DOCSLIB.ORG

In God's Image: the Abilities of the Soul

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In God's Image: the Abilities of the Soul In God’s Image: The Abilities of the Soul UNIT 1, LESSON 5 Learning Goals Connection to the ӹ God created the universe with His power, Catechism of the understanding, and free will. Catholic Church ӹ All living things have a soul. ӹ CCC 357 ӹ A soul is that which makes a living thing ӹ CCC 362-364 alive. ӹ CCC 1701-1705 ӹ Made in God’s image and likeness, the human soul has been gifted with intellect, free will, and the ability to love. Vocabulary ӹ Soul ӹ Intellect ӹ Will ӹ Theology BIBLICAL TOUCHSTONES God created mankind in his image; in the image So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is of God he created them; male and female he perfect. created them. MATTHEW 5:48 GENESIS 1:27 45 Lesson Plan Materials ӹ Creation ӹ Image of God ӹ The Powers of a Soul ӹ Paper, marker and/or colored pencils DAY ONE Warm-Up A. Review the main ideas from the previous lesson. (We are made in God’s image and likeness. This means that we were created with specific roles: priest, prophet, king, son/daughter, and spouse. We are also created as male and female in God’s image to be united in marriage.) B. Explain that being made in God’s image and likeness means not only that we have specific roles and are created by God as male and female but also that we have been given specific abilities that make us like God. C. Write on the board Jeremiah 10:12 and have a student stand and read the passage aloud: “The one who made the earth by his power, established the world by his wisdom, and by his skill stretched out the heavens.” D. Ask what this passage from Jeremiah tells us about how God created the earth. Answer: God used his power, wisdom, and skill to create everything. Activity reation A. Put students into pairs or trios, have them iretions Read about each day of creation from Genesis 1 and 2. Determine and record turn to Creation (page 26), and assign each what God had in mind and what choices He made or actions He took on each day of creation. Refer back to the Bible to support your answers. group one day of the seven days of creation Days of Creation What did God have in mind? God’s choices/actions in Genesis 1 and 2. Have students read the Day 1: Genesis 1:35 account of creation on their assigned day from Day 2: Genesis 1:68 Genesis 1 and 2 and determine and record what Day 3: Genesis 1:913 God understood on each day and which choices God made and what actions He took each day. Day 4: Genesis 1:1419 Also, have students record what evidence they Day 5: Genesis 1:2023 found in the text to support their answers. Day 6: Genesis 1:2431 B. When complete, have groups share their responses and discuss. Have students record Day 7: Genesis 2:1-3 on Creation responses from the other groups. Guide the discussion to emphasize the fact 26 that we learn from the story of creation that God has divine understanding and the ability to choose and act freely. 46 © SOPHIA INSTITUTE FOR TEACHERS LESSON PLAN Formative Assessment Distribute paper and make markers and/or colored pencils available. Have students draw a picture of their assigned day of creation. Instruct them to include in their drawing all the things that God created on that day and to represent what God understood on each day and which choices God made and what actions He took each day. DAY TWO Warm-Up A. Review the main ideas of the previous day’s lesson. (God created the universe with His power, wisdom, understanding, and free will.) B. Ask students to brainstorm some of the different abilities they have. Keep a list on the board. Answers will vary but might include artistic or athletic ability or the ability to read, think, run, or walk, and so forth. Activity Put students into pairs or trios and have them turn e Poers o a ol to The Powers of a Soul (page 27). With plants iretions Beginning with plants, then animals, and fi nally humans, brainstorm and record the abilities that each group has that make it different from other living things. For example, what abilities do plants have that make them first, then animals, and then humans, have students different from animals and humans? What abilities do animals have that make them different from plants and humans? What abilities do humans have that brainstorm and record the abilities that each group make them different from animals and plants? has that make them different from other living Plants things; that is, what abilities do plants have that _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ make them different from animals and humans? _____________________________________________________________ What abilities do animals have that make them nials _____________________________________________________________ different from plants and humans? What abilities _____________________________________________________________ do humans have that make them different from _____________________________________________________________ ans animals and plants? _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ Formative Assessment _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ When students have completed this task, ask them 27 to share their responses. Clarify any questions as needed. Note: Students may object that animals, especially their pets, have the ability to love. In this case, sensitively affirm the closeness and companionship that pets can provide. We even call dogs “man’s best friend!” If needed, differentiate this affection and UNIT 1, LESSON 5 47 LESSON PLAN loyalty from the freely chosen act of self-giving for the good of another. Love is more than an emotion; it is a freely chosen act that requires reason. Animals can love in the emotional sense, but only humans, who have reason, can fully love. DAY THREE Warm-Up A. Review the main ideas of the previous day’s lesson. (God created the universe with His power, understanding, and free will. All living thing have a soul, which is simply that which makes a living thing alive. Human beings are made in God’s image and likeness, which means that our souls share in these abilities of God: intellect (understanding), free will, and the ability to love.) B. Ask students if they’ve heard the saying “nobody’s perfect” or something similar. Then ask if they know that Jesus actually calls us to try to be perfect? Write on the board: “So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.” —MATTHEW 5:48 C. Ask students if they think Jesus was being unreasonable with this command. Damaged by Original Sin as we are, can we really be perfect? The answer is that by cooperating with God’s grace, we can. Ask students to share examples of what it means to live a holy life. Encourage students to think in terms of their intellects, wills, and capacities to love. Keep a list on the board, divided into three columns along these lines. Activity and Assessment ae o o A. Ask students to turn to Image of God (page iretions Read the essay and complete the focus and refl ection questions. Humans have all the abilities of plants means that our abilities are similar to and animals.heology nlike means plants “faith or animals, seeking God’s abilities. We have an intellect 28). Have students individually read the we alsoT haveunderstanding.” the ability to Theologians understand, use theirand a will and the ability to love, just calledminds the intellect, to understand and the our ability Faith. to St. Thomaslike God. Our image of God has been 5. What arechoose theAquinas abilities freely, is calledof one animals? of the the will. most Humans important distortedand because of sin. Our intellect essay and complete the focus and reflection also haverespected the ability theologians to love, ofbecause all time. Accordingand will do not work as well as they are love requires the freedom to choose to supposed to. We do not always choose to St. Thomas Aquinas, all living things have love. souls. This means that plants, animals,to and love others or ourselves. questions. Refl ection Questionhumans all have souls. That might be hard 6. What areGenesis the abilities 1:27 tells of ushumans? that “God created But God helps us to perfect our human In what waysmankind are toyou believe! insimilar his image; To to understand, your in the parents? image we mustWhy fido rstabilities you think again. you This gift, called grace, are like them?of Godknow he created how St. them.”Thomas In defiother ned a soul. helps us to become more like God. words,A soulGod iscreated what makes human a beingsliving thing in alive.We It have is a part to play too: we have to ___________________________________________________________________________________________ B. When this activity has been completed, review His imageclear andthat likeness.there is somethingIn part, this very differentcooperate with grace. ___________________________________________________________________________________________7. What does itbetween mean to a be rock made and in a flGod’s ower. image? The fl ower is alive, and the rock is not. That is because and discuss the answers to the focus and ___________________________________________________________________________________________1. Whatthe fldid ower St. has Thomas a soul, Aquinas and the believerock does had not. a soul? It is a soul that makes the fl ower, and any ___________________________________________________________________________________________ living thing, alive. Every living thing also has reflection questions. ___________________________________________________________________________________________certain abilities that begin in its soul. 8. How did sin affect our human abilities? Plants have the abilities of growing, of ___________________________________________________________________________________________2. What is the defi nition of a soul? taking in nutrition, and of reproducing.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MJAFT Session 5
    Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time by Marcus Borg Study/Preparation Guide: Session 5 1. Read the following pages from MJAFT 1. Chapter 4: Jesus, the Wisdom of God: Sophia Become Flesh [pp 96-118] —or— 2. Summary on reverse — if you don’t have the book 2. Check out this on-line reference for a biography of Borg, a list of his books, as well as some supplementary information for our discussions: http://www.aportraitofjesus.org Focus Questions for our discussion: • What do you make of th eimage of Jesus as the “Wisdom of God”? [pp 96-7] • What strikes you about the role of Sophia in Hebrew wisdom tradition? [pp 98-102] • Discuss the associations between Jesus and Wisdom in: • The Synoptic Gospels [pp 102-3] • Paul [pp 103-7] • John [pp 107-8] • Discuss the meaning for you when Borg speaks of “both son and wisdom”. [pp 108-11] Summary: Chapter 5 Relation of Wisdom to Jesus is Christological NT images Jesus as emissary, child and incarnation of the wisdom of God — Jesus was the “Wisdom of God” Christology is that area of theology that focusers on the relationship between Jesus and God humanity and divinity: how they’re related, etc. Nicene Creed: 3-fold division shows developing Trinitarian dogma Use of Creed in church helps shape how we think of Jesus: i.e., “Son of God” “Son of God Christology is the core of the popular image of Jesus” (97) But, in NT period, there was no official Christology; NT has a number of images, metaphors, for imaging the significance of Jesus and his relationship to God Yes, “father/son” images abound, but also “Jesus as the embodiment ofr incarnation of “the wisdom of God” “Seeing this wisdom Christology can affect our image of Jesus in more than one way.
    [Show full text]
  • Solovyov's Metaphysics Between Gnosis and Theurgy
    religions Article Solovyov’s Metaphysics between Gnosis and Theurgy Aleksandr Gaisin The Graduate School for Social Research, IFiS PAN, 00-330 Warsaw, Poland; [email protected]; Tel.: +7953-154-6247 Received: 29 September 2018; Accepted: 8 November 2018; Published: 13 November 2018 Abstract: This article provides a reading of Vladimir Solovyov’s philosophy as expressed in his ‘Lectures on Divine Humanity’ and ‘The Meaning of Love’. It seeks to unpack his eclectic thought in order to answer the question of whether there is a Jewish Kabbalistic influence on the Russian thinker amidst his usual platonic, gnostic, and Schellengian tropes. Interested as a young man in Jewish Mysticism, Solovyov fluctuates in his ‘Lectures on Divine Humanity’ between a platonic reading of Schellengian Gnosticism and some elements of Kabbalistic origin. In ‘The Meaning of Love’, he develops a notion of love that puts him very close to what Moshe Idel calls ‘theosophic-theurgical Kabbalah’. Showing how ‘The Meaning of Love’ completes the narrative of ‘Lectures’, we can affirm that there is a certain Christian Kabbalistic line in Solovyov’s thought that culminates in his theurgical understanding of love. In this sense, Solovyov might be called a philosophical Marrano as he is certainly a heterodox theosopher that fluctuates between Christian Gnosis and Christian Kabbalah, never assuming a solid identity. Keywords: philosophical theology; heterodoxy; Judeo-Christianity; Russian religious renaissance; Christian Kabbalah; Vladimir Solovyov The enigmatic and eclectic nature of Solovyov’s thought is unveiled if we simply look at the early readings of his philosophy. Already, the Silver Age’s thinker and poet Dmitry Merezhkovsky deemed Solovyov as a Gnostic writer, immersed in Christian heresy (Merezhkovsky 1991, p.
    [Show full text]
  • "Sophia": the Development of Jewish and Hellenistic Thought in the Christology of the New Testament
    Furman Humanities Review Volume 29 Article 29 2017 The Divine "Sophia": The evelopmeD nt of Jewish and Hellenistic Thought in the Christology of the New Testament James Bergman '19 Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarexchange.furman.edu/fhr Recommended Citation Bergman, James '19 (2017) "The Divine "Sophia": The eD velopment of Jewish and Hellenistic Thought in the Christology of the New Testament," Furman Humanities Review: Vol. 29 , Article 29. Available at: https://scholarexchange.furman.edu/fhr/vol29/iss1/29 This Article is made available online by Journals, part of the Furman University Scholar Exchange (FUSE). It has been accepted for inclusion in Furman Humanities Review by an authorized FUSE administrator. For terms of use, please refer to the FUSE Institutional Repository Guidelines. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE DIVINE SOPHIA: THE DEVELOPMENT OF JEWISH AND HELLENISTIC THOUGHT IN THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT James Bergman The tradition of wisdom literature was a prominent theme within the Jewish Old Testament. This emphasis on the idea of wisdom continued into the apocrypha, which detailed the presence of a personified Wisdom that helped God create the heavens and earth. In the New Testament, Jesus is the cen- ter of the wisdom literature, becoming the teacher of proverbs and parables in the Gospels and in the letter of James, yet also the personified Wisdom in John. In general, both the wisdom teachings and the Wisdom Christology of the New Testament stemmed from the fundamentals of first century Jewish thought, showing a strong continuity between Judaism of the emerging Christian movement as it is reflected in the writings of the New Testament.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses Sophia and the Johannine Jesus Scott, James Martin Clark How to cite: Scott, James Martin Clark (1990) Sophia and the Johannine Jesus, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/6231/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk SOPHIA AND THE JOHANNINE JESUS by JAMES MARTIN CLARK SCOTT The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. A Thesis Submitted to the UNIVERSITY OF DURHAM In Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY <PhD> in the DEPARTMENT of THEOLOGY April 1990 MAR 19SI SOPHIA AND THE JOHANHINE JESUS Janes Martin Clark Scott This thesis examines the relationship between the Jewish figure of Sophia and the Johannine Jesus.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gnostic and Hellenistic Backgrounds of Sophia in 1 Corinthians 1-4
    Perichoresis Volume 17. Single Author Supplement 2 (2019): 3-15 DOI: 10.2478/perc-2019-0032 THE GNOSTIC AND HELLENISTIC BACKGROUNDS OF SOPHIA IN 1 CORINTHIANS 1-4 CORIN MIHĂILĂ * Emanuel University ABSTRACT. First Corinthians 1-4 discusses the concept of sophia or wisdom as a central theme. It seems to be both a worldly standard by which the Corinthians judged their teachers and a concept which Paul redefines in light of the cross. Over the last century, two major proposals have been put forth as an explanation for the background of sophia: Gnosticism and Hellenistic Jewish wisdom. Those who advance the hypothesis of Gnosticism behind the concept, correctly identify in these chapters words and terminology that are commonly associated with Gnosti- cism. However, the literary context of 1 Corinthians 1-4, as determinative of meaning for these words, suggests different meanings associated with the cross. Moreover, claiming Gnostic influ- ence on the writing of 1 Corinthians is guilty of anachronism. The Hellenistic Jewish wisdom proposal is likewise based on alleged linguistic and conceptual parallelism with Philonic type wisdom. It is argued, among other things, that the Corinthians were taught such wisdom by Apollos. This argument, however cannot be sustained, when we look at Apollos’ ministry in light of the information we have in the New Testament. As a result, both Gnosticism and Hel- lenistic Jewish wisdom are not viable hypothesis for the background of sophia. KEY WORDS: Sophia, Corinthians, Gnosticism, Hellenistic Jewish wisdom, Apollos, Paul Introduction The first epistle to the Corinthians is well known to provide answers and solutions to some issues that were present in the Corinthian church.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mystical Sophia: More on the Great Grandmother in the Princess Books
    The Mystical Sophia: More on the Great Grandmother in the Princess Books Deirdre Hayward aria Gonzalez Davies’s discussion of the great-great- grandmotherM of the Princess books reflects a continuing interest in this figure, and deepens the understanding of a presence which is a powerful embodiment of feminine principles; particularly the Great Mother archetype, who, as Davies observes, “is a goddess in most societies and a feminine presence in fairy tales.” The power of this figure in MacDonald’s writing is indisputable, and much has been written about her. Yet, given the difficulty of wholly explaining her by, for example, Freudian analysis, or as a symbolic presence, or as part of a mythic/fairy-tale tradition, the question still lingers: why was she such a profound figure for MacDonald? Apart of the answer is to consider MacDonald’s thought within a more mystical framework. Adelheid Kegler has touched upon some Sophianic elements in MacDonald’s thought (1991, 1993); I would like to look further at this aspect. By “mystical” here I mean the search for spiritual truth or enlightenment, with a desire to achieve personal communion and union with God. These were lifelong concerns of MacDonald, which would in part have been addressed through his reading in the Kabbalah, Jakob Böehme, and Swedenborg. He was strongly influenced by Novalis, whose outlook was based upon his mystical concept of the Imagination, which MacDonald shared (MacDonald 1908,1-42; Hayward 23ff.), and informed by the equally mystical notion of the Divine Sophia. MacDonald devoted much time and effort to translating Novalis’s Sophianic “Hymns to the Night” and “Spiritual Songs,” and their imagery has many reflections in his writing (Hayward 35ff.).
    [Show full text]
  • ' Sophia ' and ' Epistēmē ' in the Archaic and Classical Periods
    1 ‘ Sophia ’ and ‘ Epistēmē ’ in the Archaic and Classical Periods David Wolfsdorf 1. Introduction My aim here is to discuss the philosophical use of the terms ‘ sophia ’ and ‘ epistēmē ’ in relation to one another from their earliest occurrences through Aristotle. I begin with pre- philosophical use for this will help to explain the philosophers’ employment and adaptation of the terms. 2. Pre- philosophical uses of ‘ sophiē ’ In philosophical contexts the originally Ionic noun ‘ sophiē ’, later Attic ‘ sophia ’, is standardly translated as ‘wisdom’, the adjective ‘ sophos ’ as ‘wise’. But this will not do for the earliest, pre- philosophical use (cf. Snell 1924 : 1– 20; Gauthier and Jolif 1959 : 479– 89; Gladigow 1965 ; Meier 1970 ). In eighth- and seventh- century poetry ‘ sophiē ’ means ‘skill’, ‘ sophos ’ ‘skilled’ or ‘skilful’. 1 As we will see, wisdom is skill; but in the early poets the skills denoted by these terms are not forms of wisdom. Formal semanticists have noted that ‘skill’, ‘skilful’, and ‘skilled’ are semantically incomplete terms in the sense that a person who has skill or is skilful isn’t skilful simpliciter , but in a particular domain. Compare ‘citizen’, which is semantically incomplete in a distinct, but related way: one is not a citizen simpliciter , but of a particular political body. T ere are various theories of such semantic incompleteness. In the case of ‘skilful’ one view is that in its so- called logical, as opposed to surface grammatical, form the predicate contains a domain variable whose value is supplied by context 99781474258272_pi-260.indd781474258272_pi-260.indd 1111 228-Mar-188-Mar-18 112:47:402:47:40 PPMM 12 Knowledge in Ancient Philosophy (be it linguistic or extralinguistic).
    [Show full text]
  • Sophiology As a Theological Discipline According to Solovyov, Bulgakov and Florensky
    109 Izvirni znanstveni članek (1.01) Bogoslovni vestnik 77 (2017) 1,109—116 UDK: 271.2-284 Besedilo prejeto: 9/2016; sprejeto: 3/2017 Karel Sládek Sophiology as a Theological Discipline according to Solovyov, Bulgakov and Florensky Abstract: The article presents one of the themes of theological disputes in the 20th century, specifically the return of the Sophiology into theological consi- derations. God´s Wisdom (Divine Sophia) was particularly topical in the Russi- an Orthodox theology in 19th and 20th centuries; however, it overlapped with Catholic theology. The text is based on Vladimir Solovyov’s, Sergei Bulgakov’s, and Pavel Florensky’s experience with the revelation of God´s Wisdom. Since their experience is the experience with revelation, the Sophiology can be inte- grated into the subjects of spiritual theology. The fundamental doctrinal dis- pute dealt primarily with the concept of Wisdom in relation to the Holy Trinity. As the mystical encounter with Sophia was described as experience with the female aspect of Divinity, it was also important to search the relationship bet- ween Sophia and Virgin Mary. The author thus concludes that sophiology is an essential part of systematic theology. Key words: Vladimir Solovyov, Sergei Bulgakov, Pavel Florensky, Russian theology, sophiology, dogmatic theology, Mariology Povzetek: Sofiologija kot teološka disciplina po Solovjovu, Bulgakovu in Floren- skem Članek predstavlja eno izmed tem teoloških sporov 20. stoletja, in sicer vrnitev sofiologije v teološke razprave. Božja Modrost (Božja Sofija) je bila še posebej obravnavana v ruski pravoslavni teologiji 19. in 20. stoletja. Kljub temu se je prekrivala s katoliško teologijo. Besedilo članka temelji na izkušnji Vladimirja Solovjova, Sergeja Bulgakova in Pavla Florenskega z razodetjem Božje Modrosti.
    [Show full text]
  • The Divine Sophia and the Rebirth of Christian Art
    134 Religion, Literature and the Arts Project ''TRUTH IN THE LIKENESS," THE DIVINE SOPHIA AND THE REBIRTH OF CHRISTIAN ART L. Cross This paper will briefly outline Titus Burckhardt's view of the state of religious art in the modern period and it will go on to explore what three Russian thinkers, namely Vladimir Soloviev, Pavel Florensky and Sergius Bulgakov, have to offer by way of amplification of Burckhardt's view. It will attempt to show where the Burckhardt thesis and the contribution of the three modern Russians belong in the tradition of sacred knowledge, the Sophianic tradition. I Burckhardt When Christian art begins to appear in paleo-Christian works, it is not conditioned by any particular aesthetical theory. However, genuine Christian inspiration clearly sprang from certain images of Christ and the Holy Virgin, images which largely have a miraculous origin and which are determined by the great facts of the Christian faith itself, that God became a man in Jesus Christ, a Saviour to deliver mankind from death and to open the way to eternal life in the community of the Holy Trinity. Assimilated to and woven into the art which expressed this mystery of God made man, were the craft traditions which became Christian by adoption. These two currents, along with some liturgical music springing from the Pythagorean inheritance, deserve to be considered truly sacred nrt.1 Christianity inherited craft symbolism in which the craftsman imitates formation of cosmos out of chaos, creating a vision of the cosmos which is holy through its beauty. Christianity purified the craft inheritance and released those elements that re-enact the laws of the cosmos, such as the Cross, 1995 CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS 135 monogram and circle which signify the Christ as the spiritual synthesis of the universe, the all, the beginning, the end and the timeless centre.2 His Cross rules the cosmos, and judges the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Sophia: the Gnostic Heritage John F
    Fall 2009 Sophia: the Gnostic Heritage John F. Nash Summary ther,” “Lord,” and so forth. Resistance has also increased to the custom of envisioning his article presents a brief history of God in any kind of anthropomorphic terms.2 TSophia, best known of the divine feminine Yet anthropomorphism is comforting to many individualities of the West. Under her Hebrew people, and the concept of a powerful God- name, Chokmah, Sophia emerged in late bibli- dess, complementing or even replacing the cal times. But it was the Gnostics of the early traditional masculine God, resonates with large Christian era who created the Sophia we rec- numbers of thinking people. ognize today. Sophia played a small but sig- nificant role in western mainstream Christian- Of all the anthropomorphized, feminine deities ity and a much larger role in Eastern Ortho- discussed today, Sophia is the most popular in doxy. Russian Orthodox theologians not only the West, to judge by the literature of feminist had personal experiences of Sophia but also theology, women’s studies, and New Age cul- shared important insights into how she related ture. The purpose of this article, then, is to to the Trinity and to the “invisible Church” present a brief review of the history and con- that transcends historical Christianity. The temporary relevance of Sophia in western article concludes with some remarks about the spirituality. Many questions remain concern- relevance of Sophia in modern spirituality. ing how Sophia can be reconciled with tradi- tional Christian doctrine. However, opportuni- Background ties also exist to integrate Sophia more firmly into the Trans-Himalayan teachings.
    [Show full text]
  • The Trinity: Mystery of Relation
    The Trinity: Mystery of Relation What is our experience of God? Our experience of God has many facets to it. We find our very lives shaped by our encounter of God who is, first of all, beyond, with and within the world; who is behind, with and ahead of us; who is above, alongside and around us. What is the symbol of the Trinity attempting to express? It's an attempt to express a dynamic life in God, a relatedness to the world in activity that creates, redeems and renews, an activity which also suggests to us that God's very own being is a relational, dynamic mystery of love. What is the problem for some Christians today regarding the doctrine of the Trinity? The doctrine of the Trinity has become divorced from the original experiences that gave it birth in human understanding. What is a consequence of this "divorce"? This symbol of the Trinity has become unintelligible to many, a kind of doctrine that we learn/memorize, and leave it at that. To paraphrase the late Jesuit theologian Fr. Karl Rahner, "If people were to read in their morning newspaper that a fourth person of the Trinity had been discovered it would cause little stir" --- so detached has the triune symbol become from the actual religious life of many people. What has been lost in our understanding of this symbol? For a variety of reasons, the liberating point of the symbol is lost. The doctrine of the Trinity seems to be found in the appendix of the personal catechism of many minds and hearts, as compared with its place in official church teaching and prayer and ecumenical statements.
    [Show full text]
  • CTSA Proceedings 64 / 2009
    122 CTSA Proceedings 64 / 2009 GOD/TRINITY Topic: Immanence, Transcendence, and Divine Freedom: Trinitarian Theologies East and West Convener: Cara Anthony, University of St. Thomas Moderator: Gill Goulding, Regis College Presenters: Aristotle Papanikolaou, Fordham University Michael Dempsey, St. John’s University Two papers were presented. The fi rst, delivered by Aristotle Papanikolaou, was entitled “ Sophia! Orthoi! The Trinitarian Theology of Sergei Bulgakov.” The second, delivered by Michael Dempsey, was entitled “Love is Free or It is Not Love: Why the Immanent Trinity Still Matters in the thought of Karl Barth and in Contemporary Theology.” Summaries of both papers are given below. The rela- tively brief discussion period after presentation of the papers was largely devoted to questions for clarifi cation. According to Papanikolaou, the most developed form of Bulgakov’s Sophiology appears in his dogmatic trilogy On Divine Humanity (O bogoche- lovechestve , 1933-45), which is only now being completed in English translation. Bulgakov identifi es the humanity of God with Sophia and affi rms the core mean- ing of Vladimir Solovyov’s Sophiology—God is always God for “me” (i.e., for creation). God’s being is not dependent on creation nor is God exhausted in God’s relation to creation; but God’s being is such that God is the God who creates and redeems creation. Bulgakov affi rms the distinction between the world that God relates to from all eternity and the created world, but it is impossible for humans to think of God as not eternally relating to the world. Bulgakov’s Sophiology is more explicitly Trinitarian and appropriates traditional Trinitarian language.
    [Show full text]