sign in sign up
<<
Home , Perichoresis

ERT (2015) 39:2, 144-156

What is ‘Perichoresis’—and Why Does It Matter? Perichoresis as Properly Basic to the Christian Faith

John Jefferson Davis

I Perichoresis: Central to ‘properly basic’ to the Christian faith, Christian Faith I am arguing that it is a primordial or fundamental concept that describes Perichoresis is hardly a term that is ‘how essentially and eternally is’. part of the working vocabulary of most As such, perichoresis is a doctrine that Christians today. This biblical concept, is not so much argued to as argued based on statements of such as from. Perichoresis will be seen to of ‘I am in the Father and the Father is fer a vision of community and deeper in me’ (Jn 14:10), and others like it— connection with other persons—often referring to the mutual indwelling of sought for in modem society, but rarely the Father and the Son—is generally realized in the face of the fragmenta considered to be of interest only to aca tion and busyness of modem life, even demic theologians—an enigmatic and with the aid of social media. esoteric idea with little practical sig This article will first, briefly review nificance for Christian living. the history of the usage of this term in It is the purpose of this article to Christian ; second, a working argue, on the contrary, that perichoresis definition of the term will be offered; belongs not on the margins of Christian third, the New Testament data will be faith, but at the very centre, and should examined, with special reference to the be recognized as a vital biblical truth life of Jesus in the , and that illuminates the nature of Christian the ‘in Christ’ language of the apostle salvation , the believer’s personal rela Paul; fourth, a philosophical analy tionship to Christ and the meaning of sis of the meaning of ‘person’ will be genuine fellowship in the church. presented, in fight of the biblical data, In arguing that perichoresis is together with a proposal for a new Con

or. John Jefferson Davis (PhD, Duke), an ordained Presbyterian minister, is professor o f Systematic Theol ogy and at Cordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Massachusetts, USA. He is a frequent public speaker and press columnist and is the author o fseveral well-known books, including Evangelical E th ics (2004), The Frontiers o f Science and Faith (2002), Worship and the Reality of God (2010), Meditation and Communion with God (2012), and numerous articles in scholarly journals. What is ‘Perichoresis’—and Why Does It Matter 145

cept of the ‘extended Self’; and fifth, The interpenetration of the natures and finally, some practical implications was understood to be the ground of the of perichoresis for the doctrines of so- interchange of the attributes.3 teriology (salvation), anthropology (na , who stud ture of man), and (fellow ied Gregory’s writings, adopted the ship and ministry in the church) will be concept, and was the first to use the suggested. noun perichoresis to describe this move ment of penetration in the person of Christ of the divine nature toward the II P e ric h o re s is : S o m e human nature.4 In the seventh century Historical Trajectories took up the concept, The concept of perichoresis was first being the first to apply it to the mutual introduced into theology by Gregory interpenetration5 of the three persons of Nazianzus in his Epistle 101, when of the : he used the verb perichoreo to speak of (T)hese are indivisible and insepa the union of the divine and human na rable from each other and united tures in Christ: ‘Just as the natures are into one, and interpenetrating one mixed, so also the names pass recip another without confusion ... they rocally into each [perichorouson) other are three although united, and they by the principle of this coalescence.’1 are distinct, although inseparable.6 Gregory here speaks of the inter In the twelfth century, John of change of names and attributes be Damascus’ The Orthodox Faith was tween the two natures that later came translated into Latin, and the concept to be called the communicatio idioma- of perichoresis entered into Western tum or ‘communication of attributes’.2 Trinitarian theology under the term circumincessio. Other Latin theologians 1 As cited by Verna Harrison, ‘Perichoresis such as affirmed the in the Greek Fathers’, St. Vladimir’s Theo logical Quarterly 35 (1991): 53-65 at page 55. For the history of perichoresis in Christian 3 A widely recognized biblical example of this theology I have drawn on Harrison and G.L. ‘communication of attributes’ is found in Acts Prestige, God in Patristic Thought (London: 20:28 , where Paul speaks of the ‘church of S.P.C.K., 1964), 282-302; Thomas F. Torrance, God which he bought with his own blood'— The Christian Doctrine of God, One Being Three where blood, a property of Christ’s human na Persons (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1996), 175- ture, is attributed to Christ as God in his divine 202; and Jacques Fantino, ‘Circumincession’, nature. in Jean-Yves Lacoste, ed., Encyclopedia of 4 Fantino, ‘Circumincession’, 315. , v.l (New York: Routledge, 5 For the patristic usage of the noun pericho 2005), 315-16. resis and the verb perichoreo with the sense 2 A very careful recounting of the history of of ‘interpenetrate’, or ‘interpenetration’, see the concept of the communication idiomatum G.W.H. Lampe, ed., A Patristic Greek Lexicon from the patristic period through the Reforma (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961), 1077. tion and post-Reformation periods is provided 6 St. John of Damascus, The Orthodox Faith, in Wolfhart Pannenberg, fesus— God and Man III,5, in Nicene andPost-NiceneFathers: Second (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968), 296-307, Series, v.9, eds. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace ‘Mutual Interpenetration of the Natures as a (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, repr. 1994), Way of Understanding the Unity of Christ'. 49. 146 John Jefferson Davis notion of the indwelling of the divine Ill Perichoresis: a W o rkin g persons of the Trinity, without using Definition: the term, as did the Council of Florence Before proceeding with a consideration (1431-45) in its Decree of Union with of the biblical data, a working defini the Jacobites.7 tion of perichoresis will be given, with There has been little dogmatic de a view to possible refinement in fight velopment of the concept of perichore- of the biblical and theological analysis sis in the East since the time of John of to follow. This working definition will Damascus, and little in the West since draw from three different, but related, the middle ages. In the West, this rela fines of thought: shared inferiority; re tive lack of theological attention to the ciprocal empathy; and the ‘Thou-Thou’ implications of perichoresis may be, in relationship. part, a consequence of the increasing In the first instance, perichoresis scholastic elaboration of the doctrine can be understood to involve a relation of the Trinity, after the introduction ship of shared inferiority, in which two of Aristotelean philosophy and the in (or more) persons share, at a deep lev troduction of many technical distinc el, their inner fives with one another. tions that tended to separate Trinitar It involves an ‘opening of the heart’ to ian doctrine from the lived experience the other, a giving of permission to the of Christians.8 As the doctrine of the other to ‘get inside’ my fife. Trinity became somewhat marginalized When Jesus says that ‘I am in the as a result, the pivotal concept of per Father and the Father is in me’, the ichoresis embedded within it tended to preposition ‘in’ does not refer to one drop out of sight as well. physical object being spatially inside With the renewal of interest in the the other, but rather, one person being doctrine of the Trinity of the last sev ‘in’ the other in a relational manner eral generations, sparked by the work that engages mind, will, and emotions. of , Karl Rahner, and others, Jesus and the Father are in a mutually it now seems that the time has come ‘open hearted’ relation with one anoth to give this neglected biblical truth er, that puts them ‘on the same page’ renewed theological attention, with a with one another, in a unity of under view to showing its significance not standing, purpose, and emotion. only for the Trinity and , but Perichoresis can also be viewed for other vital areas of Christian theol as a personal relationship character ogy as well—notably, for the doctrines ized by mutual empathy, with empathy of salvation and the church. being defined simply as ‘the ability to feel another’s experience’.9 When the

9 This definition of empathy is borrowed from Sim Van der Ryn, Design for an Empathic World: 7 Fantino, 'Circumincession', 315, 316. Reconnecting People, Nature and Self (Washing 8 As argued by the Catholic theologian Cath ton, D.C.: Island Press, 2013). The term ‘em erine Lacugna in God for Us: The Trinity and pathy’ was coined in 1909 by the psychologist Christian Life (San Francisco: HarperSanFran- Edward Titchener, as a translation of the Ger cisco, 1991), 168-69. man Einfuhlung (‘feelinginto’). Whac is ‘Perichoresis’—and Why Does It Matter 147

apostle Paul admonishes the Chris ‘heart-to-heart’ or ‘heart-in-heart’ con in Rome to ‘Rejoice with those nection between two or more persons who rejoice’ and to ‘mourn with those characterized by reciprocal empathy. who mourn’ (Rom 12:15), he is, in ef fect, pointing to such an experience of mutual empathy as a characteristic of IV P erichoresis in the Life o f Christian fellowship or koinonia. Jesus, God and the People of God: in his prayer for us as his disciples, New Testament Perspectives: prayed that we might experience the In this section we will highlight New joy that he experiences with the Father Testament passages that illustrate Qn 17:13)—that we might participate perichoresis in Jesus’ relationship to in the reciprocally empathic joy that the Father, and in the relationships of the Father knows in him and that he knows in the Father. Christians with God and with one an other, with special references to the From a third vantage point, pericho Johannine and Pauline texts. resis can be viewed as a ‘Thou-Thou’ relationship, along the lines of Mar tin Buber’s personalist philosophy of 1. J o h a n n in e te xts his well-known work, I and Thou.10 In Jesus’ programmatic statement that ‘I such a relationship each person seeks am in the Father and the Father is in to know the other not impersonally as me’ (Jn 14:10) was noted at the begin an ‘It’, as mere object or instrument ning of this paper. Elsewhere in the Jo of one’s own self-interests, but as a hannine literature we can see that the ‘Thou’ who has opened the heart to relationship of perichoretic communion share the inner life, with no ulterior that Jesus enjoyed with the Father is motives, but only in a stance of recipro promised to his disciples, through the cal self-donation. Likewise, as an T in arrival and presence of the , that relationship, each person intends and realized in the experience of fel to allow the other to know himself or lowship in the churches. Jesus’ high herself as a ‘Thou’, in reciprocal open priestly prayer (Jn 17) points to the ness, transparency and trust. eschatological perfection of this com In the light of the biblical analy munion in the life to come. sis to follow, it hopefully will become During the farewell discourse Jesus evident that God’s design for his peo announces that ‘On that day (when the ple from the beginning was that they Spirit arrives: 14:16) you will realize might come to experience with one an that I am in the Father, and you are in other and with himself the ‘Thou-Thou’ me, and I am in you’ (Jn 14:20). Jesus quality of relationship that character was teaching the disciples that this izes the Triune life of the Father, Son, perichoretic language of being ‘in him’, and the Spirit. In short, perichoretic so enigmatic before his cross and res communion could be understood as a urrection, would become understand able after Pentecost and the reception 10 Martin Buber, I and Thou, tr. Walter Kauf- of the Spirit, for the Spirit would take mann (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, them ‘inside’ Jesus’ interior experi 1970). ence, and allow them to have an expe- 148 John Jefferson Davis riential and subjective understanding 2:20) enables the believers to discern of the meaning of his words. the truth and to remain in it; by so do This is why Jesus could also say, ‘It ing, they remain in the Son and in the is for your advantage that I go away; un Father (1 Jn 2:24). less I go away, the Counsellor will not Jesus’s high priestly prayer (Jn 17) come to you’ (Jn 16:7). Jesus was mak pointed to the eschatological perfect ing the astonishing promise that his ing of the believer’s perichoretic com disciples would have an even more in munion with God and the people of timate relationship with himself when God: ‘I pray ... that all of them may be he was physically absent—for though one, just as you are in me and I am in absent in the body, he would be present you. May they also be in us so that the with them in the Spirit in a new way, in world may believe that you have sent which the Spirit would take them ‘in me’ (Jn 17:20,21). In this enormously side’ the heart experience of Jesus, cre important statement, Jesus prayed that ating a new condition of reciprocally his disciples would ultimately experi shared, empathic life. Even before the ence the depth of unity in fellowship arrival of the Spirit, he instructed them among themselves—and with himself to expect a new closeness and indwell and the Father—that he had experi ing with the Father and himself (Jn enced from eternity with the Father— 14:23), and that abiding in him in this as they experienced what it meant to perichoretic communion, like a branch be ‘in us’. in the vine (Jn 15:5), was the secret of Such a supernatural degree of unity, being a fruitful disciple. produced by the ministry of the Spirit, In his epistles John gives evidence and so poorly realized in the history of that Jesus’ promise of perichoretic the church, would be fundamental to communion was being fulfilled in his the success of the Christian mission, circle of churches, through the arrival and the world’s recognition that Jesus and reception of the Spirit. Christian had indeed been sent by the Father existence, he announces, is a matter of (17:21b). experiencing communion with the Fa ther and the Son and with those who are experiencing this joyful fellowship 2. Pauline texts (1 Jn 1:3). By abiding in the apostolic The reality of perichoretic communion teaching, the believers abide in the Son with Christ in the Spirit is fundamental and in the Father (1 Jn 3:24), and they to Paul’s understanding of Christian do so in view of the anointing of the existence as well. The apostle’s per Spirit, who remains in them (1 Jn 3:27). vasive use of the language of being ‘in In John’s ‘logo-pneumatic’ (Word- Christ’ or Christ being ‘in’ the believer Spirit) epistemology of Christian ex was a consequence of the fact that he, perience, the believers know that like John and the other apostles, had they live in him, and Christ in them (= himself experienced the fulfilment of perichoretic communion), because he Jesus’ promise of Jn 14:20. Paul had has given us his Spirit (1 Jn 4:13)—in not only a dramatic encounter with the fulfilment of the promise of Jn 14:20. risen Christ on the road to Damascus, The anointing of the Holy Spirit (1 Jn objectively and externally, but having What is ‘Perichoresis’—and Why Does It Matter 149 received the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17,18) intimacy through which God intended through Ananias’ prayer and laying on to impart all the fullness of his love for of hands, he came to know Christ as Christ his Son (Eph 3:17-19). dwelling in him, subjectively and inter nally. Paul realized that he himself was a V Perichoresis and the new creature (2 Cor 5:17), and that his Metaphysics o f‘Person’: old self-centred life had been replaced In order to advance the argument here by a new centre—Christ living in him being presented that perichoresis is (Gal 2:20) and ministering through not merely a strange property of the him. On the basis of his new pericho- Trinitarian persons, but a property retic communion with Christ, in the or capacity that is shared (in an ana Spirit, he was able to teach his disci logical sense) by human beings, some ples that they too were ‘in Christ’ and metaphysical analysis of the nature of that Christ was in them (Col 1:27). ‘person’12 will be needed. The working Because they had the indwelling definition of ‘person’ that is stipulated Spirit, as adopted sons and daughters for the purposes of the present dis of the Father, they, like Jesus, could cussion is as follows: ‘an intelligent experience perichoretic intimacy with subject of experiences that has the God and address him in prayer as capacity for self-consciousness and ‘Abba’ (Gal 4:4-6; Rom 8:15,16). God awareness of a relationship to God’. their Father was not only ‘above’ them This stipulated definition is deliberate but among them and even in them (Eph ly formulated from within a biblical and 4:6, ‘in all’). To be a Christian is to Christian frame of reference. have the indwelling Spirit (Rom 8:9), With this stipulated definition of who makes us to be in Christ (Rom person in mind, there are two common 8:1), and who enables us to know the assumptions concerning the nature of mind of Christ and God, as the Spirit ‘person’ that need to be examined: 1) reveals to us the truths hidden deep in that human beings, with physical bod the interior life of God (1 Cor 2:10-12). ies, are the primary and paradigmatic Paul’s language of perichoretic examples of personhood; and 2) that communion, of union with Christ and human persons are essentially con being in Christ, was no mere figure of tained or circumscribed by their bodies. speech or merely a matter of being un The point of examining these assump der the authority of Christ,11 but was tions is that both can be mental barri the expression of a radically new meta ers to understanding the meaning of physical and ontological reality: the perichoresis and Jesus’ statement that presence of God within the church and ‘I am in the Father and the Father is in the believer, in an astonishing depth of

12 For historical surveys of the meanings of 11 See William B. Barcley, Christ in You: A this somewhat elusive and often problematic Study in Paul’s Theology and Ethics (Lanham, notion of ‘person’, see: Joseph Ratzinger, ‘Re Md.: University Press of America, 1999), 5-19 trieving the Tradition: Concerning the Notion for a review of modem scholarly discussions of Person in Theology’, Communio 17:3(1990): of the Pauline ‘Christ in you/me’ language. 439-54. 150 John Jefferson Davis me’: how can two persons be ‘in’ one The further point to be noticed from another? the foregoing observations is that per sons without material bodies are not 1. Primary examples of subject to some of the limitations of personhood persons with material bodies, viz, im penetrability. That is to say, two mate As to the first assumption, it should rial bodies—such as two bowling balls be recognized that from a biblical and or two apples—cannot interpenetrate Christian point of view, the category one another and be ‘in’ one another, of ‘person’ is not limited to human be occupying the same region of space at ings, but includes the divine persons of the same time.14 the Trinity and spiritual beings such as However—and this is a crucial angels and demons as well. It could be point—non-material entities can in fact and in fact should be argued that the occupy the same region of space at the divine persons of the Trinity—Father, same time and so interpenetrate one Son, and Holy Spirit—and not human another. Examples of the latter non persons are the proper epistemic and material entities could include various ontological baselines or paradigm for forms of energy such as sound waves what it means to be a ‘person’. from human voices or musical instru The Pauline statement that the di ments, and different wave lengths vine Father is the source of all ‘father of electromagnetic radiation (visible hood’ in and earth (Eph 3:14, light, infrared, ultraviolet, x-rays, mi 15) certainly points in this direction: crowaves, radio waves, television sig human fatherhood is an image and nals, cell phone signals, Wi-Fi connec analogy of the divine—rather than the tions, etc.) that can be present in the reverse. Similarly, the biblical notion same room simultaneously. that human beings are made in the im At a cocktail party many voices and age of God implies that God is the origi many conversations from many per nal and that humans are the derivative sons are all present in the same room reflections of what it means to be a per and ‘interpenetrate’ one another. Simi sonal being. larly, when a trio of jazz musicians are The point of arguing that divine playing a piece of jazz together, the persons are the primary exemplars of personhood is to notice that having a physical body is, technically, an ‘ac teristics such as intelligence and the ability to cidental’ and not a necessary property interact with human persons—though without of a person. , the Holy a physical body—being embedded in software Spirit, and angels and demons do not and a silicon-based internet server. have material bodies as do human 14 The impenetrability of solid material ob jects is a consequence of what in physics is beings, but they are indeed personal known as the Pauli Exclusion Principle. Light agents.13 and electromagnetic radiation, however, are not subject to the Pauli Exclusion Principle, and so can be present simultaneously in the 13 As another possible analogy, consider a same region of space. See Michela Massimi, personal assistant app on a smartphone such Pauli's Exclusion Principle (Cambridge: Cam as ‘Siri’. Siri speaks and has personal charac- bridge University Press, 2005). W hat is ‘Perichoresis’—and Why Does It Matter 151 physical bodies of the pianist, the bass Human beings have not only physical player, and the drummer are not liter- bodies, but also minds. Human minds, ally ‘in’ one another, but they are to while connected to the brain, are not gether ‘into’ the music, and the sound identical to the brain, and are endowed of each instrument is taken into the ex with non-material capacities of under perience of the other musicians, while standing, language, and speech. each maintains his or her own identity Human persons are not circum and part. scribed by their bodies in the sense More generally, then, we can say that as intelligent agents, human be that while material objects do not ings can extend themselves and their interpenetrate one another, a mate personal presence beyond the bounda rial object can be penetrated by a non ries of their physical bodies through material entity (e.g., a human body the use of instruments, tools, language, penetrated by x-rays during a physical and written and electronic media. exam), and one non-material (mental; Human beings are not only embod spiritual; electromagnetic radiation) ied Selves, but more importantly, for entity can penetrate another non-mate the purpose of this argument, extended rial entity (e.g., two voices in the room; Selves.2* 15 As intelligent agents, human the sounds of three musical instru beings can extend themselves into the ments; one mind speaking into another world and to other humans not only by mind). Material objects are not capable physical contact (e.g., a handshake or of perichoresis—but non-material enti a hug or kiss), but through social me ties or agents are. dia and through speech and language. Whenever one person speaks to another, in deeper openness of heart 2. Contained by their bodies and vulnerability, one person is being The illustrations above of conversa allowed into the other’s inner world. If tions at a cocktail party or jazz mu the conversation is a mutual conver sicians playing jazz are relevant to sation of ‘Thou’ with ‘Thou’, they are the second assumption that is being mentally, emotionally, and relationally questioned: the assumption that hu ‘in’ one another. Just as the Holy Spirit man persons are ‘contained’ or cir is inside the mind of God the Father (1 cumscribed by their bodies. While it is Cor 2:10-12), with access to the ‘deep true that human beings are in a signifi things of God’ and the inner life of the cant sense ‘in’ their own bodies, and Father, in a relationship of perichoretic as such can be said to have a definite communion between Father and Spirit, location in space (‘here’ rather than so is deep conversation and empathic, ‘there’), an important qualification of personal sharing between two people this common-sense assumption needs an image of this Trinitarian perichore to be made. sis. More properly, I wish to argue that human beings, while centred in their 15 1 have presented this notion of the extend bodies, are neither reducible to then- ed Self in my earlier article, ‘How Personal bodies, nor circumscribed by their bod Agents Are Located in Space’, Philosophia ies, in a sense that is to be explained. Christi 13:2 (2011): 449-55. 152 John Jefferson Davis

Human conversation is a form of relationships for which Christ prayed communication. Communication be (Jn 17:21) in his greatest prayer, the tween persons can open up communion prayer that expressed Jesus’ vision of between persons; and such communion the ultimate telos of our Christian sal between persons can be a reflection vation. of and a participation in, at the ideal limit—the perichoretic communion of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Human VI ‘Perichoresis fo r the bodies, strictly speaking, cannot oc Rest o f Us’: Some Practical cupy the same space at the same time, Applications but human minds and hearts can be con At the beginning of this essay the claim nected and ‘in the same place’ by open was set forth that perichoresis was not and honest words and language. just a mysterious property unique to Recent research in neuroscience the Trinity, but was ‘properly basic’ to appears to indicate that human beings the Christian faith, and as a fundamen are in some sense ‘hard-wired for em tal truth had important implications pathy’, in that the mirror neurons in for salvation, the Christian life, and the brain allow us, through imitation fellowship and ministry in the church. of facial expressions, gestures, tone This discussion will be concluded with of voice, and so forth, to enter empa- some brief indications of how pericho thetically into the experience of oth resis and perichoretic communion illu ers.16 Far from being limited only to the minate these aspects of Christian faith persons of the Trinity, the capacity for and life. perichoretic relationships—reciprocal With respect to soteriology or the sharing of inner experience—can be doctrine of salvation, the crucial state recognized as a basic capacity of human ment in Jesus’ high priestly prayer (Jn beings. 17:21) reveals that perichoretic com Human beings made in the image munion is the highest fulfilment and of God, with the powers of speech ultimate purpose of Christ’s redemp and language, were designed for per- tive work: ichoresis, so to speak. It might be said My prayer ... is that all of them may that all the world’s great love poetry be one, Father, just as you are in me and love songs are expressions of the and I am in you. May they also be longing of the human heart for such in us so that the world may believe ‘heart-to-heart’ and ‘heart-in-heart’ that you have sent me. perichoretic intimacy. It was precisely for such an optimal quality of personal In this astonishing prayer for unity, which is at its heart a revelation of the nature of salvation, and not only a 16 Marco Iacoboni, Mirroring People: The Sci prayer for church unity—Jesus prays ence of Empathy and How We Connect with Oth that as a result of his redemptive work, ers (New York: Picador, 2008), pp. 116, 119: his disciples might be ‘in us,’ having mirror neurons in the brain connect with the limbic areas to facilitate emotions and empa the interior heart experience of the thy, and help us to imitate and understand the Father’s love that he himself enjoyed, emotions of others. and that the disciples might have such What is ‘Perichoresis’—and Why Does It Matter 153 perichoretic, ‘heart-to-heart’, ‘Thou- pie together and unitedly might enjoy Thou’ relationships with one another. his own intimate communion with the His prayer for the church’s final end Father in the Spirit—that we might reveals what was the purpose of the dwell ‘in the bosom of the Trinity’ as he Triune God from the beginning. himself dwells ‘in the bosom’ of the Fa The promise of salvation in the Old ther (Jn 1:18). Jesus promises that his Covenant was epitomized in the prom disciples can experience being indwelt ise of ‘Emmanuel’, ‘God with us’. In by him (Jn 17:26), even as he indwelt the New Covenant this promise is not the Father. Perichoresis is the basis only fulfilled, but taken to an even of the believer’s union with Christ, the deeper level: ‘God in us’. Jesus’ prayer concept that is so central to the sote- will be fully answered in the world to riological understanding of both John come, only when all God’s people, to and Paul.18 gether and in unity, enjoy the intimate communion with the Father that Jesus knows in the Spirit. God who as Re VII Perichoresis in Practice deemer is ‘in heaven’, ‘above us’, and What does such a union look like in who is also near and among us, is final practice? Three examples might be ly in us, as Father, Son, and Spirit dwell given: one from Jesus’ own experi in the hearts of every believer, sharing ence of joy with the Father; a second with us the love, joy, peace, and glory from the early Christian experience of that Jesus knows in the Father. sonship and adoption; and a third one The concept of perichoresis em from church history, Wesley’s spiritual bedded in Jn 17:21 (and elsewhere) awakening at Aldersgate. Each will be allows us to bring together the legal viewed in light of the concept of per and forensic categories of western ichoretic communion as understood in soteriology with the ‘mystical’ and this essay. participatory categories of the East.17 The atonement and forgiveness of allows us to come into God’s presence i-Joy with confidence (Heb 10: 19,22). For In Luke’s account of the return of the giveness of sins, however, while the seventy two from a mission, we are basis and beginning of salvation, is not told that at that time ‘Jesus, full of joy the final end. through the Holy Spirit, said, ‘I praise Christ’s highest purpose in going to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth the cross was that on the basis of the ... ’,(Lk 10:21). The Trinitarian nature forgiveness provided, all of God’s peo- of this incident is apparent: Jesus the Son experiences a joy mediated by a fresh affusion of the Holy Spirit in an 17 1 have discussed in greater detail such an integration of western and eastern soteriolo- gies in the chapter, ‘Salvation Reconceptual 18 I have discussed the concept of union ized: Is Our Western Gospel Big Enough?’ in with Christ, and its biblical and metaphysical John Jefferson Davis, Practicing Ministry in the dimensions in Meditation and Communion with Presence o f God (Eugene, Or.: Cascade Books, God (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2012), forthcoming, 2015). 41-51. 154 John Jefferson Davis act of spontaneous prayer and thanks sense of intimacy and affection of Je giving to the Father. sus’ own perichoretic communion (‘I This text could be viewed in the am in the Father’) with the Father. light of two others: John 14:20 (‘On This reality of perichoretic communion that day [when the Spirit comes: with the Father, mediated by the Spirit, 14:16,17] you will know that I am in was, in early —and can be the Father and you are in me, and I am today—a conscious experience that can in you’), and Romans 5:5 (‘God’s love be known: ‘This is how we know that he has been poured into our hearts by the lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he Holy Spirit who has been given to us’). gave us’ (1 Jn 3:24; 4:13: ‘We know that In Luke 10:21 we have a beautiful we live in him and he in us, because he picture of Jesus’ own experience of has given us his Spirit’). perichoretic communion with the Fa ther—of being ‘in the Father’ in ‘heart- 3. Spiritual awakening to-heart’ contact. He was experiencing at that moment what he promised that John Wesley’s experience of spiritual his disciples would later experience— awakening at Aldersgate could also be and also understand on the basis of viewed through the lens of perichoretic that experience—when they person communion. On the evening of May 24, ally received the Spirit. Jesus was ex 1738, at a Moravian meeting where periencing that of which Paul spoke Luther’s Preface to the Epistle to the Ro in Rom 5:5: the love of God the Father mans was being read, Wesley felt that was being poured afresh into his heart ‘his heart was strangely warmed’, as by the Spirit; joy is the feeling of love ex he came to experience a true meaning perienced. of the gospel and justification by faith alone. In Wesley own account in his Journal, he recalls: 2. Sonship and adoption About a quarter before nine, while The reality of perichoretic communion he was describing the change which with God the Father can be illustrated God works in the heart through faith from the New Testament and early in Christ, I felt my heart strangely Christian experience with reference to warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, sonship and adoption. The apostle Paul Christ alone, for salvation; and an reminded the believers in Galatia that assurance was given me that He they had received the Spirit, through had taken away my sins, even mine, faith, when they believed the gospel and saved me from the law of (Gal 3:2,3, 14). Because they were and death.2 *15 consequently sons of God by adoption, The Holy Spirit’s work of illuminat and no longer slaves, God the Father ing biblical truth in this way was, in had sent the Spirit of his Son into their fact, bringing Wesley into perichoretic hearts, who called out ‘Abba, Father!’ communion with Christ and the Father. (Gal 4:6,7; cf. Rom 8:15,16). The Holy Spirit was reduplicating the prayer language of Jesus in their 19 Journal of John Wesley, accessed at www. hearts, communicating to them the ccel. org/ccel/wesley/j ournal.vi.ii.xvi.htm. W hat is ‘Perichoresis’—and Why Does It Matter 155

In this case the Spirit connected not enclosed, but open and transparent to only with Wesley’s mind in new spirit one another, while yet retaining the ual understanding, and with the will in distinctiveness of the T in relationship new attitude and motivation, but with to the other as ‘Thou’. Father, Son, the affections and feelings as well, as and Spirit work not independently, but Wesley came to personally experience in partnership and harmony in all the grace—the Father’s favour and affec works of redemption ad extra.20 tion for him in Christ. As a result, John Inasmuch as human beings made Wesley was from that moment, a new in the reflect, in a par creature in Christ. tial and analogous manner, the dynam ics of the Trinitarian life, such human 4. Anthropology lives should be lived with a conscious The perichoretic nature of New Tes ness of their own interconnectedness, tament soteriology can shed light on intersubjectivity, and interdependence. biblical anthropology, the Christian un Human beings must be connected to derstanding of the human person. The survive: connected to an environment, vision of the nature of the redeemed with air and water and sunlight and human’s final end reveals what was the food chain; to families, neighbour God’s purpose for humanity from the hoods, and social institutions; and to beginning, from eternity. We might God and to the people of God. say that human beings were designed Our subjectivity and emerging sense by God for perichoresis—for intimacy, of ‘self’ and personal identity is not for communion. Or to state this in yet formed in some Cartesian, privatized another way, we could say that being subjectivity, but intersubjectively.21 Hu made in the image of God is to be con man beings learn language and devel stituted with a capacity for perichore op as human beings through social in sis, to enjoy a quality of life with God teractions and institutions. Just as the like that which Jesus knew with the Father and the Son have identities in Father. relation to one another, so it is that hu The notion that perichoresis is a man beings achieve a sense of identity concept that is fundamental for an only through their social interactions understanding of what it means to be with others in the context of communi human could be further unpacked with ties that transmit their stories, beliefs three other terms, each of which be and practices to the next generations. gins with the prefix ‘inter’, and each of which reflect the relationships within the Trinity: interconnected; intersubjec- 20 In this respect the perichoretic commun tive; and interdependent. Within the holy ion of Father, Son, and Spirit can be seen as Trinity, the Father, Son, and Spirit are the basis for the patristic formula, Opera Trini- deeply and intrinsically interconnect tatis ad extra indivisa sunt. ed, fully sharing the common divine 21 On the critical role of social processes in the formation of personal identity, see George nature, agreeing in common purpose, Herbert Mead, On Social Psychology: Selected and united in mutual love. Their con Papers, ed. Anselm Strauss (Chicago: Univer sciousnesses are not private and self- sity of Chicago Press, 1964), 19-42. 156 John Jefferson Davis

5. Church fellowship and communion with the Father: the mira ministry cles that he performed were not done Finally, perichoresis can illuminate the acting alone; they reflected the fact nature of fellowship and ministry in the that the Father was in him and that he life of the church. Koinonia or fellow was in the Father (Jn 10:38). He never ship is, at its best, not merely a matter spoke on his own authority, but first of Christians enjoying social contacts listened to the Father, and then spoke or participating in common tasks, but what the Father commanded him to more properly, a deep sharing of a com say (Jn 12:49, 50; 8:26). Before act mon life, a life of communion with the ing, he first observed what the Father Father and the Son (1 Jn 1:3). was doing (Jn 5:19). Jesus practised Such perichoretic communion in ministry with a consciousness of being volves an ‘opening of the heart’ be in the presence of the Father (Jn 8:29) tween Christians. It was for such a and in partnership with the Father, and depth and quality of relationship that his perichoretic practice of ministry is the apostle Paul hoped in his appeal the pattern for our ministries as disci to the Corinthians: ‘We have spoken ples of Christ.22 Ministering for Christ freely to you, Corinthians, and opened is first a matter of abiding in Christ (Jn wide our hearts to you. We are not 15:5), for apart from him our ministries withholding our affection from you ... will have not have lasting and eternal As a fair exchange ... open wide your value. hearts also’ (2 Cor 6:11-13). His admo Perichoretic communion, then, can nition to the believers in Rome to ‘... be seen to be ‘properly basic’ to the rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn Christian faith—to Christian salvation, with those who mourn’ (Rom 12:15) life, and ministry. Christian existence was a directive to practise perichoretic is a life of interconnectedness, inter communion with one another, to relate subjectivity, and interdependence—a to one another in reciprocal empathy. participation in the life of the Trinity, Luke’s characterization of life in the in Jesus’ joyous fellowship with the Fa early Jerusalem church subsequent to ther and the Holy Spirit. Jesus promised Pentecost could be seen as a manifes that when the Spirit came his disciples tation of such perichoretic commun would know by personal experience ion. The believers were ‘all together’ that he was in the Father and that ‘you (Acts 2:44), and were ‘one in heart are in me, and I am in you’ (Jn 14:20). and mind’ and ‘shared everything they It is our great privilege as his disciples had’ (Acts 4:32). One consequence of to believe that promise and to live into this remarkably attractive quality of it, for by so doing, we will increase the Christian common life was numerical likelihood that the world will believe growth: ‘ added to their num that Jesus was indeed the one who was ber daily those who were being saved’ sent by the Father (Jn 17:21). (Acts 2:47). The concept of perichoresis can il 22 I have developed this point in greater de luminate the nature of ministry in the tail in John Jefferson Davis, Practicing Ministry New Testament and in the church today. in the Presence of God (Eugene, OR: Cascade Jesus practised ministry in perichoretic Books, forthcoming 2015). Copyright of Evangelical Review of Theology is the property of Paternoster Periodicals and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.