Idea Of Deification Research Articles

The Specifics of the Palamite Doctrine, Its Origins, and Its Latest Reception in Russia: A Discussion with Dmitry Biriukov

ABSTRACT: Dmitry Biriukov, PhD, is a scholar of the work of the late Byzantine theologian and authoritative church teacher Gregory Palamas (1296–1359). This conversation with Dr. Biriukov is devoted to the peculiarities of Palamas's doctrine and to the reception of his legacy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, after centuries of oblivion. In the course of the discussion, the basic metaphysical scheme of Palamite theology is explained—namely, the distinction between essence and energies in God. On the one hand, the continuity of this scheme in relation to the theology of the Cappadocian fathers is traced, and, on the other hand, its novelty is revealed. The origins and parallels of the distinction between essence and energies are discussed, in particular the connection with Christology and the influence of Evagrianism on Palamas. The conversation addresses the types of divine energies in the Palamite doctrine and the question of the difference in theological languages in which the idea of deification ( theosis ) as a union of man with God is expressed. Particular attention is paid to the concept of energy and its various connotations, including those associated with its modern natural-science understanding. The philosophical dimension of the theology of Palamas, including in connection with the intellectual culture of his time, is discussed, as is the relationship between Hesychasm as a monastic practice and Palamism as a theological and philosophical doctrine. The concluding part of the conversation, dedicated to the reception of Palamism after centuries of neglect, traces the history of the study, interpretation, and actualization of the teachings of Gregory Palamas over the past two centuries, from Slavophiles to Soviet and contemporary researchers. Particular attention is paid to the so-called neo-Palamism in its various versions—both religious-philosophical and theological.

How Deification Was Rediscovered in Modern Orthodox Theology: The Contribution of Ivan Popov

AbstractIn contemporary scholarship, deification is so universally assumed to have been an abiding feature of the Eastern Orthodox tradition that it strains historical imagination to conceive of a time when the idea of deification would have been largely forgotten. This article demonstrates that the rediscovery of deification as a structurally indispensable concept of patristic thought was made by the Russian patristic scholar Ivan Popov in a trilogy of essays published in 1903‐1909. The article considers different cultural registers within which the deification motif surfaced in the nineteenth century: the Greek Philokalia and its Slavonic and Russian editions, Dostoevsky’s prophecy about the self‐divinization of humanity in revolutionary socialism, the Spiritual Diary of St. John of Krondstadt, and Vladimir Solovyov’s concept of Godmanhood. While these sources held a great potential for the theoretical development of deification, the importance of deification for Orthodox theology was not appreciated in nineteenth‐century Orthodox academic theology. The situation changed dramatically after Popov (who briefly studied with Harnack in Germany) published his essays arguing for the centrality of deification in patristic thought, providing a detailed analysis of the concept in the fourth‐century patristic authors (dwelling at length on Athanasius and the Macarian Homilies), and offering a taxonomy of the two main types of deification: realistic and idealistic. This article discusses Popov’s influence on Pavel Florensky, Sergei Epifanovich, Lev Karsavin, Georges Florovsky, Myrrha Lot‐Borodine, and Vladimir Lossky.

Eastern Church Fathers on Being Human—Dichotomy in Essence and Wholeness in Deification

The article traces the formation of Eastern Christian anthropology as a new religious and philosophical tradition within the Early Byzantine culture. The notion “Patristics” is reasoned as a corpus of ideas of the Church Fathers, both Eastern and Western. The term “Eastern Patristics” means the works by Greek-Byzantine Church Fathers, who in the theological disputes with the Western Church Fathers elaborated the Christian creed. Based on an analysis of the texts of Greek-Byzantine Church Fathers, the most important provisions of Eastern Patristics are deduced and discussed, which determined the specificity of Christian anthropology. In this context, different approaches of the Eastern Fathers to the explanation of the Old Testament thesis on the creation of man in God’s image and likeness and the justification of the duality of human essence are shown. Particular attention is paid to considering the idea of deification as overcoming the human dualism and the entire created universe, the doctrine of the Divine Logoi as God’s energies, and the potential elimination of the antinomianism of the earthly and Divine worlds. The article reflects the anthropological ideas of the pre-Nicene Church Father Irenaeus, the non-canonical early Christian work The Shepherd of Hermas, and the teachings on the man of the classical Eastern Patristics period by Athanasius of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa, and Maximus the Confessor.

Specificity of Palamite theology, its origins and later reception

A conversation with Dmitry Biryukov, Doctor of Philosophy, a researcher of the work of the late Byzantine theologian Gregory Palamas (1296–1359), is devoted to a discussion of the peculiarities of the doctrine of this authoritative church teacher, as well as the reception of his legacy in the 19th–20th centuries after centuries of oblivion. In the course of the conversation, the basic metaphysical scheme of Palamite theology is indicated — the distinction between essence and energies in God; on the one hand, the continuity of this scheme in relation to the theology of the Cappadocian Fathers is traced, and, on the other hand, its novelty is revealed; the origins and parallels of this distinction are discussed, in particular its connection with Christology, as well as the influence of Evagrianism on Palamas; the types of divine energies in the Palamite doctrine are indicated and the question of the difference in theological languages in which the idea of deification (theosis) as a union of man with God is expressed. Particular attention is paid to the concept of “energy” and its various connotations, including those associated with its modern natural science understanding. The philosophical dimension of the theology of Palamas, including in connection with the intellectual culture of his time, is discussed, as well as the relationship of hesychasm as a monastic practice and Palamism as a theological and philosophical doctrine. The concluding part of the conversation, dedicated to the reception of Palamism after centuries of oblivion, traces the history of the study, interpretation and actualization of the teachings of Gregory Palamas over the past two centuries — from Slavophiles to Soviet and contemporary researchers. Particular attention is paid to the so-called neo-Palamism in its various versions — both religious-philosophical and theological.

The Concept of Deification in Greek and Syriac

Abstract The early patristic authors dealt with the idea of deification in varying circumstances, in relation to different questions, and in more than one language. This article examines Syriac and Greek discourses and vocabularies related to deification in Early Christian and Post-Chalcedonian sources, concentrating on the Syriac tradition, which is less studied. The comparison illustrates certain similarities and differences. The most striking difference is, perhaps surprisingly, that in the Syriac tradition, the idea of deification is prevalent but specific terms to indicate it are almost never used. The incommensurability of the discourses exemplifies the conceptual difficulties at the emergence of the schisms between the Greek and Syriac speaking parts of Christendom.

Orthodoxy – the symbolic language of the drama July by Ivan Vyrypaev

Aim. The aim of the paper is to interpret and analyse Orthodox symbols through the prism of the Orthodox theology.
 Methods. The senses of the Orthodox symbolism as proposed by the artist are not always compliant with Orthodox doctrine. Therefore, in order to fully understand the sense of Ivan Vyrypaev’s drama, it is necessary to first decode the Orthodox symbols that make up the language of the work discussed. For this reason, the major Orthodox symbols occurring in July will be listed at the very beginning of the paper. Then, they will be discussed in the context of the Orthodox theology as well as the artist’s own words. This task will contribute to the decoding of the language of I. Vyrypaev’s work.
 Results. According to I. Vyrypaev, the cruelty of a patient of the Smolensk madhouse is an inverted hierarchy of values which at the same time serves as his path of inquiry. On the other hand, the superficial attitudes, such as good, culture, humanitarianism, liberal values or democracy are obstacles (demons) which he has to overcome in order to find himself and God. The Orthodox symbols in July are allegories by means of which the author wants to show the main hero’s path to the truth. Furthermore, a justification for this way of thinking is one of the mottos that I. Vyrypaev included in July.
 Conclusions. In the drama July, I. Vyrypaev utilised the following sacral symbols: the theological significance of the Church in the Orthodox faith, the idea of communality, the concept of Orthodox humility as well as the idea of deification and martyrdom. The threads of the Orthodox symbolism used by I. Vyrypaev are superficial and should not be interpreted literally. The author consciously inverts the hierarchy of the Orthodox symbols in his work in order to show the bewilderment and corruption of the modern society. In the drama July I. Vyrypaev is more focused on being inspired by the Orthodox culture than on closely reflecting its senses. The symbolism of the altar and the ideas of martyrdom as applied in July are similar to the Christian symbols in the Roman Catholic approach.

Этикетный речевой жанр «обращение» в зачине духовного письма (на материале текстов русских церковных писателей-монахов ХХ века)

The peculiarities of etiquette speech genre of “compellation” in the Russian spiritual letter are discussed. The relevance of the study is determined by the importance of studying the Church-religious style and written spiritual heritage of Russian Orthodox monasticism, by the interest to Russian speech etiquette and Russian epistolary traditions. The novelty of the study lies in the author’s reference to not previously studied texts of spiritual letters of the Russian Orthodox monks of the 20 th century, study of the interaction of language and religion, identification of the specifics of etiquette genres in religious style. The article focuses on the question of how the Hesychast idea of deification is embodied in the language of the genre of “compellation.” Also the attention is paid to the principles of theocentrism and christocentrism, determining the linguistic embodiment of the genre of “compellation.” With the help of illustrations it is shown that the specifics of the genre of “compellation” in the opening sentence of Russian spiritual letter is linked with the Christian worldview of the authors, adherence to ethical Hesychast doctrine. On the basis of involved linguistic material it is concluded that etiquette units which embody the idea of deification ( о Gospode , vo Gospode, vo Khriste, vo Khriste Iisuse, bogolyubivyy, bogolyubiveyshiy, rab Bozhiy ) become a stylistic marker. The analysis of complaints in the letters of clerical writers-monks from the point of view of their functions shows that, in addition to the usual functions of compellations, the texts of this genre realize the function of spiritual rapprochement of the author and the addressee.

Gewoon goddelijk

Abstract This article explores the early Christian symbol of theosis or deification for its potential to generate an inspiring, gender-bending, and transformative view of salvation. The idea of theosis or deification (literally: becoming divine) is present in many religious traditions. In early Christianity, it refers to the transformation of human beings effected by Christ and the way they become partakers in the divine life. As Athanasius of Alexandria wrote: ‘God became human so that the human might become God’. In Eastern Orthodoxy, the idea of deification and its corresponding spiritual and ascetic practices obtained a leading role, while, in Protestant theology, it was considered to be more close to the essence of sin. The article makes a case for a feminist-protestant retrieval of deification, not in the least because the concept enables an embodied, progressive, and even cosmic understanding of salvation. After mapping, and taking position within, the disciplinary fields of theology and Genderstudies, the author sets off to discuss the recent ecumenical interest in deification. She then listens to the voices of twentieth-century French/Russian Orthodox women theologians who have engaged with the concept of deification, also in relation to issues of gender and corporeality. Present-day Anglican theologian Sarah Coakley adds to the choir with her intriguing analysis of the ‘messy entanglements’ of sexual desire and the desire for God. Coakley’s plea for a ‘renewed asceticism’ and her reappraisal of ‘sacrifice’ and ‘surrender’ in self-realization, echoing the tradition of theosis, are surprising and edgy contributions to postmodern gender theory. The article concludes with remarks about the relevance of this deification research project for other current debates.

Deification in Contemporary Theology

Although the concept of theosis, or deification, is usually associated with Eastern Orthodoxy, it has enjoyed an ecumenical renaissance in modern and contemporary Christian theology. Nevertheless, not all uses of the idea are equal; some fall short of its full significance in Orthodox soteriology. Within Orthodox theology deification has become the cause of some debate. The Palamite essence/energies distinction is essential if the idea of deification is not to lead to panentheism.