Man (Christos Yannaras, Elements of Faith , pp. 53-88.) (original) (raw)
Related papers
This paper offers a critical overview of the theology of personhood which has become one of the distinctive features of Orthodox theology in the 20 th Century. A systematised synthesis of traits and elements within this movement is offered, thus rectifying a certain lack of it in current literature. On one hand it is shown that this theology springs forth from the neo-patristic 'turn' of Orthodox theology. On the other hand it is demonstrated how theoretical instances of this 'turn' bear upon, and appear within the model of the conception of personhood: in its Trinitarian, Christological, ecclesiological and anthropological dimensions. It is this model of personhood, in its basic elements and connections, which is at work in the ongoing debate on the human person in the Orthodox Church. The model of personhood and the model of eucharistic, i.e. ecclesial self-understanding of the Church are shown to implicate each other intrinsically.
Towards a Common Communion: The Relational Anthropologies of John Zizioulas and Karol Wojtyla
share a common relational approach to theological anthropology. 1 The Roman Catholic pope-philosopher and the Eastern Orthodox theologian place an emphasis on the person's call to communion through and in a complete gift of self. Both thinkers reflect the leitmotivs of the theological anthropology envisioned by the Second Vatican Council in Gaudium et spes nos. 22 and 24. Blessed John Paul II did this conscientiously, whereas Zizioulas' writings happen to overlap with these conciliar themes. Gaudium et spes no. 22 espouses the teaching that only Christ fully reveals the meaning of the human person. 2 This is complemented by Gaudium et spes no. 24, that emphasizes the theme of self-gift (exemplified by the Trinity) as the person's central identity and mission. 3 Christology and Trinitarian theology undergird the anthropological vision put forth by the Council. This Christological and Trinitarian vision of the human person is also developed by
THE STUDY OF SPIRITUALITY: THOUGHTS FROM THE CHRISTIAN EAST
This paper is offered as an example of a human science approach to the study of spirituality as a universal human experience. From the author’s perspective, spirituality is not only a universal element of human experience, but (because I equate spirituality with human freedom), spirituality is THE foundationally quality of the human. The thesis to be tested is this: Through a careful consideration of themes central to a specific spiritual tradition (in this case, the relationship of communion and asceticism in the Eastern Christian liturgical spirituality), we can come to an appreciative critical understanding not only of that tradition, but also of themes foundational to all human spiritualities.
Towards A Personal Ontology Of The Church - Doctoral Thesis
The primary identity of the Church as ‘Body of Christ’ in her relation with God is questioned. Understood somatically, since the Logos is the hypostasis of Christ, it fails to give the necessary ontological space for Creation to respond to God’s love. Congar’s ecclesial ontology, formulated as Body of Christ, is investigated. His hierarchical interpretation of the relation between church structure, whose ontos as visible Body derives apneumatically from the incarnate Logos, and the Spirit, which vivifies the mystical Body through faith and the sacraments, is drawn from the filioque, subordinating the Spirit to the Institution. Souls united with God are eschatological ‘brides’, the reality for which the institution temporarily exists. Christ, or the Spirit, is the ‘I’ of the Church, which is not a ‘person’. Ultimately, souls are to be catholic, transparent to each other and God’s love. There is no explicit relation of Church to Creation. Bulgakov identifies humanity as the hypostatic centre of Creation. In creating, God kenotically gives away his own being (Sophia) establishing temporality and otherness. Humanity is spirit-embodied earth, hypostasising created Sophia, drawn, through deification by the Spirit, into communion with God. The Trinitarian communion of the Godhead is imaged in Creation as the kenotic, hypostatic transparency of the Church. The Incarnation is a synergism between the Logos and Mary, who thereby participates in the salvific activity of the Son and the Spirit, as Spirit-bearer. She is the ‘Bride’ in whom all others participate. Congar’s eschatology and Bulgakov’s kenotically hypostasised Creation proffer an understanding of the Church as the invited ‘yes’ of the personalised cosmos, reborn from Christ through the Cross, eschatologically irradiated by the Spirit with the glory of God, unified in kenotic love, whose communion with the Trinity as the ‘fourth’ hypostasis, ‘the Bride,’ proceeds through her nuptial union with the Son.
This paper offers a critical overview of the theology of personhood which has become one of the distinctive features of Orthodox theology in the 20th Century. A systematized synthesis of traits and elements within this movement is offered, thus rectifying a certain lack of it in current literature. On the one hand it is shown that this theology springs forth from the neo-patristic ‘turn’ of Orthodox theology. On the other hand it is demonstrated how theoretical instances of this ‘turn’ bear upon, and appear within the model of the conception of personhood: in its Trinitarian, Christological, ecclesiological and anthropological dimensions. It is this model of personhood, in its basic elements and connections, which is at work in the ongoing debate on the human person in the Orthodox Church. The model of personhood and the model of eucharistic, i.e. ecclesial self-understanding of the Church are shown to implicate each other intrinsically. This theology is put into perspective in terms of overviewing its development and transmission between four notable exponents: Lossky, Yannaras, Zizioulas and Horuzhy. The model of personhood in particular is shown to be re-received and specifically reworked by each, not without sparks of mutual critique. Still, the general tendency is to make the conception of personhood more ecclesially and anthropologically relevant. Critical consequences of this of theological thought are not to be understood narrowly. For they ramify to bear upon epistemology, ontology, philosophy, theology proper and social ethics. Apart from fruitful solutions to the questions raised by thematizing the challenge of personhood (as immanent to our being image-bearers of God), entry points for critical problematization of this current of Orthodox thinking are displayed. Hence critical consequences of the theology of personhood are not articulated without reference to the meta-critique of it, as offered by a third generation of Orthodox theologians. I propose to view this process in general as a birth of a ‘theological age’ of sorts: the nascent of ecclesial understanding of our personhood in God.