His righteousness "through the grace of holy baptism."47
everything is given in its ultimate goal. As to the beginning, in addition "Baptized in Christ by the Spirit, we have received the first incorruptibility
to receiving being itself, one receives the natural good by participation: of the flesh; we await the final incorruptibility of Christ in the Sprit."48
as to the end, one zealously traverses one's course toward the beginning While highly esteeming the value of practical life, and its ecclesiastic
and source without deviation by means of one's good will and choice. realizations, Maximus acknowledges the limited and transitory value of
And through this course one becomes God, being made God by God. 40 the first stage of spiritual life. The experience of "an ascetic in the practice
of virtues" is indispensable yet incomplete without the experience of "a
For Maximus, the work of salvation needs to be deliberately contemplative in the hidden place of wisdom which can exist only in the
internalized-in imitation of Christ-·byevery human being; this habit of the virtues. "49 Thus, Maximus passes on to natural contemplation
divinizing process takes place within the context of the Church. Lossky of the logoi of the created order, which render the world as "God's mirror."5o
understands the Confessor to be saying that the union that begins in this Contemplation helps the believer see the world as sustained by its partaking
life, "will be consummated in the age to come, after the resurrection of of the divine energies; the Logos creates and relates to the cosmic order
the dead."41 Epifanovich observes that "the internal grace-giving content through these energies. Maximus's idea of natural contemplation "as an
of church life ... is hidden behind symbols but-i~uch a way that even experience of a merely symbolical reflection of the divine realities" reinforces
they convey the grace which corresponds to the mystical connotation of his stress on apophaticism and betrays an influence ofPseudo-Dionysius. 51
each of them."42 Maximus, himself, avers: "Holy Church bears the imprint
and image of God since it has the same activity as he does by imitation

43 Mystag. 1 (PG 91 :664D; CWS 186).

37 Epist. 2 (PG 91:401D; MC90). 44 Epifanovich, 82.
38 Epist. 2 (PG 91:400D; MC89).
45 Mystag. 24 (PG 91:704D; CWS 207).
39 Mystag. 24 (PG 91:713AB; CWS 211-12).

40 Amb. 7 (PG 91:1081D-1084A; PPS 58-59).

.. (
46 Mystag. 24 (PG 91:705A; CWS 208) .
47 CC4.73 (PG 90:1065C; CWS 83).
41 Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology ofthe Eastern Church (Cambridge: James Clarke,
48 CT1.87 (PG 90:1120B; CWS 145).
1968) 179. 49 CT2.74 (PG 90:1160AB; CWS 163).
42 S. L. Epifanovich, Prepodobnyi Maksim Ispovednik i vizantiiskoe bogoslovie (Saint
50 Hans Drs von Balthasar, Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe According to MtL\:imus the Confessor,
Maximus the Confessor and Byzantine Theology) (Kiev, 1915) 82. 3d ed., tr. Brian E. Daley (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2003) 176.

140 141
 Theosis Divinization and Spiritual Progress in Maximus the Confessor

By practicing asceticism and contem plation , believers exalt God,52 who

is It is at the stage of theologia, or purification in love, that the final
love
"knowable in ideas about him" and "unkno wable in himself. "53 In
his mediat ion between God and the created order is fulfilled. Perfect
life "lived natura lly in
turn, God provides in contem plation "a growing nouris hment of
the heals divisions, unifies being, and leads to a
intellectual throug h the sensible and a transfo rmatio n of the sensibl e into accordance with the perfect natura l logos. "60 Havin g reached "the blessed
the world of the mind."54 end for which all things are ordained," the faithful enjoy unimp eded union
Further, in the act of divine condescension, God leads the human with God.
being toward Himself, guidin g the creature along the path of spiritua
l The ultima te beatitu de of divine -huma n union subsum es, for
peY
maturity, for one's earthly action and contem plation are still in need
of Maximus, the return of "our entire self," or image, to God, the archety
the
perfection. 55 Therefore, the "most hidden knowledge of [God]" is granted This is a union "of limit and the unlim ited, of measu re and
Creato r
to the human being at the third, or final, stage of Christ ian
life, that is, unmeasurable, of circumscription and the uncircumscribed, of the
t
theologia, or theology proper, whereby believers contemplate God, Himself, with the creature, of rest with movement."62 Speaking of the end as "perfec
nce
by acquiring a "simple unders tandin g according to which they no longer fulfillment"63 0 f the soul's journey, Maximus espouses "the direct experie
that ... ofGod,"64 available now to those who have arrived at "an ever-m oving
pursue the divine and ineffable Word by sensat ion or anythi ng 65 on
appears. "56 rest" in God. The "experience of God" is a type of "knowledge, based
a type
active engagement, which surpasses all reason"; the "rest in God" is
all
of "participation in the known object which manifests itself beyond
Purification in Love conceptualization. "66
In union with God, the faithful finally "possess not just a part of the
s of
Maxim us envisages theologia as a "relati onship " with the God
who fullness but rather acquire throug h partici pation the entire fullnes
57 ian grace. "67 Maxim us celebrates the end, whereby the redeemed are "now
transce nds all knowl edge. For the Confes~or, the whole Christ
ible
pilgrimage culminates in the intima te divine -huma n union of purific ation divinized by love and made like him by partici pation in an indivis
in love and ensuing divinization: "The mind is deeme d worthy of
the identity to the extent that this is possible."68 In "the union that is beyond
. 1 d
grace of theology when on the wings of love it has passed beyond ~ll
b" or
the nat ure, "69 th e h uman emgs energles are no onger riven by nature
essence ofhlms elf sense, but by God's grace.7 0
preceding realities, and being in God it will consider the
throug h the Spirit, insofar as it is possible to the human mind."58 While
the first two stages of spiritual life are the "Sabbaths," theologia is
the
Epist. 2 (PG 91:400C; MC 89).
"Sabba th of Sabbaths," crown ing all that had led to it. 59 60
cited in
61 Amb. 7 (PG 91:1088A; PPS 63). Cf. Gregory of Nazianzus, Drat. 28.17,
Maximus, Amb. 7 (PG 91:1077B; 1085C) .
us the Confessor, r, Cosmic Liturgy, 272.
51 Lars Thunberg, Microcosmani£Mediator: The TheologicalAnthropology ofMaxim 62 Ad ThaI. 60 (PG 90:621B) quoted in von Balthasa
1965) 376. 63 Amb. 7 (PG 91:1072B; PPS 48).
Acta Seminarii Neotestamentici Upsaliensis, no. 25 (Lund: C.WK Gleerup,
52 CT2.32 (PG 90:1140B; CWS 154). 64 Ad ThaI. 60 (CCSG 22:77, 67, 69; PPS 126).

53 CC 4.7 (PG 90: 1149AB; CWS 76). 65 Ad ThaI. 59 (CCSG 22:53, 131); Ad ThaI.
65 (CCSG 22:285, 543); Amb. 67 (PG
" ( 91:1401).
54 Von Balthasar, Cosmic Liturgy, 304-5.
55 CT2.87 (PG 90:1165BC; CWS 166). 66 Ad ThaI. 60 (CCSG 22:77,8 7-90; PPS 12627).
56 Mystag. 24 (PG 91:709A; CWS 210).
67 CT2.87 (PG 90:1165C; CWS 166).
68 Mystag. 13 (PG 91:692C D; CWS 200).
57 Thunbe rg, Microcosm, 379.
69 Opusc. 7 (PG 91:76B; MC 183).
58 CC2.26 (PG 90:992C; CWS 50).
ibid. 2.64-65 . 70 Amb. 10 (PG 91:1153 C; MC 125).
59 CT 1.37-39 (PG 90: 1097C; CWS 135). Cf.

142 143
 Theosis Divinization and Spiritual Progress in Maximus the Confessor
In this supra-logical communion, believers "terminate [their] proper Selected Bibliography
faculties along with everything in [their] nature that has reached
completion."7l Maximus writes: "For what is more desirable to God's Balthasar, Hans Urs von. Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe According to Maximus the
precious one than to be divinized, that is for God to be united with those . ConJe.ssor. 3d ed.Translated by Brian E. Daley. San Francisco: Ignatius, 2003.
who have become god and by his goodness to make everything his own."72 Eplfanov~ch, S. L. Prepodobnyi Maksim Ispovednik i vizantiiskoe bogoslovie (Saint
Indeed, God's skopos, as well as Maximus's aspiration of capturing the Maxzmus the Confessor and Byzantine Theology). Kiev, 1915.
spirit of divine intent,?3 is realized in the divinization of the human being Florovsky, Georges. Collected Works. Vol. 9, The Byzantine Fathers ofthe Sixth to
and transfiguration of the whole cosmos. Eighth Century. Edited by Richard S. Haugh. Translated by Raymond Miller
et al. Vaduz: Biichervertriebsanstalt, 1987.
Lossky, Vladimir. The Mystical Theology ofthe Eastern Church. Cambridge: James
Clarke, 1968.
Abbreviations Meyendorff, John. Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes.
Rev. 2d ed. N.p., 1983. Reprint, New York: Fordham University Press,
Maximus's Texts n.d.
Ad Thal Quaestiones ad Thalassium Thunberg, Lars. Man and the Cosmos: The Vision of St. Maximus the Confessor.
Amb. Ambiguorum liber Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1985.
CC Capita de charitate - - - . Microcosm and Mediator: The Theological Anthropology ofMaximus the
CT Capita theologiae et oeconomiae Confessor. Acta Seminarii Neotestamentici Upsaliensis 25. Lund: Gleerup,
Epist. Epistula 1965.
Liber ascetic. Liber asceticus
Mystag. Mystagogia
Opusc. Opuscula theologica et polemica
Orat. Dom. Expositio oration is Dominicae

Editions, Series, and Collections

CCSG Corpus Christianorum, Series Graeca
CWS Classics of Western Spirituality
MC Maximus the Confessor (Andrew Louth 1996)
PG Patrologia Graeca (ed. J.-P. Migne)
PPS Popular Patristic Series (ed. John Behr)

" (

71 Ad Thai. 22 (CCSG 7:141, 89-90; PPS 117-18).

72Amb. 7 (PG 91:1088C; PPS 63-64).
73See Epist. 24 (PG 91 :609C) where Maximus cites 2 Pet 1:4, a biblical passage commonly
construed to envisage the goal of God's creation as participation in divine nature.

144 145
 Reforming Theosis
compatible with Reformed theology, itself a member of the Great Tradition
to which all three streams of Christendom ultimately appeal.
According to Reformed scholars, union with Christ is at the heart of
Reformed theology. While various theologians debate where exactly union
with Christ ,"fits" into the ordo salutis, it is certain that it is an integral
component. J While union with God and theosis are not identical they are
closely related. In her study of the patristic use of theosis Anna Williams
concludes that

there is a firm core that distinguishes this doctrine from some other models
of sanctification. First, we can safely say that where we find references to
human participation in divine life, there we assuredly have a claim specifically
Reforming Theosis of theosis. This kind ofclaim regarding participation in divine life is carefully
to be distinguished, however, from the idea of divine indwelling in the
MykHabets human person ... A second infallible marker of the doctrine, then, is the
union of God and humanity, when this union is conceived as humanity's
incorporation into God, rather than God's into humanity.4

Worlds Apart According to this well-reasoned definition, a Reformed doctrine of

union with Christ (unio mystica) is compatible with a doctrine of theosis.
The doctrine of theosis is clearly established within the Eastern branch of
Christendom and to this day remains the central motif uniting various
aspects of Byzantine theology, from theology proper to anthropology.!
But what of the Latin West? The West has historically given far more
Theosis and the West
attention to moral holiness and so has focused on the elimination of sin
It is important to highlight that not only did the early church and Eastern
as culpa rather than on salvation as liberation from moral corruption.
Orthodoxy adopt the language of theosis, so did the Protestant Reformers.
While the theme of theosis is not a dominant one in the West, it is not
Since the mid-seventies a new interpretation of Luther known as the
without its supporters. As one recent author reminds us: "although the
"Finnish School" has arisen under the influence ofTuomo Mannermaa.
West does not embrace the explicit notion of theosis in any major way,
The central thesis of this school is that for Luther, salvation is conceived
deification is not entirely absent from its tradition."2 Theosis-the
as union with Christ, based on Luther's phrase" in ipsa fide Christus adest'
deification of the human person-can and indeed must be seen to be
("in faith itself Christ is really present"). 5 The Finnish School argues that
1 Two works are considered to be more or less authoritative on the subject: J. Gross, La

divinisation du chretien d'apres les peres grecs: Contribution histoJ'ifiue a la doctrine de la 3 See R. Letham, The Work o/Christ (Leicester: IVP, 1993) 55-56.
grace (Paris: Gabalda, 1938); E.T.: The Divinization 0/ the Christian According to the 4 A. N. Williams, The Ground o/Union: Deification in Aquinas and Palamas (New York:
Greek Fathers, tr. P. A. Onica (Anaheim, Cali£: A & C, 2002); and M. Lot-Borodine, La Oxford University Press, 1999) 32.
Deification de l'homme selon fa doctrine des Peres grecs (Paris: Cerf, 1970). . ~Tuomo Mannermaa, "Why is Luther So Fascinating? Modern Finnish Luther Research,"
2 D. B. Clendenin, Eastern Orthodox Christianity: A Western Perspective (Grand Rapids: III Union With Christ: The New Finnish Interpretation o/Luther, eds. C. E. Braaten and R.
W. Jensen (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 4, 19-20.
Baker, 1994) 124.

146 147
 Reforming Theosis
Theosis
., . in Christ· in faith a believer receives makes it plain that this does not mean we partake of the divine essence but
for Luther faith is a rea1partlClpatton . . d of the divine likeness: "The apostles were simply concerned to say that
· Ch' t not only in a nommal an external
the righteousness 0 f G 0 m d rlS , . 11 h 11 when we have put off all the vices of the flesh we shall be partakers of
. 1 d . dl This insight radlca y c a enges
way but genume y an mwar y. . .('. . divine immortality and the glory of blessedness, and thus we shall be in a
'. . h 1 h' If the forensic model of JustnlCatton argues
dltlonal Luther sc 0 ars Ip. r way with God so far as our capacity allows."12
t~at throu h faith we are declared righteous, while in actua Ity we a.re not
t g h' d' of Luther argues that through faith we For Calvin, the process of theosis is initiated in our election for
made righteous, t IS new rea mg .' . . salvation, is effected in our union with Christ, and is made possible in
.' h 1 Ch' h in hiS dlvme person commumcates
artiClpate m the woe nst, w 0 . h h two interrelated ways, the first of which is by the incarnation of the Son,
p . fG d H . lies the bridge from Reformatton t oug t
the nghteousness 0 o. erem - . 6 which represents a divinizing of humanity through the humanizing of
to the Orthodox idea of salvation, understood as ~heosls.. 7 .
_. . 1 . L ther but also m Calvm. For Calvlll, divinity. In his Institutes Calvin speaks of partaking of the divine nature in
Theosls IS present not on y m u 1 . h terms of the mirifica commutatio or "wonderful exchange" whereby
_. comes closest to what is more common Y m t e
f h
the concept 0 t eOSlS h h . .
". . h Ch' "8 It has been argued t at t e umo mystzca
West termed umon Wit nst. . h d . f having become with us the Son of Man, he has made us with himself
. , h logy 9 If this is true, then logically t e octrlne 0
. centra1to C a 1vms t eo . fh' sons of God. By his own descent to the earth he has prepared our ascent
IS . C 1 . 's theology.lO In one 0 IS rare uses
-' . 1 f Importance to a vm
h
t eOSlS IS a so 0 . I'. • "c 1 . ites "We should notice that it is the to heaven. Having received our mortality, he has bestowed on us his
of the word "demcatton a vm w r , . . d d' . immortality. Having undertaken our weakness, he has made us strong
oner or later hke God; m ee It IS, so
ur ose of the Gospe1to rnak e us so . Cal . in his strength. Having submitted to our poverty, he has transferred to
p p . d fd·1'. . "11 Echoing Eastern Orthodoxwnters, Vlll
to speak, a kin 0 elIlCatton. us his riches. Having taken upon himself the burden of unrighteousness
· ys from F·millS. h th eologians and responses from American
-. with which we were oppressed, he has clothed us with his righteousness. 13
6 For compre h enSlve essa. c· Lutheran theology of theosls see
. Wi' h Ch t On post-rerormatlon .
Lutherans, see UnIOn It rzs . 1Vrll A d' as Osanders Theosisgedanke und die
H k G tt Raben - um Gottes wi en. n re . h . The second way that union with Christ is effected is through the
R. au e, 0 - d t h verstandenen RechtJertlgung. Versuc ezner
Diskussion um die Grundlagen er evange ISC kf L 1999) work of the Holy Spirit. This partaking of the divine nature, or more
. . Gedankens (Fran urt: ang, .
Neubewertung eznes umstrzttenen . F' W N .. "Deification: Consensual and specifically of Christ, is then experienced and further developed through
. . n of Norns· . orIlS,
7 Despite the ~ontrary opllllO (1996) 420. See C. Mosser, "The Greatest Possible the sacraments and the life of piety lived out in the Spirit's power. From
Cogent," Scottzsh Journal ofTh~0Iogz.49 . h]. I {Theology 55 (2002) 36-57 for a
Blessing: Calvin and D~i~catlon, .m Scottzs ourna 0 the preceding quotation of Calvin we see the direct parallels between what
solid refutation of Norns c~nten~lOn·h . .]. hn Calvin and the Mysticism ofSt. Bernard. he considers to be theosis with what Eastern Orthodoxy advocates in its
O
S See D. E. Tamburello, Unzon With Crist. L • .11. Westminster John Knox, 1994). doctrine of theosis.
Columbia Series in Reformed Theol~gy (. OUlSVI e. d most closely to the Western Behind Calvin's treatment of theosis the doctrine of the Trinity provides
. "Deification correspon s . "
Bray is incorrect wh en h e wntes, .. h d h I gy" G Bray "Deificatlon,
h . .. f Chnst III Ort 0 ox t eo 0 , . , a foundation and context by which we can understand the deiBcation of
understanding 0 f t e Imitation 0 d D F Wright (Downers Grove,
in New Dictionary of Theology, eds. S. B. Ferguson an .. humans. Calvin's doctrine of theosis, like its classical antecedents, is built
Ill.: IVP, 1988; electronic edition, 200.0). . h ,/+ b . C l· (Neukirchen: Moers, around the hypostatic union. Theosis is only possible because human nature
. W K lfh s Chrzstusgemeznsc aJ' el a vzn . "
9 See, for lllstanCe, .. 0 ~u'. d C Panee, "Calvin's Central Dogma Agam, has been deiBed in the theandric person of the Mediator. As men and women
1939); Tamburello, Unzon With Christ; a n · .. ( .are united to Christ, his divinity deifies them. 14 Our divinization is only
Sixteenth Century Journal 18 (1987) 191-99. LI b d 1 and 2 Peter, tr. W. B.
t · Vol 12· ne rews an 'Ii'"
10 Calvin's New Testament Commen arzes, . d' R ·d. E dans 1963) 330; "e
W d T F Torrance (Gran apl s. er m , 314 Institutes 4.17.2.
Johnston, eds. D .. : an .... H B id e (London: Clarke & Co, 1953) 1.1. ;
Institutes ofthe Chrzstlan ReligIOn, cr. . ever g 14See D . Willis-Watkins, "The Unio Mystica and the Assurance of Faith According to
27.1· 3.2.24; 3.11.10; 3.25.10;4.17.2,4,11. . y, I 12 330. . "in Calvin: ErbeundAuftrag, ed. W van't Spijker (Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1991) 78.
11· Referring to 2 Pet 1 :4: Calvin's New Testament Commentarzes, o. ,

149
148
 Theosis Reforming Theosis

made possible by the unique work of the incarnate Son who unites us to Such language leads Holmes to state that "In common with Eastern
himself so that through the Holy Spirit we may know and worship the Orthodox thought, Edwards was prepared to see salvation as theosis, being
Father. .fu Mosser puts it: "The believer's union with Christ and the Father, made one with God."19 Holmes states the position of Edwards in the
the indwelling presence of the Spirit in our hearts, restoration of the divine simplest terms possible: "God regards the believer as one with Christ and
image, being made like Jesus and our eventual glorification are each so, ontologically, the believer is one with Christ. Under the metaphysical
important themes in Calvin's soteriology and eschatology."15 This provides positions with which Edwards was working, it really is that simple."20 By
a suitable overview and summary of the place of theosis within Calvin's asserting an ontological union Edwards clearly goes beyond the Palamite
theology by which one may participate in God's energies, which are strictly
theology.
Moving beyond the Reformation we can trace a continued usage of economic, but not in God's essence, which is ontological.
the doctrine of theosis within later Reformed theology. One important The doctrine of theosis was not neglected in the Western tradition,
post-Reformation theologian to adopt the language of theosis is Jonathan not least within Reformed theology. It has been there all along, if
Edwards. From his reflections on the Trinity Edwards presents a brief underdeveloped. With the republication of many contemporary Eastern
16 Orthodox texts on the os is in English,2! the re-examination of the theology
articulation of theosis as human participation in the Triune God oflove.
According to Edwards, God created humans to participate in the Triune of the Reformers, especially Luther and Calvin, and recent calls from a
communion which could only be achieved through union with Christ. number of contemporary Protestant theologians to reintroduce theosis
The saints are "exalted to glorious dignity" and "to fellowship" and even onto the Western soteriological agenda,22 the doctrine of theosis is one of
"union" with God Himself, but "care is taken" that this is not their own a number of patristic themes being appealed to today to recall the Church
glory, but that it comes from God. l ? By means of the ~nalogy of_~arriage, to its theological sources and to aid the church in confronting the post-
Edwards shows his express commitment to the doctrlne of theosls. modern era. It is also being used by a number of theologians as a possible
way of ecumenical advancement. It is this context that the contribution
The end of the creation of God was to provide a spouse for his Son Jesus ofT. F. Torrance has much to offer.
Christ that might enjoy him and on whom he might pour fourth his
love, ... the end of all things in providence are to make way for the 19 Holmes, God of Grace, 58.
exceeding expressions of Christ's love to his spouse & for her exceeding 20 Holmes, God of Grace, 149; c£ 184,242.
18
close & intimate union with & high & glorious enjoyment of him. 21 Some of which include: V. Lossky, The Vision of God. Tr. A. Moorhouse (Crestwood,

N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1963, 197Y); idem, Orthodox Theology: An
Introduction, trs. 1. and 1. Kasarcodi-Watson (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Press,
15Mosser, "The Greatest Possible Blessing: Calvin and Deification," 55. 1978,2001); idem, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (Crestwood, N.Y.: Sr.
16 See J. Edwards, "An Unpublished Essay on the Trinity," www.truthinheart.com/ Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1944, 1998); Mantzaridis, The Deification ofMan; P. Nellas,
EarlyOberlinCD/CD/ Edwards/Trinity.htm; D. L. Weddle, '.'Jonath~n Edwards on Men Deification in Christ, tr. N. Russell (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press,
and Trees and the Problem of Solidarity," Harvard Theological Review 67 (1974) 155- 1979, 1987); D. Staniloae, The Experience of God: Orthodox Dogmatic Theology: Vol 2:
F:
75; and W Youngs, "The Place of Spiritual Union in Jonathan Edwards's Conception The World: Creation and Deification, trs., eds. 1. Ionita and R. Barringer (Brookline,
Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox, 1978,2000).
of the Church," Fides et Historia 28 (1996) 27-47.
17 S. R. Holmes, God of Grace and God of Glory: An Account oftlpe Theology ofJonath~n
22 C. H. Pinnock, Flame ofLove: A Theology ofthe Holy Spirit (Downers Grove, Ill.: lYp,

Edwards (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000) 43. Holmes is commenting on the Miscellanies 1996); G. D. Badcock, Light of Truth and Fire of Love: A Theology of the Holy Spirit
of Edwards, personal theological notes he made throughout his life. Holmes notes how (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997); R. V. Ral(estraw, "Becoming Like God: An Evangelical
the Church is central to Edwards' view of theosis in the treatise, Concerning the End for Doctrine of Theosis," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40 (1997) 257-69;
Clendenin, Eastern Orthodox Christianity; and "Partakers of Divinity: The Orthodox
Which God Created the World (44-49).
Edwards, Miscellanies 710, cited in Holmes, God of Grace and God of Glory, 58.
18
Doctrine ofTheosis," Journal ofthe Evangelical Theological Society 37 (1994) 365-79.

150 151
 Theosis Reforming Theosis

T. F. Torrance: A Case Study Taking up Torrance's challenge we may ask: What might a Reformed
doctrine of theosis look like? Torrance himself paints broad strokes but
Commonly regarded as one of the foremost Reformed theologians of the provides enough of a sketch for a more complete portrait to be crafted.
second half of the twentieth century, Thomas Forsyth Torrance provides Reformed theology, in Torrance's view, speaks of human participation in
us with a model of soteriology that is at the same time orthodox and the divine nature as a union and communion with Christ in his human
creative. 23 Drawing heavily on the work of the Fathers, in particular nature, a participation in his incarnate sons hip, and as a sharing in Christ
Athanasius, Epiphanius, and Cyril of Alexandria, in addition to such the divine life and love. "That is to say, it [Reformed theology] interprets
Reformed mentors as John Calvin and Karl Barth, the soteriology of 'deification' precisely in the same way as Athanasius in the Contra
Torrance presents us with an opportunity to observe how a modern-day Arianos."25 Quoting Calvin, Torrance argues that it is only through "real
Reformed doctrine of theosis may be constructed. While his work does and substantial union" with Christ in his human nature that we partake
not provide a fully systematized doctrine of theosis, and thus much work of all his benefits, and it is only in the incarnate Christ that we are really
remains to be done, it does provide a starting point for Reformed thought made to partake of the eternal life of God himself,26 An examination of
to engage with an Eastern Orthodox doctrine of theosis. the imago Dei, the Creator-creature distinction, and the concept of
In an address delivered to the World Alliance of Reformed Churches , "reconciling exchange" in Torrance's thought, provides us with one possible
in Frankfurt on August 5, 1964, Torrance pleaded for "a reconsideration way of "reforming" theosis.
by the Reformed Churches of what the Greek fathers called theosis."24

23Torrance is uniquely qualified to act as a representative of the Reformed tradition in Imago Dei
this discussion for several reasons. An ordained Minister of the Church of Scotland, he
held the position of Professor of Christian Dogmatics at New College, Edinburgh, for Within Torrance's anthropology a subtle yet crucial distinction between
29 years (1952-79). Torrance founded the Scottish Journal ofTheology, which he edited
for over thirty years, founded the Scottish Church Theology Society, and served as
being and person is offered which applies theologically and anthropologically.
moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland 1976-77. Throughout Theologically speaking, the Being of God refers to ousia, while Person refers
his career Torrance has formed theological bridges between the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches and the Eastern Orthodox Churches. Torrance was invited to Addis S. Anderson, eds. C. H. Kettler and T. H. Speidell (Colorado Springs: Helmers and
Ababa by Methodius the Greek Archbishop ofAxum, and was consecrated as a Presbyter Howard, 1990) 2-15; and Scottish Theology from John Knox to John McLeod Campbell
of the Greek Orthodox Church and given the honorary title of Proto presbyter. In 1970, (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1996),
24 T. E Torrance, "Come, Creator Spirit, For the Renewal of Worship and Witness," in
at a session of the General Assembly in Edinburgh, the Patriarch of Alexandria conferred
on Torrance the Cross of St. Mark, which was followed in 1977 by his being given the Theology in Reconstruction (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965) 243.
25 Torrance, Theology in Reconstruction, 184.
Cross of Thyate ira by the Greek Orthodox Archbishop in London. Instigating further
26 Atthis point Torrance goes no further, stating: "We are unable to describe this participation
talks between these two traditions, Torrance sought theological consensus on the doctrine
of the Trinity, for agreement in this area would influence all further discussions. Between in positive language any more than we can describe the hypostatic union in positive
1986 and 1990 discussions took place, resulting in the ''Agreed Statement on the Doctrine language-refusal to do so does not by itself import that a real and creative and therefore
of the Holy Trinity," reached at Geneva on 13 March 1991. See Theological Dialogue an ontological relation is not envisaged in this participation," Torrance, Theology in
Between Orthodox and Reformed Churches, vols. 1 & 2, ed. T. F. Torrance (Edinburgh: Reconstruction, 186. Torrance is appealing to some form of apophatic reticence, as Eastern
Scottish Academic, 1985, 1993). Torrance considers this historfc agreement to be one of Orthodoxy does. Apophaticism is a common epistemological commitment among all
the supreme achievements of his career. For Torrance's most important writings on his Eastern Orthodox writers both ancient and modern, although to different degrees with
each. Amongst the various forms of apophaticism Bartos identifies a strict/radical approach
I relation to Reformed theology see "The Deposit of Faith," Scottish Journal of Theology
I, 36/1 (1983) 1-28; "'The Substance of the Faith': A Clarification of the Concept in the and a relative approach as the two most obvious forms: E. Bartos, Deification in Eastern
I Orthodoxy.· An Evaluation and Critique ofthe Theology ofDumitru Staniloae. Paternoster
I' Church of Scotland," Scottish Journal ofTheology 36/3 (1983) 327-38; "The Distinctive
"I
I' Character of the Reformed Tradition," in Incarnational Ministry: Essays in Honor ofRay Biblical and Theological Monographs (Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999) 25.
Iii
,1
1

rI'. 152 153

III
"
 Theosis Reforming Theosis
to hypostasis. Torrance applies a similar distinction to his anthropology. The personal or inter-personal structure of humanity in which there is imaged
human creature is created in a special sense, as Gen 1:27 makes clear. The the ineffable personal relations of the Holy Trinity."31 This means that,
structural aspect of the human being as creature in God's image is thus like Barth before him, when Torrance treats humanity or, regretfully, his
posited. However, because the imago Dei is ultimately christological, more customary appellation man, he does not mean an individual (even
soteriological, and eschatological, the relational aspect of the imago is what less a male!32) but rather a person in ontological relation with other
makes human "beings" human "persons," true men and women. Because persons. 33 This is what Torrance means by "onto-relations" or being-
Jesus Christ is the only true human, he is the true image of God, and so constituting-relations. 34 While first applied to the intratrinitarian relations
only in Christ can the human creature be fully personY The movement it is also applicable to intra-human relations. 35
within the salvation of men and women then, is from human beingto human For Torrance it appears that as man or woman we do not image God
person. Anything outside of Christ falls short of true personhood. 28 in the strict sense, rather, as person we image God. It is strictly not man or
When God created humanity he created man and woman as one. 29 woman (or man and woman together) but man or woman as person.
Torrance, clearly influenced by Barth, sees in the creation of men and Remembering that "person" is used here in the distinctively Christian
women in the image of God an otherness and togetherness that is to be sense as shaped by the intra-trinitarian relations of the three Divine Persons
expressed in an inherent relatedness which is a creaturely reflection of a who are the Triune God. "It is a person in that contingent, relational
transcendent relatedness in the divine Being. 3D For Torrance, "this is the sense that is the image of God .... not person as male or female human
being as such."36
27 Torrance is here reliant once again upon the seminal work of Karl Barth who argued that in
the strict sense it is God who is properly Person, and humans are persons in derivation from
him. K. Barth, ChurchDogmatiCJ~ 4vols (Edinburgh:T. &T. Clark, 1956-75) II11, 272. SeeT. 31 Torrance, "The Soul and Person in Theological Perspective," 109-10.
F. Torrance, God and Rationality (1971; Reprint, Eugene, Ore.: Wipf & Stock, 1997) 141-42. 32 "That is to say by 'man' the biblical tradition means 'man-and-woman', for it is man
28 One could even say that anyone outside of Christ falls short of true human being. Barth and woman who constitute in their union the basic unit of humanity," Torrance, "The
himself appears to argue this in his reinterpretation of the doctrine of election in Jesus Goodness and Dignity of Man in the Christian Tradition," 311.
Christ. See B. McCormack, "Grace and Being," in The Cambridge Companion to Karl 33 The idea of person being equated with the individual is attributed by Torrance, as it is
Barth, ed. J. Webster (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) 92-110; C. Gunton, by most scholars, to Boethius, De duabus naturis et una persona Christi, adversus Eutychen
"Karl Barth's Doctrine of Election as Part of his Doctrine of God," Journal of Theological et Nestorium, 2.1-5, c£, Torrance, "The Soul and Person in Theological Perspective,"
Studies n.s. 25 (1974) 381-92; and H. T. Goebel, Uim fteien Wahlen Gottes und des Menschen: fn.12.
Interpretations, bungen zur ':Analogie" nach Karl Barths Lehre von der Erwahlung und Bedenken 34 Torrance, "The Goodness and Dignity of Man in the Christian Tradition," 311.
ihrer Folger! fitr die Kirchlichen Dogmatik (Frankfurt: Lang, 1990). Torrance's view of "person" is derived from the work of Richard of St Victor as opposed
29 Torrance follows Barth's much criticised thesis that an essential aspect of the imago Dei to that of Boethius or Aquinas, both of which are described by Torrance in his Reality
is gender. "Difference in sex is not simply a feature of the body, merely adventitious or and Scientific Theology (Edinburgh: Scottish Academic, 1985) 174-76. Contrary to
accidental to the soul, but is intrinsic to the human soul which, far from being neutral, Torrance, C. E. Gunton, argues that Richard's Trinitarian theology only allowed the
is, either male or female ... sexuality thus determines the innermost being of people, possibility of a relational view of person, see The Promise of Trinitarian Theology
making them either male or female in themselves," T. F. Torrance, "The Soul and Person (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1991) 93-94. Be that as it may, while Torrance interacts
in Theological Perspective," in Religion, Reason, and the Self Essays in Honour ofHywel with the work of Richard St. Victor he develops his theology of the person based upon
D. Lewis, ed. S. R. Sutherland and T. A. Roberts (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, the insights of Athanasius and the Nicene theologians. See Torrance, ''Athanasius: A
1989) 108-9. As with Torrance's persistent use of masculine lang~age for humanity, he Study in the Foundations of Classical Theology," in Theology in Reconciliation: Essays
opens himself up for severe critique at this point and, also typical, he does not offer Towards Evangelical and Catholic Unity in East and West (London: Geoffrey Chapman,
detailed rationale for his commitment to such a position. 1975) 215-66.
30 The ultimate expression of this relatedness is vertical, between God and humanity, but 35 T. F. Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God: One Being Three Persons (Edinburgh:
is also reflected horizontally in marriage and procreation. T. F. Torrance, "The Goodness T. &T. Clark, 1996) 102-3.
and Dignity of Man in the Christian Tradition," Modern Theology 4 (1988) 311. 36 Torrance, "The Ministry of Women," 281.

154 155
 Theosis Reforming Theosis

Given Torrance's doctrine of onto-relations, the imago Dei is thus a Given this definition of the imago Dei, one that is restored through
dynamic and eschatological reflection that, while initiated and developed the vicarious humanity of Jesus Christ, and mediated to us in the Spirit
in time-space within creation, is ultimately only realized in the eschaton who unites us in Christ, we can see what Torrance means when he speaks
of which the Church is currently a foretaste. The onto-relations work on of the doctrine of theosis. Colyer helpfully summarizes Torrance at this
two levels, vertically and horizontally. Vertically one is justified and point:
sanctified through a relationship with the triune God, and horizontally,
one is formed into communion with other believers in the Body of Christ, Theosis or theopoiesis is not the divinising or deification of the human
the Church. But these two levels are one integrated whole, not two separate soul or creaturely being, Torrance contends, but rather is the Spirit of
spheres. Theosis, communion with God, is thus a "personal" activity and God humanizing and personalizing us by uniting us with Christ's
persons are defined as humans-in-relationship. The ultimate person is vicarious humanity in a way that both confirms us in our creaturely
Jesus Christ hence mature men and women are those who have been reality utterly different from God, and yet also adapts us in our contingent
perfected by grace as they are united to Christ by the Holy Spirit. The nature for knowledge of God, for communion with God and for
Church thus becomes the locus of theosis this side of the Parousia. fellowship with one another. 39
Because of sin and the fall the onto-relations that exist between all
personal beings, God-humanity, humanity-God, and humanity-humanity Thus theosisltheopoiesis is closely related to Torrance's relational imago
have been radically "disrupted," resulting in the breakdown of personal Dei founded on an analogia relationis,40 for in Torrance's trinitarian
relating on both the horizontal and vertical levels. 37 This disruption affects
Torrance's position is quite different from that ofRahner's at this point. For Torrance,
the "transcendental determinism" of the human being as they refuse to
there is no independent knowledge of God outside of God himself, hence no logical
listen to the Spirit of God in their ali~nated and sinful rebellion. The bridge can be walked from the experience of self-transcendence to the God revealed in
result is that only through the mediatioit of Christ can the Holy Spirit be Jesus Christ. This is in direct opposition to Rahner's basic methodology.
poured out on human beings so that they can again come to more fully A similar thought to that ofTorrance's is found in the Eastern Orthodox theologian
38 D. Staniloae's theology of the Logos. For Staniloae, the human person is created with an
reflect the imago Dei that God intended them to.
inherent orientation toward the ontological pursuit of "ultimate transcendence." This
ultimate transcendence is made known supremely in the person of Jesus Christ the Logos
37Torrance, "The Goodness and Dignity of Man in the Christian Tradition," 312-13. and it is here that theosis, or deification, takes place. There is a need for Christ written
T. F. Torrance, "The Goodness and Dignity of Man in the Christian Tradition," Modern
38 into the vety existence of men and women. See D. Staniloae, Teologia Dogmatica Ortodoxa
Theology 4 (1988) 320-21. The idea of "transcendental determinism': is. an important (Bucuresti: EIBMBOR, 1978) 2:47. See Staniloae's critique ofRahner's position in idem,
one for Torrance and for a doctrine of theosis. The drive created wlthm the human 2:14-16.
person for God is a theme that has been developed by a number of t~eologians. Rahner 39 E.M. Colyer, How To Read T. F Torrance: Understanding his Trinitarian and Scientific

spoke of a "transcendental Christology" in which men and women are ~n a :ranscendental Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVp, 2001) 178.
necessity or thirst for the absolute and the hope of a free self-commuIllcatlon on t~e ~ar~ 40 In an insightful essay on the ministry of women, Torrance further clarifies what it

of God. This led Rahner to explicate his distinctive theology of the "anonymous Chnstlan means to be created in the imago Dei, with special focus on the distinctive maleness and
and anonymous theism. femaleness inherent in the human person. In terms of "image" this is strictly a relational
According to Rahner, whenever a person is open to the mystety tha~ grounds h~man term in Scripture and thus in practice, not a physical term. The image of God does not
existence he or she is open to God himself. While the (RomiuJ. Catholic) Church IS the inhere in human nature, far less in specifically male or female nature, but it is a donum
visible sacrament of salvation, all sinners are in a sphere of grace. See K. Rahner, A New superadditum, a gift wholly contingent upon the free grace of God. T. F. Torrance, "The
Christology (London: Burns & Oats, 1980). For a survey of Rahner's position and an Ministry of Women," in The Call to Serve: Biblical and Theological Perspectives on Ministry
interaction with the theology ofT. F. Torrance see P. D. Molnar, Divine Freedom and the in Honour ofBishop Penny Jamieson, ed. D. A. Campbell (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic,
Doctrine ofthe Immanent Trinity: In Dialogue with Karl Barth and Contemporary Theology 1996) 276. From this we are not to think that human beings reflect God's uncreated
(London: T. & T. Clark, 2002) 181-96. Nature through some intrinsic analogy of being (analogia entis), but rather are destined

156 157
 Theosis Reforming Theosis

perspective, the Spirit unites us to Christ and through Christ with the maintained then many false views of divinization will be dismissed outright.
Father, and therefore, "The Spirit makes man's being open for fellowship As Torrance consistently maintains:
with God, and thereby brings his creaturely relations to their true end
and fulfilment in God, He is essentially the living Spirit who, coming By coming into man the Holy Spirit opens him out for God. But at the
from the inner communion of the Holy Trinity, creates communion very heart of this movement is the act of God in which he became man
between man and God."41 in order to take man's place, and give man a place within the communion
of the divine life. It is the act of the divine love taking the way of
substitution, and opening up the way for a corresponding act on the
Creator-Creature Distinction part of man in which he renounces himself for God's sake that the divine
love may have its way with him in self-less objectivity.44
Torrance uses the themes of objectivity and subjectivity to present a
nuanced doctrine of theosisY For Torrance, theosis or communion with Torrance understands God's presence in creation as communion, a
God is achieving creaturely objectivity as opposed to sinful subjectivity. communion in correspondence to the hypostatic union between God and
True objectivity is achieved only in the Spirit that unites the creature to hu~anity in Christ and the onto-relations that exist in the perichoretic
the humanity of the incarnate Son. un~on of t~e thr.e~ divine Persons in the one being ofGod. 45 Torrance posits
This is important to keep in mind as it guards Torrance's doctrine of an Immediate dIvIne presence in creation and creation's real participation in
theosis from any false view of the divinization of humanity by any God, however, God and humanity are never confused or mixed into one. 46
mechanical, naturalistic, or ordinary human means. 43 Participation with In this way Torrance distinguishes between a Christian doctrine of theosis
God is achieved by grace, by God and God alone. If this point can be c~~c~ive~ in. terms of koinonia and a Greek philosophical conception of
diVInIZatlOn In terms of methexis (mixture of being). He clearly affirms the
first and rejects the second. Much of Torrance's thought on the doctrine of
by grace to live in faithful response to the purpose and movement of God's love toward theosis revolves around making this distinction extremely clearY
us as his creaturely partners (analogia relationis).
41 Torrance, "The Soul and Person in Theological Perspective," 112.
44 Torrance, Theology in Reconstruction, 138.
45 As a d·Irect consequence 0 f ·
the doctrInes of the homoousion and perichoresis Torrance
42 "God does not override man but recreates, reaffirms him and stands him up before
himself as his dear child, and man does not seek to use or manipulate knowledge of God has ~eveloped what. he t~rms an onto-relational concept of the divine Persons. By onto-
for the fulfilment of his own ends in self-will and self-understanding, but loves him relatIonal Torrance ImplIes an understanding of the three divine Persons in the one God
objectively for his own sake and is so liberated from himself that he can love his neighbour ~n whi.ch t.he. ont.ic relations between them belong to what they essentially are in themselves
objectively also," Torrance, Theology in Reconstruction, 237. In theI.r dI~tInctIve .hypostases. In short, onto-relations are being-constituting-relations.
43 One false view of deification that Torrance would also rule out is noted by P. E. The diffenng relatIo.n: between the Father, Son, and Spirit belong to what they are as
Hughes, The True Image: The Origin and Destiny of Man in Christ (Grand Rapids: Father, Son, and Spmt, so the homoousial relations between the three Divine Persons
Eerdmans, 1989) 232: "The incarnation as it affects our humanity is not just one more belong to what they are in themselves as Persons and in their Communion with one
stage in an incredibly long sequence of stages from inanimate matter to biological ~nother. Tl:is onto-r.elational understanding of person defined as person-in-relationship
organization, from animality to intellectuality, and thence on to spirituality and IS als? app~Ica~le to :nter-human relations, but in a created way reflecting the uncreated
divinization. It is the grace of God intervening to lift man out ~f/he pit which he has way 12 w.hlc~:t applIes to the Trinitarian relations in God. See the discussion of "person"
dug for himself and to restore him to the wholeness of his creation, so that once again he and belllg 111 Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God: One Being Three Persons
may function freely in accordance with the purpose of his being and his high calling (Edinburgh:T. &T. Clark, 1996) 103-5.
46 Torrance, Theology in Reconstruction, 184.
under God .... Through the saving work of the incarnate Son the believer recovers both
the integrity of his being and also the purpose and the power and the ultimate glory that 47 He does so at times by distinguishing between a Roman Catholic doctrine of the

belong to his constitution in the image of God." church and grace from that of a Reformed perspective. See ibid., 169-91.

158 159
 Theosis
Reforming Theosis
Torrance sees the idea of intimate communion developed masterfully
between the human person and God that "posits us as subjects over against
in the theology of the Nicene Fathers and again in the Reformation.
the divine Subject."51 This is an onto-relational view of human persons
Torrance's positing of a dialogical relation between creation and God asserts
partaking in the divine nature.
a personal interaction which inclu~e~ a clea: distinct.io.n a~d close u~~on
As with much of Eastern Orthodox theology, for Torrance the goal of
in reciprocity. It was the Hellemstlc notlOn of d1vme 1mmutab1lIty,
theosis is not to become "God" or to become "gods." It is not in any
according to Torrance, that created a wedge between God and creation
literal sense a matter of transcending the confines of the human nature
necessitating a realm of intermediation which was then conceptualized in
but is, rather, the process and means by which the human can achieve
the formation of causes. Torrance sees in the Chalcedonian notion of
true human personhood. Theosis does not do away with our creatureliness;
participation (hypostatic union) an assertion of a direct com.munion
rather, it fulfils it. In similar vein the Eastern Orthodox theologian Staniloae
without mediating causes. This same idea is presented or recla1med by
suggests that theosis cannot be taken literally. One cannot literally become
Calvin's conclusion that "all nature, and the gifts and endowments of
God since that would be as absurd as if we were to state that God is a
man, depend for their being upon the immed.iate agen~y of God th~ough
creature. 52 The "transcendental determination" implanted within each
His Spirit and His Word."48 Clearly Torrance 1S advocatmg a reformmg of
human person and realized by those united to Christ Jesus is that men
theosis which, as a Reformed theology, questions the very basis of the
and women will be able to be and do what they were created to be and
essentia-energeia schema of Palamite theology. Communion for Torrance
do-be mirrors of God back to God, in Christ by the Holy Spirit. This is
acts as a cognate for theosis. Accordingly,
the goal of humanity summarized by the term theosis within the patristic
writers, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Torrance's own Reformed theology.
by encountering us as personal Being God at once brings us into a
According to Torrance theosis is prescriptive of a relation between
personal relation with himself and prevents us from including him within
God and creation which consistently holds together two distinct aspects
our own subjectivity, ,for it is as the Thou, the transcendent Other, that
of this relationship: first; the complete distinction between Creator and
he meets us and makes himself known. He both distinguishes himself
creature is maintained with vigorous lucidity; second, theosis represents a
from us as independent Reality over against us, and indeed as Lord God
dynamic relationship between God and humanity in which a real-even,
of our very being, and at the same time posits and upholds us before
according to Torrance, an ontological (onto-relational)-participation of
him as persons in relations of mutuality and freedom with God and
the creature in God is made possible inherently in the creation of humanity
with one another. 49
in the imago Dei. By means of the language of participation in the divine
life, union, and communion with God, a defense of the transcendence of
It is clear that Torrance does not confuse the distinction between God
God and the humanizing of persons we have entered the specific realm of
and creation. Rather, communion has the idea of encounter between two
theosis language. Torrance deals with each of these specific points and is
distinct but not separate entities. To maintain the strongly personalist
thus outlining a doctrine of theosis, even if the technical vocabulary is
force of this communion between God and human beings Torrance adopts
used only sparingly.
Calvin's stress on the importance of the Holy Spirit as "God's creative
personal presence."50 What the Spirit creates is a real personal relation
51 Ibid., 97. R. SpjuthsummarisesTorrance's "communion theology" thus: "Communion
" (
as personal interaction means that God can be present as transcendent without being
48 T. F. Torrance, Calvin's Doctrine 0/Man (London: Lutterworrh, 1949) 63.
49 T. F. Torrance, Reality and Scientific Theology (Edinburgh: Scottish Academic, 1985) confused with creation; 'union without mixture,'" R. Spjuth, Creation, Contingency and
179. Divine Presence: In the Theologies o/Thomas F Torrance and Eberhard}iingel (Lund: Lund
Torrance, Theology in Reconstruction, 96-97.
50
University Press, 1995) 36-37.
52 See Bartos, Deification in Eastern Orthodoxy, 145.

160
161
 Theosis Reforming Theosis
Reconciling Exchange "reconciling exchange," an "atoning exchange," a "sweet exchange," or
"atoning propitiation," Christ takes what is his and gives it to fallen
Of signal importance to Torrance's theology is the integral link between humanity and takes what is ours and heals, restores, forgives, and judges
Christology and soteriology or incarnation and atonement. 53 Those writers it within his own being and lifeY The language of "exchange" along with
theologians, and preachers who, according to Torrance, can hold the worl~ the concepts employed to present the idea, its historical origins and
and person of Christ together, while clearly developing the organic unity development, and the applications Torrance derives from it are all evidence
of the two, will be standing on solid biblical and historical ground.54 that Torrance is committed to a highly stylized doctrine of theosis which
Torrance takes this solid and "high" ground in his own theology by making forms a leitmotifrunning throughout his soteriology.
the incarnation the central feature of his soteriology.55 The centerpiece of When applied to human persons the atoning or "sweet exchange"
Torrance's soteriology is the concept of "exchange" which he employs that occurred in the person of the incarnate Son takes on the character of
countless times throughout his theological oeuvre. 56 By means of a a "soteriological exchange." Torrance appeals to Gregory Nazianzen to
speak on his behalf when he writes:
53 See a concise summary of his position in T. F. Torrance, Preaching Christ Today (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994) 41-71. W Pannenberg,jesus-GodandMan, trs. L. L. Wilkins
Let us become like Christ, since Christ became like us. Let us become
and D. A. Priebe, (London: SCM, 1968) 38-49 surveys a number of soteriological
models to highlight the danger of allowing our subjective views of soteriology to dictate divine for his sake, since he for ours became man. He assumed the
our Christo logy. Viewing the "work" as paramount risks reducing the person of Christ worst that he might give us the better; he became poor that we through
to a mere symbol of reconciliation. A doctrine of the person of Christ separate from his his poverty might be rich; he took upon himself the form of a servant
work would lead eventually to the question whether this work could not have been that we might be exalted; he was tempted that we might conquer; he
accomplished by another agent. C£, K. Barth, Church Dogmatics. 4 vols (Edinburgh: T.
&T. Clark, 1956-75) lVII, 127£ was dishonoured that he might glorifY us; he ascended that he might
54 See for instance the criteria outlined in K. Rahner, Theological Investigations. Volume draw us to himself, who were lying low in the fall of sin. Let us give all,
17:Jesus, Man and the Church, tr. M. Kohl (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1981) offer all, to him who gave himself a ransom and reconciliation for US. 58
17.28-31.
55 Th' .
IS IS one 0 f th e more Important
. contributions Torrance has made to contemporary To this Torrance adds: "this atoning exchange then, embraces the whole
theology, his articulation of the saving significance of the incarnation. See G. Pratz,
"The Relationship Between Incarnation and Atonement in the Theology of Thomas F.
relationship between Christ and ourselves."59 In a "saving interchange"
Torrance," Journalfor Christian Theological Research 3/2 (1998) http://apu.edu/ ~CTRFI Christ worked out our reconciliation within the saving economy of the
articles/1998_articles/pratz.html. C£ T. F. Torrance, "The Christ Who Loves Me," in incarnation, and in the ontological depths of the humanity which he made
A Passion for Christ: Vision that Ignites Ministry, eds. G. Dawson and J. Stein (Edinburgh: his own, and now, by participating in his humanity, we too can be lifted
Handsel, 1999) 10. This is also one of the most highly contested areas of Torrance's
theology. See for instance R. A. Muller, "The Barth Legacy: New Athanasius or Origen faith, with the dynamics of reconciling exchange at its heart," J. H.-K. Yeung, Being and
Redivivus? A Response to T. F. Torrance," Thomist 54 (1990) 673-704. Knowing: An Examination ofT F. Torrance's C"'hristological Science, Jian Dao Dissertation
56 Torrance repeatedly introduces this theme into his theology at key points, and uses 2 Series 3, Theology and Culture 1 (Hong Kong: China Alliance, 1996) 205.
Cor 8:9 as a key text: "You know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was 57 Torrance identifies this "wonderful exchange" with certain elements ofIrenaeus' doctrine
rich, yet for your sakes became poor, that you through his poverty might be rich." Here of recapitulation: Irenaeus, Adv. Haer., 5. praef, "Out of his measureless love our Lord
we find the doctrine of the6sis explicitly dealt with, right at thy lteart of Torrance's Jesus Christ has become what we are in order to mal(e us what he is himself," cited in T.
theology. A failure to understand this aspect ofTorrance's theology is a failure to understand F. Torrance, The Trinitarian Faith: The Evangelical Theology ofthe Ancient Catholic Church
any of it. The doctrine of the6sis thus provides a window into the centre of Torrance's (1988. Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1995) 156, 179; and Calvin's mirifica commutatio in
soteriology. See T. F. Torrance, Preaching Christ Today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994) Institutes, 4.17.2.
32-34; Theology in Reconciliation, 167. As Yeung so rightly noted, "in this way a set of 58 Torrance, The Trinitarian Faith, 181. Cf., Gregory Nazianzus, Or. 1.5.
intrinsic relations between God, Christ and humanity becomes the main pattern of the 59 Ibid. See our comments on Calvin on the third page of this article.

162 163
 Theosis Reforming Theosis

up to the immediate presence of the Father in Christ through the Spirit. Because incarnation and atonement are intimately linked in the one
In this way Torrance presents his Reformed doctrine of theosis. person of the Mediator then his entire life is one of atoning reconciliation,
Torrance is insistent that, against his reading of certain tendencies of from c~nception t~ the cross. We see this in Torrance's understanding of
scholastic Protestantism, justification is not simply a declaratory act, but the active and paSSIve obedience of Christ and how they are distinct but
an actualisation of what is declared. Justification has to do with forgiveness, separate so that we can and must speak of the active obedience as actio
and when forgiven, sinners are forgiven. 60 Accordingly, "forgiveness" is passiva and the passive obedience as passio activa. It is on the basis of the
not just a word of pardon but a reality translated into our existence by unity between the active and passive obedience of Christ that Torrance
crucifixion and resurrection, by judgment and recreation. It means that con~end~ that in our justification "we have imputed to us not only the
the sinner is now given a right standing before God and is hol y- passl~e nghteousness of Christ in which he satisfied for our sins in suffering
"justified."61 Torrance suggests precisely that the believer is now holy the Judgement of God in his death on the Cross, but the active
(hagios, iustus) in Christ. In stressing the "in Christ" dimension Torrance righteousness of Christ in which he positively fulfilled the Father's holy
is constructing the very "paradigm shift" which Trevor Hart calls for when will in an obedient life."65 The only correct conclusion for Torrance
he states: "What would seem to be required ... is for Western theology to therefo~e is that justification cannot simply refer to the non-imputation
undergo a 'paradigm shift,' to leave behind the outlook which has been ?f o~r SI~S. through the pardon of Christ, but also to the positive sharing
predominant ever since the writings ofTertullian, and to seek to recapture III hIS dIvllle-human righteousness. Sanctification is correlative with

the missing dimension in our soteriology, namely the person of the Saviour justification: to receive one is to receive the other.
himself."62 Torrance attempts to do just this partly by means of reforming Through the appeal to justification as involving both declaration and
66
theosis. deification Torrance anticipates the move within Lutheran scholarship
"It is an outstanding characteristic of all the documents of the Scottish to see Luther's doctrine of justification as more than a declaratory "legal
Reformation," writes Torrance" "that a place of centrality is given to the fiction," but as actually involving the making righteous of the sinner
union of God and Man in ChrIst, and therefore our 'blessed conjunction' throug~ deificati?n. Like Torrance, Luther does not separate the person
or 'society' or 'fraternity' with Christ. That union with Christ lies at the of Ch~lst from hIS work. Rather, Christ himself, both his person and his
heart of our righteousness in him, for it is through that union that we ~ork, I~ t~e ground of Christian righteousness as the believer participates
actually participate in his holy life."63 It is this participation or union with m the dlvllle nature through Christ. As we have already noted, this became
God which makes us truly holy, not just legally so. "Justification is not a hallmark of Luther's own theology: Christ is really present in the faith of
only the forgiveness of sins, but the bestowal of a positive righteousness the Christian (in ipsa fide Christus adest).
that derives from beyond us, and which we have through union with In a return to the theology ofAthanasius, Torrance recalls the threefold
Christ."64 disti~ction i~ unio~ and communion of which patristic theology speaks
and III so domg clanfies his own doctrine of theosis. There is first of all a
60 Torrance uses the healing of the paralytic in Mark 2.1-12 (pars) to bear this out. See T. co~~ubsta~tial communion between the Father and the Son in the Holy
F. Torrance, Space, Time and Resurrection (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1998) 62. Sp~rlt who IS the love that God is. In the second place, there is the hypostatic
61 Ibid., 6l. umon between the divine and human natures in the one Person of Christ
62 T.A. Hart, "Humankind in Christ and Christ in Humankind:.salvation as Participation which takes place through the operation of the Holy Spirit who is the love
in Our Substitute in the Theology ofJohn Calvin," Scottish Journal o/Theology 42 (1989)
70.
63 T. F. Torrance, "Justification: Its Radical Nature and Place in Reformed Doctrine and
65 Ibid., 155.
Life," in Theology in Reconstruction, 15l. See the useful discussion of this in B. D. Marshall, "Justification as Declaration and
66

64 Ibid., 151-52. Deification," Internationaljournalo/Systematic Theology 4 (2002) 3-28.

164 165
 Reforming Theosis
Theosis
This is an emphatic rejection of any reading of the doctrine of theosis
of God. The third feature is the communion or koinonia of the Spirit who
which arg~es that the human is swallowed up by the divine, a charge
is mediated to us from the Father through the Son, and who is the love of
often unfaIrly leveled at an Eastern Orthodox presentation of the tradition.
God poured into our hearts. In light of this three-fold distinction Torrance
!~eosi~ is the work of the Triune God in making human persons
maintains, "It is in virtue of our union with Christ by the power of the
partICIpate m or partake of the divine nature, a participation in the Triune
Son that in and through him we are made to partake of the very Love
communion or perichoresis. Through being united to Jesus Christ the God-
which God himself is, and are thus partakers of the divine nature."6? Here
man, ~e are unite~ to ~is divinized humanity and through that relationship
the technical language and the citation of 2 Pet 1:4 puts us in no doubt
we ~nJoy fell.owshlp wIth God. Torrance has written that this is the goal of
that Torrance is again advocating a nuanced doctrine of theosis by which,
the mcarnatlOn, that we may be gathered up in Christ Jesus and included
through Christ, the human person is lifted up to participate in the Triune
in his own self-presentation before the Father, and in that relationship
communion in Christ by the Holy Spirit. This doctrine is again seen to
partake of t~e divi~e natureJo But importantly, as Torrance acknowledges,
be a central component within Torrance's soteriology, here acting as the
the staggenng thmg about this is that the exaltation of human nature
heart of his doctrine of reconciliation in the midst of his ordo salutis.
into the life of God does not mean the disappearance of man or the
swallowing up of human and creaturely being in the finite ocean of the
divine b~ing, but rat~er that human nature, remaining creaturely and
Conclusion huma~, IS yet exalted m Christ to share in God's life and glory."?l
It IS dear that Torrance, as one example of an influential Reformed
For much of Western theology the concept of theosis creates unease and
thinker, has articulated a vision of theosis that is at once deeply respectful
often hostile rejection as it appears to make humans into "gods." Reformed
of Eastern Orthodoxy and indelibly Reformed. While Torrance's
and Evangelical Christians in particular have been wary of accepting or even
articulation of a Reformed doctrine of theosis lacks development and is
entertaining a doctrine of theosis. Torrance is aware of this unease and while
only one of many potential entry-points for reforming theosis, it is our
his doctrine of theosis never comes remotely dose to affirming the apotheosis
hope that further reflection on theology of this nature, focused on such a
of humanity, or the divinization of humans, he does speak of the "danger of
central theme as theosis, will result in further truly ecumenical works
vertigo" that can overwhelm some people when they contemplate being
which contribute to the healing and rapprochement of the three streams
exalted in Christ to partake of the divine nature (theosis).68 The vertigo of
of the Great Tradition.72
which Torrance speaks is the kind of mysticism or pantheism which identifies
soli Deo gloria
human being with the Divine Being. Torrance argues that this is the exact
antithesis of the Christian Gospel. This is important to note for it shows the
lengths to which Torrance will go in dearly stating what he does and does
not mean by the adoption of theotic doctrine. "The hypostatic union of the
divine and human natures in Jesus preserves the human and creaturely being
he took from us, and it is in and through our sharing in that human and
.
creaturely being, sanctified and blessed with him, that we share in the life of
Ii God while remaining what we are made to be, human~ and not Gods."69
I
'i 70 Ibid., 135.
II 71 Ibid.
67 Torrance, Space, Time and Resurrection, 70. 72 See for instance the important work ofV-M. Karkkainen, "The Doctrine ofTheosis

I
11.1
68 Ibid., 136-39.
69 Ibid., 136.
and its Ecumenical Potential," Sobornost 2312 (2001) 45-77. .

II
II!,I 167
166
~i
 The Comedy ofDivinization in Soloviev
English. 3 She documents how effectively Soloviev uses humor to convey
the most serious message. 4
I will focus on the first two meanings of "comedy," both of which
involve some recognition of the foolishness and pain of the earthly level
of existence, one of which contrasts this level with an anticipated level
where good always triumphs, the other of which delights in exposing
human folly and greed. One produces a laugh that is understanding and
optimistic; the other produces a laugh that is either bittersweet (if it has
some anticipation of the higher level) or bitter (if it does not).
Triumphant comedy is seen in Soloviev's insight that "There is no life
situation, even if arising according to our own fault, out of which it would
not be possible to come out in a dignified way with good will."5 Of course,
The Comedy of Divinization this requires the willing cooperation of the person, and such cooperation is
an essential ingredient in Soloviev's concept of spiritual triumph. Soloviev's
in Soloviev article on the motives that led Pushkin into his fatal duel, is comedic, in
that it shows that Pushkin learned his lesson, learned that he had been
Stephen Finlan foolish to give in to rage and vanity. At the last moment, after already being
wounded, Pushkin chose a Christian response, and commanded his seconds
not to seek revenge against the duel's victor. 6 In his three days of dying from
I understand comedy to have three common meanings: his wounds, the rage that had filled him disappeared, and he was finally
liberated, Soloviev says, "from the captivity of passion."? Given his final
• a literary genre featuring triumphant outcomes; the opposite of tragedy; enlightenment, and his not having to live with the burden of having killed
• a literary style utilized in exposing the folly, immaturity, or baseness someone out of rage and vanity, Pushkin's death was really a triumph, and
of much human behavior, communicated through irony, satire, his fate is better described as providence. s This is truly a comedic, that is a
exaggeration, and sarcasm; spiritually triumphant, interpretation. Pushkin came finally to realize that
• an artistic genre where humor dominates, although a serious
message is possible. l 3I will refer to iVtzr, Progress, and the End o/History: Three Conversations Including a Short
Story o/the Anti-Christ, tr. A. Bakshy, rev. Thomas R. Beyer, Jr. (Hudson, N. Y.: Lindisfarne,
1990). The original edition of Bakshy's translation was called Three Conversations
Of course, the three meanings often overlap. Kornblatt ably shows Concerning iVtzr, Progress, and the End 0/History, Including a Short Tale 0/ the Antichrist.
the presence of the last two meanings in Soloviev's final book, Three There is also the Constable and Co. edition of 1915, entitled iVtzr and Christianity .from
Conversations,2 which has been published under three different titles in the Russian Point o/View-Three Conversations by Vladimir Solovyof.
4 Kornblatt, "Soloviev on Salvation," 73, 83-84.
1 The Random House Dictionary o/the English Language (Ed. Je~ Stein [New York, 1967] 5 Vladimir Soloviev, "The Fate of Pushkin," from The Heart 0/Reality: Essays on Beauty,
294) seems to combine my meanings 1 and 3: "light and humorous ... with triumph Love and Ethics, tr. Vladimir Wozniuk (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press,
over adverse circumstances, resulting in a successful or happy conclusion." 2000) 164.
2 Judith Kornblatt, "Soloviev on Salvation: The Story of the 'Short Story of the Antichrist,'"
6 Soloviev, "Fate of Push kin," 166.
in Russian Religious Thought, eds. Judith Kornblatr and Richard F. Gustafson (Madison: 7 Ibid., 165.
University of Wisconsin Press, 1996) 68-87. 8 Ibid., 170.

168 169
 Theosis The Comedy ofDivinization in Soloviev

"service to the muse does not tolerate vanity," and that "before it can be Divinization and Comedy
pleasant, beauty must be worthy. "9 From the spiritual viewpoint, this insight
is a great triumph, although, from the earthly viewpoint, it is sad to see the To e~~la!n c.omedy in Soloviev, it is necessary to sketch out his philosophy
realization only coming on the deathbed. But if the Christian teaching of of dl~mIZat10n, .however inadequate our sketch may be. Soloviev gave
an afterlife is true, then the sadness will itself be absorbed into the triumph, new Me to the Important orthodox (not just "Orthodox") doctrine of
and the triumph itself consists in spiritual progress. theosis, giving it a particular emphasis on repair, reconciliation, and
In one place, Soloviev focuses on the second meaning of comedy, which harmonization. Theosis was to be understood philosophically and ethically,
I gave above. He sees comedy as the expose of human contentment with more than mystically (as with the Eastern Orthodox tradition). Divinization
selfish and ignoble existence; he "defin [es] comedy as a negative presentiment for Soloviev does not mean monastic self-cultivation, but human
of life's beauty through the typical portrayal of anti-ideal reality in its participation in the divine project of transforming persons, institutions,
complacency."10 He sees this approach to be particularly appropriate to poetty, society, and even the physical world.
whose "main subject ... is the moral and social life of humanity, infinitely The key to deification or Divine Humanity is voluntary human
far from the realization of its ideal. "11 The classical (my first) meaning of the cooperation in the divine plan. 15 Soloviev does not envision passive human
word "comedy" also applies; God's project will ultimately unfold as a stoty acceptance of divine manipulation, nor proud and self-directed rationalism,
of triumphant resolution and universal unification. but rational and sincere cooperation.
Of course, Soloviev has the biblical tradition upon which to draw. What Soloviev seems to find most interesting is reconciliation and
The fundamental biblical comic sources are the Psalms and the Gospels. harmoniza~ion, helping God to achieve, "a universal restoration of all things
Even the psalm that Jesus recited while on the cross, and which begins so . ... Mankmd has to co-operate with God in this work, for otherwise there
dismally, ends in triumph: "he did not hide his face from me, but heard cannot be a complete oneing of God with his creatures and a full expression
when I cried .... May your hearts live forever" (Ps 22:24, 26). And the of the meaning of existence . . . . a materialization of spirit and
Gospels, although so full of tragedy, are all triumphant at the end. spiritualization of matter-a new union of these two elements."16 Theosis
Triumph, in Soloviev, combines biblical and philosophical principles. involves a literal transformation of the human body (more on this later),
There is not only a reversal of isolation and selfishness, but of cosmic Chaos and ~lso a real reconciliation between religions, which he sees as entirely
as well. God "must distinguish His perfect totality from the chaotic plurality pOSSible, at least for the estranged branches of Christianity, and for Judaism
.... He must be able to embrace in His unity the opposite principle itself. as well. In a move that horrified many of his contemporaries, Soloviev
... with a grace penetrating and transforming it and so drawing it back to says that Russia must learn to recognize the truths of the Catholics and
17
unity."12 This philosophic idea finds a biblical parallel, where "God's will ... Jews. By affirming this unprecedented openness to other religions,
knows no envy.... 'I have loved thee with an everlasting 10ve."'13 There is a Soloviev i~, in fact, criticizing his friend Dostoevsky, though trying his
"new divine-human covenant, based upon the inner law oflove."14 best to pamt the latter as already knowing all these things. 18
Thus, there is a strong social side to theosis in Soloviev. He is decidedly
9 Ibid., 155. shy about developing the repercussions of such participation for the
10 Soloviev, "The Universal Meaning of Art," from The Heart o/Reality, 78.
11 Ibid., 79-80. ' ( 15 Kornblatt, "Soloviev on Salvation," 68.
12 Soloviev, Russia and the Universal Church (London: Geoffrey Bless, 1948) 158. 16 V1adimir Soloviev (here spelled Solovyev), God, Man and the Church: The Spiritual
13 Soloviev is quotingJer 31 :3; Lectures on Divine Humanity, rev., ed. Boris Jakim (Hudson, Foundations o/Life, tr. Donald Attwater (London: James Clarke, 1938) 134.
N.Y.: Lindisfarne, 1995) 70. 17 Judith Deutsch Kor~blatt and Gary Rosenshield, "Vladimir Soloviev: Confronting

14 Ibid., 71. In support, he cites Jer 31:31-34 and Isaiah chapters 2,11, and 56. Dostoevsky on the JeWish and Christian Questions," JAAR 68 (2000) 78.
18 Kornblatt and Rosenshield, "Vladimir Soloviev: Confronting," 73-74, 79.

170 171
 Theosis The Comedy ofDivinization in Soloviev
individual. This resistance to the temptations of spiritual egotism is one The threefold Deity is reflected in the threefold reality of human
of the essentials of the divinizing process: a divinizing person needs to be experience in doing, thinking, and feeling; or will, representation (thought),
aware of the comical (that is, absurd) pretensions of human pride. In his and feeling. These three realms of experience are illuminated, respectively,
"Story of the Antichrist," he is "poking fun at himself," quoting his own by divine goodness, truth, and beauty, which are promulgated by,
earlier poetry and attributing it to the "all-wise" monk Pansofius. 19 Soloviev respectively, the Father, Son, and Spirit. 24
is maturely aware of the danger of self-centered religious imagination, God is "that which is," and we find the Trinity again summarized in
and the Anti-Christ figure in his "story" embodies exactly this. He is a this clause: "That which is thus wills its essence or content, represents it,
charming, humanistic, persuasive writer20 who has allowed his spiritual and feels it."25 The Son represents or expresses the Father, while the Spirit
powers to go to his head: probably Soloviev's imaginative picture of what echoes, fulfills, and feels what has been willed and expressed. Of course,
he would look like if he had gone a certain direction. Soloviev knows that will, thought, and feeling overlap and intertwine in
Kornblatt is correct to insist that this is not a repudiation of his earlier human experience-and also in divine experience. He is not saying that
belief; it is self-parody but not self-negation, since the key idea of theosis- each person of the Trinity embodies one of these modes in complete
God making use of human cooperation-is still centraP1 Despite the separation from the others, but that one manifests "as preeminently willing,"
humor, though, Soloviev is issuing a severe warning about how a popular one "as preeminently representing," and one "as preeminently feeling."26
but false theosis can temporarily delay the coming of real theosis. Soloviev God, or "the all,"27 has a different form of expression in each of the
has not lost his dream, but has foreseen that a nightmare would assault three modes or persons: as (predominantly) goodness, truth, or beauty.28
that dream. A monstrous caricature of spiritual unity will precede the Love, or unity, which is the same thing, underlies each of these. Goodness
emergence of real unity. is love in essence, Truth is love in ideality, beauty is love in outward reality:
"beauty is also love .... as manifested or made available to the senses."29
Love's cycle, then, is to be willed, to be ideally conceived, and to be really
Trinitarianism experienced. Tying this together is the insight that divinity is unity.
Faith and creativity are primarily (though not exclusively) identified
Soloviev's ideas are Trinitarian. Spiritual realities will always reflect the with the latter realm, the realm of feeling. 30 This means that he saw faith
Trinitarian originating pattern. In deification, God's purpose finds largely as an intuitive response to inward spiritual gifts. The third level
embodiment in the incarnation of the Son, and comes to fruition socially "may, to distinguish it from the first, be called soul. ... The soul [is] the
in the incarnation of the Spirit in the lives of believers. In both humans and spirit in the process of being realized."31 Despite being highly theoretical,
in nature, there is an innate tendency toward reunification with the source, Soloviev's philosophy calls most of all for vigorous action.
a "tendency toward the incarnation of Divinity in the world."22 The work
of Christ and of the church is "the restoration of mankind and the universe 24 Robert Slesinski, "V S. Soloviev's Unfinished Project of Free Theurgy," in Diakonia
. . . in which all creation becomes a faithful likeness of the Godhead."23 29 (1996) 139 .
25 Soloviev, Lectures on Divine, 97.
26 Ibid., 100.
19Kornblatt, "Soloviev on Salvation," 76-77. 27 Ibid., 99.
20Soloviev, war, Progress, 165, 169. Anti-Christ writes of "distributive justice," of "universal 28 Ibid., 100.
peace and prosperity," and "the equality of universal satiety";,(h~ is a vegetarian (166, 29 Ibid., 103.
169, 173). 30 Slesinski, "Unfinished Project," 137-38, where he unfairly criticizes Soloviev for
21 Kornblatt, "Soloviev on Salvation," 70. restricting creativity to the realm of feeling, though noting on the next page that Soloviev
22 Soloviev, Lectures on Divine, 136. could also link creativity with the will ("the creative act of the will," 139).
23 Soloviev, God, Man, 168. 31 Soloviev, Lectures on Divine, 101.

172 173
 Theosis The Comedy ofDivinization in Soloviev
Sophiology alchemy.37 Linked with alchemy is Hermeticism, a Gnostic philosophy,
which transmits the idea that Sophia descended to earth, but was rejected
Soloviev's Christology and theosis can be quite complicated. He speaks of by people. 38 Add to this some notions of the Eternal Feminine that Soloviev
the unity that produces, and the unity that is produced;32 the former is the drew from Dante and Petrarch,39 Soloviev's studies ofJewish Kabala (which
Word or Logos, the latter is the Sophia; and Christ "is both Logos and has a divine Sophia40 ), and his interest in mystics such as Bohme,41
Sophia."33 Here he attempts to combine doctrine with philosophy: the Swedenborg, and Blavatsky (although he ended up repudiating the latter) ,42
teaching that Christ is fully divine and fully human, with the philosophic and one gets the picture of how thoroughly syncretistic his early Sophiology
notion that spirituality arises from potentials, and is achieved in actuals. was.
Sophia is "the principle of humanity .... ideal or perfect humanity"34- Yet he is able to subject this exotic cauldron of influences to a
in potential; it still needs to be actualized through human choice. Christianizing synthesis. It hardly matters what he reads, he assimilates
. This is both Chalcedonian and Hegelian. Too many commentators everything to his own transformative vision, and Christ is a focal point of
dismiss Soloviev with the label "Hegelian." But why should not philosophic that vision. In at least two of his books, he insists that the essence of
models be used to fill out theological truth, to give it greater explanatory Christianity "is uniquely and exclusively Christ"-it is the incarnation of
power? After all, this is also what happened at Nicaea and Chalcedon. deity in/as Jesus. He cites Jesus' "reference to Himself as living incarnate
Philosophic concepts that were not available to Peter and Paul were used truth" in John 14:6.43 Christ can do this because he embodies the threefold
to fill out the apostolic teaching. Such new expressions must, of course, unity mentioned earlier.
be judged by their moral worth, intellectual coherence, and beauty of He takes the pantheism of ancient Stoic thought and Christianizes it
exposition. It is only fitting that Soloviev should be subjected to a triune in such statements as this: "the world-soul feels a vague but profound
test. desire for unity. By this desire it attracts the action of the Word."44 The
It is true that Soloviev's Sophiology draws upon a colorful and eclectic world-soul, the sum of "all living entities," can choose to reject the divine
range of mysticism and philosophy. In his young manhood he looked guidance, or to become "the body of Christ, Sophia,"45 by allowing "the
deeply into medieval and Platonic mysticism, Hermeticism, Gnosticisn:' incarnation of the divine Idea"46 in it. Christ's divine humanity begins to
theosophy,35 and even the occult, looking into many concepts of Sophla be mirrored in humanity when the world-soul grows up into Sophia, when
or other feminine images of the divine. He picks up on popular Christian its unconscious striving for unity becomes a mature loyalty to the real
reverence for Sophia and for Mary, which had its own roots in Jewish source of unity. All of this depends upon humanity fulfilling its divine
philosophic speculation about Wisdom as God's partner.in creation (b~se.d goal:
on Prov 3:19; 8:22-31 and Wis 7:25-8:1), but also m the Hellemstlc
theology of the Isis cuit,36 which had an all-embracing mother figure.
Soloviev also draws upon the alchemical tradition "in which Mary- 37 Ibid., 202, 205, 210.
38 Ibid., 202 and n. 19.
Sophia was the Great Mother" and was considered the discoverer of
39 Whom Soloviev translated; ibid., 203.
40 Ibid., 202, 204.

41 Ibid., 200, 205, 235, 236 11.132.

32 Ibid., 107. This may borrow from Stoicism's idea of active re~~n and passive matter. 42 Ibid., 211.

33 Ibid., 108. 43 Soloviev, Lectures on Divine, 105; c£ idem, "what we value most in Christianity is
34 Ibid., 113. Christ himself," a comment that greatly upsets the Ami-Christ in war, Progress, 183-84.
35 Kristi A. Groberg, "The Feminine Occult Sophia in the Russian Religious Renaissance: 44 Soloviev, Russia, 163.
a Bibliographical Essay," in Canadian-American Slavic Studies 26 (1992) 204-6. 45 Soloviev, Lectures, 132.
36 Groberg, "Feminine Occult," 206-7. 46 Ibid. 138.

174 175
 Theosis The Comedy ofDivinization in Soloviev
As the intermediary between heaven and earth, Man was destined to be with God. The "active action of God [theourgia]" is to be a "cooperative
the universal Messiah who should save the world from chaos by uniting action of Divinity and humanity for the re-creation of the latter from the
to God and incarnating the eternal Wisdom in created forms .... Man fleshly or natural into the spiritual or divine."53 This leads to the ultimate
... was to be priest of God, king of the lower world, and prophet of goal, when the "Kingdom of God be not only above all, which it already
their absolute union: priest of God in sacrificing to Him his own is, but also in all . ... God will be all in all."54 Theosis fulfills individual,
arbitrariness, the egoism of humanityY social, and cosmic destinies.
The repercussion on the individual is an experience of spiritual
So this superman is not a Nietzschean egomaniac. But the mission of enlightenment, even a transfiguration: a recovery of one's natural and
humanity is divine. In fact, "the periphery of Divinity-is humanity."48 original connection with God. "Salvation is a restoration of unity," 55 which
is, of course, a Platonic idea, but one that goes much further than the pre-
Christian philosopher could imagine:
Following the Christ Pattern
Another principle of death abolished by the higher pathway of love is
Under Christ's direction, the believer becomes a "new spiritual man" who the contrast of the spirit to the body. In this respect as well, the issue is
unites divinity with nature in himself.49 But this is not an individualist the whole person, and the true principle of its restoration is a spiritual-
endeavor; in fact, deification is the real mission of the Church. corporeal principle.... Man can become divine only by the actual power
of an eternally existing Divinity [and by] a divinely human process. 56
The free divinization of mankind is effected when the divine mother,
the Church, is made fruitful by the action of the human power. 50 This can be described as "the Origenist restoration of all things."57 It
is a dynamic philosophy with tremendous potential, and could fill a long-
The Church is mankind deified by Christ.... to believe in mankind standing void in Western theology, which has suppressed the notion of
means only to believe in its capacity for deification, to believe in the spiritual transformation, has hammered home a sense of shame and guilt,
words of Saint Athanasius the Great, that in Christ God became man in thus diminishing the felt connection with the Divine.
order to make man God. 51 Yet we cannot deny that this side ofSoloviev's thought also lends itself
to a kind of magical spirituality, possibly influenced by the "Neoplatonic
Christian divinization follows the pattern of Christ "divinizing his view" of matter being penetrated by the active force of divinity. 58 Is Soloviev
humanity after his Divinity became man."52 The key is human cooperation taking literally the notion of the "spiritualization and divinization of the
flesh"59? Is this a kind of alchemy, a literal transformation of matter?
47 Soloviev, Russia, 179.
48 Soloviev, Lectures on Divine, 114.
49 Translating from Soloviev's collected works (Brussels) 3: 166, is Richard F. Gustafson, 53 Ibid., 39; collected works, 3:377.
"Soloviev's Doctrine of Salvation," in Russian Religious Thought, eds. Judith Kornblatt 54 Ibid., 41; collected works 3:318-19.
and Richard F. Gustafson (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996) 37. 55 Ibid., 33.

50 Soloviev, God, Man, 169-70. 56 Soloviev, "Plato's Life-Drama" XXVI, from Politics, Law, and Morality: Essays by V S.
51 Gustafson, "Doctrine," 41--42, translating from the collected•W'orks 3:222. Athanasius Soloviev, ed. and tr. Vladimir Wozniuk (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000) 248;
says this in De inc. Verbe 54. It had aldready been expressed by Irenaeus in A.H. V see also Kornblatt, "Transfigutation of Plato," 43.
preface, and would be expressed later by Gregory Nyssa in Grat. Cat. XXV and these 57 Gustafson, "Doctrine," 4l.

authors would be widely cited by later ones. 58 Ibid., 39.

52 Gustafson, "Doctrine," 37; translating from the collected works 3: 170. 59 Ibid., 38.

176 177
 Theosis The Comedy ofDivinization in Soloviev

Probably some of his remarks do envision s?me ki.nd ~f ?hysical matters in human life, for it can be done ethically or dishonestly, can be
transformation, but others seem to be metaphoncal, as m th1s mstance: motivated by religious feeling or by greed, can be backed with a love of truth
"this new flesh, spiritualized, deified, is the divine substance of the or with lazy nihilism. From the good side of these choices comes comedy, an
intuition of triumph in the face of adversity, an intuition that is based on real
Church."60
Since the church is "a real, living being growing continuously in spiritual experience of love in the centers of the personality, from whence arise
power,"61 there has to be real growth in Christian unders:anding of motivation, feeling, and reflection. True religion is inherently prophetic.
dogmatic truth, even as the great theologi~n, Gregory of N~z~anzen had Goodness is so bold as to sense that the meek will inherit the earth, despite all
explained. While arguing for the personality of ~he Holy Splflt, Grego~y evidence to the contrary. Beauty is so hopeful as to foresee a time when
had said that some Christians could not grasp 1t because they were snll knowledge of God will fill the earth, as the waters fill the sea (Isa 11 :9). And
grappling with the Son's personality and divinity. First the Father had to truth is so generous as to patiently work for the time when its divided foes tire
62 of their raging, and come to Jerusalem to be taught of God, so to speak.
be revealed, then the Son, and finally the Spirit.
Soloviev also has a concept of spiritual evolution or development, but Actually, "Isaiah and Jeremiah herald the coming revelation as the banner ...
it is not a naIve and simplistic notion of inevitable progress, as ca~ be seen to which all nations shall come.... a universalization of a positive national
in his final work. We should remember that, in his day, theolog1ans both idea, not an empty and indifferent cosmopolitanism."64
E st and West were ignoring or minimizing apocalyptic literature, while An important conclusion to be drawn from Soloviev's comedic view
S:loviev was exploring its remarkable appropriateness f~r depictin~ ~e oflife is that he is not, despite his reading tastes in his twenties, a Gnostic,
confrontation between truth and falsehood, between princ1ple and polincs, at least not in the sense of second century Gnosticism, with its paranoid
between honest religion (whether christo logical or Jewish) and a certain resentment and dread of the Creator. The fundamental instinct of comedy
kind of dishonest modernism. His story picks up on the fact that people is the goodness of the creator, and Soloviev affirms this. This illuminates
must have a Messiah, either a true one 0; a sham one (or, in the Jewish his understanding of sin and suffering. He makes an observation that
others, such as C. S. Lewis, have made, that "If ugly reality were the sole
case, a Messianic hope).
reality, then how would it be possible for man to feel the burden of this ...
to reproach and deny it?"; suffering is evidence of "the authentic power of
the ideal living within him."65 The presence of God within, the promise
Anti-Gnostic Triumph
of divinization, provides comedy with its hope. When Soloviev calls himself
The "Story of the Antichrist" rings true because we ~~ ~un~er ~or, and need, a Gnostic, he means what Clement of Alexandria means when he also
a revelation of the "Humanity of God."63 Of course dlVlillzatlon 1S a d~gerous calls himself a Gnostic: one who seeks knowledge of God.
subject, but so is love, so is marriage, so is organization, so is everythmg that What is unique in the Gospel is its affirmation of comedic triumph
overarching and even embracing the stuff of tragedy. What is unique is
6U Soloviev, God, Man, 170. . the incarnation of the Godhead (not just "a god"), making possible the
61 Soloviev, quoted by Paul Valliere, Modern Russian Theology-Bukharev, Solovzev,
Bulgakov: Orthodox Theology in a New Key (Grand Rapids: Eerdman~, 2000) 190. millions of incarnations in the lives of divinizing humans. Jesus, "the God-
62 Valliere Modern Russian Theology, 189; he cites Gregory from Chmtology of the. Later man is individual," but regenerated humanity, "divinized man, man-God,
Fathers, ed. Edward R. Hardy, Library of Christian Classics 3 (P~l~delphia: Westmmster, is necessarily oecumenical or catholic. "66 Soloviev's vision was broad enough
1954) 209-10. .
63The phrase is Valliere's translation for bogochelovechestvo (Modern Ruman Theology,
11-12), emphasizing the incarnation of the Son, God's invasion of t~e .h~man sphe~e-:; 64 Soloviev, Lectures on Divine, 73-74.
an interesting idea, whether or not his translation is better than dlvme humantty, 65 Soloviev, "Fate of Pushkin, " 153.
66 Soloviev, God, Man, 171.
which most translators prefer.

178 179
 Theosis
The Comedy ofDivinization in Soloviev
to connect individual creativity with universal harmonization. He affirms
.... Christ, as God, freely renounces the glory of God and thereby, as
the ending of separatism and the emergence of "catholicity as an inner
a human being, acquires the possibility of attaining that glory.72
perfection. "67 This process always relies upon divine guidance; if one ever
forgets this, one's spirituality becomes a caricature.
By so doing, Christ enables others to attain glory. That this is
It is such a sham spirituality that Soloviev exposes in his story of the
accomplished by God's grace is obvious (except to the egotistical person);
Antichrist. This charming writer and political leader brings about peace
what Solovievwishes to emphasize is the necessity for human cooperation:
on earth, and is made world emperor. He then seeks to be recognized as
"God acts only with and through man .... God's work has become the
the world's religious leader. He offers to preserve all the "icons and rituals,"
work of man also."73 God's whole plan would be defeated if God were to
and to establish "a world museum of Christian archaeology."68 But the
arbitrarily divinize humanity and the world. The divinization process needs
Elder John (who stands for Eastern Orthodoxy) says, "what we value most
human loyalty to be voluntary, mature, and love-motivated.
in Christianity is Christ himself .... in him dwells all the fullness of the
Godhead bodily" (Col 2:9); he then challenges the Emperor to "confess
his name." When the Emperor becomes angrily silent, the Elder John
Abbreviations
says, "Little children, it is Anti-Christ!"69 In the same vein, Pope Peter
(representing Catholicism) rejects the "ecumenical" claims of the Antichrist
A.H - Against Heresies (Irenaeus )
and anathematizes him, while Professor Pauli (representing Protestantism)
De inc. Verbe - On the Incanation ofthe Word (Athanas ius)
affirms the Elder's identification and the Pope's expulsion of "the arch
JAAR - Journal of the American Academy of Religion
deceiver. "70
Orat. Cat. - Catechetical Orations (Gregory of Nyssa)
Such a warning about false and egotistical self-theosis is a powerful
TT - Theology Today
and necessary aspect of any mature teaching. Theosis is not meant to be a
way to diminish or undermine Christology. It is Christ who revealed the
way, and who is the way. Theosis is hardly more than a by-product of
Bibliography
walking the way that he showed us. Christ is "God incarnate in humanity
.... the new spiritual Man."7l Soloviev spends much more time on ethics,
Carlson, Maria. "Gnostic Elements in the Cosmogony ofVIadimir Soloviev." In Russian
social progress, and the divinization of humanity than he does on
Religious Thought, edited by Judith Deutsch Kornblatt and Richard E Gustafson,
Christology, but his arguments in these other areas depend on recognition 49-67. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996.
of the unique divinity of Christ: Gregory of Nazianzen. "The Theological Orations." In Christology of the Later
Fathers, edited by Edward R. Hardy, 128-214. Library of Christian Classics
For there to be an actual union of Divinity with nature, a person in 3. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1954.
whom this union might take place is necessary.... Both natures are Groberg, Kristi A. "The Feminine Occult Sophia in the Russian Religious
necessary. ... In Christ ... we have an actual divine-human person ... Renaissance: a Bibliographical Essay." Canadian-American Slavic Studies 26
accomplishing the double exploit of divine and human self-renunciation (1992) 197-240.

67 Ibid., 168. " (

68 Soloviev, ~r, Progress, 181.

69 Ibid., 183-84.
Ibid., 158-6l.
72
70 Ibid., 185-86. Here I leave out the story's intense drama.
Soloviev, "On Counterfeits," from A Solovyov Anthology, ed. S. L. Frank, tr. Natalie
73
71 Soloviev, Lectures on Divine, 154-55.
Duddington (London: SCM, 1950) 47-48.

180
181
 Theosis The Comedy ofDivinization in Soloviev
Gustafson, Richard F. "Soloviev's Doctrine of Salvation." In Russian Religious . war, Progress, and the End ofHistory: Three Conversations Including a
Thought, edited by Judith Deutsch Kornblatt and Richard F. Gustafson, Short Story of the Anti-Christ. Translated by Alexander Babhy. Revised by
31-48. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996. Thomas R. Beyer, Jr. Hudson, N.Y.: Lindisfarne, 1990.
Hare, Richard. "East Moves West-The Enigma of Vladimir Soloviev." The Starr, James M. Sharers in Divine Nature: 2 Peter 1:4 in Its Hellenistic Context.
Russian Review 17 (1958) 29-40. Coniectanea Biblical NT Series 33. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2003.
Johnson, Matthew R. "Political Writings of Vladimir Solov'yev." Religion, State, Stein, Jess, editor. The Random House Dictionary of the English Language. New
and Society 30 (2002) 347-55. York: Random House, 1967.
Kornblatt, Judith Deutsch. "The Transfiguration of Plato in the Erotic Philosophy Valliere, Paul. Modern Russian Theology-Bukharev, Soloviev, Bulgakov: Orthodox
of Vladimir Solov'ev." Religion and Literature 24.2 (1992) 35-50. Theology in a New Key. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.
- - - - . "Soloviev on Salvation: The Story of the 'Short Story of the
Antichrist.'" In Russian Religious Thought, edited by Judith Deutsch Kornblatt
and Richard F. Gustafson, 68-87. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press,
1996.
Kornblatt, Judith Deutsch, and Gary Rosenshield. "Vladimir Soloviev:
Confronting Dostoevsky on the Jewish and Christian Questions." Journal
ofthe American Academy ofReligion 68 (2000) 69-98.
Lossky, Vladimir. The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. London: James
Clarke, 1957. (First published in Paris in 1944.)
Slesinski, Robert. "V S. Soloviev's Unfinished Project of Free Theurgy." Diakonia
29 (1996) 133-4l.
Soloviev, Vladimir-Some English editions spell his name Solovyev or Solovyov, but
we are using Soloviev as our standard
- - - - . God, Man and the Church: The Spiritual Foundations ofLife· Translated
by Donald Attwater. London: James Clarke, 1938.
- - - - . The Heart ofReality: Essays on Beauty, Love and Ethics. Translated by
Vladimir Wozniuk. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2000.
- - - - . Lectures on Divine Humanity. Revised and edited by Boris Jalcim,
based on the translation by Peter Zouboff and published by Dennis Dobson,
London, 1948. Hudson, New York: Lindisfarne, 1995. (From his lectures
of 1878-1881, given in various European cities.)
- - - - . The Meaning of Love. Translated by Jane Marshall. New York:
International Universities, 1947.
- - - - . "On Counterfeits." In A Solovyov Anthology. Edited by S. L. Frank.
Translated by Natalie Duddington. London: SCM, 1950.
- - - - . Politics, Law, and Morality: Essays by V. S. Soloviev. Edited and
translated by Vladimir Wozniuk. Russian Literatufe and Thought. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 2002.
- - - - . Russia and the Universal Church. London: Geoffrey Bless, 1948.

182 183
 List of Contributors

Stephen Finlan (Ph.D., Durham [U.K.]; M.Phil., Drew; M.A., Pacific

School of Religion) has published The Background and Content ofPaul's
Cultic Atonement Metaphors with Society of Biblical Literature, and
Problems with Atonement: The Origins of and Controversy about, the
Atonement Doctrine with Liturgical Press. He teaches at Seton Hall
University and is a research assistant with the Ancient Christian
Commentary on Scripture at Drew University.

Vladimir Kharlamov (M.Phil., Drew; M.Div., Southern Baptist

Theological Seminary; M.A., Odessa Theological Seminary) has several
academic articles published, teaches at Fairleigh Dickinson University,
and is working on a Ph.D. at Drew University. Kharlamov is a research
assistant with the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture at Drew.

Gregory Glazov has a D.Phil. from Oxford's Oriental Institute and has
published The 'Bridling of the Tongue' and the 'Opening of the Mouth' in
Biblical Prophecy with Sheffield Academic Press, along with numerous
articles. He taught at Oxford, and is now an Assistant Professor in Old
Testament Studies at Immaculate Conception Seminary, Seton Hall
University, South Orange, New Jersey.

Jeffrey Finch (Ph.D., Drew) has several articles published, and is in training
to be ordained a Roman Catholic priest.

Robert Puchniak is a Ph.D. candidate at Drew University.

.. (
Elena Vishnevskaya (Ph.D., Drew) teaches at Fairleigh Dickinson
University.

Myk Habets has taught Systematic Theology since 1999, and is a Ph.D.
candidate at Otago, New Zealand.

185