Theosis vs. Beatific Vision

[Vico]

The term grace, by Catholics, can have several meanings:

• the Uncreated as he communicates his life,
• the instruments God uses to communicate his life to a person, and
• effects of that communication within the human person.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Insertation into the divine trinity in monergistic theology is impossible because grace is said only to renew man’s natural state. Adam and Eve, according to monergistic theology, were in their natural state in Eden with God. If grace does not elevate (but merely restores), then man cannot be elevated beyond his nature and there cannot be beatific vision or theosis without treading into the ground of Pelagianism.

I cannot agree that grace is only a source of renewal, nor can I believe that it is natural for a rational animal to be in a friendship with God. Especially in reformed theology, this is so far assumed that mankind could only ever be “spiritually alive” or “spiritually dead”. What’s neglected is that a spiritual “status” presupposes a sanctifying grace–namely of friendship with God-- as opposed to merely a “covenant of works”. God never had to give us his friendship since it’s not natural to us as rational animals.

It is quite funny. The Latins and the Protestants are much, *much *closer to eachother than the Latins are with the Byzantine East. The Protestants are like the rebellious and annoying children of Rome while the East is that strange uncle no-one ever talks about.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Eastern Church, which holds that man is deified by God through entering into His uncreated life, and not by receiving some alien “created grace” or habitus.

Man is not deified on Earth.

"Divinization or deification is the “making divine”, the “deification” of an earthly entity, individual, group, or activity.

In Christian theology, divinization (or deification, or making divine, or theosis), the transforming effect of divine grace, the spirit of God, or the atonement of Christ. It literally means to become more divine, more like God, and/or take upon a “divine nature.”

"The term is often used interchangeably with the term “diefication.” Aleady have this theory on page one. I disagee that simple.

1. To make a god of; raise to the condition of a god. 2. To worship or revere as a god: deify a leader. 3. To idealize; exalt: deifying …

That is mildly disturbing.

Comes back to you have a “theory” a “hypothesis”.

Man receives a supernatural infused virtue called Grace, in Birth, at Baptism etc, then through Free Will he may commit Mass Murder and never repent. Man has an inclination to sin which “never” ends in this realm. Through Grace we can and do continue on the path to the Sonship promised by Christ, thus Heaven.

Of course God can infuse this as He wills, time is not essense, so He can interact directly as He wills. He can also convert a killer immediately, this is a process of infused Grace. How “exactly” grace is infused we do not know. Its a “Mystery”. Just as the interaction with the Lord, the Priest and the Eucharist is.

To define in mere human vocab in how God in fact does infuse supernatural Grace it is in fact intellectual foolishness. We can’t even act upon Gravity yet, and we would like to become upset because another doesn’t agree with an assumption about God? Wow, Let us not think to much of ourselves here. All this Divinity going around and all man has perfected is killing in fact its never stopped since written language has been recorded.

We ought to get back to “Love thy Neighbor” then we can work our way foward, “maybe”.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Man is not deified on Earth.

Yes we are. The saints are capable of working miracles by virtue of their state deification. St. Cyril of Alexandria teaches in his explanation of the twelve anathemas that the Christ must be one and that the body of Christ must be confessed not to be the flesh of a mere man but the deified flesh of God, so that when we partake of the eucharist, we partake unto the end our deification. We only know in part according to St. Paul, that is true, but that does not mean that our deification in Christ does not begin in this life.

 

[Apotheoun]

GaryTaylor;9520664:

Man is not deified on Earth.

Yes we are.

I agree with Cavaradossi.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Yes we are. The saints are capable of working miracles by virtue of their state deification. St. Cyril of Alexandria teaches in his explanation of the twelve anathemas that the Christ must be one and that the body of Christ must be confessed not to be the flesh of a mere man but the deified flesh of God, so that when we partake of the eucharist, we partake unto the end our deification. We only know in part according to St. Paul, that is true, but that does not mean that our deification in Christ does not begin in this life.

Yea, I disagree.

By “Virtue” as you said, thus Grace, not deification. Grace is a supernatural infused Virtue. How “exactly” did you say God infused this virtue? Right you didn’t. Because you do not know. I becomes a word definition agruement of what one does not agree with, but yet you do not in fact know.

Why are the Saints you chose more relevant than Augustine of Aquinas or any Doctro of the Church? Oh right they are not.

So Christians outside this paradigm of Christianity of the Apostolic Church’s do not reach deification is what you are stating?

Part with Paul? No we know he was not Christian, he did not partake in the Eucharist, in fact he persecuted Christians for a living. So then he reached deification in Christ how? Paul was not in ignorance of Christ, the Church or Christians. How does this relate to the paradigm of Church/Priest/Eucharist you are committed to?

Since God chose every living being and knew them before they were formed in their mothers womb per scripture, then all are on the deification process.

And what does Genesis state about “Creation” and Adam and Eve did God “create” them? How per Bible? Is that unacceptable also?

1:27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

So God does “Create” and how did they receive some alien “created grace” ?

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

You really think someone from Eastern Orthodoxy is going to place Thomas Aquinas on the same footing as St. Basil?

Cavaradossi;9520874:

Yes we are.

I agree with Cavaradossi.

Me too

 

[Apotheoun]

Yea, I disagree.

By “Virtue” as you said, thus Grace, not deification. Grace is a supernatural infused Virtue. How “exactly” did you say God infused this virtue? Right you didn’t. Because you do not know. I becomes a word definition agruement of what one does not agree with, but yet you do not in fact know.

To participate in the uncreated divine energies (i.e., grace) is to be deified, and so theosis begins here and now, which means that it cannot be relegated to the eschaton. To see the Taboric Light is to participate in divinity, and that participation is not merely a future reality; instead, it occurs through the Holy Mysteries and through contemplation during man’s earthly life.

Why are the Saints you chose more relevant than Augustine of Aquinas or any Doctro of the Church? Oh right they are not.

Because the saints Cavaradossi referenced represent the Tradition of the Eastern Church and St. Augustine does not.

So Christians outside this paradigm of Christianity of the Apostolic Church’s do not reach deification is what you are stating?

God only knows. What happens to non-Christians and heretics (i.e., “Christians” outside of the Apostolic Churches) is something only God can know and determine.

Part with Paul? No we know he was not Christian, he did not partake in the Eucharist, in fact he persecuted Christians for a living. So then he reached deification in Christ how? Paul was not in ignorance of Christ, the Church or Christians. How does this relate to the paradigm of Church/Priest/Eucharist you are committed to?

Yes, St. Paul reached theosis, and his theosis began during his earthly life. You seem to be laboring under the misconception that theosis is a once for all thing, but it is not; instead, theosis is a neverending process.

Since God chose every living being and knew them before they were formed in their mothers womb per scripture, then all are on the deification process.

Yes, in a sense, because God is the end of all men. Now whether or not a man experiences God in the eschaton as ever-well-being or ever-ill-being is left to the activity of his free will in cooperation with the divine energy.

And what does Genesis state about “Creation” and Adam and Eve did God “create” them? How per Bible? Is that unacceptable also?

Nice rhetorical questions, but not really all that relevant; beyond saying that God created all that exists. How He did it is a mystery He alone comprehends.

1:27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

A beautiful quotation, and one that exemplifies the fact that man - as far as his intellect and will are concerned - is an image of God. He also was created with the potential to “liken” himself to God by participation in the divine energies, but alas Adam failed to do that, which is why death entered into the world.

So God does “Create” and hoe dod they receive some alien “created grace” ?

I am not sure what you mean by this question because it is worded in a way that does not make complete sense; nevertheless, if by it you mean to reject the notion of “created grace,” then you and I agree on that point, but if you mean to affirm the idea that there is such a thing as “created grace,” then we obviously do not agree on that issue.

 

[Apotheoun]

. . . We only know in part according to St. Paul, that is true, but that does not mean that our deification in Christ does not begin in this life.

I agree; and St. Gregory Palamas touches on this point in his treatise The Triads (see for example The Triads 3:1:28). Theosis is - as St. Gregory explains - the “uncreated deification, the enhypostatic illumination” [Nicholas Gendle (translator), Gregory Palamas: The Triads, (New York: Paulist Press, 1983), page 84], and there is no beginning or end to it.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Why are the Saints you chose more relevant than Augustine of Aquinas or any Doctro of the Church? Oh right they are not.

Saint Cyril is both a doctor of the Roman Catholic Church (called the doctor of the incarnation)and his twelve chapters (which I referenced in my other post) were approved by the council of Ephesus, so I think he is quite relevant. How sad that you would smear the name of St. Cyril by trying to make him irrelevant.

 

[GaryTaylor]

, if by it you mean to reject the notion of “created grace,” then you and I agree on that point, but if you mean to affirm the idea that there is such a thing as “created grace,” then we obviously do not agree on that issue.

I don’t think anything needs to be rejected as to the conversation of West or East for the dilemma is you do not know how God exactly through the Supernatural does infuse His Grace on an individual. We know he does, we know we partake in the Sonship through the process of Grace or as with Paul it can very well be infused into the soul in the immediate or with Mary. Still they continued to perfection with the Lord, much suffering, great trials. There is much we do know.

As much as I agree Created Grace is so-so, I also see the opposite as lacking. If we look at the Burning Bush or the Transfiguration since both have been mentioned. What we see is the ability of God through the Holy Spirit to decend directly to man. First it should be noted this places God outside of time which has also been mentioned. Since it would be logical to reason He is not subject to time thus has the ability to collapse time as He wills. If fact this is exactly what occurs through the Eucharist [though slightly different here], a Locution, Vision etc. and also through Baptism, Virtue’s and so forth. The degree of the Supernatural may range from any degree within profound. This introduces an interval from which we receiving the infused virtue, emerge further along in time than would otherwise have occured. If Pauls vision had not occured then we could safely state Paul would have taken much longer to get on board, God willed otherwise. And directly communicated His Blessing on Paul. The rest is history

What this does is substitute for learning that which may well have taken 10, 20, years. This occurs by recognition of perfect equality of God and the receiver on which this transfer of communication rests. Thus God is communicating to you on a level of comprehension, His love, and mercy by descending with His communication. No different than with Jesus Human/Divine the Word became flesh, commnunication occured. Much occured with Christ, one of the most significant is understanding just how utterly worthless the flesh is. Yet the commandment is to Love Your …yup that guy who you don’t like…Him.

Therefore what is occuring is God shortens time by collapsing it, thus eliminating intervals within it. We see this also from Genesis foward, time was non-existant, then time as man understood it was altered. Time is a “learning tool” perhaps when man picks up some speed in the process or accepting God Kingdom, then this will no longer need to exist or be altered as to mans success.

However God is not packing snow-balls of different size and winging them down from Heaven to hit souls with Grace. He is interacting through His Word. Not words on paper, really, in truth His Word. His communication, which may not even be spoken, His covenants, elect in "altus christus’ etc.

Words then as above lack complete understanding. yes we partake in the Sonship which is never complete on Earth. And “exactly” how God infuses this Supernatural virtue is in fact a major Mystery. I see direct communication. Jesus speaks well on this in relation to the Kingdom of God. Mans ignorance cripples his spiritual eye, thats why they cannot see the Kingdom. If fact some of the harshest words Jesus spoke were on “religion”. This is a test, and nope you don’t get the lesson first. Its one of Faith, as you believe so it will be.

Essence I’m pretty sure is CCC teaching. Nevertheless I’m not overwhemed with either defined word above. I like Essence, energy I’m not keen on. I have an EE degree, so in my paradigm its just not up to par. Divinization, not big on either, I’d have to contemplate on it, seems to lack humility IMHO. I believe the best is yet to come when we can put our minds together. I’d rather deflate than inflate. The push must be in communion though. There resides the abundance of the supernatural Blessing as it already has with Christ.

That said none of this is the Beatific Vision. Here we still have a completion process underway. Thus the completion here leads to the Communion of Saints, or the last step on Jacobs Ladder. I would think this need for completion exists in all who hear the Word, thus Heaven in Communion.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Saint Cyril is both a doctor of the Roman Catholic Church (called the doctor of the incarnation)and his twelve chapters (which I referenced in my other post) were approved by the council of Ephesus, so I think he is quite relevant. How sad that you would smear the name of St. Cyril by trying to make him irrelevant.

I’m not “smearing” anyone, St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas are Doctors of the Church also. I’m looking at all the teachings with an open mind. How sad it is you are so judgemental and critical of other Saints you don’t feel obligated to venerate. To me they are all relevant and had something significant to convey. And I do believe I have stated this very early in this thread.

 

[Cavaradossi]

I’m not “smearing” anyone, St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas are Doctors of the Church also. I’m looking at all the teachings with an open mind. How sad it is you are so judgemental and critical of other Saints you don’t feel obligated to venerate. To me they are all relevant and had something significant to convey. And I do believe I have stated this very early in this thread.

Where in this thread have I mentioned either St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas at all, much less passed judgment on them? Please show me, or admit that you are simply putting words into my mouth. One is capable of disagreeing critically with a theologian’s conclusion without questioning his relevance or personal piety by the way.

 

[Apotheoun]

I don’t think anything needs to be rejected as to the conversation of West or East for the dilemma is you do not know how God exactly through the Supernatural does infuse His Grace on an individual…

Alas, we do know enough to reject the notion of “created grace,” because nothing created can elevate a man into the divine life and divinize him.

The Eastern Churches have always rejected, and rightly so, the notion of “created grace.”

 

[Vico]

Created Grace does not refer to the substance of Grace, which is God himself (the energies of God or His life in us). The substance of Grace is God and is uncreated. Created Grace is the effect.

There are three forms of uncreated grace:

1. Hypostatic Union (John 1:14; 17)
2. Indwelling Presence of God in the just soul (John 14:17)
3. The Beatific Vision (I Peter 1:13)

The effect of each uncreated grace is created and is (respectively):

1. The Second Person of the Trinity unites with a human nature,
2. Sanctifying grace in the soul, and actual graces, making one a partaker in the Divine Nature,
3. The light of glory, in Heaven, allowing to see God face to face.

Blessed Pope John Paul II said 12 September 1984, for the Homily:“We thank the Father for the Son and the Holy Spirit. We thank the Son for the Father. We thank the Holy Spirit because through the love of the Father and the Son he is the uncreated Gift: the source of all the gifts of created grace.”

 

[Apotheoun]

The substance of Grace is God and is uncreated. Created Grace is the effect.

In the Byzantine tradition the effect of grace in man is also uncreated, and so when a man loves with the divine energy of love he loves in an uncreated manner, for the effect of the reception of divine love in man is an uncreated and eternal reality, which is why there can be no such thing as “created grace” in the tradition of the East.

The effect of each uncreated grace is created and is (respectively):

1. The Second Person of the Trinity unites with a human nature,

In the Byzantine doctrinal tradition:

The effect of the union of the divine and human natures in the one person of Christ is uncreated, because the human nature is permeated with uncreated grace and becomes energetically eternal and uncreated at the very moment that the divine Logos assumes human nature.

1. Sanctifying grace in the soul, and actual graces, making one a partaker in the Divine Nature,

The deifying energy that permeates man’s body and soul makes him uncreated and eternal by grace, and no “created sanctifying grace” (however one tries to dress it up to make it more palatable) could ever have that effect. So as I have said several times now, the effects of the reception of the uncreated energies by the saints are themselves uncreated.

1. The light of glory, in Heaven, allowing to see God face to face.

The Taboric Light, which is the Light of God’s glory, is in itself, and in its effects, eternal and uncreated, and nothing created can empower a man to see God face (prosopon) to face (prosopon).

That being said, the Eastern Churches have always rejected, and will always reject, any notion of “created grace,” for just as the created Arian savior could not save anyone, so too “created grace” cannot divinize anyone.

 

[Apotheoun]

Blessed Pope John Paul II said 12 September 1984, for the Homily:“We thank the Father for the Son and the Holy Spirit. We thank the Son for the Father. We thank the Holy Spirit because through the love of the Father and the Son he is the uncreated Gift: the source of all the gifts of created grace.”

This statement is contrary to the doctrinal tradition of the Eastern Churches. There is no such thing as “created grace.”

 

[Vico]

This statement is contrary to the doctrinal tradition of the Eastern Churches. There is no such thing as “created grace.”

True there is no such thing, rather what is created is an effect, which effect is called created.

 

[Apotheoun]

True there is no such thing, rather what is created is an effect, which effect is called created.

No, as I have already said, the effects of grace in man are also uncreated.

 

[GaryTaylor]

No, as I have already said, the effects of grace in man are also uncreated.

So the arguement is if I’m not mistaken is that created grace depersonalizes grace?

Its an interesting debate to be sure. Lets go back to Paul, the Holy Spirit descends upon Paul instantly and completely Paul is transformed into a New Man, which I believe he talks about in Scripture. However, this infused supernatural Grace also has another effect on Paul, this profound event leaves for lack of a better word an “aura” or a lasting living memory in Pauls mind. For at once he knows this wasn’t a dream, hes not crazy, and in fact he’s a different man completely. However this effect also caused Paul to continue to act with his own Free-Will in cooperation with the will of God on account of this event. Here in view now we do see created Grace, for this interaction of the Holy Spirit and Paul has a domino effect with Grace and through Pauls participation through “works” it could well be said created Grace is an extension then.

I think we see this with all the Saints who are Spiritual Mystics, from Catherina of Siena, Theresa of Avila, John of the Cross etc. While one may agree or disagree, it makes a great debate, one I believe we need to carefully consider. These Souls become “tools” of the Lord, by the Lord, and foward they are in essence by participation, thus their works, touching others and Grace is expanding outward from the initial effects.

So God isn’t creating Grace, this is a Supernatural infusion of God and by God/Holy Spirit, this infusion penetrates the soul completely and profoundly, especially when one is an open channel as we see with Paul and the Mystics, this effect is so profound it effects others through the initial Soul, in effect as a nuclear explosion expands outward.