5 Comments
User's avatar
Stephen Golay's avatar

Gorman is a good reference. As you well know, the "faith in Chist" (vs.?) "faith of Christ" is having a contentious brawl in the academic sphere. The Orthodox take on communal Being is the proper referee.

Sidenote: Why are the Orthobros on a campaign to size you up and size you down. (At least a goodly cohort of them.) Difficult locating the threat. Are you not seeing a species of heresy in your work; are you importing an unwarranted language.

Expand full comment
Treydon Lunot's avatar

They don’t like me because of my views on ecumenism, generally speaking.

Expand full comment
Stephen Golay's avatar

Outside of remarks on X , have you gone into any depth regarding those views? Sincerely asking. Most likely the 'Paris School' would be a summary of sorts.

Expand full comment
Stephen Golay's avatar

Addendum to prior post: Something about Husserl-Heideggerian hammers & hammering comes to mind.

Expand full comment
Aaron's avatar

Do you think we stop short by limiting our understanding of the body of Christ to those who are baptized within the Orthodox Church? Does communal theosis not inherently include our participation in the entire horizontal chain of the communion of being? If, as we pray, the Holy Spirit is everywhere present and fillest all things, how could the Church as the Body of Christ also not be present everywhere as everything? Otherwise, we paint a dualistic, disjointed, ontologically separated picture of theosis and communion. Are union, communion, and theosis really a matter of being (as it seems you’d like to say) or of exclusive participation in the life of the Orthodox Church?

Expand full comment