A few weeks ago I put up some posts about the idea of salvation as theosis or “divinization”. Acolyte4236 has recently added to the debate in the combox by underlining the differences between the Catholic and Orthodox approaches to divinization (Acolyte4236 writes from an Orthodox perspective), with particular reference to the differences between the soteriologies of Thomas Aquinas and Gregory Palamas (1296-1359).
Basically, Catholic advocates of the idea of theosis have tended to see divinization in terms of imitatio and of a created likeness to the divine nature, whereas Orthodox theologians think more in terms of a participation – a kind of bodily and spiritual immersion – in the uncreated energies of the Godhead.
The debates between Thomists and Palamites are too complicated to address adequately in a blog-post, but, if anyone wants to get an idea of how Orthodox theologians understand this participation, the articles on Palamas and on essence and energies at Wikipedia seem like useful introductions, and the essays on St Gregory Palamas by M.C. Steenberg on his excellent monachos.net website are well worth consulting.
My own view is that a rediscovery of the “existentialist” (in Etienne Gilson’s sense of the word) and Trinitarian dimensions of Aquinas’s thought could help carry the debate forward.
3 comments:
Uncreated energies that aren't God.
Berenike - yes, that's how I see it, though I think Orthodox theologians might disagree.
From Athanasius to the Cappadocians to Cyril to Maximus to Palamas, the energies are deity. They are the divine processions, predestinations, wills or logoi. If the energies weren't God, then we couldn't be said to be partakers of the divine nature and salvation would be impossible.
Post a Comment