Catholics claim that men become gods. It is in the CCC. What is at issue here is what that claim means. I believe I follow the pre-Athansius ECF in my believe and Catholic follow a developed view.
It does not change the fact that the ECF before Athanasius taught deification as I believe it and not as the modern Catholic Church believes it.
Can you please elaborate on what your view of deification is (if this has already been done, please point out the post so you don’t have to retype it), and whether it is the same as traditional LDS thought? I think it is important to specifically point out what your view is so that it can be compared to the pre-Athanasian view.
I think that just saying “there were no limitations” doesn’t really mean anything unless we know what limitations you are referring to. For example, you point out the belief, as both LDS and Catholics agree, that Christ became man so that we can become God/gods (again, the difference is on what that means). You then say:
It is IMO doing violence to the Fathers to say that Christ became completely what we are, but we are to become associatively what He is. They never said this until Athanasius.
But what do you mean by “completely”? Again, you are referring to the traditional doctrine on the Incarnation, which presumably can be found pre-Athanasius. Catholics and Orthodox don’t believe that Christ became human in the sense that He also had original or ancestral sin. So clearly, there was at least some difference between Him and us when He became human, at least in that specific area.
Your quotation from Deification and Grace also doesn’t seem to be saying anything un-Biblical, as it demonstrates that the Bible says that we partake of the divine nature (noting that LDS believe that we, as children of God, already have that divine nature, it’s only a matter of progressing, yes, through Christ’s atonement). The author clearly says that we participate in the Divine nature, we are inserted into the Divine communion of Persons through grace, etc. Again, I think you have to understand some philosophical ideas that are found in Catholicism that are not necessarily found in Mormonism to understand what he is saying. Catholics believe that it is God’s nature to exist eternally (and humans have not existed eternally). There was never a time when the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit did not exist. They have existed eternally as God, eternally in that relationship (which is not the LDS view). So, it is God’s nature to exist as such. Therefore, there must necessarily be some sort of difference between our deification and the life of God at least in that respect, and that is what I think he is referring to, and it is quite logical.
Pre-Athanasius, I think that you will be very hard pressed to find many unique aspects of LDS exaltation. Namely, that God Himself was not always God, and progressed to Godhood, and we follow His example (again, something clearly taught by various prophets and apostles throughout the history of the restored Church, despite the philosophical rationalizations of Ostler, who many do not support, at least on that issue). Also, the belief that we are co-eternal with God in some sense (i.e. intelligence). Also, the belief that the Son and Holy Ghost are literal spirit offspring of the Father (and Heavenly Mother), and that they did not eternally exist as a Godhead, as the Son is the literal firstborn of the Father. Also, the implications of LDS exaltation, that we will be able to do the same things that the Father did, like create worlds, have spirit children, etc.
I think that the LDS view has many surface commonalities with the ancient Christian views on deification, however it is clear that such a belief was never lost. It’d be interested to see what you mean by limitations on deification and how that relates to the LDS teachings on deification. Remember that the traditional view stems from the belief that God and man are different by nature (just like cats and dogs are different by nature). LDS belief does not have such a distinction, believing that man and God are the same “species”, it is only a difference of progression (which again points to the traditional LDS view that God progressed to Godhood, again, despite Ostler’s philosophies of men mixed with scripture, quite ironic). Therefore, in traditional Catholic and Orthodox thought, it makes sense to say things like we become by grace what God is by nature, that we participate or partake of the divine nature, yet there is still some distinction, since, for example, we are not eternal entities, while God is, by nature, eternally God, and has eternally existed as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
Anyway, General Conference time. Looks like we’ll be having 2 new temples, including yet another one in Utah.
:ehh: