Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • The Meaning of Deification

    Uploaded by

    piratehome1
    123 views19 pages
    Keith Edward Norman, Maxwell Institute. Mormonism.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Keith Edward Norman, Maxwell Institute. Mormonism.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    123 views19 pages

    The Meaning of Deification

    Uploaded by

    piratehome1
    Keith Edward Norman, Maxwell Institute. Mormonism.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 19
    Chapter 4 THE MEANING OF DEIFICATION Jules Gross, whose important monograph on the Christian doctrine of deification virtually opened up a new perspective to modern scholars, observed that despite the centrality of diviniza- tion for the soteriology of the Greek Fathers, none of them gave a precise definition for the term @éoo.s oF its equivalents which they used. This is especially significant for Athanasius, since deification is not “a more or less secondary and casual element” as with the majority of his pred- ecessors, “but the central idea of his theology.” Yet even with our great Alexandrian bishop, one searches in vain for a systematic exposition of the doctrine: As a result, the tendency of modern scholarship has been to dismiss Athanasian lan- guage of divinization as grounded in the Greek concept that immortality is the equivalent of divinity. As we shall sec, this is @ cursory analysis. and does not do justice to the depth and richness of his doctrine. Since this chapter, investigating the meaning of deification for Athanasius, forms the crux of our study on his soteriology, it is appropriate to consider the so-called “physical theory of redemption” more closely Generally speaking, the view that Athanasius (and others of the Greek Fathers) valued only or primarily physical incorruptibility or immortali- ty as the basis of the divine life of the redeemed is taken from a deprecatory stance. Harnack sets. this tone when he laments the transformation of the “living faith” of “the glowing hope of the Kingdom of Heaven into a doctrine of immortal- ” M. Werner follows Harnack in seeing deification as a principal example of the Hellenization of Christian doc- trine.* The analysis of deification as a mere (and almost vulgar) “physical” redemption is sub- scribed to also by such scholars as Rashdall, Loisy Riviére,’ Tixeront,' Inge,’ Lawson," and more recently Brooks Otis. ‘The latter places Athanasius in the “Irenaean tradition,” which emphasizes the salvation of the flesh, as opposed to the more spiritual “Origenistic” tradition. ity and deification. Basically speaking, this [Irenaean] tradition conceives of salvation in quite a mystical way: flesh is deified: its mortal and genetic quality is transformed by immortal and age- netic deity. The idea of an immortal and 58 + Deificatio: he Content of Athanasian Soteriology immaterial soul-substance is minimized (though not usually denied) in this tradition: the problem is not to release the soul from the bodily prison, but to immortalize the body itself... The emphasis in this tradition is thus on deification of the flesh which involves the commingling of full God and fall body in the act of physical theosis." While this analysisis true as far as it goes, its one- sided emphasis is a distortion of the full range of Athanasius’ thoughts on deifcation. Certainly the tenor of the early chapters of De Incarnatione seems to reveal a fixation upon the corruptible flesh as needing redemption, The death which Adam's fall brought into the world was compounded by the iniquity in which his descendants have continued to indulge. Thus death held greater sway and corruption stood firm against men; the race of men was being destroyed, and man who was rational and who had been made in the image was being obliterated; the work created by God was perishing.” If this had not taken place, if humanity had remained in its pristine state of innocence and grace, because of his likeness to his creator, “being incorruptible he would thenceforth have lived as God.” This does imply an equation of immortality or incorruptibility with divinity according to Hellenistic religious and cultural ideals" and thus lends support to the analyses of Harnack and Rivitre. But this treatise needs to be read in the perspective of its literary genre. From the Apologetic point of view, ic., in dialogue with Greek culture, the development of the Christian doctrine of deification needs to be seen in the light of the belief in a bodily resurrection, In such a cultural milieu, this most peculiar and loudly-proclaimed tenet of Christianity could be seen as the essential feature of deification, its sine qua non. If the Greeks equated immortality with divinity, Christianity’s cultured spokesmen were to insist that physical immortality, pioneered by the incarnate Logos, was the mark of divinization which they were seeking, This attempt to come to terms ith Greek culture was far-ranging, as is well-known, In terms of the self-conscious philosophical theolo- 8y established by Origen, God was set apart from humanity both by his eternal existence, never having had a beginning as coming into being, and by his unchangeability, which was expressed by the category of not being subject to deteriora- tion, or incorruptibility." Obviously any scheme of deification which maintained the integrity of the individual subject, as did Christianity, could never appropriate an absolute eternity, extending both forward and backwards in time. As Gross uts it, “OF the essential perfections of divinity, Uungenerateness and incorruptibility, only the lat- ter is communicable to creatures.” ‘This is behind the apparent Patristic identification of the terms “to deify” and “to immortalize:” To this extent the description of Patristic soteriology as the “physical theory of redemption” is conven- ient, and may be judiciously applied at least to the Contra Gentes-De Incarnatione as far as Athanasius is concerned. But as propounded, the Harnack-Rivitre analysis assumes that theologi- cal development stops at this apologetic point, and makes little attempt to understand the con- cept of deification in any depth.” Regarding the salvation of the flesh, Dalmais notes a development of Athanasius’ thought on deification from De Incarnatione to the anti- Arian writings." But even the Arian controversy brought out the physical aspect of divinization, since Athanasius had to stress that the overcom- ing of death and physical corruption is entirely the work of the divine Logos, whom the Arians perversely debased to creaturehood, whereas the overcoming of (individual) sins and the develop- ment of the qualities of godliness require our cooperation in ethical striving.” Obviously, in the face of Arian ascent soteriology, which has the believer follow the example of a creaturely Saviour to gain a similar adoption and inher tance to his;* Athanasius would emphasize the aspect of the work of salvation which only the Saviour who is God by nature and essence could accomplish. In reality, of course, the distinction between overcoming death and sin is not so clear-cut, since, for any disciple of Paul, death is the consequence or recompense of sin. To con- ‘quer death is to vanquish sin as a power enslav- ing man, and this proclamation of freedom from sin is implied if not always specified by ‘Athanasius when he refers to redemption from death and corruption.” As we shall see, “corrup- tion” implies more than just physical decay, and “incorruption,” égeapata, includes purity from ‘every stain of sin and guilt. Likewise, terms such as nde, passionlessness, and sanctification describe the state of the deified as one of ethical or moral virtuousness and purity. The constant recurrence of this motif already betrays the inad- equacy of the “physical theory of redemption.” This is evident even in the passages which concentrate on the redemption of the flesh. In arguing with the Arian interpretation of the phrase “God has highly him” (Philippians 2:9), he maintains that it is not the Logos as such which is intended in this formula, but “his body” and through our relationship to thus, For in saying this he did not imply any prize of virtue, nor promotion from advance, but exacted the cause why exaltation was bestowed upon us... For if the Lord had not become man, we had not been redeemed from sins, not raised from the dead, but remaining dead under the earth; not exalted into heaven, but living in Hades:* Although obviously even here he includes free- dom from sin and a promise of a place in heaven in this exaltation, Athanasius goes on to specify ‘The Meaning of Deification » 59 that the primary focus of Paul in the Philippians passage is on Christ's resurrection from the dead. For after saying “He bath humbled himself even unto death?” he immediately added, “Wherefore he hath highly exalted him; wishing to show that, although as a man he is said to have died, yet, as being Life, he was exalted in the resurrection. .. . For all other men, being merely born of Adam, died, and death reigned over them, but he, the Second Man, is from heaven ... wherefore he was not held under death. Perhaps even more than with the earlier apolo- getic works, the emphasis here is controlled by the polemical situation: because Athanasius must explain away these exaltation passages in terms of the Saviour’s flesh, his doctrine of deification tends to focus most readily on the abolishment of fleshly corruption and the promise of physical immortality." But it is a mistake to conclude from this that deification is limited to incorrupt- ibility and is thus merely a takeover of the Hellenistic idea of divinization. However impor- tant immortality is to Athanasius, it is only one aspect of his doctrine of deification.» The basis of this exaltation is our union with God through participation in Him, not simply the removal of, death as a threat to our being.» We shall attempt to analyze the various aspects of deification in a systematic way to demonstrate the richness and profundity of this concept. ‘The Renewal of Manl din the Image of God The anthropological basis of deification, which we have already considered in chapter Il, forms the basis of Athanasius’ description of the content of his soteriology. “For in two ways our Saviour had compassion through the Incarna- tion: he both rid us of death and renewed us.”* It is clear even here, in the early apologetic treatises, that Athanasius goes beyond immortality alone. The most obvious justification for the necessity 60 + Deifcation: The Content of Athanasian Soteriology of the Incarnation is to restore or renew mankind, which was created in God's image.” If, as we have seen in chapter II, the imago Dei is not focused on man’s physical being, then the restoration of that image cannot be restricted to physical immortality ‘The Incarnation was necessary because only the Saviour who created us could “recreate men in the image.” The framer of the body renewed it in order to deify it» He both “formed the race of man and restored what he had formed.” Thus, Tixeront concludes, Athanasius is “the restoration of our nature [and] a return to that divine life and to that par- ticipation of the Word which had been first granted to mankind.”* From the standpoint of anthropology/creation, redemption is not so Beoroinas in much an expiation of original sin and the cor- ruption consequent upon it,” which restores mankind to its pristine innocence and capability of eternal progression (as with Irenaeus), as itis ‘re-exaltation of mankind “to its original state of deification?™ In reviewing Mme, Lot-Borodine’s study of deification, Congar’s summation of “Oriental” anthropology-soteriology is illumi- nating, although the terminology may be over- stated in respect to Athanasius: Human nature was in itself theophoros, con- substantial to the divine and made to blos som into the higher life of the wots in the

    You might also like