Is this an accurate Orthodox description of salvation?

[David Lindblom]

I just read this over at Belief.net. Here is a quote describing how we Orthodox view salvation. What do you think? Agreement, critiques?

All are already saved (Christ's death and resurrection), are still being saved (through the church), and will be saved in the future (second coming of Christ). Demands faith in and prayers to God and Jesus Christ, and good works. Required sacraments include one baptism at infancy and the Holy Eucharist with confession and repentance. Adherence to moral laws is essential.

Here's the link to the page: http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2001/06/What-Eastern-Orthodox-Christians-Believe.aspx

[Paul Cowan]

Better to stick to what the Orthodox define itself rather than some quasi-informed group. There is some accuracy and some not accuracy below. We are not already saved. We are being saved. No one will be saved until the second coming and even then not all. (Lord have mercy). Yes, we pray alot, to many for intercession before God and to He Himself. Good works are a good thing but not everything. We don't require infant baptism, though we do require baptism to be a member of the church. I was baptised at 37 into the church. confession; yes, repentence; yes, moral laws; yes.

Paul

[David Lindblom]

Better to stick to what the Orthodox define itself rather than some quasi-informed group. There is some accuracy and some not accuracy below. We are not already saved. We are being saved. No one will be saved until the second coming and even then not all. (Lord have mercy). Yes, we pray alot, to many for intercession before God and to He Himself. Good works are a good thing but not everything. We don't require infant baptism, though we do require baptism to be a member of the church. I was baptised at 37 into the church. confession; yes, repentence; yes, moral laws; yes.

Paul

That was kinda what I was thinking. I wondered about the first statement and that was what I was getting at in my other post on what Christ accomplished on the cross. As for the rest of it, the way it is written bothers me a bit. The statement makes it sound as if we have to do prayers and such as further duties that save us. Like a check list. These are tools in our battle for our bodies and souls.

[Owen]

There is a distinction to be made between salvation (which God did to deliver us from death and sin) and theosis (what we're supposed to do in response to appropriate the gifts He has given us).

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear Dr Owen, you wrote:


There is a distinction to be made between salvation (which God did to deliver us from death and sin) and theosis (what we're supposed to do in response to appropriate the gifts He has given us).

I suppose I would disagree with this -- both on the idea that there is any real distinction between salvation and theosis, and on the definition you've given of each term.

Where are you getting these definitions?

INXC Dcn Matthew

[Owen]

I'm not sure what you're driving at. God has done most of the "work" for us by His Incarnation. If you understand salvation as process, then yes, it includes what I above described as theosis. St. Paul makes it clear that we must work synergistically with God to appropriate our salvation (Phil. 2:16ff.).

Everybody has been saved, but some are not now being saved and will not be saved because they have rejected the gift and spurned the Giver. For those who have accepted the gift and emgraced the Giver, there remains the ongoing struggle denited by the terms theosis and synergy. I hope this clarifies things for you.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear all,

It seems it is time for some clearer definitions to come into this discussion. Casual usage of words like 'salvation', 'saved', 'sanctification', 'theosis', etc., at times has a place; but once discussions get into how specific issues are to be understood, then the right definition and patristic understanding of key vocabulary is very important.

In Orthodox thought, 'salvation' does not simply mean 'what God did to deliver us from death and sin'. Salvation is understood far more embracingly as the uniting of human life to that of God. Being delivered from death and sin is an aspect of this, and an important one; but it is not the whole of salvation. We find this, for example, in the discussions amongst the Fathers of the 'saving' actions of God even prior to human sin. The idea that salvation is simply God's response to the actions of sin and their consequences, is a kind of debasement of the much more vibrant patristic vision of salvation as the whole of God's creative love and work for creation.

More distinctly yet, theosis cannot be defined as 'what we're supposed to do in response to appropriate the gifts God has given us'. This is a functional idea, which might be said to serve as part of the human engagement in a life of theosis; but it can't stand as a definition of theosis itself. Nor can it be said that theosis is a term that 'denotes the ongoing struggle' of seeking after the life of God. This struggle may be described as 'ascesis', 'praxis', or other terms; but theosis refers to the act of God drawing His human creature into His own life -- an act which requires human response and synergeia, and indeed struggle in order to live out such synergeia rather than succumb to the will to sin; but this synergy, these acts, are not to be identified with theosis itself, which is the outpouring of God's love upon the creature, so as to draw its life into His own.

Which is precisely why 'salvation' and 'theosis' are theological synonyms -- and this is perhaps right at the heart of what makes the Orthodox understanding of the life in Christ unique and precious in the world.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

[Father David Moser]

I would have to agree with Fr Matthew that one cannot separate salvation and theosis. I think rather that they are the same thing. Salvation is theosis (that is becoming like God). Salvation is a process, not an independant circumscribed event (like turning a switch on and off). It is made possible by the triumph of Jesus Christ over sin death and the devil which was accomplished by the Crucifixion and Resurrection. Some people liken this to "salvation" however it is only the initial point in the process. We are not "saved" until we achieve theosis and manifest the image and likeness of the Trinity in our being, which is accomplished through the acquisition of the grace of the Holy Spirit (which is where the "works" come in - see St Serpahim of Sarov on the purpose of the Christian life). Thus we have been saved - that is the doors of salvation have been opened to us. We are being saved - that is we continue to work out (actualize) our salvation in our lives. We will be saved - the process is never ending and is fully accomplished only when we enter into the Kingdom of heaven at the Great Judgment (we have not yet entered into our reward - see Heb. 11:39-40).

Fr David Moser

[Andreas Moran]

I understand Dr Owen to be saying that salvation is offered and has to be accepted by each individual to be accomplished in him. The human race was prepared (by the OT) for salvation through Christ, Christ was incarnate, took upon Himself the sins of the world and by death overcame death. So, since Pascha, the preparation having been accomplished, Christ's saving actions abolished death and replaced it with eternal life. That is the general salvation. But what kind of eternal life? Each person must work out his salvation 'with fear and trembling' by accepting the general salvation for himself personally. The aim of such working out is theosis. And that is why we have the sacraments of the Church. A failure to work out his salvation puts the person in peril of perdition.

This post 'crossed' with Father David's; I understand he and I to be saying the same thing except he put it better than I.

[David Lindblom]

Dear all

In Orthodox thought, 'salvation' does not simply mean 'what God did to deliver us from death and sin'. Salvation is understood far more embracingly as the uniting of human life to that of God. Being delivered from death and sin is an aspect of this, and an important one; but it is not the whole of salvation. We find this, for example, in the discussions amongst the Fathers of the 'saving' actions of God even prior to human sin. The idea that salvation is simply God's response to the actions of sin and their consequences, is a kind of debasement of the much more vibrant patristic vision of salvation as the whole of God's creative love and work for creation.

More distinctly yet, theosis cannot be defined as 'what we're supposed to do in response to appropriate the gifts God has given us'. This is a functional idea, which might be said to serve as part of the human engagement in a life of theosis; but it can't stand as a definition of theosis itself. Nor can it be said that theosis is a term that 'denotes the ongoing struggle' of seeking after the life of God. This struggle may be described as 'ascesis', 'praxis', or other terms; but theosis refers to the act of God drawing His human creature into His own life -- an act which requires human response and synergeia, and indeed struggle in order to live out such synergeia rather than succumb to the will to sin; but this synergy, these acts, are not to be identified with theosis itself, which is the outpouring of God's love upon the creature, so as to draw its life into His own.

Which is precisely why 'salvation' and 'theosis' are theological synonyms -- and this is perhaps right at the heart of what makes the Orthodox understanding of the life in Christ unique and precious in the world.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

How does this quote from Elder Cleopa of Romania strike you?

Our objective salvation is realized only in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, whereas our personal or subjective salvation, which in the language of the New Testament is called righteousness, holiness, or salvation (in the narrow sense), is realized as a continuance of this objective salvation, with our personal energy or activity acting in co-operation with Divine Energy or Grace.


The truth is that Christ has brought salvation to everyone, something theologians have labelled general (or objective) salvation. And yet, everyone does not actualize this objective salvation, only those who seek and pursue it. While objective salvation is granted to every human being, subjective or personal salvation depends on the intent of man. Those who desire to be saved and work toward that goal receive divine Grace as their aide and guide. This Grace does not work in us violently; rather it abides with us peren- nially as a specific offering for the work of our salvation. Subsequently, it is not possible for us to speak of an unconditional predestination and its inadequate presuppositions for salvation.

[Antonios]

How does this quote from Elder Cleopa of Romania strike you?

Like the words of a saint. Lord, save us.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear David, thank you for the fine and very relevant quotation from Elder Cleopa; and Andreas, thank you for your comments. The distinction between salvation as a the universal gift granted to creation, and salvation as that which 'I' (as each person much utter) work to realise in myself, is of course a very ancient distinction in the Fathers - and one that is critical. As is said at every Divine Liturgy of St John, Christ is He who 'offered Himself for the life of the world'; and yet it is I, the person, who must say 'Behold, I draw near...'.

What we must be attentive to do (as indeed the Fathers were) is not surrender the terms that articulate the richness of the faith to different meanings. This distinction is not the same as a distinction between 'salvation' and 'theosis'; the distinction does exist, but these are not the terms to speak of it (as I mentioned above, and as Fr David also echoed in his own words, these two terms are theological synonyms).

So, how might the Fathers describe this distinction? I would suggest looking at the usage of 'friend of God' in contrast to 'alien from the Lord'.

INXC, Dcn Matthew