WITH BEING GOD Trinity, Apophaticism, and Divine-Human Communion aristotle papanikolaou University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, Indiana © 2006 University of Notre Dame Press 00 Papa (i-x) Final iii 1/9/06 2:32:19 PM Copyright © 2006 by University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 www.undpress.nd.edu All Rights Reserved Manufactured in the United States of America Material from “Divine Energies or Divine Personhood: Vladimir Lossky and John Zizioulas on Conceiving the Transcendent and Immanent God,” Modern Theolog y 19, no. 3 ( July 2003): 357–85, appear throughout the four chapters of this book and are reprinted with the permission of Blackwell Publishing. A revised version of “Is John Zizioulas an Existentialist in Disguise? Response to Lucian Turcescu,” Modern Theolog y (October 2004): 587–93, appears in chapter 4. Material from that article is reprinted with the permission of Blackwell Publishing. Library of Congress Cataloging in-Pulication Data Papanikolaou, Aristotle. Being with God : Trinity, apophaticism, and divine-human communion / Aristotle Papanikolaou. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index. isbn-13: 978-0-268-03830-4 (cloth : alk. paper) isbn-10: 0-268-03830-9 (cloth : alk. paper) isbn-13: 978-0-268-03831-1 (pbk. : alk. paper) isbn-10: 0-268-03831-7 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Deifi cation (Christianity)—History of doctrines—20th century. 2. Trinity—History of doctrines—20th century. 3. Orthodox Eastern Church—Doctrines—History—20th century. 4. Lossky, Vladimir, 1903–1958. 5. Zizioulas, Jean, 1931– . I. Title. bt767.8.p37 2006 231.092'2—dc22 2005036071 ∞This book is printed on acid-free paper. © 2006 University of Notre Dame Press 00 Papa (i-x) Final iv 1/9/06 2:32:19 PM Introduction This book is about ‘being with God,’ about the realism of divine-human com- munion as it is expressed in the work of Vladimir Lossky (1903–58) and John Zizioulas (1931– ), arguably two of the most infl uential Orthodox theologians of the past century.1 Since it discusses divine-human communion through these two fi gures, it is also a small window into contemporary Orthodox the- ology. In addition to their impact on twentieth-century Orthodoxy, each has served in their own time as a spokesperson for Orthodoxy to the non- Orthodox world. Vladimir Lossky was one of the many Russian émigrés to Paris, where he lived and taught after the Bolshevik revolution until his tragically sudden death. Zizioulas studied at the University of Athens and at Harvard, worked with renowned Orthodox patristic scholar and church historian Georges Flo- rovsky, and was a part of a group of young Orthodox theologians in Greece who were determined to heed Florovsky’s call for a “neo-patristic synthesis” in Greek theological studies. In spite of being separated by a generation, both theologians shared a com- mitment to a return to the fathers for contemporary Orthodox theology. Lossky, together with Florovsky, was instrumental in initiating this paradigm shift in contemporary Orthodoxy against what he perceived to be the philo- sophically tainted Russian sophiology best represented in the person of Ser- gius Bulgakov. Zizioulas was reacting to a Greek theology that he considered inherently infl uenced by the neo-scholastic models of the ‘West.’ Both also taught in non-Orthodox institutions and worked within the ecumenical move- ment, Zizioulas more formally in the World Council of Churches (WCC), and Lossky more informally through a theological working group that included 1 © 2006 University of Notre Dame Press 00 Papa (1-8) Final 1 1/9/06 2:32:40 PM 2 being with god such fi gures as Gabriel Marcel. Lossky also counted among his friends such notable Catholic theologians as Yves Congar, Jean Daniélou, and Henri de Lubac and was active in the English Fellowship of St. Alban and St. Sergius. Both Lossky and Zizioulas, however, are united by something more sub- stantial than simply formal characteristics of their academic life and work. The two theologians identify as the heart and center of all theological discourse the realism of divine-human communion, which is often understood in terms of the familiar Orthodox concept of theosis, or divinization. The Incarnation, ac- cording to Lossky and Zizioulas, is the event of a real divine-human commu- nion which is made accessible to all; God has become human so that all may participate fully in the divine life. This book will show how an ontology of divine-human communion is at the center of both Lossky’s and Zizioulas’s theological projects. It will also show how, again, for both theologians, this core is also used as a self-identifi cation marker against ‘Western’2 theologies, which they see as excessively rationalistic and therefore a threat to the very heart of theological discourse defi ned in terms of the realism of divine-human communion. On these two points, the affi rmation of the realism of divine- human communion and the rejection of the so-called ‘Western’ rationalism, Lossky and Zizioulas share much in common with other contemporary Or- thodox theologians. There exists an identifi able consensus in contemporary Orthodox theology that is united around these two principles, particularly that of the realism of divine-human communion. The similarities between the theologies of Lossky and Zizioulas do not ex- tend much further than this affi rmation of the realism of divine-human com- munion as the central core of theological discourse. Theology for both theologians attempts to give expression to this core of theological discourse, to unpack the implications of this central axiom. The theologies of Lossky and Zizioulas give witness to the fact that shared premises do not lead necessarily to the same conclusions. In fact, the shared premise of the realism of divine- human communion resulted, in the case of Lossky and Zizioulas, in two dis- tinct theologies. This is nowhere more evident than in their trinitarian theologies. For both Lossky and Zizioulas, the doctrine of the Trinity is rooted in the Christian affi rmation of the realism of divine-human communion in Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the Trinity is the Chris- tian expression of the God who is simultaneously transcendent and immanent, who offers the gift of God’s very life to that which is ‘other’ than God—the non-divine. The God who offers and realizes this divine-human communion © 2006 University of Notre Dame Press 00 Papa (1-8) Final 2 1/9/06 2:32:41 PM Introduction 3 is the trinitarian God; on this both Lossky and Zizioulas concur. On what the affi rmation of the realism of divine-human communion means in concep- tualizing God as Trinity, Lossky and Zizioulas have substantial and profound differences. The central debate is over the use of apophaticism in theology in general, but especially the relation of apophaticism to the doctrine of the Trin- ity. For Lossky, apophaticism is the central precondition for a trinitarian the- ology, i.e., there can be no non-apophatic doctrine of the Trinity; for Zizioulas, apophaticism has a much more restricted role in theological discourse and the God experienced in the eucharist is not the God beyond being but the imma- nent life of the trinitarian God. In a way, one could frame the debate between Lossky and Zizioulas over the relation between apophaticism and trinitarian theology as one over Karl Rahner’s famous axiom, “The ‘economic’ Trinity is the ‘immanent’ Trinity and the ‘immanent’ Trinity is the ‘economic’ Trinity.”3 Lossky would reject the identifi cation of the economic and the immanent Trinity, while Zizioulas would accept Rahner’s axiom with qualifi cations. The central task of this book then is a critical comparison of the trinitarian theologies of Lossky and Zizioulas as expressions of the core axiom that they both share—the realism of divine-human communion. Insofar as the most substantial debate between the two theologians is over the relation between apophaticism and trinitarian theology, it will explore the relation between their theological epistemologies and trinitarian theologies. Both Lossky and Ziziou- las develop theological epistemologies that are rooted in their affi rmation of an ontology of divine-human communion. In their theologies, ontology precedes epistemology. Their particular understanding of the implications of an ontol- ogy of divine-human communion for theological epistemologies then impacts their respective trinitarian theologies. These initial moves in their theologies then explain the substantive differences in other aspects of their theologies. The “critical” component of this exercise will be to judge the adequacy of their theologies based on their consistency with the central premise that they both share—the realism of divine-human communion. Chapter 1 will begin this critical comparison by analyzing Lossky’s and Zizioulas’s theological epistemologies. The question of the knowledge of God is a perennial theological and philosophical problem. During the modern pe- riod, this question, together with questions of epistemology in general, shaped theological discourse. The content of central Christian theological themes was often dependent on and derivative of the answers theologians gave to the ques- tions of epistemology. In modern theological discourse epistemology preceded ontology. © 2006 University of Notre Dame Press 00 Papa (1-8) Final 3 1/9/06 2:32:41 PM 4 being with god For Lossky and Zizioulas the relation is reversed. This chapter will show how for both theologians ontology precedes epistemology, i.e., that their theo- logical epistemologies presuppose an ontology of divine-human communion. Both agree that knowledge of God is experiential, given only in union with God; however, they disagree over the nature and locus of such a union and on the limits of God-talk.