The Fathers and Theosis

[Rick Henry]

marc hanna Wrote:Well, when it comes down to it, that is true. There are two essential components in salvation: our participation and God's participation. God will not save us if we don't want to be saved, but if we do want to be saved it is still by His Grace that we are saved and not by our ability to attain it without His consent per se.

Marc, thanks very much for your time here, very gracious of you, this has been very helpful in terms of clarifying what we are talking about.

And, from here as we might move back to a comparison between theopoiesis and theosis, as we have in the past . . . I wonder if you know that what you are describing in this quote is what I understand to be a classic description of the doctrine of cooperation in Eastern Orthodoxy?

And, also, I wonder if you know that this is what lies at the heart of theosis as understood in Eastern Orthodoxy.

And, in this doctrine of cooperation, between man and God it is also part of mainstream Eastern Orthodoxy to know that even if we do our part, either God saves us or He doesn't.

So there does not seem to be any difference between what is being presented as theopoiesis and theosis, at this point.

Neither one teaches that anything that we do, on our part can invoke a progression; but, that this progression is only a voluntary act of God. This includes the forms of participation that you have listed above as well as all forms of hesychastic prayer and asceticism. All of these are viewed as either tools or means/methods to help us in our quest for theosis . . . and these may or may not do so.

For example, as you know, in Eastern Orthodoxy, the Jesus Prayer is different from the Prayer of the Heart. The Jesus Prayer is something we do, something we pray out loud or silently to ourselves throughout the day. We can pray the Jesus Prayer 10,000 times per day, everyday of our lives . . . but, unless through a voluntary act of God, He moves in us to bring this to a true Prayer of the Heart, then there is only a method or a tool here, and nothing more.

Do you see what I mean? Any act of participation, any aspiration for communion on any level, whether it be by means of the participation you have spoken of, or hesychastic activity or asceticism in its many manifestations . . . these are not viewed as magic bullets in any way . . . just as you say in theopoiesis it is in theosis, it is: "by His Grace that we are saved and not by our ability to attain it without His consent per se."

We can position ourselves in different ways, in the hope of not falling from grace, and we may practice our piety 'each as is appropriate for oneself, but all of this is much different from working with magic methods and techniques that bring salvation on oneself based on one's own efforts, based on one's own hard work. It would be error to describe the Eastern Orthodox doctrine of theosis as a reward or something due or any kind of compensation for anything that we do.

So now, after our lightening round I am left wondering exactly what the difference is between theopoiesis and theosis?