Perichoretic Salvation

The Believer's Union with Christ as a Third Type of Perichoresis

James D. Gifford

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2011
• Print ISBN: 9781610971140
• eBook ISBN: 9781630879624
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Church

For two thousand years, Christian theologians have struggled to explain the believer's union with Christ. What sort of union is it? How can it be fully described? This book is an attempt to join the conversation to explore exactly what it means to be in union with Christ. This book will argue that the believer's union with Christ can rightly be presented as a third type of perichoresis. Perichoresis is a word that describes the way the persons of the Trinity interrelate, without losing their essential oneness nor without being absorbed into each other. In short, the doctrine of perichoresis preserves the unity and diversity within the Godhead. It is also used to describe the hypostatic union of the divine and human in Christ. In Perichoretic Salvation, James Gifford argues that the union of the believer and Christ is a relationship of the same kind, though of a third type. Arguing from a perspective that is rooted biblically, historically, and theologically, the book will allow the union to be explained more fully than in the past while remaining within the bounds of what the church has taught over the centuries. It may prove to be a basis for understanding the work of Christ afresh for the twenty-first century.

1

Introduction

The Lay of the Land

The times are a-changing. That might be the understatement of the millennium. Both philosophically and theologically, the landscape in the first decades of the twenty-first century is shifting. Philosophically, the world is becoming more multicultural, postmodern, and informed. The modern mindset is being replaced with a collection of posts: post-modern, post-colonial, post-critical, post-Christian, and so forth. Theologically in the West, thanks to the work of Karl Barth, Karl Rahner, and a host of others, the doctrine of the Trinity has been freed from its centuries-long exile on the island of Enlightenment rationalism.1 In theological reflection on the life of God, theologians have likewise resurrected a long-dormant term to describe the inner relations of the Godhead, perichoresis. Western Christianity, both Protestant and Roman Catholic, is rediscovering the relational roots of the faith emanating from the eternally-relational Godhead.

The roots of the relational paradigm are many, including the aforementioned revival of the Trinity, the rejection of the Enlightenment notion of the autonomous self in favor of an attempt at real community, and the innate human need to relate as social creatures. Human persons are who they are because, as Zizoulas and others say, humans are “beings in communion.”2 If God and humanity are inherently relational, then salvation—the rescue from sin and eternal fellowship with the relational one—should be relational too. Recently, the doctrine of the believer’s union with Christ has gained considerable popularity as a way to unify salvation into a central motif that is relational. It is in the framework of such a relational paradigm that this book is located. In a way, the convergence of eternal relationality within the Trinity, the idea of perichoresis, and the believer’s union with Christ has formed the proverbial “perfect storm” that has produced this study.

This book will attempt to harmonize these three doctrines, as it will argue that the soteriological union—the union of the believer and Christ—constitutes a third type of perichoretic relationship; that is, Christ and the believer mutually indwell and participate in one another analogously to the way the persons of the Trinity do.3 This study will offer biblical, historical, and theological evidence that supports the argument that the relationship existing between Christ and the believer may rightly be called a third type of perichoresis distinct from both the trinitarian and christological varieties of the term, thus providing a theological foundation to Christian soteriology that is inherently relational in nature and directly flows out of the eternal relationality of the triune Godhead. The way the believer’s union with Christ is developed in this work will closely overlap patristic views of theosis. Further, this study will argue that the twin elements of mutual indwelling and active participation are present in the union of a believer with Christ in ways analogous to that among the divine persons such that perichoresis is an appropriate, accurate, and theologically fruitful way to think of that union. However, it is a perichoresis of a third type.

One of the difficulties in describing the terminology describing the believer’s union with Christ, such as “mutual indwelling,” lies in the limitations of language. So often spatial terminology is used to describe relational reality. This occurs in both the biblical and the contemporary worlds. When two people are “close,” it is understood that the meaning of “close” is relational rather than spatial. The Bible repeatedly uses spatial terms in a relational fashion. Sometimes it is not easy to discern if the proper meaning of a spatial term is spatial or relational. For example, even though “the presence of God” is spatial language, its true meaning is relational. One is reminded of hell, where it is traditionally held that the presence of God is absent. Spatially this is not true, since God is omnipresent—unlimited in regard to space—even in hell (see Ps 139). However, the relational presence of God (as far as we know) cannot be experienced in hell. Thus in this study, one must be mindful of a relational meaning of spatial terms.

Therefore, to state that the believer’s union with Christ is a perichoretic relationship is to proclaim that there is a mutual relational indwelling of the believer and Christ, that is, that Christ is in the believer and the believer is in Christ. Furthermore, this relationship is neither merely static nor spatial. There must be an active, loving pursuit of this relationship by both parties at all times, ultimately reaching the goal of being one, analogous to the way the Father and Son are one. As Christ partakes of human nature in the incarnation, so analogously does the believer partake of the divine nature in the soteriological union. The purpose of this book is to argue from the pertinent biblical, historical, and theological evidence that this is indeed the case.

Rather than a concept which can only be applied in trinitarian and christological enquiry, the soteriological union, this study argues, is a relationship of the same kind as the trinitarian and christological, although a third type.4 Though this book will interact with some authors who believe there are other types of perichoretic relationships that exist, mirroring with varying degrees of clarity what exists in sole perfection in the Godhead, there will only be three types of perichoretic relationships discussed.5 The trinitarian perichoresis is the pattern for all relationships in creation that resemble it in mutual indwelling and active participation in the other.6 This study will argue that the union of Christ and the believer is such a relationship while acknowledging the existence of other relationships that come close to being perichoretic.

In arguing the case that the union of the believer and Christ is a perichoretic relationship, two assumptions must be kept in mind. First is the ontological difference between God and his creation. Since Christians are part of that creation, the analogy between the trinitarian perichoresis and the relationship inherent in union with Christ will never be an exact correspondence. As Avery Dulles writes, the correspondence will be “asymptotic” rather than identical. (“Asymptotic” is another spatial term representing relational reality.)7 Second is the continuing presence of a relational paradigm for understanding not only soteriology but all Christian theology as a whole. A relational paradigm must be maintained for this argument to remain coherent. The rationale behind the relational paradigm comes directly from Scripture and theology. The triune God is inherently relational, and he is love (1 John 4:8). One may rightly argue that God is also holy, just, powerful, and a host of other biblical attributes. But ...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Preface
• Abbreviations
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: Biblical Evidence
• Chapter 3: Historical Development
• Chapter 4: Theological Issues
• Chapter 5: Possible Implications and Conclusion
• Bibliography