Glorification: Perichoresis Or Participation Taylor Wright Systematic Theology 517: Christology, Soteriology, and Eschatology
[email protected] May 7, 2019 In the last chapter of Charles C. Twombly, Perichoresis and Personhood: God, Christ, and Salvation in John of Damascus, Twombly argues based on John Damascene’s work that the language of perichoresis should not be used for man’s relation to the Trinity but instead that communion and participation are the proper language for such a truth.1 At the close of the chapter, he powerfully states: It is in the final scene that our restored image and deified flesh will manifest themselves and the instability inherent in our present experience of participation will be removed. The final state will move participation closer to the permanency of mutual indwelling.2 That man’s glorification shifts participation towards perichoresis, or theosis, seals the Eastern Orthodox emphasis in the book. While Twombly’s survey of the doctrine of perichoresis in John of Damascus is helpful, the closing statement says too much. In this paper I will argue that, from a Reformed perspective, man’s glorification through his communion and participation in the Trinity does lead to a oneness that is not perichoretic3 but is still advanced and fuller than earthly communion. The doctrine of theosis4 places heavy emphasis on our union with Christ.5 The Reformed doctrine of glorification better explains the future intimacy of the heavenly union 1Charles C. Twombly, Perichoresis and Personhood: God, Christ, and Salvation in John of Damascus, Princeton Theological Monograph 216 (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2015), 88–103.