Theosis vs. Beatific Vision

[Apotheoun]

If we think essence energy, then energy becomes the function or work of the essense.

This is a problematic statement. Essences cannot act; instead, only persons can act. Moreover, if a man were to apply the notion that essences can act to Christology he would invariably fall into the heresy of Nestorius, because he would turn Christ’s human nature into a human person separate from the divine person of the Word.

The divine energies - in the theology of the Eastern Fathers - are the enhypostatic energies of the three divine persons.

 

[Apotheoun]

And as for the enhpostatic energetic “thing”, is it enhypostatic in the sense that St. Maximus the Confessor defined the will against the monothelite heresy? In context, it would be easy to understand how this facet of Christology plays out into eastern anthropology.

I am using the term enhypostatic as a contrast to the terms authypostatic and anhypostatic. That which is enhypostatic is not self-subsisting (authypostatic), nor is it merely transitory or illusory (anhypostatic), but is instead a real quality inhering in a hypostasis.

 

[Vico]

Eastern brothers and sisters,

For those of you who are well educated in its implications, is there any substantial difference between the fundamental concept of Beatific Vision in the western Church and Theosis in the eastern Churches? Obviously, we approach it from very different perspectives, but it is my knowledge that they are both direct participations into the blessed life of the most holy Trinity.

I also understand this to be an concept unique to the Catholic Churches (east and west) and the eastern Orthodox churches, seeing as it has no place in monergism.

I am also currently very absorbed in thinking about it.

2 Pt 1:4, 1 Cor 13:12, Heb 11:1, Rev 22:4, etc.
I’m gathering scripture on this also. If you have any to add, feel free to share (even if you’re a latin )

The eastern way to Theosis is kenosis. We empty ourselves that we may be filled with the Holy Spirit, which is union with God. This is extreme humility.

St. Gregory Naziansus: ‘Whoever has been permitted to escape from matter, and from the fleshly cloud (or should we call it a veil?) by means of reason and contemplation, so as to hold communion with God, and be associated with the purest light (in so far as human nature can attain to it): such a man is truly blessed: both in terms of his ascent from here, and in terms of his deification there, a deification which is conferred by true philosophy, and by virtue of his rising above all the duality of matter through that unity which is perceived in the Trinity.’ – Oration 21, 2.

The western teaching is intuitive knowledge of God as defined by the Church, where the souls of the just “see the divine essence by an intuitive vision and face to face, so that the divine essence is known immediately, showing itself plainly, clearly and openly, and not mediately through any creature” – Denzinger 1000-2

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

The western teaching is intuitive knowledge of God as defined by the Church, where the souls of the just “see the divine essence by an intuitive vision and face to face, so that the divine essence is known immediately, showing itself plainly, clearly and openly, and not mediately through any creature” – Denzinger 1000-2

Is this dogma? Can a Latin Catholic be a Palamite?

 

[GaryTaylor]

Essences cannot act

Essence is a name assigned to what you do not fully know thus cannot define. Thus you cannot know its function fully.

The Sun is not its Rays or its Light, but they are in fact an act of the Suns energy changed energy, however, they are not the Sun…

“Orthodox position is that when we experience the energies of God, we are really experiencing God Himself (His energies are not created symbols of Him, but His actual touch).”

So how is the essence not acting through the energy?

“The Latin is that God can be known about through His created works, but not directly through the living experience of His own energies.” “Archbishop Lazar”

Thus the variable of the Beatific Vision. Grace given through the Lord is not the beatific vision, It is Grace and the degree willed when and how by the Lord. Course otherwise the Bible would then contradict itself, and to a large degree, thus a logical explaination.

Who Biblically or Historically has seen the Beatific Vision? “No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father” in the words of Christ. John 6:46. While there are many claims starting in Genesis, this is no different that the Grace experienced today by the Mystics.

Personally I believe both sides need modern work.

.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Who Biblically or Historically has seen the Beatific Vision? “No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father” in the words of Christ. John 6:46. While there are many claims starting in Genesis, this is no different that the Grace experienced today by the Mystics.

Personally I believe both sides need modern work.

What about the Light at the Transfiguration? The Light when St. Paul fell of his horse? That has always been identified with the Uncreated Energies.

 

[GaryTaylor]

What about the Light at the Transfiguration? The Light when St. Paul fell of his horse? That has always been identified with the Uncreated Energies.

Right but is it the Beatific Vision. Which would be to see God in His essense. Not in other words a Grace of God or Energy which Biblically or Mystically I believe is what we are saying, or Biblically and Mystically is what occurs. To me this is the only way Bible and the Mystics coincide with what Jesus states.

For me the issue becomes not essense defined, this is the finite understanding the infinate, but to what occurs Biblically and Mystically. I also believe these Miracles through God occur probably more than we will ever know.

The Burning Bush is another great example which may be the closest anyone in this realm has come to the Beatific Vision. Yet Moses couldn’t look.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Right but is it the Beatific Vision. Which would be to see God in His essense.

But we can’t see God in his essence (oὐσία)

 

[GaryTaylor]

But we can’t see God in his essence (oὐσία)

Right thats what I’m saying. All the Biblical verse of seeing God are Grace including Paul IMO are somewhat similar including the Mystics since 382. The Burning Bush seems slightly different though still not the Beatific Vision.

Or Beatific Vision…

“The immediate knowledge of God which the angelic spirits and the souls of the just enjoy in Heaven. It is called “vision” to distinguish it from the mediate knowledge of God which the human mind may attain in the present life. And since in beholding God face to face the created intelligence finds perfect happiness, the vision is termed “beatific”. For further explanation of the subject, see HEAVEN.” Catholic Encyclopedia

To what degree this explains understanding “essence” is still unknown. Seems to make sense Biblically and through the Mystics though, and the words of Christ.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

So we can never directly experience God in this life? Like what Barlaam said?

 

[GaryTaylor]

I see it as you never obtain complete Communion with God is this reality which becomes understood for example with Jacobs Ladder. You can through Grace continue your ascent as the Lord wills. One having experienced Visions or Locutions also doesn’t mean they have aquired more Grace than say the Patriarch of Constantinople who isn’t a visionary or Benedict who openly admits he has no practical experience in this realm.

The journey becomes as it is in Church to obtain and remain in a perpetual state of Grace, easier said than done. The goal being to obtain the perfect state of Grace which is then understood as Saint in the eternal life. There are many as we see with Daniel or Isaiah or the Apostles who have been very Blessed. Those which more was given also more was expected. They seem to bear the greatest trials. Rightfully so they were allowed through Grace to see Faith realized to some degree.

Which is why the Eucharist is so important in the Churchs.

 

[Apotheoun]

But we can’t see God in his essence (oὐσία)

Correct, no one will ever see the essence of God, because it is beyond any form of vision or participation.

So we can never directly experience God in this life?

To participate in the divine energies, both in this life and in the eschaton, is to experience God directly,

 

[Vico]

Is this dogma? Can a Latin Catholic be a Palamite?

The Catholic Church has never defined Palamism as heretical. The dogma is:

DenzingerBENEDICT XII 1334-1342
The Beatific Vision of God and the Last Days *
[From the edict “*Benedictus Deus,” Jan. 29, 1336]

530
By this edict which will prevail forever, with apostolic authority we declare: that according to the common arrangement of God, souls of all the saints who departed from this world before the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ; also of the holy apostles, the martyrs, the confessors, virgins, and the other faithful who died after the holy baptism of Christ had been received by them, in whom nothing was to be purged, when they departed, nor will there be when they shall depart also in the future; or if then there was or there will be anything to be purged in these when after their death they have been purged; and the souls of children departing before the use of free will, reborn and baptized in that same baptism of Christ, when all have been baptized, immediately after their death and that aforesaid purgation in those who were in need of a purgation of this kind, even before the resumption of their bodies and the general judgment after the ascension of our Savior, our Lord Jesus Christ, into heaven, have been, are, and will be in heaven, in the kingdom of heaven and in celestial paradise with Christ, united in the company of the holy angels, and after the passion and death of our Lord Jesus Christ have seen and see the divine essence by intuitive vision, and even face to face, with no mediating creature, serving in the capacity of an object seen, but divine essence immediately revealing itself plainly, clearly, and openly, to them, and seeing thus they enjoy the same divine essence, and also that from such vision and enjoyment their souls, which now have departed, are truly blessed and they have eternal life and rest; and also [the souls] of those who afterwards will depart, will see that same divine essence, and will enjoy it before the general judgment; and that such vision of the divine essence and its enjoyment makes void the acts of faith and hope in them, inasmuch as faith and hope are proper theological virtues; and that after there has begun or will be such intuitive and face-to-face vision and enjoyment in these, the same vision and enjoyment without any interruption [intermission] or departure of the aforesaid vision and enjoyment exist continuously and will continue even up to the last judgment and from then even unto eternity.

1000 530 (Visio Dei beatifica.)
Hac in perpetuum valitura Constitutione auctoritate Apostolica diffinimus: quod secundum communem Dei ordinationem animae sanctorum omnium (hominum), qui de hoc mundo ante D’ni N. Iesu Christi passionem decesserunt, nec non sanctorum Apostolorum, martyrum, confessorum, virginum et aliorum fidelium defunctorum post sacrum ab eis Christi baptisma susceptum, in quibus nihil purgabile fuit, quando decesserunt, nec erit, quando decedent etiam in futurum, vel si tunc fuerit aut erit aliquid purgabile in eisdem, cum post mortem suam fuerint purgatae, ac quod animae puerorum eodem Christi baptismate renatorum et baptizandorum cum fuerint baptizati, ante usum liberi arbitrii decedentium, mox post mortem suam et purgationem praefatam in illis, qui purgatione huius modi indigebant, etiam ante resumptionem suorum corporum et iudicium generale post ascensionem Salvatoris Domini nostri Iesu Christi in caelum, fuerunt, sunt et erunt in caelo, caelorum regno et paradiso caelesti cum Christo, sanctorum Angelorum consortio congregatae, ac post Domini Jesu Christi passionem et mortem viderunt et vident divinam essentiam visione intuitiva et etiam faciali, nulla mediante creatura in ratione obiecti visi se habente, sed divina essentia immediate se nude, clare et aperte eis ostendente, quodque sic videntes eadem divina essentia perfruuntur, necnon quod ex tali visione et fruitione eorum animae, qui iam decesserunt, sunt vere beatae et habent vitam et requiem aeternam, et etiam (animae) illorum, qui postea decedent, eandem divinam videbunt essentiam ipsaque perfruentur ante iudicium generale;

catho.org/9.php?d=g1

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Vico, the wording of that dogma certainly makes it SEEM as if the Catholic Church has declared Palamism heretical. I mean, Palamism states that humans can never see the true divine essence. But the dogma says that people in Heaven:

have seen and see the divine essence by intuitive vision, and even face to face

That certainly seems like it’s completely contrary to Palamism…

 

[Stylites]

So we can never directly experience God in this life? Like what Barlaam said?

Certainly God can be seen in this very life. The Beatific Vision can occur at any time, not only in the afterlife. The difference between the burning bush or St. Paul on the road to Damascus, and the actual Beatific Vision is that in the latter there is only the soul and God and nothing else.

 

[Vico]

Vico, the wording of that dogma certainly makes it SEEM as if the Catholic Church has declared Palamism heretical. I mean, Palamism states that humans can never see the true divine essence. But the dogma says that people in Heaven:

have seen and see the divine essence by intuitive vision, and even face to face

That certainly seems like it’s completely contrary to Palamism…

To compare one must define divine essence in the Catholic dogma, and the define divine essence in Palamism, this is the object. And then define what the specific mode of perception is in both. And also what is perceiving in both (a human).

Father John Hardon, S.J., writes in Modern Catholic Dictionary:HUMAN NATURE. The nature of humankind considered abstractly and apart from its elevation by grace to a supernatural state with a heavenly destiny. It is the human as such, having a body and soul, capable of rational thought and voluntary decision. Actually human nature has never existed independent either of a supernatural destiny or of free acceptance or rejection of the supernatural invitation of God’s grace.

**UNCREATED GRACE. **God himself, insofar as in his love he has predetermined gifts of grace. There are three forms of uncreated grace: the hypostatic union, the divine indwelling, and the beatific vision. In the first of these, God has communicated himself in the Incarnation of Christ’s humanity (the grace of union) so intimately that Jesus of Nazareth is a divine person. In the second and third communications, the souls of the justified on earth and of the glorified in heaven are elevated to a share in God’s own life. All three are created graces, considered as acts, since they all had a beginning in time. But the gift that is conferred on a creature in these acts is uncreated.

ENERGY. Inherent power to produce a given effect. The term is commonly applied to physical or natural power, but it may also refer to the spiritual power conferred by divine grace. As supernatural power, it enables a human being to perform actions that are either beyond the capacity of human nature, weakened by sin, or totally beyond the natural capacity of any created being and leading to the possession of God in the beatific vision.

DIVINE ESSENCE. The nature of God as mentally distinguished from the persons and the attributes of God. Thus each of the three divine persons has one and the same essence. And the different attributes of God are objectively identical with the divine essence.

DIVINE ATTRIBUTES. The perfections of God, which, according to a human way of thinking, proceed from and belong to the essence of God. In reality the divine attributes are identical among themselves and with the divine essence. Theology distinguishes the attributes from the essence because they correspond, in human language, to different properties in creatures which reflect, so to speak, the perfections of God.

DIVINE IMMANENCE. The omnipresence of God permeating all creation. It is the interpenetration of the divine essence and activity within all created beings. In the Christian faith this immanence does not deny but complements the divine transcendence. God remains God and is neither part of the world nor is perfected by the world. In pantheistic immanence God is said to be present and operating in the world, but he is also held to be somehow identical with the universe.
**
TRANSCENDENCE.** Supassing excellence, which may be either relative or absolute. It is relative when the excellence surpasses some objects below it, as human nature transcends the irrational creation. It is absolute when the excellence surpasses in being and activity all other beings. Only God is absolutely transcendent; in being because he alone is infinite and perfect Being who cannot change; in activity because he alone has existence of himself as uncreated First Cause on whom all creatures depend for their least operation.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Correct, no one will ever see the essence of God, because it is beyond any form of vision or participation.

To participate in the divine energies, both in this life and in the eschaton, is to experience God directly,

I knew that, I thought that GaryTaylor denied the essence-energies distinction and said we can know/see God in His essence

Certainly God can be seen in this very life. The Beatific Vision can occur at any time, not only in the afterlife. The difference between the burning bush or St. Paul on the road to Damascus, and the actual Beatific Vision is that in the latter there is only the soul and God and nothing else.

This somehow makes me think that the Beatific vision is just another word for God’s uncreated energies.

 

[Apotheoun]

To compare one must define divine essence in the Catholic dogma, and the define divine essence in Palamism, this is the object. And then define what the specific mode of perception is in both. And also what is perceiving in both (a human).

Father John Hardon, S.J., writes in Modern Catholic Dictionary:HUMAN NATURE. The nature of humankind considered abstractly and apart from its elevation by grace to a supernatural state with a heavenly destiny. It is the human as such, having a body and soul, capable of rational thought and voluntary decision. Actually human nature has never existed independent either of a supernatural destiny or of free acceptance or rejection of the supernatural invitation of God’s grace.

**UNCREATED GRACE. **God himself, insofar as in his love he has predetermined gifts of grace. There are three forms of uncreated grace: the hypostatic union, the divine indwelling, and the beatific vision. In the first of these, God has communicated himself in the Incarnation of Christ’s humanity (the grace of union) so intimately that Jesus of Nazareth is a divine person. In the second and third communications, the souls of the justified on earth and of the glorified in heaven are elevated to a share in God’s own life. All three are created graces, considered as acts, since they all had a beginning in time. But the gift that is conferred on a creature in these acts is uncreated.

ENERGY. Inherent power to produce a given effect. The term is commonly applied to physical or natural power, but it may also refer to the spiritual power conferred by divine grace. As supernatural power, it enables a human being to perform actions that are either beyond the capacity of human nature, weakened by sin, or totally beyond the natural capacity of any created being and leading to the possession of God in the beatific vision.

DIVINE ESSENCE. The nature of God as mentally distinguished from the persons and the attributes of God. Thus each of the three divine persons has one and the same essence. And the different attributes of God are objectively identical with the divine essence.

DIVINE ATTRIBUTES. The perfections of God, which, according to a human way of thinking, proceed from and belong to the essence of God. In reality the divine attributes are identical among themselves and with the divine essence. Theology distinguishes the attributes from the essence because they correspond, in human language, to different properties in creatures which reflect, so to speak, the perfections of God.

DIVINE IMMANENCE. The omnipresence of God permeating all creation. It is the interpenetration of the divine essence and activity within all created beings. In the Christian faith this immanence does not deny but complements the divine transcendence. God remains God and is neither part of the world nor is perfected by the world. In pantheistic immanence God is said to be present and operating in the world, but he is also held to be somehow identical with the universe.
**
TRANSCENDENCE.** Supassing excellence, which may be either relative or absolute. It is relative when the excellence surpasses some objects below it, as human nature transcends the irrational creation. It is absolute when the excellence surpasses in being and activity all other beings. Only God is absolutely transcendent; in being because he alone is infinite and perfect Being who cannot change; in activity because he alone has existence of himself as uncreated First Cause on whom all creatures depend for their least operation.

Fr. Hardon has presented the Western viewpoint in his definitions, but I - as an Eastern Catholic - reject several of those definitions (e.g., Fr. Hardon’s definition of “divine attributes,” the “divine essence,” the “divine immanence,” and “uncreated grace”). I also reject what Fr. Hardon has written about “created grace” in several of his books and lectures; and in fact, I do not believe that there is such a thing as “created grace” at all.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Grace is divine energy, it can’t be created or God would create Himself, which is absurd.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Fr. Hardon has presented the Western viewpoint in his definitions, but I - as an Eastern Catholic - reject several of those definitions (e.g., Fr. Hardon’s definition of “divine attributes,” the “divine essence,” the “divine immanence,” and “uncreated grace”). I also reject what Fr. Hardon has written about “created grace” in several of his books and lectures; and in fact, I do not believe that there is such a thing as “created grace” at all.

Probably due to not understanding “Created”. We are not talking here about the actual substance of Grace. But the moment which Grace occurs, since Grace to a particular individual has a starting point.

Fr Hardin would be a secondary source here, Summa and Aquina’s would be the point of origin in Theory. Which also isn’t Dogma

Again we have to revert to the concept of finite and infinate, thus our participation in the Divine has a start point, since we are finite not eternal. The arguement is simply we particpate in Divinity and this has a start point.