theosis and deification

[FireDragon76]

I thought I'd start this discussion on theosis and deification, finally. I've finished reading Pr. Jordan Cooper's work, Christification: a Lutheran Approach to Theosis.

One thing I found noteworthy in this book is that Pr. Cooper shows clearly two seperate motifs of theosis in the Christian tradition. One present in the Scriptures and the early Fathers which is focused on the work of Christ in deifying us through the incarnation, and another that is part of the Palamite tradition that seems to, in his mind, focus on deification as a result of mystical contemplation. Pr. Cooper also shows how language of deification is found in both Luther and Calvin, without going into the essence/energies distinctions that Orthodox make- Lutherans are simply able to recognize a mystical union of divine and human natures, where some of the divine attributes are communicated to human nature by grace.

Pr Cooper closes the book concluding that the Palamite approach is speculative, and in his view, not the sort of thing the Lutheran Confessions can countenance, seeming too much like the Schwarmer ("buzzing bees") heresy that promoted direct experience of the Spirit. Indeed, the Formula of Concord condemns the Schwarmer in the strongest language. This is a salient point we must contemplate as Lutherans, but I'm not sure he presents the most persuasive case, since I'm not sure Luther's Schwarmer critics were identical to the Palamites in their essential teachings.

And I'm not sure Pr. Cooper himself has an experiential understanding of Orthodox spirituality and the place of hesyschasm in the Orthodox life. Sure, he seems to have an academic understanding of Orthodox theology, but that's far different from understanding the place of apophaticism and hesychasm in Orthodx spirituality. He seems to insinuate at times that Palamite theology is merely apophatic transcendentalism, like Zen Buddhist mysticism, and I don't believe that's the case, that Orthodox believe God has promised to regenerate people apart from the sacraments, but merely through prayer and contemplation alone.

To add to the complexity, he admits in many places many points of contact between Palamism and Lutheran doctrine, particularly concerning "the hidden God" and recognizing God's transcendence in a way that is unque from the Catholic analogia entis (analogic of being). So it's hard not to think he is perhaps being needlessly polemical, and more dialogue is necessary as to whether Lutherans are free to consider the merits of hesychasm.

Pr. Cooper actually does state that Lutherans are free to engage in proscribed, rote prayers, and even use prayer beads and the Jesus Prayer. But he never states what the purpose of this sort of prayer is. Lutherans in general have a weakness in understanding the purpose of prayer and worship, and I think Pr. Cooper's silence on this point is telling. Indeed, prayer without purpose is the sort of vain thing Jesus condemned in the Sermon on the Mount.

And since we Lutherans are sola scriptura sort of folks, I have to ask what are we to make of cases such as Cornelius the Centurion or other spiritual experiences that are mediated through prayer? Pr. Cooper risks making Lutheranism sound wooden and needlessly agnostic about spiritual realities.

So it would definitely be interesting to see dialogue on this issue.

 

[Tigger45]

Subscribing noting I've read Pr Cooper's book 'Christification: A Lutheran Approach to Theosis'

 

[ArmyMatt]

well, the mystical contemplation doesn't begin with Palamas. read the dialogue between St Justin Martyr and Trypho. so Palamas isn't speculative at all.

 

[FireDragon76]

well, the mystical contemplation doesn't begin with Palamas. read the dialogue between St Justin Martyr and Trypho. so Palamas isn't speculative at all.

I'll have to read that dialogue. He does cover some of it in his book, but I don't recall him discussing contemplation as an aspect of deification in Justin Martyr's dialogue, at least not contemplation as wordless mysticism.

Part of the issue is that many Lutherans are effectively cessationists in regard to many of the charismata of the Spirit. Even though there are Lutheran churches that are almost Pentecostal in their spirituality, such as in Africa among the Mekane Yesus Church in Ethiopia, where prayer for healing and exorcism is a normal part of church life. Indeed, the founders of this church rejected much of what they saw as the dualism of western Christianity, and instead focus on a "whole person" view of salvation.

I couldn't help but think there is nothing speculative for the Orthodox about the transfiguration of Seraphim of Sarov, where he held Motovilov's hand while his face became as bright as the sun, and Motovilov was strangely warmed in the middle of a Russian winter. Neo-Platonic metaphysics aside, there's nothing speculative about that type of spirituality. Pr. Cooper's perspective is rooted more in a particular worldview, where the Bible is merely a sacramental relic of the apostolic age. No doubt this was heavily shaped by Luther's sense of apocalypticism and living in the end times, but I believe it's also filtered through rationalism and intellectualism.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

...
Pr Cooper closes the book concluding that the Palamite approach is speculative, and in his view, not the sort of thing the Lutheran Confessions can countenance, seeming too much like the Schwarmer ("buzzing bees") heresy that promoted direct experience of the Spirit. ....

More like ostrich theology

 

[~Anastasia~]

Pr. Cooper risks making Lutheranism sound wooden and needlessly agnostic about spiritual realities

I haven't read the book. But very early in my explorations, I WANTED Lutheranism to be a course I could follow. I actually tried and tried to make it fit. But in the end I had to walk away because this is just the sort of impression I got from actual Lutherans, and I couldn't handle what were essentially rejections of the activity of God working in our lives.

At the time it was just a deep mistrust of the actions of the Holy Spirit, but continuing on a few years, I think it pervades all of Lutheran soteriology, resulting in what seems an insistence to discount our own roles in cooperating with grace of God as He works out our salvation.

 

[FireDragon76]

At the time it was just a deep mistrust of the actions of the Holy Spirit, but continuing on a few years, I think it pervades all of Lutheran soteriology, resulting in what seems an insistence to discount our own roles in cooperating with grace of God as He works out our salvation.

Indeed, that can be an issue, and you're more likely to find real spirituality among the more liberal mainline Lutherans that do not take such a wooden view of their religion, than among conservative Lutherans of a scholastic orientation. In Lutheranism, "Pietist" is often a dirty word, a slur almost, used to dismiss someone with a warm, personally involved spirituality. Because that's what the original Pietists like Johann Arndt were criticizing: overly polemical, wooden, cold religion. they didn't deny Lutheran doctrines per se, but the way those doctrines were used to create a wooden and stilted religious atmosphere.

 

[Tigger45]

This quick, less then five minute video overview by Pr Cooper himself might help the discussion along.

 

[FireDragon76]

I just wanted to add that Pr. Cooper is probably one of the better conservative Lutherans theologians and he's not necessarily the most emblematic of the wooden scholastic. Having a Reformed background, he really does emphasize our personal involvement in the Christian life in a balanced and healthy way (he's not Gerhard Forde, who is that kind of Lutheran that @Anastasia would probably immediately have issues with). But he's still trapped within a Protestant scholastic bubble at times, and I think his Reformed background influences his scholastic inclinations.

I think the best story about Pr. Jordan Cooper was what I read about in Pr. Nadia Bolz Weber's book, Pastrix, about how he became unlikely friends with Pr. Nadia, as an example of how God's grace leads to repentance and reconciliation in our lives, even when we come from very different perspectives. That speaks well of his character as a Christian, because some conservative Protestant Christians aren't willing to bridge that gap, drawing sharp distinctions in not only their theology but their relationships.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Just to be accurate - I didn't at all have issues with the individuals I spoke with. There were among them some of the most theologically grounded as well as some of the most compassionate persons. It was their doctrine that grieved me. But I didn't hold it against them personally, and still don't.

 

[FireDragon76]

Just to be accurate - I didn't at all have issues with the individuals I spoke with. There were among them some of the most theologically grounded as well as some of the most compassionate persons. It was their doctrine that grieved me. But I didn't hold it against them personally, and still don't.

We are Augustinian and that's pretty common among western Christians in general outside the Wesleyan or Pentecostal movements. But as I pointed out some time ago, cooperation with God in sanctification is affirmed in the Lutheran Confessions, as Jordan Cooper himself would point out. Our justification, however, is not the result of our cooperation with God, but is completely his work alone in Christ.

Our soteriology regarding election and grace is completely in keeping with the conclusions of the Council of Orange (529) and the moderate Augustinianism of St. Prosper of Aquitaine.

And last time I checked, Augustine is a respected father in your church. Sure, some Orthodox like to cast aside his theology as sub-orthodox, but I would submit that's a result of modern, polemical, and romantic theology. In Russia in the 18th and 19th centuries, Augustine was received more positively. I've even read of Russian Orthodox articulating an Augustinian notion of original sin.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I'll have to read that dialogue. He does cover some of it in his book, but I don't recall him discussing contemplation as an aspect of deification in Justin Martyr's dialogue, at least not contemplation as wordless mysticism.

Part of the issue is that many Lutherans are effectively cessationists in regard to many of the charismata of the Spirit. Even though there are Lutheran churches that are almost Pentecostal in their spirituality, such as in Africa among the Mekane Yesus Church in Ethiopia, where prayer for healing and exorcism is a normal part of church life. Indeed, the founders of this church rejected much of what they saw as the dualism of western Christianity, and instead focus on a "whole person" view of salvation.

I couldn't help but think there is nothing speculative for the Orthodox about the transfiguration of Seraphim of Sarov, where he held Motovilov's hand while his face became as bright as the sun, and Motovilov was strangely warmed in the middle of a Russian winter. Neo-Platonic metaphysics aside, there's nothing speculative about that type of spirituality. Pr. Cooper's perspective is rooted more in a particular worldview, where the Bible is merely a sacramental relic of the apostolic age. No doubt this was heavily shaped by Luther's sense of apocalypticism and living in the end times, but I believe it's also filtered through rationalism and intellectualism.

yeah, St Justin says it to Trypho right out of the gate. it sounds very much like Nyssa before Nyssa.

 

[FireDragon76]

yeah, St Justin says it to Trypho right out of the gate. it sounds very much like Nyssa before Nyssa.

How exactly does that relate to the Palamite tradition of mystical union through prayer and contemplation vs. the patristic emphasis on deification through union with Christ?

 

[ArmyMatt]

How exactly does that relate to the Palamite tradition of mystical union through prayer and contemplation vs. the patristic emphasis on deification through union with Christ?

those don't oppose. prayer and contemplation are two things that lead to deification and union with Christ. Palamas never opposed what Barlaam said would lead to union, only what Barlaam said didn't lead to union with Christ.

 

[FireDragon76]

those don't oppose. prayer and contemplation are two things that lead to deification and union with Christ. Palamas never opposed what Barlaam said would lead to union, only what Barlaam said didn't lead to union with Christ.

How does this prayer and contemplation fit with the sacramental and liturgical life of the Church? If prayer and contemplation are all good ways to achieve mystical union with God, what is the role of the sacraments?

The Lutheran concern is about what you guys would see as "prelest", or in Lutheran terms, seeking grace where God has not promised it. That we could easily become deluded into believing we are hearing God's voice or seeing some uncreated light, when in fact we are not, and the spiritual confusion that could result. Or perhaps just becoming despondent and despairing about our justification before God if the desired spiritual experiences do not happen.

This video by Pr. Finck sums up alot of the issues a Lutheran might have with mysticism in general. Of course, like many conservative Lutherans he's polemical in tone but I still think there is a lot of truth in his message.

I look forward to your comments.

 

[ArmyMatt]

How does this prayer and contemplation fit with the sacramental and liturgical life of the Church? If prayer and contemplation are all good ways to achieve mystical union with God, what is the role of the sacraments?

The Lutheran concern is about what you guys would see as "prelest", or in Lutheran terms, seeking grace where God has not promised it. That we could easily become deluded into believing we are hearing God's voice or seeing some uncreated light, when in fact we are not, and the spiritual confusion that could result. Or perhaps just becoming despondent and despairing about our justification before God if the desired spiritual experiences do not happen.

This video by Pr. Finck sums up alot of the issues a Lutheran might have with mysticism in general. Of course, like many conservative Lutherans he's polemical in tone but I still think there is a lot of truth in his message.

I look forward to your comments.

we don't separate them. we pray before, during, and after receiving them, and the sacraments equip us for pure prayer. actually, pure prayer occurs perfectly in the Liturgy.

as far as prelest goes, that is why we look to the Church and an experienced father-confessor to help avoid prelest.

and I can't watch the vid now.

 

[Noxot]

you can go one way or another and die or live. God said not to cling to an image of him but rather to himself.

 

[~Anastasia~]

you can go one way or another and die or live. God said not to cling to an image of him but rather to himself.

Hello, and welcome to St. Justin's!

I'm not sure exactly what you mean to say in the context of the discussion. You are referring to mental images as part of contemplative prayer? We expressly avoid those, but for other reasons. And of course we cling to Him.

I'm not aware of any such quote from God though. Can you provide reference for it?

 

[FireDragon76]

those don't oppose. prayer and contemplation are two things that lead to deification and union with Christ. Palamas never opposed what Barlaam said would lead to union, only what Barlaam said didn't lead to union with Christ.

OK... how exactly does prayer and contemplation lead to union with Christ? Hindus do a great deal of prayer and contemplation, after all.

Some in the early church saw suffering and martyrdom as a way of mystical union with Christ, as Pr. Cooper points out. And that makes sense. But I think the question of the nature and place of prayer and contemplation in the Christian life is something we need to explore.

It's not always clear to me how it is connected with Christ. Christ obviously prayed a great deal in his ministry, is that the sort of mystical connection you all see? One participates in divinity because God himself in Christ prayed? Perhaps that is possible, but the Neo-Platonism that Palamas borrowed from posits that nature naturally participates in divinity, and I think the concern is that Neo-Palamism is not sufficiently Christocentric.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me ...

This is not Christ-centered?

I don't quite understand how one can question that prayer and contemplation can be a part of union with God (prayer TO God, and contemplation OF God, which is not what Hindus do).

I don't mean that disrespectfully, but in following this conversation, I really don't understand that question.