Slideserve.co.uk Oprean, Daniel G Towards A Dialogical Community. An Investigation Of A Possible Development Of Orthodox And Baptist Theological… [621176]

TOWARDS A DIALOGICAL COMMUNITY:
AN INVESTIGATION OF A POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENT OF ORTHODOX AND BAPTIST
THEOLOGICAL CONVERSATION IN ROMANIA

This thesis is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Daniel G. Oprean

University of Wales
Undertaken under the auspicies of the International Baptist Theological Seminary

Director of Studies: Doc Dr Parush. R. Parushev
Supervisor: Dr. Dănuț Mănăstireanu

June 2013

2
ABSTRACT
This dissertation explores the way in which the existent theological resources could be used for
enhancem ent of the theological conversation between B aptists and Orthodox in Romania. As such the
research aims to contribute to the mutual und erstanding of th e two , Orthodox and Baptist, and towards
a proper understanding of how many things the y have in common, as well as how important the
acknowledgment of the differences could be in order to understand the limits of what could be translated
from one to the ot her. The r esearch starts with an introduction that states first, the context of Romanian
Baptists. Second, it states the need of Romanian Baptists for a non -reductionist understanding of
baptism, Eucharist and spirituality as important elements for a holis tically understood process of the
spiritual journey. Third, the introduction states the way that could be fostered by ecclesiology, via the
conversation between an Orthodox theologian, Dumitru Stăniloae and a Baptist theologian, Paul Fiddes.
After introduction in part one the research aims to explore the context of Dumitru Stăniloae and the
development of his theology and spiritual practices. In part two the research aims to explore Paul
Fiddes’ context and the development of his theology. In part three, the conclusion, the research aims to
underline the dialogical and transformative dimensions of the spiritual journey.

3
Declaration
This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not concurrently
being submitted in candidat: [anonimizat]
23. 06. 2013

Statement 1
This thesis is the result of my own investigations except where otherwise stated. Other sources are
acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended.

Candidate Date
23. 06. 2013

Statement 2
I hereby give consent for my thesis if accepted to be available for photocopying and for interlibrary
loan, and for the title and summary to be mad e available to outside organisations.

Candidate Date
23. 06.2013

4
Acknowledgments
At the end of this meaningful journey my thoughts go to all the people that were instrumental in
different phases of this journey. First, I remember the fact that back in 2000, I was encouraged to
pursue doctoral studies, by the late Dr. John Stott, with w hom I had the privileged to spend unique
moments at London Institute for Contemporary Christianity . Second, my thankful thoughts go to Dr.
Daniel Martin, my friend and my collegue at LICC, who insisted that I have to pursue theological
studies and that I am called to be a theologian of Romania in the third millennium. Third, a special
place is occupied by Dr. Corneliu Constantineanu, my friend and dean at Evangelical Theological
Seminary, Osijek, Croatia , where I obtained my Bachelor and Master degrees in Theology. Fourth,
my thanks go to Dr. Haddon Willmer, my professor at ETS, and my supervisor for Master
dissertation. He was the one that together with his wife , Hilary, were so kind to pay for the first
instalment of my doctoral program fees. Fiffh, I wan t to thank my director of studies, Dr. Parush. P.
Parushev, for his constant and meaningful assistance along the entire process. Sixth, I want to
thank, Dr. Dănuț Mănăstireanu, my supervisor for his constant encouragement. Seventh, I want to
thank Langham Partnership Organisation and Dr. Ian Shaw, for their financial support that enabled
me to finish this project. I want also to thank, Nancy Lively for her wonderful work of language
corrections in order for this text to be clear.
My last words of thanks go to the ones to whom I dedicate this work, to my family, in Romania, my
wife Ana, and the boys Cristian and David, for the way they inspired me through their love and
encouragement.
I also dedicate this work to the Romanian Christian family that I have t he honour to serve, to all my
friends who never ceased to believe in me.

5
Abbreviations

CD – Church Dogmatics

EG – The Experience of God

Mysteries – The Experience of God , Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, 5: The Sanctifying Mysteries.

PM – A Perichoretic Model of the Church: The Trinitarian Ecclesiology of Dumitru Stăniloae
Revelation – The Experience of God, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, 1: Revelation and Knowledge of the
Triune God
The World – The Experience of God , Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, 2: The World: Creation and
Deification

TDO – Teologie Dogmatică Ortodoxă

6
Contents
ABSTRACT ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………. 2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 4
ABBREVIATIONS ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. 5
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCT ION………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………… 8
PART ONE. THE DYNAMI C OF SPIR ITUAL JOURNEY IN STĂ NILOAE’S THEOLOGY ………………………….. …………… 15
CHAPTER 2. STĂNILOAE ’S SPIRITUAL JOURNEY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……. 16
2.1. SPIRITUAL AND INTELLECTUAL CLIMATE IN ROMANIAN ORTHODOXY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 20TH CENTURY ……………. 16
2.2 STĂNILOAE’S BIOGRAPHY AND SPIRITUAL LEGACY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. .. 22
2.3. STĂNILOAE’S WAY OF DOING THEOLGY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………….. 25
2.4. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 2 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. 40
CHAPTER 3. TRINITARI AN THEOLOGY OF PARTI CIPATION IN STĂNILOA E’S THOUGHT ABOUT BA PTISM …… 42
3.1. THE FRAME OF STĂNILOAE’S THEOLOGY OF PARTICIPATION ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………….. 42
3. 2. THE HEART OF STĂNILOAE’S THEOL OGY OF PARTICIPATION ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………. 51
3.3. BAPTISM IN THE CONTEXT OF THEOLOGY OF PARTICIPATION IN THE THOUGHT OF STĂNILOAE ………………………….. …….. 54
3.4. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 3 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. 61
CHAPTER 4. STĂNILOA E’S THEOLOGY OF EUCH ARIST AS A REFLECTIO N OF PERICHORESIS ………………….. 64
4.1. THE TRIAD OF BAPTISM , CHRISMATION AND EUCHARIST ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… 65
4.2. REAL PRESENCE AND HUMAN SACRIFICE OF SUBMISSION ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………….. 68
4.3. CHRIST , THE PRIEST AND THE CHURCH ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. 70
4. 4. SUMMARY O F CHAPTER 4 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. 73
CHAPTER 5. STĂNILOAE ’S THEOLOGY OF SPIRI TUALITY AS ACTUALISA TION OF THE TRINITAR IAN
CHRISTOLOGICAL -PNEUMATOLOGICAL CONVERGENCE ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… 77
5.1. THE CRUCIFORMITY OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. … 77
5. 2. THE TELOS, THE FOUNDATION AND THE WAY OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY ………………………….. ………………………….. 81
5.3. THE STAGES OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………. 84
5. 4. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 5 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. 99
PART TWO: THE DYNAMI C OF SPIRITUAL JOURN EY IN PAUL FIDDES’ T HEOLOGY ………………………….. ……….. 101
CHAPTER 6. PAUL FIDD ES’ SPIRITUAL JOURNE Y ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …. 102
6.1. PLACE OF PAUL FIDDES WITHIN THE BAPTIST WORLD ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………….. 102
6.2. FIDDES’ SPIRITUAL AND INTELLECTUAL JOURNEY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. . 105
6.3. FIDDES THEOLOGY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 111
6. 4. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 6 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 127
CHAPTER 7. FIDDES’ T HEOLOGY OF PARTICIPA TION IN HIS THOUGHT ABOUT BAPTISM …………………………. 131
7.1. TRINITARIAN PARTICIPATION AS THE ATMOSPHERE FOR HUMAN PARTICIPATION ………………………….. ………………….. 131
7. 2. BAPTISM AND THE PROCESS OF CHRISTIAN INITIATION ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… 135
7. 3. BAPTISM IN THE CONTEXT OF THE THEOLOGY OF PARTICIPATION ………………………….. ………………………….. ……….. 138
7.4. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 7 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 141
CHAPTER 8. FIDDES’ PERICHORETICAL THEOL OGY IN HIS THOUGHT A BOUT EUCHARIST ………………………. 143
8.1. THE FRAMEWORK OF FIDDES’ THEOLOGY OF EUCHARIST IN A PERICHORETICAL KEY ………………………….. ………………. 143
8. 2. THE HEART AND DIMENSIONS OF FIDDES’ THEOLOGY OF EUCHARIST ………………………….. ………………………….. ….. 144
8.3. FIDDES’ EUCHARISTIC THEOLOGY IN AN ECUMENICAL PERSPECTIVE ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 154
8. 4. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 8 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 157
CHAPTER 9. FIDDES’ C OVENANTAL THEOLOGY I N HIS THOUGHT ABOUT SPIRITUALITY ………………………….. 159
9.1. THE CONCEPT OF COVENANT AS A FRAMEWORK FOR FIDDES’ THEOLOGY OF SPIRITUALITY ………………………….. ………. 159

7
9. 2. THE STORY OF CHRIST AS THE CENTRE FOR FIDDES’ THEOLOGY OF SPIRITUALITY ………………………….. ………………….. 161
9.3. THE POLES AND THE COORDINATES OF THE EMBODIMENT OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY ………………………….. …………… 165
9.4. SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 9 ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 168
PART THREE: CONCLUS IONS ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ….. 170
CHAPTER 10. THE DIA LOGICAL DIMENSION OF SPIRITUAL JOURNEY: R ESULTS OF THE CONVER SATION . 170
10.1. THEOLOGY OF PARTICIPATION AND THE SPIRITUAL JOURNEY ………………………….. ………………………….. …………… 170
10.2. PERICHORETICAL THEOLOGY AND SPIRITUAL JOURNEY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………….. 175
10.3. TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY AND THE SPIRITUAL JOURNEY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………….. 184
CHAPTER 11. THE TRAN SFORMATIVE DIMENSION OF THE SPIRITUAL JOU RNEY: LESSONS FROM THE
CONVERSATION ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………….. 192
11.1. BAPTISM AS A WAY OF LIVING ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. 192
11.2. EUCHARIST AS A PERICHORETICAL REFLECTION ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. . 209
11.3. SPIRITUALITY AS A SHARED PILGRIMAGE ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………. 219
CHAPTER 12. GENERAL CONCLUSION ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………… 233
12. 1. SUMMARY OF THE THESIS ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………. 233
12.2. CONCLUSIONS ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………… 234
BIBLIOGRAPHY ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… 237

8
Chapter 1. Introduction
Why Conversation between Baptist s and Orthodox in Romania?

I grew up in a Baptist family and have always been a member of a Baptist church in
Romania. I was baptized when I was 18 years old in the Baptist church where I grew up. I
soon became one of the preachers of that community and later her Bible study teacher . I did
this for 13 years. During the time I was studying in my first university and was involved in the
underground student ministry movement, which was focused on evangelism and discipleship.
So, from the beginning of my Christian life I thought and beli eved, as many Baptists, in
Romania that baptism was an external expression of a previous inward conversion experience.
I believed that evangelism was the way to convert unbelievers to Christ and that discipleship
was a way to follow Christ in spiritual gro wth.
Yet, very soon I realized that the reality in many Baptist churches was that for many
people, baptism is an end in itself, the conversion experience replaces discipleship with the
end result of a perpetual immaturity coming from a lack of interest in spiritual development.
This has led in the last decades, arguably, to a more and more present phenomenon of
nominalism, among such members of Baptist churches. The lack of interest in spiritual
development and growth in knowledge is many times covered ove r cosmetically in legalistic
attitudes inside the same community and by an aversion towards members of the Orthodox
Church. Without any differentiation between sincere believers of the Orthodox Church and
merely nominal members of Orthodox churches, a gene ral consideration of all Orthodox as
unbelievers leads to a declared necessity for Orthodox believers to be converted under the
slogan that „if religion will not change you, then you have to change your religion.” Such a
slogan betrays a lack of understand ing that when we speak of Orthodox and Baptist churches
we speak of different expressions of manifestation in the same Christian family, and the same
Christian religion. As I have served in many Baptist churches in Romania, I have been able to

9
observe that this is a widespread mentality in regard to the members of the Orthodox tradition,
that mindset needs to be corrected.
One of the possible explanations for such an attitude of Baptists against the Orthodox
could be the fact that from the beginning of th eir existence in Romania, Baptist communities
have faced the denial of their identity as Christian communities. They have faced hard times
of persecution that contributed equally to the reaction of encapsulation and to a hermeneutic
of suspicion towards th e other traditions that were many times contributors to the persecution
being it from the political regimes before communism1 or the communist regime.
Yet, even though the extreme attitudes against each other are more or less absent
today, the Baptist communities still have the scars of the hard times of their recent history that
make them remain in isolationism and suspicion. Moreover, with all the salutary exceptions of
some ministers and churches, a really formal dialogue between Baptists and Orthodox has still
been an unfulfilled reality, at least for the first fifteen years after 1989. Now, even if a really
formal theological dialogue between these two different groups was almost impossible during
the Communist regime, there was still an ongoing bilateral underground theological exchange
that was at most times unacknowledged. That is seen in the streams and influences from the
hierarchical view of the Church in the Ortho dox tradition via the Reformed (Calvinistic)
tradition, which became part of the baptistic2 practices, even though not always based on a

1 Alexa Popovici, Istoria Baptiștilor din Romania, 1856 -1989 (Oradea: Faclia, 2006), 632. Popovici
speaks of 8 waves of persecution between 1920 and 1944, one of the eight was between 1941 and 1944,
consisiting in the eradication of the Baptist denomination, many Baptists being deported and all continuing to
function illegaly, 636 -644.
2 In using the term “baptistic” we are following Parushev’s explanation of the term: “By 'baptistic' is
meant those of the Free Church and believers' baptism tradit ion. This term is used as an umbrella term for a
variety of believing communities (‘gathering’ churches) practising believers’ baptism, and demanding radical
moral living, such as [Anabaptists,] Baptists or Pentecostals. It can also include a number of oth er groups in the
regions, such as Adventists and [Mennonite] Brethren. (There is an overlap with the use of the term
‘Evangelical’ in the Central and Eastern contexts —sometimes in denominational names). It excludes churches in
which members think in terms of ethnicity or geographical and political boundaries and in which people
typically baptise their children into these ethno -geo-religio -identities. That is, 'baptistic' excludes traditionally
state sponsored ecclesial bodies. See, Parush V. Parushev, “Doin g Theology in a Baptist Way: the Plenary
Papers Collection of the Symposium,” in Open Lecture at Free University, Amsterdam April 16 2009, in Teun
van der Leer, ed., Doing Theology in a Baptist Way: (Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit, 2009, English and Dutch),

10
meaningful theological reflection. I realized in time that there was something wrong with
limiting your vision for ministry on ideas or ideologies that are foreign to your own context.
When the Revolution of 19 89 came as gift from God, we soon entered a time as a
country in the process of change, and transition from oppression to democracy, and Romanian
society found itself in reconstruction. That process still continues. In the new Romanian
society in transitio n, Baptist communities soon faced an identity crisis, even though it was
dissimulated by big evangelistic strategies coming mainly from fundamentalist Baptists from
the United States, and we were in the position to experience a significant infusion of new
members in our churches.3
Big church buildings star ted to replace the smaller ones and big hopes were
connected with that change. But the identity crisis continued and its signs were visible in the
way theological education continued to be done, being mainly focused on the preservation of
„what we have rec eived” from our Baptist antecessors. Yet, over the years it became clear that
if we have to think seriously about the Christian mission in Romania in contemporary times,
our thoughts need to include the sincere sojourners from the Orthodox churches.

1-33, 3. Parushev also offers a bibliography for “the origination of the terms ‘baptist,’ ‘baptistic:’ James Wm
McClendon, Jr., “The Believers Church in Theological Perspective,” in Stanley Hauerwas et al, eds, The
Wisdom of the Cross: Essays in Honor o f John Howard Yoder (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1999), 309 -26 and Lina Andronovienė and Parush Parushev, “Church, State, and Culture: On the
Complexities of Post -soviet Evangelical Social Involvement,” Theological Reflections, EA AA Journal of
Theology, # 3 (2004), 194 -212. Cf. McClendon’s earlier account of the theological heritage of baptistic (or
‘baptist’) communities in Ethics: Systematic Theology, Vol. I, revised edition published posthumously
(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002 , 1986), 17 -34. For a collection of writings produced from a baptistic
perspective since the beginning of fifteen century, see Curtis W Freeman et al, eds., Baptist Roots: A Reader in
the Theology of a Christian People (Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1999).
3 Ivana Noble signalizes what seems to have been an invasion of foreign missionaries in former
communist countries, with evangelistic strategies that mediated „simplistic forms of conversion, instead of
“conversion as transformati on and sojourn from inauthenticity towards authenticity.” See Ivana Noble,
“Memory and Remembering in the Post -Communist Context“, in Political Theology 4 (2008), 455 -475, 467. She
is also arguing against any „proper meaning of conversion” that will trans form it in conformation to a set of rules
rather than transformation to live a new life, a transformation that will enable a meaningful journey from
unauthenticity towards authenticity, in the interrelatedness of all aspects of conversion: Ivana Noble,
“Conversion and Postmodernism,” i n Heller, Dagmar. Bekehrung und Identität: Ökumene als Spannung
zwischen Fremdem und Vertrautem (Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Otto Lembeck, 2003), 45 -68.

11
It is also imperative that instead of continuing to be isolated and encapsulated, Baptist
communities should be in the process of reconstructing the ways in which they relate to the
other churches from the Christian family, and to the society around, through a mean ingful and
constructive conversation .4 It is equally true that during the times of persecution extensive
theological formation within the Baptist communities was impos sible, yet things have
changed in the last 20 years.
A new generation of ministers, much better educated and with access to more
theological resources than ever in the history of Baptists in Romania, has flourished. From
among them some have become in the last years theologians who are respected for their
capacity to converse with Orthodox theologians. Nowadays it is no longer a surprise that in
the Baptist Union in Romania we have theologians able not only to understand the Orthodox
tradition but also abl e to contribute at the academic level in many common projects with the
Orthodox theologians.5
We should add to the three examples given above the appearance in the last period in
the theological arena of the Romanian academy a series of doctoral research on the theology
of Stăniloae.6

4In this context Ivana Noble is right when describing the situation after the fall of communism, says
that: „In tandem with the democratic changes in the society, the churches had to develop a different mode of
presenting their life as free and equal participants in society.” “Memory and Remembering in the Post –
Communist Context“, 465.
5 I want to give three examples that reflect this reality. First, see Danut Manastireanu, Locul Scripturii
in trad iția ortodoxă (Cluj -Napoca: Alma Mater, 2006). It is a notable fact that the preface of this book, was
written by a leading contemporary New Testament scholar of the Orthodox Church, who after reading the book
affirms, about the author, that „it is a refined knower of the spirituality and tradition of the Orthodox Church’,
14. The second example is that of Emil Bartos, Deification in Eastern Orthodox Theology: An Evaluation and
Critique of the Theology of Dumitru Stăniloae (Carliste, PA: Paternoster Press, 1999). In the preface of this book
the Bishop of Diokleia, Kallistos Ware says about the author „it is a worthy monument to a great Christian
thinker,” (ibid., x.). The final example is Silviu Eugen Rogobete, O ontologie a iubirii: Subiect si Realitate
Personala suprema in gandirea parintelui Dumitru Stăniloae (Iasi: Polirom, 2001). In the preface of this book
the Metropolitan of Banat, Fr. Nicolae Corneanu says about the author that „is one of our valuable
youngsters,,,who became a theologian…an intellectual extremely profound…,” 5.
6 Paul Negruț, The Development of the Concept of Authority within the Roman ian Orthodox Church
during the twentieth Century , Unpublished PhD dissertation (London: Brunel University, 1995). Silviu
Rogobete, Subject and Supreme Personal Reality in the Theological Thought of Fr. Dumitru Stăniloae. An
Ontology of Love, Unpublished P hD dissertation (London: Brunel University, 1997). Emil Bartoș, The Concept

12
How could the existing theological r esources be used in the conversation between the
Baptist and Orthodox traditions in Romania?
From many such meaningful initiatives has started to come more vigorously the
understanding not only for the need of an interdisciplinary dialogue of theology with other
disciplines, but also for a enhanced conversation between Orthodox and Baptist traditions if
we want to be of help for the spiritual change of Romania, providing theological reflection
that will be ecumenical not exclusivistic..
In the actual project we acknowledge the fact that the previous studies done on
Stăniloae by Baptists, show the fact that Stăniloae was a theologian of his time, who
meaningfully addressed contemporary theological issues, and looked for the revitalisation of
the spiritual life of the Romanian Orthodox Church, a model that could be important for
Baptist theologians of contemporary Romanian society. Yet, we also acknowledge the fact
that these studies neither show the way in which Stăniloae’s theological work could or should
be relevant for Baptist communities i n Romania, nor, the way of exploring different avenues
of the necessary ongoing conversation .
This is the way in which this research could be a platform to help the Baptist
communities to enable authentic Christian witness and mission in Romania. In this context the
actual research aims to contribute to the reflection of the riches that could be dis covered in a
meaningful conversation between Baptist and Orthodox in Romania.
It is our firm conviction that as communities living in a country in which the majority
of population is Orthodox, baptistic theology should reflect an engagement with the theology
of the Orthodox Church, rather than only be an echo of the imported theologies of foreign
missionaries that are soon transformed in ideology. Therefore, it is the hypothesis of this

of Deification in Eastern Orthodox Theology . Eugen Matei, The Practice of Community in Social Trinitarianism:
A theological evaluation with reference to Dumitru Stăniloae and Jurge n Moltmann (Fuller Theological
Seminary,Pasadena, CA, 2004). Dănuț Mănăstireanu, A Perichoretical Model of the Church: Trinitarian
Ecclesiology of Dumitru Stăniloae (Unpublished PhD dissertation) (London: Brunel University, 2005). Marius
Daniel Mariș, Biblical Theology of Creation as Basis for the Christian Dialogue between Evangelicals and the
Orthodox Church in Post -Communist Romania (Bucharest University, 2006).

13
research that there is a need for theological formulations that will help these communities to
overcome their extreme isolation and encapsulation, and that there are theological and
ecclesial resources for this process, both in the Orthodox Church as well as in the
contemporary European Evangelical arena.
The present research will try to answer the question of how these resources could be
used for the enhancem ent of the theological conversation between Baptists and Orthodox
in Romania . As such the research aims to contribute to the mutual und erstanding of the two ,
Orthodox and Baptist, and towards a proper understanding of how many things the two have
in common, as well as how important the acknowledgment of the differences cou ld be in
order to understand the limits of what could be translated from one to the other.
Methodologically , the research will start with Part one in which I aim to explore the
dynamic of spiritual journey in Stăniloae’s theology. Accor dingly, chapter 2 will aim to
explore Stăniloae’s spiritual journey. As such the chapter will start with a description of the
spiritual and intellectual climate in Romanian Orthodoxy at the beginning of the 20th century.
Chapter 2 will continue with an exp loration of St ăniloae’s biography, spiritual legacy and
theology. In chapter 3 the research will focus on the way Stă niloae’s theology of participation
informs and roots his view of baptism as the first step in the spiritual journey of a Christian. In
chap ter 4, the research will focus on the way St ăniloae ’s theology of Eucharist reflects the
concept of perichoresis and chapter 5 will focus on the way in St ăniloae ’s theology of
spirituality, the Christological -Pneumatological convergence is actualized.
In Part two I a im to explore the dynamic of spiritual journey in Fiddes’ theology.
Accordingly, in chapter 6, I will start with Fiddes’ spiritual journey, aiming to understand his
place in the contemporary Baptist world as well as to understand some dominan t influences
for his spiritual and intellec tual journey. In this context then I will try to explore the way his
theology developed. In Chapter 7, I will then explore the way Fiddes’ theology of

14
participation informs his thought about baptism. In chapter 8, I will explore the way Fiddes’
perichoretical theology informs his thought about Eucharist and in chapter 9 the way his
covenantal theology informs his thought about spirituality
In Part three, the conclusions, I aim to underline, based on the conversation between
Stăniloae and Fiddes, the dialogical and the transformative dimensions of the spiritual
journey. Therefore, in chapter 10 , I will focus on the way theology of participation, the
perichoretical and Trini tarian theology are connected with the spiritual journey. In chapter 11,
I will focus on the subjects of baptism as a way of living, Eucharist as a perichoretical
reflection, and spirituality as a shared pilgrimage.

15
Part One. T he Dynamic of Spiritual Journey in Stăniloae’s Theology

The aim of Part one of the present project, is to explore the dynamics of spiritual
journey in Stăniloae’s theology. In order to show t he importance of Stăniloae as a theologian
for the actual conversation between Baptists and Orthodox in contemporary Romania , and in
order to understand Stăniloae’s uniqueness for Romanian Christianity we will explore first the
spiritual and intellectual climate in Romanian Orthodoxy at the beginning of th e 20th century.
Second, in order to understand why Stăniloae is a possible entrance door for the enhancement
of the conversation between Baptists and Orthodox in Romania we will explore his life
through three lenses, his biography, spiritual legacy, and t heology. As such we will focus on
the person of Stăniloae as a theologian and we will provide at this point a general scan of his
theology. In the subsequent chapters 3, 4 and 5 we will focus on the way his theology of
participation frames his view of bapt ism, his Trinitarian perichoresis is mirrored in his
theology of Eucharist and the Christological Pneumatology roots his view of spirituality, all
these being part of Stăniloae’s holistic understanding of Christian spiritual journey

16
Chapter 2. Stăniloae’s Spiritual Journey
2.1. Spiritual and Intellectual Climate in Romanian Orthodoxy at the Beginning of the 20th
Century

For centuries, the population of the Romanian territories was under foreign
domination. While the Transylvanian population and territory was under the domination of
Habsburg Empire since the eleventh century, the Walachian and Moldavian populations and
territories were under the domination of the Byzantine Empire until 1417 and for the next
three centuries under the Turkish domination.7 Yet in spite of these dominations that were
political, administrative and ideological the larger population in the territories remains
predominantly Orthodox, even though with some positive influences from East and West.8
Explaining the uniqueness of the Romanian ethos that developed under these influences
Dumitru Stăniloae says about the being of the Romanian people:
…his being s tructured as a border being between East and West. He cannot become
unilaterally Western or multilaterally Eastern…Yet the spirit of synthesis of our people is not
explained through his persistence from immemorial times in the middle space between East
and West, but also through the penetration of the Latin character and of Orthodox
Christianity.9
The development of Romanian nationalism, expressed in the “cultural regeneration” of
the eighteen century, and the establishment of the United Principalities of Moldavia and
Walachia in 1859,10 culminated with the formation of the Romanian unitary State in 1918,
which included Moldavia, Walachia and Transylvania.11 Yet, even if, as a new state,
Romania, experienced a short period of political stability until 1920,12 it entered soon a
period of 20 year s of turmoil before the Second World War, characterized by “a passionate

7 Alexandru Popescu, Petre Țuțea: Between Sacrifice and Suicide (England: Ashgate Publishing
Limited, 2004), 271 .
8 Charles Miller, The Gift of the World: An Introduction to the Theology of Dumitru Stăniloae
Edinburgh: T& T Clark, 2000 ), 8.
9 Dumitru Stăniloae, Reflexii despre spiritualitatea poporului român (Craiova: Scrisul Românesc ,
1992), 8, 14.
10 Poperscu , Petre Țuțea , 271.
11 Ibid., 272.
12 Ibid., 273.

17
and profound confrontation of ideas,”13 a confrontation that involved political as well as
religious thinkers. Miller says in regard with Stă niloae in that period:
Amid the polarities of traditionalism and modernism, nationalism and internationalism,
orthodoxy and “western materialism,” we find Stăniloae deepening his appreciation for the
Romanian Orthodox cultural and theological tradition. A lasting influence was exercised upon
Stăniloae by the militantly Orthodox journalist and poet Nichifor Crainic (1898 -1972) who
championed attempts to define a specifically Romanian mentality and return natural culture to
traditional Christian roots.14
In fact the tradition of Romanian nationalism, st arted with the greatest poet of
Romanian history Mihai Eminescu (1850 -1889), named by Alexandru Popescu, “the leading
political theorist of the nation -State, ”15 having as followers the philosopher Petre Țuțea (1902 –
1991 and the theologian Dumitru Stăni loae (1903 -1993).16
The period between the two World Wars, was also a period of spiritual struggle. For
some important Romanian philosophers of those times, the s piritual struggle, took the form of
a critique of “the political theory divorced from God ” that “ would lead to the exaltation of
power as the only truth. ”17 Petre Țuțea, together with “ two distinguished Romanian
philosophers, Sorin Pavel (1903 —1957) and Nicolae Tatu (1910 —2000), produce d The
National Revolution Ma nifesto .18 According to Alexandru Popescu in the Manifesto , “the
Orthodox identity of the Romanian people was proposed as the basis for a national policy.19 It
also “presents the country as being in a sorry spiritual state,” and “identifies the real “enemy”
as those who undermine the Church.”20
However, the nationalism of this period took also secular forms that tried to promote a
secular Romanian ethos , having as one of its representatives “the philosopher -poet Lucian

13 Miller, The Gift , 15.
14 Ibid., 15.
15 Popescu, Petre Țuțea , 30
16 Ibid., 31
17 Ibid., 16
18 Ibid., 16.
19 Ibid., 16.
20 Ibid., 17.

18
Blaga (1895 -1961).21 Also, there was an attractive nationalistic Christian ideology, attractive
for many intellectuals of the period that was embodied in the extreme nationalistic
organization called the Legionary Movement, whose ideologue was one of the famous
philosophers of those times, Nae Ionesco.22
For Dumitru Stăniloae, this spiritual struggle took the road of what Miller named as
“Orthodox Via Media.”23 Miller is right when affirming that Stăniloae’s balanced character
was fo rmed in the religious ethos of Romanian Orthodoxy of his native Vl ădeni in
Transylvania. Miller describes it as following:
In its restraint, the discomfort with extremes, in its modest expressiveness; in its light –
heartedness as well as its reasoned sensi tivity to the mystery of God, the religious ethos of
Romanian Orthodoxy is pre -eminently one of spiritual balance .24
In his search for balance, we find in Stăniloae, says Miller, “a religious sensibility in tune with
the notion of via media …understood as a fundamental spiritual disposition whose instinctive
preference is for the observances of balance and due proportions,” a disposition that embarked
Stăniloae on “a long, at times painful, theological journey.25
Due to his spiri tual sensibility, Stăniloae found himself from the beginning of his
theological studies in Cernăuți (1922) dissatisfied with the way the Orthodox theology was
taught. 26 Radu Bordeianu describes accurately the status of Orthodox theology in th ose
times:

21 Miller, The Gift, 16.
22 Popescu, Petre Țuțea , 20.
23 Miller, The Gift , 10
24 Ibid., 12.
25 Ibid., 12.
26 Mircea Păcurariu, „Pr. Prof. Acad. Dumitru Stăniloae. Câteva coordonate biografice,” i n Persoană și
Comuniune: Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profesor Academician Dumitru Stăniloae la înplinirea vârstei de 90 de
ani. Sibiu: Editura Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe, 1993), 3.

19
Orthodox theology suffered an unhealthy influence during its “Western captivity:” Its
neoscholastic theology was overly intellectualistic, an academic exercise divorced from
spirituality.27
This state of affairs had a long history with a decline that could be detected in the
Orthodox theology after the patristic period, culminating during the Ottoman Empire period,
with th e East turn “rather uncritically to the West,” adopting the Western neoscholasticism.28
Bordeianu speaks of several reactions to this situation over the centuries. He starts with the
philokalic movement of the eighteen century, with the promot ion of the hesychast literature
that represented “a spiritual approach to theology in contrast with the rationalism of
neoscholasticism.”29 Then was the Slavophil movement of the nineteenth century, with the
departure from Catholic and Protesta nt West, and the movement of twentieth century to
depart from neoscholastic theology, represented by, Nicholas Afanassief, Alexander
Schmemann, John Meyendorff, Vladimir Lossky, and Florovsky.30 However , Bordeianu
considers that “Stăniloae wa s the first Orthodox theologian to successfully break away from
manual theology.”31
For Stăniloae, this break consists not in its rejection per se , rather he was looking to
replace it with a th eology that will be a profound actualization of the Patristic heritage. This
started earlier in his theological activity with the discovery of St Gregory Palamas (1296 –
1359). Palamas thought helped Stăniloae to find balance for the concepts that he learned from
theologians of other traditions. For example, Bordeianu signalizes the fact that after
discovering in Karl Barth’s theology “the transcendence of God before man,”32 he balanced
that view with the Palamite view of un created energies, a theology that facilitates an

27 Radu Bordeianu, Dumitru Stăniloae: An Ecumenical Eclessiology (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark,
2011), 13
28 Ibid., 14.
29 Ibid., 18.
30 Ibid., 19.
31 Ibid., 27.
32 Bordeianu, Dumitru Stăniloae , 23.

20
understanding of “God’s real involvement with humankind and the world without
compromising his essential unknowability and transcendence.”33
Also, through Palamas’ thought, Stăniloae found a sta rting point for what he aimed
for, a spiritual theology. Palamas is considered one of the theologians that were instrumental
for the full development of Hesychasm,34 and considered “the theologian of Hesychasm.”35
The synthesis of he sychast mystics owned to St Gregory Palamas closes theologically all the
efforts, starting with the Alexandrian theologians to Simeon the New Theologian to express in
a framework of a biblical and patristic theology, the most authentic Chris tian experience,
proper to the Apostles on the Tabor , to the first martyr, Stephen, to Ap. Paul on the Damascus
Road and to all monk – saints or to simple believers along the entire Christian history.36
In Romania, the Hesychast tradition was present even from the time when the
Romanian Principalities were not united. The presence of “a very ancient monastic tradition
of prayer” was in existence in Walachia by the time St. Nikodimos of Tismana (1320 -1406)
came in these territories.37 Nikodimos was instrumental for the revitalization of this Hesychast
spirituality, which continued and spread in monasteries and caves, from Walachia, to
Transylvania, and in Moldavia.38
Some of the representatives of Roma nian Hesychasm among monks, were Daniel the
Hesychast (in the fifteenth century), Elder Basil of Poiana Mărului (eighteenth century), Paisy
Velichovsky (1722 -1794) – the first who translated into Slavonic the Hesychast writings from
Greek, a collection tha t was named Philokalia .39 Considered “the first to achieve that
synthesis of Byzantine and Russian spirituality that is so characteristic of Romanian

33 Ibid., 23.
34 Popescu, Petre Țuțea , 279.
35 Serafim Joantă , „Din istoria isihasmului până în secolul al XV -lea,” in Persoană și Comuniune:
Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profesor Academician Dumitru Stăniloae la înplinirea vârstei de 90 de ani . Sibiu:
Editura Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe, 1993) 559
36 Ibid., 561.
37 Popescu, Petre Țuțea , 280.
38 Ibid., 281.
39 Ibid., 281.

21
Orthodoxy,40 Paisy was followed by disciples as St. Calinic of Cernica, and in t he twentieth
century by Arsenie Boca (1910 -1989) in Transylvania and Ilie Cleopa (1912 -1998) in
Moldavia).41
The novelty introduced by Paysian view of hesychast spirituality, followed by his
disciples, was that of opening the practice of Hes ychasm outside the monastery to the lay
believers, something that was a kind of recapture for the Nicolas Cabasilas “adapted
Hesychast spirituality for laity:”42 This Paysian innovation was embodied and revitalized in
the “Burning Bush movement” a movement that reunited monks, intellectuals and scholars of
Romania at the end of Second World War.43 Dumitru Stă niloae as one that was part of this
movement translated and published the second edition of Filokalia,44 to be available for the
larger public. Mircea Păcurariu speaks about the diversity of the “Burning Bush” group:
Part of the group were th e Archimandrites Benedict Ghiță and Sofian Boghin, the physician
Alexandru Mironescu, professor Constantin Joja, the poet Vasile Voiculescu, the poet and
journalist Sandu Tudor, the writer and journalist Ion Marin Sadoveanu, the young assistant
Andrei Scri ma and others. They met periodically at the Antim Monastery or in the house of
one of them, and they were trying to keep alive the Orthodox and authentic Romanian
conscience in the new condition of the political and social life from our country.45
Also, in one of his last interviews, in 1 of April 1992, Dumitru Stăniloae, points out
this new way of seeing Hesychasm. He considered that the prayer of the heart is “a gift and a
result of a spiritual exercise.”46 As such it is a gift not to be used only in solitude but it is
communitarian.47 Therefore it is not to be limited as a monastic practice, but also as a day to
day practice.48 During the Antonescian dictatorship and the beginning of Communist regime,

40 Ibid., 282
41 Ibid., 282.
42 Joantă, Din istoria isihasmului , 561
43 Popescu, Petre Țuțea , 282 -283.
44 Ibid., 283.
45 Mircea P ăcurariu, „Preotul Profesor și Academician Dumitru Stăniloae: Câteva coordonate
bigrafice,” 9.
46 Sorin Dumitrescu, 7 dimineți cu părintele Stăniloae (București: Anastasia, 1992 ), 82
47 Ibid., 83.
48 Ibid., 84.

22
Hesychasm flourished in the political prisons.49 Later on un der the Communist dictatorship of
Gheorghe -Gheorghiu Dej, the members of the Burning Bush movement were arrested and in
1958, and imprisoned. For them as for others before them, the Hesychast prayer was a mean
for survival “that sustained them through the Soviet experiment of re -education.”50
2.2 Stăniloae’s Biography and Spiritual Legacy

Regarding Stăniloae’ s biography (1903 -1993), the first notable thing, from a
theological point of view, is that he was a contemporary witness to 20th century Romanian
history with its greatest events (1918, the second World War, the Communist regime, the
Revolution in 1989). As a contemporary of this history the issues concerning the society and
the church , are reflected in his theology. So, Stăniloae was a theologian of his times, doing
theology in a relevant way.
He is a spiritual father…A man of profound modesty and piety…A witness of his epoch he
passes the history of this century with the trust and serenity of a witness of faith. He is a
monument of contemporary experience of Christ.51

The second notable thing is that he tried not to be enslaved by previous systems of
thought. He was always a theologian pushing the boundaries. He had no hes itation to address
critically, yet in a constructive way, the philosophy, theology and spirituality of his times.52
Third, Stăniloae tried never to evade in an academic tower of thought, or in the academic
mediocrity so often practised by chu rches (of any denomination) especially in times of crisis.
Proud to be Romanian and Orthodox, Stăniloae was in himself and through his theology,
representing Romanian Orthodox thought and spiritual ethos at the superlative, in a unique
way of seeing the co mplementarity of different areas of thought such as philosophy, history,
science and theology. His interdisciplinary dialogical approach to theology was not only a

49 Popescu, Petre Țuțea , 284.
50 Ibid, 284 -285.
51 Ion Bria, Spațiul nemuririi sau eternizarea umanului în Dumnezeu (The Space of Immortality or the
Eternization of Humaness in God) (Iași: Trinitas, 1994), 7.
52 Ibid., 8.

23
feature of his theological thought, but also of his character and spirituality. He not only
addressed each epoch of the history he participated in, afresh and relevant theologically, but
he also suffered for his theological convictions and spirituality during the communist
regime.53 The reality described above is the reason one cannot separate Stăniloae’s biography
from his theology and his theology from his spirituality.54
How all these complex dimensions of his life and theology are embodied today can be
seen in what could be called Stăniloae’s spiritual legacy, whose first dimension can be seen in
the school of thought h e represents for his disciples.
There is a “Stăniloae’s generation,” a school, a current, an influence, an attraction. It was his
generous presence that gathered around himself with love and true interest and he was
considered a master.55

Another impor tant feature of Stăniloae’s legacy is his life of discipleship. In a time
when Romanian Orthodox Christianity was characterized by a crisis of models and spiritual
direction, he was in himself a way to be followed towards revival. In the words of one of hi s
disciples: „What Council Vatican II realized at the pastoral and structural level for the Roman
Catholic Church, the same Father Stăniloae realized for Orthodoxy at the level of theological
reflection”.56

53 Silviu Eugen Rogobete, O Ontologie a Iubirii: Subiect si realitate personala suprema in gandirea
parintelui Dumitru Stăniloae (Iași: Polirom, 2001), 26. Rogobete refers to the time spent in prison by Stăniloae
during the Communist regime in the period 1958 -1963, the time when he practiced the prayer of Jesus. This
spiritual experience in difficult times of imprisonement rooted Stăniloae‘s view of spirituality, that will be
analzyed in chapter 6 of the present dissertation. The truth of the the practice of hesychasm is proved by
Stăniloae’s own confession in a discussion with Olivier Clement, in the preface to Stăniloae, Rugaciunea lui
Iisus si experienta Duhului Sfant (Sibiu: Deisis, 2003), 18. Also, Stăniloae, Priere de Jesus et experience du
Saint -Esprit (Paris: Desclee dr Brouw er, 1981).
54 Ivana Noble, “ Doctrine of Creation within the Theological Project of Dumitru Stăniloae”, in
Commun io Viatorum 2 (2007), 185 -209, 206. Also, Silviu Rogobete, Subject and Supreme Personal Reality in
the Theological Thought of Fr. Dumitru Stăniloae. An Ontology of Love , Unpublished PhD dissertation (London:
Brunel University, 1997). 28. Also, Rogobete, O Ontologie a Iubirii, 27.
55 Fr. Antonie Plăm ădeală, “Generația Stăniloae” (Stăniloae’s Generation) in Persoană și Comuniune:
Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profesor Academician Dumitru Stăniloae la împlinirea vârstei de 90 de ani (Sibiu:
Editura Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe, 1993), XI .
56 Bria, Spațiul nemuririi 43.

24
Third, part of Stă niloae’s legacy is his enormous volume of work: 20 books, 1,300
articles, 30 translations.57 Considered an “Eastern Karl Barth,”58 Stăniloae embodied in his
writings the unique experiences of his philosophical and theolo gical encounters.59 This
dialogical formation is expressed in his writings where the dialogue with philosophy and
different Christian traditions is a constant feature. Reading extensively the Bible, the Fathers
and also contemporary Catholic and Protestant theology, as well as Eastern Orthodox
theology, Stăniloae had no problems using their arguments and ideas when all these were
appropriate with his arguments.60 In this regard Mănă stireanu affirms that „Stăniloae’s
theology i n general…was firstly patristic ……thoroughly Trinitarian …profoundly

57 Emil Constantinescu, “Pr. Prof. Dr. Dumitru Stăniloae: profil de teolog și filosof creștin ortodox,” in
Persoană și Comuniune: Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profes or Academician Dumitru Stăniloae la înplinirea
vârstei de 90 de ani (Sibiu: Editura Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe, 1993), 93.
58 Virgil Ierunca, “Teologia Dogmatică Ortodoxă’ a Părintelui Dumitru Stăniloae,” in Persoană și
Comuniune: Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profesor Academician Dumitru Stăniloae la înplinirea vârstei de 90 de
ani (Sibiu: Editura Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe, 1993), 103.
59 Bria, Spațiul nemuririi . He says that, “We can distinguish now the three great omnipresent influences
in his work: Greek and Byzantine patristic having as model, for the point of view of theological systematisation,
Maximus the Confe ssor and Gregory Palamas, and from the point of view of ethical and spiritual expressions,
Simeon the New Theologian; Western philosophy, especially Christian existentialism (Martin Heidegger,
Charles Peguy, Karl Jaspers, Gabriel Marcel), and the cultural forms in which the Orthodoxy embodied in
Romania,” 8.
60 For example: Dumitru Stăniloae, Catolicismul după războ i (Catholicism after the War) (Sibiu:
Editura Arhidiecezană, 1933); Stăniloae, “Curente noi în teologia protestantă germană” (New Currents in
German Protestant Theology), in Revista Teologică , an, XIX, 1929, nr. 7 -8, 234 -238; Stăniloae, “Metafizica lui
Lucian Blaga,” (Lucian Blaga’s metaphysics) in Revista Teologică , XXIV, 1934, nr. 11 -12, Sibiu, 393 -401;
Stăniloae, “Organizarea sinodală a Bisericii Ortodoxe în paralel cu cezaro -papismul catolic,”(Sinodal
organization of the Orthodox church in parallel with Ca tholic cesar -papism), în Studii Teologice , II, 1950, nr.9 –
10, 541 -555; Stăniloae, “Dumnezeiasca Euharistie în cele trei confesiuni” (The Divine Eucharist in the three
confessions), in Ortodoxia , v, 1953, nr. 1. 46 -115; Stăniloae, “Ființa Tainelor în cele trei confesiuni” (The Being
of Sacraments in the three confessions), in Ortodoxia , VIII, 1956, nr. 1, 3 -28; Stăniloae, “Starea primordială a
omului în cele trei confesiuni” (The primordial estate of man in the three confessions), in Ortodoxia , VIII, 1956,
nr. 3, 323 -357; Stăniloae, “Romanian Orthodox Anglican Talks: A Dogmatic Assesement,” in Romanian
Orthodox church and the church of England (Bucharest: Biblical and Orthodox Missionary Institute, 1976, 129 –
148); Stăniloae, “Posibilitatea reconcilierii do gmatice între Biserica Ortodoxă și Vechile Biserici Orientale,”
(The Possibility of dogmatic reconciliation between the Orthodox Church and the Old Oriental Churches), in
Ortodoxia , VVII, 1965, nr. 1, 5 -27; Stăniloae, “Doctrina luterană despre justificare și Cuvânt și câteva reflexii
ortodoxe,” (The Lutheran Doctrine of Justification and Word and some Orthodox reflections), in Ortodoxia ,
XXXV; 1983, nr. 4, 495 -509; Stăniloae, “Tendința Vaticanului după comuniunea euharistică cu ortodocșii (The
tendency of the Vatican after the Eucharistic communion with the Orthodox), in Ortodoxia , XXXIV, 1972, nr. 3,
492-494; Stăniloae, “Filosofia existențială și credința în Iisus Hristos,” in Gândirea, XVIII, nr. 10, 1939, 565 –
572; Stăniloae, “Pentru Pacea confesională, ( For the confessional peace) in Telegraful Român , LXXIX, 1931,
nr. 33 -34, 1 -2; Stăniloae, “Reîntoarcerea filosofiei,” (The Return of Philosophy), in Telegraful Român , LXXXV,
1937, nr. 43, 1.

25
Romanian …dialogical , characterized by an ecumenical spirit .”61 Even though Stăniloae is
often critical and polemical, he proves in most cases at least that he does not suffer from what
I call “illiteracy of other traditions.” The way the ch aracteristics of his character and
spirituality contributed to the way he was doing theology will be explored in the next section.
2.3. Stăniloae’s Way of Doing Theol gy

To explore deeply into the comple x personality and thought of Dumitru Stăniloae, one
will observe that he was a theologian of complementarities . First, Stăniloae starts from the
revelation of God in history, combining creatively the two forms of God’s revelation, namely,
natural and super natural revelation. He states:
The Orthodox Church makes no separation between natural and supernatural revelation.
Natural revelation is known and understood fully in the light of supernatural revelation, or we
might say that natural revelation is given and maintained by God continuously through his
own divine act which is above nature.62

Stăniloae continues to develop the concept of the inseparability of the two forms of revelation
by the avenue of combining Scriptural arguments with Patristic teachings. He appeals to
proofs from the biblical texts such as Job, Romans, and Psalms,63 and from the Patristic
Fathers such as Saint Maximos the Confessor, Saint Athanasios, Saint Simeon the New
Theologian and Kabasilas.64 From this combination Stăniloae develops the co ncept of the
interdependence of the natural and supernatural revelations.
The framework in which Stăniloae considers that this interdependency can be seen
best is the history of salvation. In this space of revelation of God, in history, Stăniloae asserts,
we can see the unity of God’s plan for the salvation of humanity. Taking in consideration the
message of both the Old Testament and New Testament, an d in the unity of their message ,

61 Mănăstireanu , A Perichoretic Model of the Church: The Trinitarian Ecclesiology of Dumitru
Stăniloae (Saarbrucken: Lambert Academic Publishing, 2002), 238 -239 (henceforth PM)..
62 Stăniloae, The Experience of God (Brookline: MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1994), (henceforth
EG).
63 Stăniloae, Teologie Dogmatică Ortodoxă, 1 (Bucuresti: EIBMBOR, 1996), 26 -27 (henceforth TDO).
64 Stăniloae, EG, 20-30. Manastireanu, PM, 238 -239.

26
Stăniloae sees the harmony of God’s way of revelation through both natura l and supernatural
acts, in the formation and maturation of Israel as the people of God.65 For Stă niloae this
process of revelation is profoundly Trinitarian. It is the Father who reveals Himself through
the work of the Holy Spirit culminating in the Person and Work of Christ.66 The spiritual
movement that Stăniloae sees is the dynamic of descent and ascent, which constitutes the
whole of the salvation process. The descent dimension is seen in the supernatural acts of God
in history, and the ascent dimension is seen in the response of human beings in what Stăniloae
calls, “the ascending sp iritual progression.”
Clearly, the history of salvation does not consist of supernatural acts alone, because these do
not occur continuously; just as God’s supernatural revelation is not given continuously. These
acts are found, however, within the order o f an ascending spiritual progression and, in this
sense, they have a history, which is the history of salvation .67

This is an important insight into the participatory dimension of human salvation. Stăniloae is
very clear about this reality of salvation asserting that the entire movement is not one way,
from God to humanity, but also that the history of salvation that is “guided, enlightened, and
strengthened in good by divine revelation…is made up also of our responses…”68
Moreover, this concept of salvation is in harmony with the constitutive elements of
God’s revelation in the history of salvation. For Stăniloae, the starting point for this
participatory reality of salvation is Christ, being also the culmination or the final stage of
supernatural revelation, and consecutively, “the period after Christ… is the ultimate stage in
the history of salvation.”
Thus, Christ represents the climax of supernatural revelation and the full confirmation and
clarification of the mean ing of our existence through the fulfillment of this existence within
himself, the one in whom our ultimate union with God, and thus our perfection also, is
achieved. 69

65 Ibid., 24-25.
66 Ibid., 25.
67 Ibid., 26.
68 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 27 .
69 Stăniloae, EG, 28.

27
Stăniloae continues to explain the way this becomes reality in th e life of believers. He
considers that a believer becomes part of this movement if he accepts being drawn closer to
God by the Word, through the Holy Spirit. The Word, Christ, made the first move, namely, to
take “our own image into himself in order to res tore it…exalting that humanity of ours which
he assumed.” He states this complementary work of the Word and the Holy Spirit as:
This cooperation of the Word of God and of the Holy Spirit can be observed first, of all, in
revelation down to the time of its conclusion in Christ, and after that in the Church, in
Scripture, and the Tradition .”70

For Stăniloae the model for this complementary work is the life of the Trinity. As in
the revelation the Father is expressed through the Word in the Holy Spirit, the same happens
in the fin al stage of revelation that is Christ. The Christ event was prepared and revealed by
the Spirit, and He Himself as the Word incarnate prepared the coming of the Spirit, who will
prepare the creation for the second coming of the incarnate Word.71 This circularity of
movements of one divine person towards the other is for Stăniloae a reality that is to be
replicated in the believer as part of the Church. Stăniloae quotes Evdokimov in order to
endorse this reality:
…After Pentecost it i s the relation to Christ which is brought about through and in the
Holy Spirit…Pentecost restores to the word the interiorized presence of Christ and
reveals him now not before, but within his disciples.72

Stăniloae finishes his assertion on the complementary work of the Word and of the
Spirit, in a survey of the development of this reality from the Old Testament to the New
Testament, by concluding that Christ is the model of t he “total return of the Holy Spirit to

70 Ibid., 29. Also, John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion , edited by John T. McNeill
(Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960), 95. Stăniloae’s argument is very close with that of John Calvin
who also argued that is of vital importance the intimate relationship between Word and Spirit. In his view the
Word and Spirit not only “belong inseparable together” but also “the Word may abide in our minds when the
Spirit, who causes us to contemplate God’s face, shines. “ (Ibid.)
71 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 33.
72 Paul Evdokimov, L’ Esprit Saint dans le tradition orthodoxe (Paris: 1967), 89.

28
human nature.”73 This leads to the second theological complementarity in the thought of
Dumitru Stăniloae, that of Scripture and Tradition in the life of the Church. For him,
The Church is the dia logue of God with the faithful through Christ…the Church is Christ
united in the Holy Spirit with those who believe and over whom has been spread and through
whom is spreading Christ’s own act of drawing the faithful..74

To the question of how the Church is an instrument of such a revelation in Christ and
of Christ, Stăniloae answers: through Scripture and tradition. For Stăniloae, the Church’s
capacity to interpret and understand the Scripture is rooted in Christ’s presen ce through the
Holy Spirit in the life of the Church.75 Yet this happens not in isolation of individuals but
exactly in the koinonia of the believers mediated by Christ that mirrors the koinonia of the life
of the Trinity. The centrality of Chr ist is vital, for he is the source and the means for the work
of the Holy Spirit in the communion of believers.76 Scripture, for Stăniloae is a space of
explanation not only of the way in which God came to us in Christ through the H oly Spirit but
also of the way in which through the Holy Spirit we can ascent to God, in Christ. Therefore
Scripture is “a book that is always contemporary.77
Thus, Scripture is one form through which the words of Christ are preserved, not only in the
words spoken by him in the past, but also in the words which he is continually addressing to
us.78

The medium in which the contemporaneity and actuality of Christ, in Scripture, is
made reality in the life of the Church, is the work of the Holy Spirit. In the Spirit’s work the
words of Scripture become the entrance door into “relation with the authentic person of
Christ,” a dynamic encounter with Christ, in and beyond Scripture, through the internal work

73 Stăniloae, EG, 33.
74 Ibid., 38.
75 Ibid., 39.
76 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 43.
77 Stăniloae, EG, 41. Stăniloae is here in agreement with what Romanian Baptists would affirm about
Scripture. See in this regard Octavian Baban, “ The Bible in the Life of the Orthodox Church,” in Ian Randall
(ed.), Baptists and the Orthodox Church: On the Way to understanding (Prague: International Baptist Seminary,
2005), 15-29. He says: “ The Baptist call for a revitalized reading of the Bible is founded on the conviction that
while the Scriptures shape our views of God they also invite us to engage the Word as faithful communities who
struggle to live by it,” (ibid., 29).
78 Stăniloae, EG, 42.

29
of the Holy Spirit, an encounter that become possible not through simply meeting the words
of the Scripture but through the process of transcending the words towards the meaning they
signify.79 For capturing this meaning, Stăniloae continues, the Church needs the other form of
preserving the revelation of Christ in Scripture, namely, tradition. The role of tradition is
twofold:
Tradition keeps this dynamism of the Scripture contemporary without cha nging it, for tradition
represents an application and a continuous deepening of the content of Scripture. At the same
time as it preserves the authentic dynamism of Scripture, tradition, in its quality as true
interpreter of Scripture, brings that dynamism to bear upon real life.80

In order to show th e importance of such a complementarity , between Scrip ture and
tradition, Stăniloae gives the example of the Apostle Paul whose oral teachings were the
needed hermeneutical key or the lens through which the community of the church could
interpret the Christ event. Stăniloae considers the “apostolic teachings or explanation of faith”
as a necessary “permanent model,” 81 for tradition is the means for interpreting and integrating
the content of Scripture’s message about Christ.82 This is so, continues Stăniloae, exactly

79 Ibid., 44.
80 Ibid., 45. See also Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church (London: Penguin Books, 1993), 196. Ware
defines Christian tradition as “the faith and practice which Jesus Christ imparted to the Apostles, and which
since the Apostle’s time has been handed down from generation to generation in the Church.” See also, Jaroslav
Pelikan , Tradiția creștină: O istorie a dezvoltării doctrinei, 1: Nașterea tradiției universale (100 -600) (Iași:
Polirom, 2004), 33 He says that “ tradition is the living faith of the death; traditionalism is the death faith of the
living.” See also Mănăstireanu, Locul Scripturii in tradiția ortodoxă . Commenting on the concept of tradition as
icon in the thought of Jaroslav Pelikan, in The Vindicatio n of Tradition (Yale University Press: New Haven, CT,
1984), Mănăstireanu considers that “a viable model of the relation between Scripture and Tradition would imply
the fact that this inseparable pair be regarded as an icon of revelation,” 75. Mănăstireanu also considers that
Stăniloae’s “perichoretical model” of the relation between Scripture, Tradition and the Church, “has a value
because it avoids the contradiction between its constitutive elements,” 91, even though Mănăstireanu sees its
weakness in Stă niloae’s “insistence on the preeminence of the Church over Scripture and Tradition,” an
insistence that “breaks the fragile equilibrium of the relation between Scripture and Tradition, in the favour of
the latter, that leads on one hand in practice to a ne glect of Scripture in the life of the Church, and on the other
hand, to a diminishing of Scripture’s authority in the validation and invalidation of specific traditions,” 92.
Relevant in the context of the present project is the opinion expressed by a lead ing Romanian Baptist theologian,
the actual president of Baptist Union in Romania: Otniel Ioan Bunaciu, “The Meaning of Tradition,” in Baptists
and the Orthodox Church: On the Way to understanding (Prague: International Baptist Seminary, 2005), 30 -45.
Buna ciu considers that “It is Stăniloae’s approach that allows us, nevertheless, to link dynamically and
permanently Tradition and revelation. This might be a possible way forward in ecumenical discussions,” (ibid,
42). However, Bunaciu signals a concern that remains from a baptistic point of view with its emphasis on the
fact that “Scripture remains, for the Church, the central witness of the Revelation of God in Christ,” (ibid, 44).
81 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 43-44
82 John Breck, Scripture in Tradition: The Bible and Its Interpretation in the Orthodox Church (New
York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001), 10. Breck affirms what is central for the Orthodox biblical theology,

30
because the tradition “is both the invocation of the Spirit of Christ ( epiclesis …) and the
reception of the Spirit.”83
In this context, for Stăniloae, the reality of sanctification in the life of the Church,
through the Spirit, is inseparable from the work of Christ in the Church. If the essence of the
sacramental life of the Church, says Stă niloae, is in the invocation and the descent of the Holy
Spirit, in the framework of the life of the believers prepared in the process of discipleship, it is
based on “the saving works of Christ” and on his example. This is the why for Stăniloae
authentic Christian life is:
…An imitation of Christ made possible by his own power, a progress towards his holiness
which comes about through their sanctification, and has in view their liberation from the
automatism of nature and from the passionate attachment to the pleasures offered by nature –
for it is this liberation which is the condition for true communion with the person of Christ
whose love is infinite and with all human persons .84

Moreover, for Stăniloae tradition cannot be conce ived apart from the Church and its
life. This inseparability is seen in the fact that, if tradition is the invocation and receiving of
the Holy Spirit, the Church is the recipient of this reality. Of course it is the believer who
receives the work of the H oly Spirit but it is not the believer in his individuality but the
believer in community. For Stăniloae this is again the mirroring of the life of the Trinity,
where the divine persons are persons in communion. Moreover, in Stăniloae’s thought “the
Church is a subject that bears tradition…and tradition is an attribute of the Church.”85 For
Stăniloae the unity between Scripture, tradition and Church is pneumatological, it is made by
the presence and work of the Holy Spirit, in their synthesis . He asserts:
Scripture arose within the bosom of the Church and for her benefit, as a way of fixing one part
of the apostolic tradition or of revelation in written form in order to nourish the Church from
and maintain her in Christ who is authentical ly transmitted through the tradition as a whole .86

to whom Stăniloae is faithful to: „Tradition provides the hermeneutic perspective by which any biblical writing
is to be properly interpreted.”
83 Stăniloa e, TDO , 1, 44.
84 Stăniloae, EG, 48-49.
85 Ibid., 53 -54.
86 Ibid., 55.

31
The Church as the Body of Christ is for Stăniloae a reality brought into existence by the Holy
Spirit in order to be the embodiment of the revelation of Christ. There the Church is the
realit y of the continuation of the working power of revelation in the world. The circularity87
of this movement between Scripture, tradition and the Church is given by the movement of
the Holy Spirit in the unity He creates between them:
The Church moves inside the revelation or in side Scripture and tradition; Scripture discloses
its content inside the Church and inside tradition; tradition is alive within the Church.
Revelation itself is effective within the Church and the Church is alive within revelation .88

The third complementarity in Stăniloae’s theological thought is that of negative and
positive ways of knowing God, n amely apophatic and cataphatic. He says:
In our opinion these two kinds of knowledge are n either contradictory nor mutually exclusive,
rather they complete each other. Strictly speaking, apophatic knowledge is completed by
rational knowledge of two kinds, that which proceeds by way of affirmation and that which
proceeds by the way of negation.89

There are two things that Stăniloae warns against. First is the danger of living only
through the rational way of knowing God. Even if, says Stăniloae, the rational way of
knowing God can be the starting point and is necessary at any stage o f Christian life, not to
complete it with experiential knowledge would be to live an incomplete life. However, in
order for this completion to take place there is a necessary connection of the entire life to the
content of the revelation of God’s character . This is to happen by the way of purification of
life, as the Apostle Paul says in 1 Corinthians 2, the reality of God’s presence is a spiritual
one and can be apprehended by spiritual persons. Mirroring the saying of the Apostle Paul,
Stăniloae asserts:
The presence of God as person – a presence that presses upon us and from which shines forth
his infinity – is not the conclusion of a rational judgment, as in the case of knowledge that is
intellectual, cataphatic, or negative; rather it is perceived by on e in a state of revived spiritual

87 Mănăstireanu, Locul Scripturii , 90. He considers that Stăniloae „borrows from the doctrine of the
Trinity, the concept of perichoresis and is using it to create a dyna mic model of the relation between Scripture,
Tradition and Church.”
88 Stăniloae, EG, 58.
89 Ibid., 96.

32
sensibility and this cannot come about so long as man is dominated by bodily pleasures or
passions of any kind.90

Moreover, Stăniloae considers that the deepness of our knowledge of God is influenced and i s
dependent on our purification in life, showing the fact that it is experiential knowledge. 91
This is consistent with Stăniloae’s idea, explored above, of the life -long process of
sanctification in the believer s’ lives, on which an extended analysis will be provided in
chapter 6 of the present project.
The second thing Stăniloae warns against is the danger of transforming knowledge
into an idol. The true knowledge of God is one, Stăniloae seems to say, that keep s the person
conscious of how much we do not know from God, recognizing therefore, the limitations of
our present ideas about God. This true humbling knowledge is in contrast with the idolater’s
knowledge that keeps God blocked in a certain, momentous unde rstanding of Him thus,
placing “limits in God.”
Every understanding that touches upon God must have a certain fragility and transparence; it
cannot be something fixed once for all, but must itself urge us to call this understanding into
question and stimul ate us to seek one further along in the same direction92

But this dynamic, critical movement from what we know to what we need to discover
continuously beyond our present knowledge, is possible, Stă niloae seems to be arguing, only
if we develop in our life what could be called the habit of going beyond, even going beyond
the words of Scripture, as Paul says: “the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.” (2 Corinthians
3: 6)
Stăniloae continues by arguing that the knowledge of God is intrinsic to everyday life.
It is knowledge in the experience of life that is the space where the complementarity between
the affirmative and negative knowledge of God is encapsulated, and therefore expressed. The
know ledge of God in the experience of life is different than that of knowing theoretical

90 Ibid., 100.
91 Stăniloae , TDO , 1, 85 -86.
92 Stăniloae, EG, 105.

33
concepts about Him. It is knowledge of Him in “his special care in regard to me,” 93 that is
framed by a personal relationship with Him. This newness of know ing God in an intimate
relationship becomes possible in Stăniloae’s thought because of his unique way of
understanding the Triune Divine being. For Stăniloae any separation between immanent and
economic Trinity is inconceivable.94 However, to prevent any idea of a possibility for a full
knowledge of God in himself, that is an impossibility, Stăniloae distinguishes, following
Gregory Palamas, between the being and the operations of God, arguing that „through each of
these operations, it is God, who is one in being, who is at work.”95 The power of this refusal,
to project any separat ion in God, is consistently seen first, in his refusal to project any
separation in knowing God, analyzed above.
Second, the consistency of his concept of the unity of God is seen in his conception of
the double constitution of the church, as a Christol ogical-Pneumatological reality . The model
behind this idea is that of the “person in communion,” rather than that of the “person is
communion.” He says:
The indissoluble union between Christ and the Holy Spirit who truly constitutes the Church
and sustains t he life of the Christian within the Church has its profound roots in that
indissoluble union which according to Orthodox teaching exists between them within the
sphere of their inner Trinitarian relations. 96

The inner Trinitarian relations are for Stăniloae to be found in the manifestation of the
economic Trinity. The key terms for Stăniloae are procession and irradiation. The Holy Spirit
proceeds from t he Father towards the Son and irradiates from the Son and through the Son
towards the Father.

93 Ibid. , 118.
94 Karl Rahner, The Trinity (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1997), 21 -22. Stăniloae is
in agreement with Karl Rahner who speaks of the „axiomatic unity of the „economic” and „imanent Trinity.”
Rahner affirms: says: „The „economic” Trinity is the „imanent” Trinity and t he „immanent” Trinity is the
„economic” Trinity.”
95 Stăniloae, EG, 125.
96 Stăniloae, Theology and the Church (New York: St. Vladimir ’s Seminary Press, 1980), 15.

34
The Spirit proceeding from the Father comes to rest in the Son who is begotten of the Father,
and like an arch, unites Father and Son in one embrace. Thus a unit y among the three Persons
is manifested which is distinct from their unity of essence.97

Speaking about the Christ event, Stăniloae considers that the Spirit is “the milieu in
which Christ is seen.” We can neither know Christ nor experience t he Spirit in separation of
one from the other. Therefore, Christ is pneumatologically constituted and the manifestation
of the Spirit is christologically framed. The believer cannot posses Christ without the Spirit
and cannot posses the Spirit without the Christ.98 Moreover, this relational circularity of the
three Persons of the Trinity is, for Stăniloae, to be seen at any moment of the Christ event. In
the incarnation, a fully pneumatological reality, the Son uniting humanity with Him is al so
uniting the ones who are united with Him, with the love of the Father, in the response of love,
of Himself toward the Father in the irradiation of the Spirit towards the Father. For Stăniloae
This is the climactic moment of the condition of salvation: the union of all with Christ in the
Spirit, and through the Spirit, in the consciousness of the Father’s love for them and in their
own love for the Father.99

Stăniloae supports these assertions biblically, grounding them in the Pauline theolo gy
of spirituality,100 and then he shows that the indissoluble relation between the Son and the
Spirit is a matter of concern and agreement, in many regards, between Eastern Orthodox
theology and Protestant theology. 101 He also e xtensively quotes the Protestant theologian T.
F. Torrance who considers that the Spirit “…through the crucified and resurrected Christ and
in him, sustain the creative and redemptive work of the Holy Trinity, from beginning to end
and brings it to its per fection…”102 Stăniloae understands this integrative view of the work of
the Trinity in salvation, as a necessary and vital corrective for what he considers to be

97 Ibid., 23.
98 Ibid., 24 -26.
99 Ibid., 32.
100 R.P. Meye, „Spirituality,” in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters , G. F. Hawthorne, R. P. Martin, D.G.
Reid (Eds) (Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 906 -916.
101 Stăniloae, Theology and the Church , 33.
102 T.F. Torrance „Spiritus Creator,” in Verbum Caro 23 (1969), No, 89, 82 -83.

35
the permanent errors of Romanism and Protestantism: the former confusing the Spirit of God
and the spirit of the Church… substituting ecclesiaque for the filioque …. the latter confusing
the Spirit of God with the human spirit and substituting for the filioque a homineque . 103

Stăniloae considers the Church as the fifth act in the salvation work of God, after the
Incarnation, Crucifixion, Resurrection and the Ascent of Christ.104 Also, for him any
separation between Christ and the Holy Spirit is inconceivable. He considers that the Holy
Spirit does not replace Christ after His ascension; rather the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of
Christ.105 Therefore, for Stăniloae, it is Christ who enters the life of the believer through the
Holy Spirit and the model for that is the total pneumatisation of Christ’s body as seen in the
resurrection.106 The mutuality of the work of Chris t and the Holy Spirit as expression of their
Trinitarian relationship is expressed as follows:
From His perfect pneumatized body irradiates the fullness of the Spirit… He enters through the
Spirit in the lives of the ones that believe in Him…from this po int of view there can be said
that through the descent of the Holy Spirit the Church takes concrete existence, for now Christ
descends for the first time in the hearts.107

Even though he starts with Christ as foundation of the church and the Holy Spirit as
the medium in which the church lives,108 Stăniloae does not show the way in which the
Christological -pneumatological constitution of the church is to root consistently the way in
which the church is structured. However, he reflects his interaction with Protestant theology,
namely, John Calvin, when he considers the church’s participation in the three offices of
Christ, as King, Prophet and Teacher.
Through the continuation of His threefold office i n the Church, Christ maintains, with the
Church and with every member of her, a progressive dialogue in which neither He nor the
Church, nor any of her members are in a passive state. This is the meaning of kingly

103 Stăniloae, Theology and the Church, 41.
104 Stăniloae, TDO , 2 (Bucuresti: EIBMBOR, 1997), 129.
105 Ibid., 130.
106 Ibid., 130 -131.
107 Ibid., 132, 134.
108 Tim Grass, „Orthodoxy and the Doctrine of the Church,” in Baptists and the Orthodox Church: On
the Way to understanding (Prague: International Baptist Seminary, 2005), 5 -14. He says: “While Christ founded
the Church, it is the Holy Spirit, whose descent at Pentecost, gave it life.” (Ibid., 6)

36
priesthood of the believers called to proc laim the goodness of Christ and to avoid the carnal
passions (1Pt 1: 8 -11; 1Jn 2: 20)109

Stăniloae argues consistently the primacy of Christ’s continuous teaching in the
Church, and the part icipatory dimension of it, as Christ has the Church in the fellowship of
this ministry, “encouraging internally her members through the Holy Spirit to teach each
other.110 Yet, even if one would expect that from here Stăniloae would „attribute to believers
as a whole” a priestly role,111 he or she will be surprised with Mănă stireanu „to observe that
Stăniloae devotes only two paragraphs” to the subject of the general priesthood of
believers.112 Instead of seeing the general priesthood of the church as a normal embodiment of
the vertical incarnation of Christ as a teacher in the life of the church in harmony with
horizontal participatio n of the members of the church in teaching each other, he considers the
representative role of the special priesthood of priests as symbols of Christ the Mediator.113
We agree with Mănăstireanu, who quotes the orthodox theologi an John N. Karmiris,114
when he explains that one of the reasons for the limited role of the general priesthood and for
the vital, represen tative role of the special priesthood, in Stăniloae’s view could be rooted in
„a conviction that Protestantism has given the laity excessive rights and privileges.”115 We
have also to note the fact that, as Mănăstireanu says, Stă niloae’s view of the two forms of
priesthood, with the pre -eminence of the special priesthood, leads him to consider the
limitation of laity to private teaching, the role for public teaching being the prerogative of the

109 Ibid., 152. Also, Mănăstireanu, PM, 273. He agrees with Louth when says that even if Stă niloae
considers the theme of the threefold office of Christ as being patristic, he does not give any reference. See
Andrew Louth, “Review Essay: The Orthodox Dogmatic Theology of Dumitru Stăniloae”, in Modern Theology ,
13.2, 1997, 253 -267. He says that “i t was only with Calvin’s Institutes that the notion of Christ’s threefold office
assumed the structural significance with which he invests it,” 259.
110 Stăniloae TDO , 2, 152.
111 Charles Miller, The Gift of the World: An Introduction to the Theology of Dumitru Stăniloae
(Edinburgh: T& T Clark, 2000), 96.
112 Mănăstireanu, PM, 275. He also considers that „the little attention given by Stăniloae to the
priesthood of all believers is symptomatic for the reduced attention genera lly given to this topic in Orthodox
eclessiology.
113 Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 155 -156.
114 John N, Karmiris, The Status and Ministry of the Laity in the Orthodox Church (Brookline, MA:
Holy Cross, 1994), 1.
115 Mănăstireanu, PM, 282.

37
special priesthood.116 However, Stăniloae is in harmony with the patristic tradition when he
speaks of the priest and his duty to teach and the efforts necessary for this, namely a
permanent purification and spiritual education.117 Even though for Baptists in Romania
Stăniloae’s view of ministry would be considered problematic, it is worth noticing that it is
developed in conversation with other traditions a s pertinently explained by Mănăstireanu:
Stăniloae is animated by his constant drive towards balance when he seeks to work out the
Christological/pneumatological basis for the theology of ministry over against what he
perceives to be an exaggerated Chris tological approach to it in Catholic theology, and as
exaggerated pneumatological approach in Protestant circles.118

In harmony with his desire for such a balanced view, is Stăniloae’s argument for the
unity of the church that „ is not institutional…but ontological -pneumatological in Christ and in
His Holy Spirit.”119 He agrees with other Orthodox and Western theologians when they
consider that “the separations of Christians in different Churches are only a t the surface, they
do not affect their deep unity.”120 Arguing the fact that „the unity of the Church is a dogmatic
one” 121 he states the difference between traditions:
In a way the Church contains all the denominations separated from her, because they could not
separate themselves totally from the Tradition present in her. In another way the Church in the
fullness of the word is only the Orthodox Church.122

When Stăniloae speaks about the salvation of Christians fro m different denominations,
especially the ones who were born in these denominations, he argues that they could be
incomplete participants in Christ123 on earth and in eternity based on the text from John 14: 2,

116 Ibid. 284. Als o, Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 162. For a different view than of Stăniloae in the Orthodox
tradition, see John Zizioulas, Being as Communion: Studies in Personhood and the Church (New York: St.
Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1993), 214 – 225. Zizioulas asserts „the rel ational character of ministry” next to its
„sacramental character, ” (ibid., 214, 225). He argues that „there are no un -ordained persons in the Church,” as
baptism and confirmation are „essentially an ordination,” (ibid., 215 -216). A possible development of this idea
of baptism as confirmation will be argued in chapter 7 of the present project.
117 Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 160 -163.
118 Mănăstireanu, PM, 284.
119 Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 172.
120 Ibid., 173.
121 Ibid., 175.
122 Ibid., 176.
123 It is interesting in this context the article summarized by John Briggs from the report of World
Council o f Churches, September 2002: John Briggs, „Evangelicals and Orthodox,” in Journal of European
Baptist Studies, vol 12, No.1/September 2011, 5 -18. Briggs summarizes: „The Church recognizes in the other

38
where Christ says that in his Father’s house are many rooms!124 When Stăniloae argues the
Church’s holiness, he proves consistent with his desired Christol ogical -pneumatological
complementarity . He starts by saying that Christ is the source of the holiness of the church,125
and he asserts that no human being is holy in himself, but rather by participation in Christ’s’
holiness,126 participation possible through a permanent cleansing from sin and in maintaining
a pure life. He says,

The Church is the laboratory where the Spirit of Christ makes us holy or more complete
images of Christ, in whom is concentrated as in a per son the holiness and love of the Holy
Trinity.127

How this participation in Christ’s holiness through cleansing happens in the lives o f
believers starting at baptism, expressed in Eucharist and embodied in the day to day
spirituality will be extensively analyzed in chapter 3, 4 and 5 of this dissertation. At this point
we also underline Stăniloae’s idea of the Christian life as a process in which the reality
expressed at baptism needs to be actualized in daily life, holiness being “not only a gift but
also a mission, a duty for the believers of the Church.128 The inevitable tension between what
we are potentially in Christ and the limits de monstrated in our life on the earth is to lead us to
repentance as a way of living, through the practice of confession of sins (1 John 1: 9).129
From the unity and holiness of the church, Stăniloae continues with the catholic ity of
the church, a subject on which he prefers the term sobornicity that in his opinion is more
appropriate in defining the nature of Church’s unity, namely, a unity that is given by the

member of the WCC elements of the true church, even if i t does not regard them as true churches in the full
sense of the word,” (ibid., 15).
124 Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 177. Also, Sorin Dumitrescu, 7 dimineti cu părintele Stăniloae (București:
Anastasia, 1992), 221. See also Emil Bartos, „Salvation in the Orthodox Church,” in Baptists and the Orthodox
Church: On the Way to understanding (Prague: International Baptist Seminary, 2005), 46 -63, 60.
125 See also Sergius Bulgakov, The Orthodox Churc h (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1988),
95. He says that „the sanctity of the Church is that of Christ Himself.” (Ibid.).
126 Stăniloae, TDO, 2, 177.
127 Ibid., 181.
128 Ibid., 181.
129 Ibid., 185. A more in -depth analysis of the features of Stăniloae’s view on baptism will be done in
chapter 4, a t this point our desire being only to show the way Stăniloae sees the holiness of Christ infused at
baptism and actualized in the daily life of believers through repentance.

39
Convergence, communion, unanimous complementarity of its members…s obornicity
expresses the position and the complementary work of the members of the Church, as a real
body, not its cause as expressed by the term catholicity. 130

Consistent with the Christol ogical -pneumatological complementarity Stăniloae’s view sees
the Church as a dynamic reality, expressed by the concept of a body filled with the Holy
Spirit and having Christ as her head. Stăniloae adds to the Pauline image of the body,131 the
saying of Basil the Great who considers that the „Holy Spirit is wholly (  ) in each and is
entirely everywhere .”132
Stăniloae continues by saying that this dynamic pre sence of the Holy Spirit is seen in
the unity and diversity of “different gifts that the Spirit imparts and exercises for the life of the
entire body and of every member.” The dynamic between individual and communal is seen in
the key concepts of sobornici ty, namely, communion and plenitude, the two concepts
expressing the inner role of a gift for a believer, and the communal role of this gift for the
entire community.133
Fortunately, Stăniloae does not say anything about the clergy versus lait y, and what
seems to keep him away from this danger of artificial separation in the context of the Holy
Spirit’s gifts in the Church, is the close reading of Pauline texts about the Body of Christ. The
power of Pauline thought mirrored in the thought of Ba sil the Great, John the Great and
Origen, influences Stăniloae in keeping the dynamic work of the Holy Spirit in the gifts of the
Church at the level of the entire community.134 In this way his vision of the Church’s
sobornicity is in itsel f an important corrective for his vision of the general priesthood that was
under scrutiny in a section above.

130 Stăniloae, TDO, 2, 186 .
131 Nigel G. Wright, Free Church, Free State: The Positive Baptist Vision (Carliste: Paternoster Press,
2005), 13.
132 Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 188.
133 Ibid., 187.
134 Ibid., 188 -189.

40
Stăniloae continues with the apostolicity of the Church, considering rightly and
biblically Christ as the foundation of the Church (1 Co3: 11; Ep h 2:20), and the apostles of
Christ as the pillars of the Church (Gal 2: 9).135 There are three components of the Church’s
apostolicity, according to Stăniloae’s thought. First, the apostles’ non-transmissible
apostleship, they being unique witnesses of Christ’s resurrection. Second, the apostles were
the first to believe, and third, their primacy in the transmission of the teachings of Christ.136
Stăniloae seems to be arguing for a distinction between the succession of grace that is
conditioned by the continuity of Christ’s teachings and the apostolic succession to the bishops
as the means for the preservation of apostolic teachings. Yet, Stăniloae continues by insisting
that “the Church is apostolic by inheriting the faith, teaching, and grace from the apostles,”
and that “the apostolicity of the Church unites history with the present.” 137 He says:
The apostolicity means the connection of generations in the whole tradition that comes from
the apostles, for it is the whole Revelation, but also in the grace and spirituality that comes
uninterrupted from the Holy Spirit of Christ through them.138

2.4. Summary of Chapter 2

I started this chapter with an exploration of the spiritual and intellectual context in
which Stăniloae was born, lived and developed his theology and spiritual practices. I
continued with an exploration of his biography , spiritual legacy and general scan of his
theology. These three dimensions of his life show the coordinates of Stăniloae’s spiritual
journey. I argued that the uniqueness of Dumitru Stă niloae in the tapestry of Romanian
theological thought is given first by his interdisciplinary, dialogical approach that makes him
a theologian of complementarities. His way of working in concentric circles covers the

135 Ibid., 193.
136 Ibid., 194.
137 Ibid., 196 -197.
138 Ibid., 197.

41
domains of the revelation of God, of t he knowledge of God, of Christology, pneumatology
and ecclesiology.
Second, Stăniloae is a theologian of ecumenical dialogue. His extensive reading of
Catholic and Protestant theology, even though not always acknowledged, is present in every
area of his th eological construct. Often polemical, radical and sometimes using too much
generalization, in his judgments of Catholic and Protestant ideas, Stăniloae proves at least a
good knowledge of those different traditions, allowing them to speak into his Orthodox
thought.
Third, Stăniloae is a theologian who through his theology opens new avenues for the
development of contemporary Orthodox theology, especially, on the direction of recovering
the interdependency between theology and spirituality. He also constitu tes a good starting
point or entrance door for Romanian Baptist theology that could benefit enormously and
could be enriched by Stăniloae’s integrative way of doing theology. Moreover, there are also
many elements in Stăniloae’s theological thought that co uld be taken in account in a
formula tion of new ways of thinking about the Church and her mission in third millennium
Romania.
One last note in the end of this chapter is in regard to what is not seen in Stăniloae’s
thought so far, namely an [over -] emphas is on liturgy as almost constitutive of theology. This
is, arguably, a result in part of his biography and his experience in the prison camps, where
liturgy was hardly possible, and where the practice of hesychasm became more than
important. This lesser em phasis on the liturgy and insistence on spirituality as a life long
journey, may prove important for dialogue with Romanian Baptists and can be detected in his
view of baptism which will be explored in chapter 3, in his view of Eucharist, which will be
explored in chapter 4 and in his thought on spirituality which will be explored in chapter 5.

42
Chapter 3 . Trinitarian Theology of Participation in Stăniloae’s Thought about Baptism
3.1. The Frame of Stăniloae’s Theology of Participation

Stăniloae’s theology of participation is framed by his concept of the being of God,
with its super -essential and spiritual attributes and inner Trinitarian relat ions. He starts first
with a distinction of the relation between the being of God and the uncreated operations of
God that “are flowing from it.”139 In Stăniloae’s opinion each operation of God bears features
of the being of God, being actually “the attributes of God in motion.” In fact, says Stăniloae,
“we only know the attributes of God in their dynamism and to the extent to which we
participate in them,” experiencing God in His operations in the world and in us. 140 This
knowledge of God’s operations becomes progressively rich er “as we develop the capacity to

139 Stăniloae, Revelation , 125. This distinction between the esse and the energies of God that Stăniloae
embrac es here is the fruit of his engagement with Gregory Palamas (1296 -1303), one of the most important
theologians of the period between the XIIthXVth centuries, named by Pelikan “the last blossoming of the
Byzantine Orthodoxy.” See in this regard J aroslav Pelikan, Tradiția Creștină, O istorie a dezvoltării doctrinei,
2: Spiritul creștinătății răsăritene (600 -1700 (Iași: Polirom, 2005), 277. Speaking about Palamas, Pelikan argues
that “he had the responsibility to articulate a new theology of spiritu al life that will include the doctrine of God
as light,” 286.
140 Stăniloae, Revelation , 125 -126. An interesting fact is that Stăniloae sees the attributes of God in their
perichoretical relationship. He is close here with the same perichoretical view of Karl Barth in regard to the
attributes of God. Of course there are differences between the two views but the perichoretical view of the
attributes is what t hey have in common. See in this regard, Eric J. Titus, „ The Perfections of God in the
Theology of Karl Barth: A Consideration of the Formal Structure,” in Kairos : Evangelical Journal of Theology /
Vol. IV. No. 2 (2010), 203 -222. Titus speaks of the fact t hat the divine perfections (a term that Barth prefers to
use for divine attributes) are perichoretic and dyadic and that „the perfections are then divided into six dyads,
three belonging to divine love and three belonging to divine freedom. Grace and holi ness, mercy and
righteousness, patience and wisdom all are affiliated with divine loving. Unity and omnipresence, constancy and
omnipotence, eternity and glory are connected with divine freedom. But within this structure of dyads exists also
a substructure . For example, within the dyad of the perfections of grace and holiness, which are associated with
divine love, a dialectical tension is maintained. That is, for example, that within the divine perfections of love,
grace and holiness are further expressed mercy and righteousness as grace and holiness; grace and holiness as
patience and wisdom; patience and wisdom as mercy and righteousness, etc. The same construction occurs under
the divine perfections of freedom. For example, unity is paired with omniprese nce, with unity expressing the
divine freedom under consideration and omnipresence bringing the dialectical play of love into the
considerations of divine freedom while yet being itself considered a perfection of freedom. This happens then in
turn with con stancy and omnipotence and eternity and glory. It may further be said that the perfection of divine
love and that of divine freedom as wholes also express this same form of perichoretic relationship. Each of these
interrelationships point back and interpla y with the foundational proposition that God is the One wholoves in
freedom, and in this is the essence of the life of God, the God who lives as the One who loves in freedom,”
(ibid., 211 -212).

43
participate in them.”141 The possibility of such participation is provided, in Stăniloae’s
thought, by the Personal character of God as a Supreme reality.

Only as Supreme Person is God „of himself”/per se and are all His attributes from himself; he
can give to the human person too the possibility of participating in this quality of being per se
which belongs to him and of his acts…only in relation with such Personal reality do we also
feel ourselves overwhelmed by his powers which we feel no longer as coming from
somewhere else or merely relative.142

Stăniloae adds to the personal char acter of God another important feature of God’s
being, namely, the apophatic character of God. For him God as a supreme personal being is as
such only if He is totally apophatic or super existent. He follows Evdokimov in considering
that because of His sup er existence, there cannot be rational proofs of God’s existence. Yet,
he states, it is equally true that the experience of faith in the human soul, as a gift from God, is
the frame in which “all become proofs for the existence and activity of God.” 143 Stăniloae
concludes:
Only the transcendence of the divine Personal reality assures the existence of human persons
who are not totally enclosed within nature’s sys tem of references…Otherwise everything
would fall under the rule of the meaningless laws of nature and of death.144

141 Stăniloae, Revelation, 127. Also, Stăniloae, Viața și învățătura sfântului Grigorie Palama
(București: Scripta, 1993), 65 -78. Also, Lossky, The Vision of God (New York: St. Vladimir’ s Seminary Press,
1983),131. We found in Lossky’s argument the foundation for Palamite distinction between essence and
energies. Lossky says that „the distinction between the nature and attributes or between the unknowable essence
and the revelatory powers or energies of God is expressly affirmed, following Dionysius and the Cappadocians.”
Also, Pelikan, Tradiția Creștină , 294. He comments: „The systematic justification of this vision of the relation
between participative and unparticipative in God, was c onstituted by the combination between the doctrine of
divine works…elaborated during the christological controversies, and the doctrine of the divine
nature…elaborated during the trinitarian controversies. Palamas and his disciples were helped by the
controversies with monoenergetism. From these controversies comes the teaching that divine energy is eternal
and uncreated, yet being distinct from divine essence.”
142 Stăniloae, Revelation , 132.
143 Ibid., 135. Also, Evdokimov, Vârstele vieții spirituale (Bucuresti: Christiana, 1993), 45.
144 Stăniloae, Revelation , 137 -138. Also, Emil Bartoș, Deification , 63. Speaking about the trinitarian
basis of Stăniloae’s distinction between e sse and energies, comparatively with Palamas, Bartoș argues that
Stăniloae „introduces a more personalist dynamic, ” (ibid.,63). However, one of the reasons why Stanilolae
found Palamas’ thought attractive for that could be Stăniloae’s hesychastic experien ce in prison, a spiritual
personal experience that constituted the platform for his theology, life and ministry.” See in regard to Palamas as
a theologian of hesychasm, John Meyendorff, St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality (New York: St,
Vladimir’ s Seminary Press, 1974), 75 -130. Meyendorff points out the position of Palamas in opposition with that
of Barlaam’s view derived from Greek philosophy. It might be that here is another reaseon why Staniloe found
Palamas’ thought relevant for the Romanian O rthodox Church, whose revived spirituality he was preoccupied
with. In Meyendorff’s judgment, Palamas „integrates the mystical tradition, going back to Evagrius and
Macarius, with Christian thought that is based on the Bible and on a vast knowledge of the Fathers…Hence
Palamas refused to give any credence to what the ancient philosophers said of the knowledge of God. He

44

If the first pillar of Stăniloae’s construct of the Trinitarian theology o f participation is the
being of God, with the distinction between the esse and operations, the second pillar is
constituted by the super essential attributes of God, namely, infinity, simplicity, eternity,
supraspatiality, omnipotence.
For Stăniloae the i nfinity of God is paralleled in the created order by finitude. In fact,
he says the finitude of the created order exists in the framework of God’s infinity, the finitude
being conditioned by the infinite, while the participation of the finite in the infini ty is possible
only through the grace of the infinite God.145 Stăniloae considers that, the source of God’s
infinity is the divine super -essence that is expressed in the inner Trinitarian relations of the
three hypostases of the Trinity, a rel ation of which fullness is the cause of a finite human
being’s longing movement towards it.146 Moreover,
… any circling movement of existing things will come to an end in the infinity around God in
whom all things that move receive their stabil ity…Infinity is God’s ambiance and through it
he makes himself accessible or communicates himself to creatures which have reached union
with him as supreme subject.147

The model of the progress and realization for this participative dimension of the finite in the
infinite Stăniloae concludes, is Christ in whom “after the resurrection, his humanity was
raised to the supreme participation in the divine infinity…”148
The second super -essential attribute in Stăniloae’s analysis is God’s simplicity. He
says that the unity of God is to be seen in the Trinitarian distinction of the three hypostases of
God’ s being, a distinction that means not a composite God, but a God in which “the threefold

developed a realistic doctrine of supernatural knowledge, independent of any sense experience but granted in
Jesus Chrst to man as a who le-body and soul -admitting him even here below to the first fruits of final deification
and the vision of God, not by his own powers but by the grace of God,” (ibid., 108 -109).
145 Ibid., 141.
146 Ibid., 142.
147 Ibid., 143.
148 Ibid., 144.

45
and common divine subjectivity is simple in itself…”149 Moreover, Stăniloae asserts the
unifying importance of Christ’s resurrection for the vertical unity of God with human beings
and the horizontal unity of human beings between t hemselves and with the created order
By acquiring the unity or simplicity which is in God, the composition of creation overcomes
the force of decomposition and corruptibility. Hence through the resurrection of Christ, bodies
acquire incorruptibility. Corr uptibility is overwhelmed by the unitary force of the spirit.150

The third super -essential attribute of God in Stăniloae’s analysis is eternity. For
Stăniloae the eternity of God is the plenitude of the triune communion,151 the true eternity of
God is to be seen in the self existence of God152 and in the fullness of the triunic perfect
persons’ relationships.153 For Stă niloae, one of the purposes for the created order is to
participate in God’s eternity, in the case of human beings eternity is being achieved “through
a movement towards God which comes about in time.”154 This is the reason Stăn iloae
considers time to be the medium in which the progress of a human being, towards God
becomes possible.155 God in His relations within the immanent and economic Trinity
experiences simultaneously eternity and time. Stăniloae ex plains how this simultaneity is
possible:
…On this road of ours towards eternity God himself experiences together with us the
expectant waiting (and hence time) on the plane of his energies and of his relations with us.
And this is so because he himself v oluntarily lives out the limitation of the offering of his
love…God experiences simultaneously his eternity in the inter -trinitarian relations and his
temporal relation with created spiritual beings; or indeed in his very relations with creatures he
experi ences both eternity and time. This is a kenosis voluntarily accepted by God for the sake
of creation…156

149 Ibid., 145. See also, Pelikan, Traditia crestina , 294. He says that in maintaining the distinction
between the u ncreated energies that are many, Palamas, also maintained that ousia is simple.
150 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 148.
151 Ibid. , 172.
152 Stăniloae, Revelation, 150. Also, Barth , CD II/1, 608. Barth considers that „God’s eternity, like His
unity and constancy, is a quality of His freedom…It is the sovereignty and majesty of His love…Eternity is God
in the sense in which in Himself and in all things God is simultaneous…” (Ibid.)
153 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 174.
154 Stăniloae, Revelation , 154.
155 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 179.
156 Stăniloae, Revelation, 159-160.

46
Stăniloae states that even though time is not existent within Trinity, it is explained as
having its source in it, as a means to open the possibility of human beings answer to the love
of God.157 For Stăniloae the incarnation of the Son is the expression of this rela tion between
divine eternity and human temporality.158 Coming to the supraspatiality of God, Stăniloae
affirms that this is an expression of God’s apophatic transcendence.159 In this context space as
a medium for the human beings is as time, originated and ended in the Trinity.160 Moreover
space is the medium of God’s communion with human beings,161 God accepting space, in
Christ as anothe r form of his kenosis .162 Stăniloae concludes:
The distance between ourselves and God is overcome in Christ not only because God has
come down to us, but also because we are raised up to God. In Christ all of us have potentially
overcome the di stance separating us from God and from one another.163

The last super -essential attribute of God, in Stăniloae’s analysis is God’s omnipotence
that is not the power to do whatever He wants, rather it is the power to do good.164 The power
of God, manifests outside the life of the Trinity, in creation and towards creation, through
God’s kenosis in regard to human beings. It is manifested in the fact that He offers His power
for the human being’s ascension towards Hims elf, freely, as an answer in a movement of
ascent to the movement of descent from God.165
Moreover, for Stăniloae, the manifestation of the omnipotence of God towards
creation and human beings is always for salvation and deification, not against the world.166
Stăniloae considers that God’s power is always first the power of a Father. The “divine

157 Ibid., 163. Also, Barth, CD II/1 , 611. The same idea is argued by Barth, who says: God is both the
prototype and foreordination of all being, and therefore also the prototype and foreordination of time. God has
time because and as He has eternity. Thus He does not first have it on the basis of creation, which is also, of
course, the creation of time.” (Ibid.)
158 Stăniloae, Revelation , 169.
159 Ibid., 171.
160 Ibid., 173.
161 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 205.
162 Ibid., 210.
163 Stăniloae, Revelation, 182.
164 Ibid., 186.
165 Ibid., 189. See also, Barth, CD/II, 522. Barth names God’s omnipotence as a perfection of his
freedom and that „as omnipotent God, He is constant.” (Ibid.)
166 Stăniloae, Revelation, 1 90-191.

47
paternity” frames all manifestations of God’s power, as Creator and Judge.167 Moreover the
power of God is spiritual, a power to love and to open in this way human responses in love to
Him. He concludes with the central ity of Christ in understanding this reality.

In Christ, the Son of God becomes bearer of the perfect Trinitarian love for men and also of
human love raised up to the capacity of responding perfectly to that love. In the state of
resurrection, moreover, th e Son extends unobstructedly this perfect divine -human dialogue of
love which has been realized in himself, by drawing us also into it. In Christ, man has received
the power to love God within a unique love together with the only begotten Son of God, and t o
love men with the very love of God.168

The spiritual169 attributes of God: omnis cience, justice and mercy, holiness, goodness
and love, constitutes in Stăniloae’s thought, the third pillar for the theology of participation.
Speaking about the omniscience of God, Stăniloae states that God’s knowledge of everything
does not come from th e things themselves, rather it is prior to the things, and therefore it is the
cause of all things. Moreover, Stăniloae considers that even though human knowledge is
rational, God’s knowledge is accessible for participation in it, through human union with
God.170 God’s knowledge of the creatures and God’s knowledge of Himself should not be
seen as separate, asserts Stăniloae, following Dionysius the Areopagite,171 an understanding
that seems for Stăniloae more appropriate172 in regard to the unity of God. He says:

167 Ibid., 192.
168 Ibid., 195.
169 It is interesting that in Stăniloae’s thought the construct of the perichoretical relation is a reality not
only in regard to super -essential attributes of God among themselves but also between them and spiritual
attributes. . He comes close again with Barth who says that “He is the one, unique and simple God, and as such
omnipresent. This clearly raises His grace and holiness, mercy and righteousness, pat ience and wisdom, above
the perfections which…could be ascribed to the creature…they are all of them omnipresent, omnipresent grace,
omnipotent holiness…For they are all in themselves the omnipotence of God.” Barth, CD II/ 1 , 523.
170 Stăniloae, Revelation, 199.
171 Dyonysius the Areopagite, The Divine Names and Mystical Theology (London: SPCK, 1975). We
have here a possible reason for Stăniloae’s appropriation of Dionysus’s synthesis between super essential and
spiritual attributes of God, as Dionysius argues that „We must not dare to speak, or indeed to form any
conception, of t he hidden super -essential Godhead, except those things that are revealed to us for the Holy
Scriptures, (ibid., 51).
172 In asserting this, Stăniloae criticises the separation between the two kinds of knowledge, as in Karl
Barth’s opinion the knowledge of God in regard tothe creatures is finite for they are finite, whilst the knowledge
of God in regard to Himself is infinite for He is infinite. Stăniloae also criticised the Vatican 1 perspective abo ut
the knowledge of God as infinite both in regard to the creature and with Himself .

48
The Eastern Fathers in general declare that full knowledge is the union between the one who
knows and the one who is known, just as ignorance causes separation or is the effect of
separation.173

For Stă niloae, there are three implications for this kind of perichoretical knowledge.
First, it implies the personal character of God, second, this knowledge cannot exist outside the
full love as expressed in the Trinitarian relationships,174 and third, this full knowledge opens
the possibility for progress in union with God for human beings, as the end of this union of
humans is known to God,175 an end fulfilled in Jesus Christ.176
In Christ God knows the humanity of all at its maximum level through its total participation in
his life, and God has this knowledge because of his own maximum participation in human
life.177

For Stăniloae God’s justice towards creatures is r ooted in the equality of the Three
Persons. This is again a participatory reality opened to human beings based on the fact that
God’s justice and mercy are united in such a way that “God cannot be just without being
merciful and is not merciful without bei ng just.”178 Moreover, to participate in God’ s justice
and mercy, even though incomplete because of human limitations to show horizontally these
attributes, is to be part of the ascent of human beings towards God. The way and model for
this ascent is Christ’s perfect justice and mercy, that we could internalize as we identify
ourselves with Him
Christ alone as man has attained complete justice. From his justice we absorb power to make
progress in assimilating – in the life to come – the justice that belongs to him and is the human
form of the divine j ustice (1 Corinthians 1: 30; 2 Corinthians 5: 21; Ephesians 6: 14)179

173 Stăniloae, Revelation , 201. Also, Dionysius the Areopagite, The Divine Names . He says:
„Knowledge unites the knower and the objects of knowledge…,” 153.
174 Stăniloae, Revelatio n, 202.
175 Ibid., 205.
176 Ibid., 209.
177 Ibid., 210.
178 Ibid., 215. Stăniloae is arguing here the dyad of mercy and justice, as they are inseparable reflecting
the dyad of mercy and righteousness and their inseparability as well as the inseparability between grace and
holiness, in Barth’s thought. See in this regard Barth, CD, II/1, 376. Barth is arguing: „We have seen that there
exists a relationship between God’s grace and holiness, a relationship of mutual penetration and consummation
determined by grace, which necessarily precedes. The relations hip between God’s mercy and rightneousness, is
similar. We shall have to emphasize the righteousness of God no less than His mercy…The relationship between
God’s mercy and rightneousness will also present itself to us as a relationship of mutual penetrat ion and
consummation, but here again it will receive its characteristic stamp from the fact that divine mercy necesarily
precedes.” (Ibid.)
179 Stăniloae, Revelation , 218.

49

God, says Stăniloae, is sustaining and will reward this internal work of harmonisation
with the right justice that will affect the external status of affai rs, with the “full justice that
comes particularly in the life to come… (Luke 16: 25). The full expression of this reality is
Jesus, “who was most just and suffered the greatest injustice from the world…and…raised up
to heavenly glory because of his justic e…180 The participatory dimension is stated again:
Those who participate in the energies of God (among which is numbered the energy of
justice)…by which their being is re -established and strengthened – are themselves also
animated by the impuls e to bring about justice.181

Another dimension of this participation is the understanding that the spiritual human
being should have, that the interior and the external justice, are not an ends in itthemselves
but rather “the complete justice ” that is “the reestablishment of the perfect balance between
all created things, the full reflection of the justice of God.” Only in this way, says Stăniloae,
God’s justice “will fill the earth…radiating both from within us and from above us.”182
Holiness, for Stăniloae, comes from God in the descent of his revelatory activity and is
a participatory reality through the ascent of human persons towards God.183 Also, the two
directions of holiness, the one through which it comes and the one through which it is
appropriated, are embodied in Christ, in His divine descent into human form and in His
human ascent towards God. This identification of Christ starts for the human in His baptism a
reality mirrored in the human being’s bapti sm, deepened and developed, through the other
sacraments, in their “struggle for purification.”184 Arguing the possibility of this participation
in the holiness of God, S tăniloae says:
The Fathers saw in holiness a great likeness of man with God through purification from the
passions and through the virtues which culminate in love…acquired through the energy of the

180 Ibid., 219.
181 Ibid., 220.
182 Ibid., 22 0-222.
183 Ibid., 222.
184 Ibid., 225. Also, G.L.Prestige, God in Patristic Thought (London: SPCK, 1952), 23 -24.

50
grace which strengthens human powers…a radiation of the pr esence of God from within
man.185

Here again the centrality of Christ is underlined, in the fact that the “essence of all
virtues is our Lord Jesus Christ himself.”186 Therefore the stru ggle of the believer against
passions, is assisted by the operation of the cross that opens the possibility for the presence of
God in Christ to enlighten the human soul,187 a process that will lead to the human being’s
“surrender to absolu te Person” a surrender that is a “sanctifying self -sacrifice.”188 The
participatory dimension is then again stated:
Orthodoxy believes that through spirituality, through the penetration into the world of the
uncreated energies, the world is tra nsfigured, a transfiguration which also depends on efforts
towards holiness made by believers who are strengthened by these energies. For in these
energies, which have come to belong to men also, God in Trinity is made transparent.189

Coming t o the goodness and love of God, Stăniloae considers that God is “goodness
beyond the good” as the supreme goodness God is the source of all good things that he
created out of love. This love is supremely expressed in the Trinitarian relationships and is th e
love that God manifests towards creation and is the one that produces the answer in love from
creation. 190 Again, Christ is the supreme embodiment not only of th e love of God towards
creation but also the maximal manifestation of the answer in love to the love of God.
The fullest loving going out towards creatures was carried out by God through the incarnation
of his Son…But simultaneously the Son filled human nat ure with his divine love for the
Father.191

185 Stăniloae, Revelation, 226.
186 Ibid., 227.
187 Ibid., 227 -228.
188 Ibid., 231.
189 Ibid., 238.
190 Ibid., 238 -241. Also, John R. Franke, „God is Love: The Social Trinity and the Mission of God,” in
Trinitarian Theology for the Church: Scripture, Community, Worship , Daniel J. Treier and David Lauber (eds),
115. He says: „God’s love for the world is not that of an uninvolved, unmoved, passionless Deity, but rather that
of one who is actively and passionately involved in the ongoing drama of life in the world, one who lavishly
pours out this love in Jesus Christ. This lavish expression of love for humanity and creation is revealed in Jesus
Christ and points us to the internal life of God as an eternal trinitarian fellowship of love shared between Fath er,
Son and Holy Spirit. In other words, explication of the triune God in God’s self disclosure in and to creation is at
the same time the explication of the triune God in the divine reality.” (Ibid.)
191 Ibid., 243.

51
These considerations lead Stăniloae to a profound discussion on the Holy Trinity, a construct
that will be analyzed in the next section.
3. 2. The Heart of Stăniloae’s The ology of Participation

The Holy Trinity is the heart of his theology of participation, being a mystery192 that is
revealed in multiple directions. First, the Holy Trinity is the structure of Supreme Love. The
mutual love between the Trinitarian Persons originates and explains the love in the world.193
Stăniloae states the importance of the Holy Trinity for our participative progress towards God,
being “the foun dation, infinite reservoir, power and model of our growing eternal
communion.”194
Second, for Stăniloae, the Holy Trinity is the foundation of our salvation, revealing
itself in the work of salvation. The Father restores the relationship with human beings through
the incarnate Son and develops progressively through the Spirit the intimate relationship
without distance that exists between Him and the Son.195
Third, the Holy Trinity is the mystery of perfect unity of distinct Persons , a mystery
that is expressed in the human beings’ “unity of being and personal distinction.”196 The
difference between the unity of being and persons in regard to God and in regard to human
beings is that in God t here is no interval between the divine being and its expressions in the
three Persons, whilst, for human being the interval exists. 197
From here Stăniloae continues to discuss the divine essence thro ugh the concept of
intersubjectivity. This means a “compenetration of the consciousness of each,” the three

192 Also, Berkof, Systematic Theology , 89. He says in the same line with Stăniloae that „ the Church
confesses the Trinity to be a mystery beyond the comprehension of man.” Also Rahner, The Trinity , 21. Rahner
argues that „The Trinity is a mystery of salvation.”
193 Stăniloae, Revelation, 245.
194 Ibid., 247.
195 Ibid., 248.
196 Ibid., 250.
197 Stăniloae imagines this interval in the metaphor of knots (the distinct persons or hypostasis) and
strings (the common na ture). When the communion “is a positive one the strings between the knots can grow
thicker, whereas distance and struggle between the knots makes the string grow thinner.” (Ibid., 253.)

52
Persons being three pure subjects experiencing each other as such, in a total transparency.198
Moreover, the intersubje ctivity means that each of the divine persons „experiences the modes
in which the others live the divine being,”199 Stăniloae argues the active aspect of the
intersubjectivity between the divine persons.
The Son is not passive in his generation from the Father, although he is not the subject who
begets but the subject who takes his birth. Neither does the term „procession” in reference to
the Holy Spirit mark any passivity on the part of the Holy Spirit…Moreover, as the Father in
incomprehensi ble fashion is the source of both the Son and the Spirit, each of them together
with the Father not only lives the act of his own coming forth from the Father, but also joyfuly
participates along with the other -though from his own position – in living the act whereby the
other comes forth from the Father.200

For Stăniloae this is the model that Christ brings in his personal relationship with us
opening the possibility for us to move from sinful individualism, towards mutual communion
with each other in Him.201 Stăniloae continues by saying that the Trinity of Person s is a
condition of their full personal character and of their perfect communion, for “the
number…which par excellence represents the distinction in unity or unity made explicit in
three,”202 and makes possible the manifestation of the love of the Father for the Son towards
the others.203
The Trinity of Persons is also a condition of maintaining the distinction of the persons
in communion, by overcoming the “dual subjectivity” of two persons and expressing “an
objective reality.”204 Finally, the Trinity of Persons “assures the f ullness of their communion

198 Stăniloae, Revelation , 260.
199 Ibid., 261.
200 Ibid., 262. Here Stăniloae is close to Calvin in his view of the Trinity: See in this regard, Calvin,
Institutes of Christian Religion, 1 (Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press, 1960). 153. Calvin affirms that „we
teach from the Scriptures that God is one of essence, and hence that the essence both of the Son and and of the
Spirit is unbegotten; but inasmuch as the Father is first in orde r, and from himself begot the wisdom…he is
rightly deemed at the begining and fountainhead of the whole divinity”
201 Stăniloae, Revelation, 265. Also, Meyendorff, St. Gregory Palamas. Commenting on the Father’s
view of spirituality, Meyendorff says: „Participation in God is a total participation, in Jesus Christ. In fact there
could be no participation in a ‚part’ of God, for the divine Being is simple and therefore indivisible, and the
divine ‚energy’ is God, not lessened, but freely revealed,” 44.
202 Stăniloae, Revelation, 266. Also, Stăniloae, Sfânta Treime sau La început a fost iubirea (The Holy
Trinity or In the Beginning was Love) (București: IBMBOR, 1993), 34.
203 Stăniloae, Revelation , 267.
204 Ibid., 268.

53
and makes this communion full with the joy one person finds in another.”205 Stăniloae
concludes:
…as the Son has a distinct position as image of the Father, while the Spirit has been caused to
proceed for the purpose of participating in the joy which the Father takes in the Son as image,
the Spirit does have a special role…that he might make of the joy each person has in the other
a joy that is shared by the other.”206

From the Concept of the Holy Trinity as a structure of Supreme Love, Stăniloae
continues with the concept of the Holy Trinity as the foundation of Christian spirituality207
Mirroring the Trinitarian model, Stăniloae imagines the human being as a temple in three
parts: body, soul and the inner part where in baptism Christ enters and lives.208 Christ enters
our lives through sacraments (baptism, chrismation, and Euc harist)209 and from there Christ
leads the mortification of the old self and the resurrection of the new self.210 Baptism is not
only the “momentous realization” of this death and resurrection but also the beginning of a
long life process. In this process of the “continuation and actualization of baptism,”211 faith is
an essen tial element. Stăniloae considers that faith is given by Christ through the Church “his
Body, full with the Spirit of communion.”212 Faith is, says Stăniloae, “the first step in the
spiritual life, and as such comes from God through baptism. He continues with some
important affirmations:
All of our virtuous life is a development of this beginning made by God. Of course it is not an
automatic development, without us, rather a development willed and helped by us, through all
our power. So, before all the virtues we must have the faith received and strengthened at

205 Ibid., 275.
206 Ibid., 277.
207 Stăniloae , Spiritualitatea Ortodoxă: Ascetica și Mistica (București: IBMBOR, 1992), 29.
208 Ibid., 42.
209 Ibid., 43.
210 Ibid., 43 -44. Also, Meyendorff, A Study of Gregory Palamas (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary
Press, 1998), 151. Speaking about the life in Christ in the hesychatic view of Palamas, Meyendorff says: „the
life in Christ in us is, according to Palamas, the foundation of hesychast spirituality…For him „within…” does not
designate the purely intellectual reality of man…but refers t o the whole composite human being. It is within our
body, grafted on to the body of Christ by baptism and the Eucharist, that divine light shines.” We see again here
the influence of Palamas on Stăniloae, reached with a Trinitarian flavour.
211 Stăniloae , Spiritualitatea Ortodox ă, 44.
212 Ibid., 45.

54
baptism. But its efficacy depends on our participation, to progress on the road of virtues
towards perfection213

The strengthening of faith, continues Stă niloae, happens progressively, in the immersion of
will, intellect and sentiment in the reality of God.214 In its progress faith becomes, says
Stăniloae, fear of God.215

3.3. Baptism in the Context of Theology of Participation in the Thought of Stăniloae

Stăniloae considers that the salvific work for humanity is a profound Trinitarian
reality. He says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and rests in the Son, in order to
show the total unity of reciprocal love between the Father and the Son, and also to mediate the
manifestation of this perfect love through the Son towards humanity.216 The complementarily
work of the Son and of the Hol y Spirit in salvation is in Stăniloae’s opinion a biblical truth,
expressed in the Nice o-Constantinopolitan creed. Stăniloae expresses this by quoting
Evdokimov:
During Christ’s earthly ministry the relationship of humanity with the Holy Spirit was
mediate d by Christ. On the contrary after Pentecost the relationship with Christ with humanity
is mediated through and in the Holy Spirit. The ascension ends the historical visibility of
Christ. But Pentecost opened to humanity the possibility of the internal pre sence of Christ,
revealing Him not face to face, rather inside His disciples. 217

For Stăniloae, baptism reflects and expresses the salvific work of the Trinity. Baptism
expresses this by the complementarity of the work of the Son and of the Spirit that is the
foundation for the redemptive reality in humans. To argue the inseparability of these two
works (of the Son and of the Spirit) in baptism, S tăniloae quotes John 1: 11, where is revealed

213 Ibid., 95.
214 Ibid., 96 -97.
215 Ibid., 100.
216 Stăniloae, The Holy Trinity , 69.
217 Ibid., 70. Also, Evdokimov, L’Esprit Saint dans la tradition orthodoxe (Paris: Editions du Cerf,
1969), 90.

55
the fact that the ones who receive the Word are united with Him by being born anew “from
water and Spirit,” according to Christ’s teaching to Nicodemus in John 3: 5 -7.218
For Stăniloae, Trinitarian participation in the transfiguration of humanity is the bas is
for humanity’s participative answer to God’s participation, in baptism, as expressing the birth
that is the coming out from spiritual death and it is the entrance into the new life in God.219
This is seen in the two liturgical questions that the believer or the godparents of the child are
to ans wer affirmatively when they present the child for baptism: Are you renouncing Satan?
Are you uniting with Christ? In the context of the two declarative answers, “through the Spirit
comes Christ or through Christ comes the Spirit of Christ.”220 The participation of Christ in
the act of baptism is stated by Stăniloae who considers that Christ
introduces in the water His creative power through which He created human beings in the
beginning after the divine image and likeness and He enters first, and is baptized in it. First,
for re -establishing the grace that recreates…second, to attract the reb orn through baptism into
the fellowship, becoming Himself the first born from many sons…Only through baptism the
Lord make us truly in His likeness and by introducing into the water His deifying power He
establish the basis for our deification…221

Moreover, baptism is for Stă niloae the start of the participatory journey of salvation
for the human being, a journey assisted and empowered by the Holy Spirit. This is argued
through the unity between water and Spirit as the “bosom of the new man.”222 He remembers
the work of the Spirit in the Son in the act of creation, over the waters, and its direct
connection with the re -creation of the new man in Christ’s baptism in the Spirit, as he unites
in Him the entire creation.223

218 Stăniloae, The Holy Trinity , 72. Also, Basil the Great, „ On the Spirit,” in Nicene and Post -Nicene
Fathers, 8: Basil: Letters and Selected Works, Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (Eds) (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, Inc, 1995), 23. Basil argued:” that the Holy Spirit is in every conception inseparable from the Father
and the Son, alike in the creation of perceptible objects, in the dispensation of human affairs, and in the judgment
to come.”
219 Stăniloae, The Holy Trinity , 71. Also, Sf. Ioan Gura de Aur: C ateheze baptismale (St. John
Chrysostom, Baptismal homilies) (Sibiu: Editura Oastea Domnului, 2003). He says: “baptism is tomb and
resurrection,” 48.
220 Stăniloae, The Holy Trinity , 72.
221 Stăniloae , “Drumul cu Hristos prin tainele si sarbatorile ortodoxe,” ( The Way with Christ through the
sacraments and Orthodox celebrations) , in Ortodoxia , nr 2, aprilie – iunie 1976, 406 -407.
222 Stăniloae, TDO , 3 (București: Ed itura Institutului Biblic, 1997 ), 25.
223 Ibid., 27.

56
The water of Baptism, is in a hidden way the matter of the age to come…Immersing in this
water the man meets Christ in it…he is framed by His person and is filled with the energies of
the Holy Spirit irradiating from Christ.224

Baptism is therefore, first, the death of the old man and resurrection, and total
submission to God, and in this way, an immersion into the eternal life of God. Baptism is
secondly, in Stăniloae’s thought “the power of continual spiritual grow th,” shown in the
cultivation of Christian virtues. 225 For Stăniloae the gift of spiritual power received in
baptism is to be followed by the responsible continuation of the development of this gift.226 In
the case that man sins in this process of development for the gift of spiritual power in the
virtues, the human being has the possibility to return in the close relationship with Christ
through repentance.
Moreover, if baptism offers the possibility of cleansing past sins and e ntering the new
life in Christ that is released from the chains of inherited sin, baptism does not offer the
possibility of cleansing for sins done after baptism. 227 Stăniloae warns about the danger of
considering the sacraments as “magical mea ns” that offer to human beings the possibility to
enter the Kingdom of God, being just an object on which these are administered.
Rather contrary, argues Stăniloae, the conscious participation of the believer is vital in
his effort to assimilate the purity of Christ, in this process of “transformation and perfection,”
in accord with the image of Christ.228 Howeve r, there is a danger Stăniloae does not warn
against, that of consider ing the water touched by the Holy Spirit, to operate the sacramental
cleansing. However, one of the Fathers of the Church, Gregory of Nyssa warns against this
danger when he says:
If, then, by being ‘washed’, as says the prophet, in that mystic bath we bec ome ‘clean’ in our
wills and ‘put away the evil’ of our souls, we thus become better [people], and are changed to
a better state. But, if when the bath has been applied to the body, the soul has not cleansed

224 Ibid., 27 -28.
225 Ibid., 28 -32.
226 Ibid., 33.
227 Ibid., 34.
228 Ibid., 35.

57
itself from the stains of its passions and affec tions, but the life after initiation keeps on a level
with the uninitiated life, then, though it may be a bold thing to say, yet I will say it and will not
shrink; in these cases the water is but water, for the gift of the Holy Ghost in no way appears
in [the one] who is thus baptismally born229

Third, baptism is the reconstruction of Christ’s image in a human being. For Stăniloae,
sin weakens the human person, reducing the human being to a biological existence, by
weakening the divine image in a human being or his relationship with God. Th is is why
baptism has also this dimension of re -establishing the divine image in a human being.230
Stăniloae states the participatory dimension of the reality of re -establishment of divine
image in the person. The human being ent ers through baptism in a relationship of “calling –
response” with God. This relationship is established through the will of Christ, who
resurrects the human being to a new life, and also through the human will, in the responsible
response that a human bei ng gives to the personal call to a new life, a manifestation of human
will that is not manifested at his natural birth. This is the way in which an individual becomes
more and more a unique person imprinted more and more with the form of Christ.231
The image of Christ is a light robe, is Christ Himself. “for all of you who were baptized into
Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ” (Gal. 3: 26). This robe is not only on the surface
as are normal clothes; rather it is imprinted in our entire being. It is Christ Himself, and also in
the same time it is a special, personal, and unique relationship with Christ…232

Stăniloae continues by saying that the clarification of the image of the human person
imprinted by Christ’s image happens in a process of continual positive response to the call of
Christ. This call is manifested through the words of the Apostles and of the servants of the
church. The quality and intensity of this call of Christ through His servants, for the imprint of
His image on and in the believers, is illustrated by the passionate and persuasive words of

229 Gregory of Nyssa, Catechetical Oration , NPNF, ser. II, vol. 5, 508. See also, N.T. Wright, Surprised
by Hope (London: SPSK, 2007). He says: “Baptism is not magic, a conjuring trick with water. But nor it is
simply a visual aid. It is one of the points, established by Jesus himself, where heaven and earth interlock, where
new creation, resurrection life, appears within the midst of the old…it should be the foundational event for all
serious Christian living,” (ibid, 2 85.)
230 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 35.
231 Ibid., 36.
232 Ibid., 37.

58
Paul addressed to the believers of the Galatian church (Ga latians 3: 1, 20; 4: 8-9, 19; 2Cor 3:
18; Col 3: 9-10).233
Stăniloae warns again, consistently, in regard to the idea of baptism as part of a
participatory process, about the fact that a human is not received in a personal relationship
with Him starting at baptism, without the response of the human in expressing his desire for
this relationship and with the assumption of the life long responsibility to answer positively to
the call of Christ. He continues by saying that this assuming of respo nsibility is reflected on
the one hand, in the double baptismal declaration of renouncing Satan and uniting with Christ,
and on the other hand, in the confession of faith, in the recitation of the Creed. The
partnership initiated by God, in Christ, Stănilo ae continues to argue, is developed by the
coordinates of mutual “fidelity in love,” illustrated in the Pauline theology of spiritual
freedom (Gal 5: 1, 13; Rom 6: 18 -19; 8: 2).234

Fourth, baptism is the entrance door to the church. This i s so, says Stăniloae, because
“personal existence is a form of existence in communion, in which each grows in the
originality of his own giving of himself…in the service of others” 235 This inclusion in the
community of the church is signified, says Stăniloae, by the fact that the act of baptism is
done by the priest or bishop, who represents, because of his ordination, Christ and the church
in their indissoluble relation.
In this context it is important that Stăniloae states not only the fact t hat the efficiency
of baptism is not rooted in the worthiness of the priest, but also the fact that in Stăniloae’s
opinion the church recognizes baptism done outside the church with the condition of the three
times immersion in water, pouring of water or s prinkling with water in the name of the Holy
Spirit. He adds that the church could also baptize again ones baptized outside the church, from

233 Ibid., 37 -38.
234 Ibid., 39 -40.
235 Ibid., 40.

59
a different Christian tradition. The reason the church could do so is that of the incompleteness
of Christ’s grace and work in the community from which he comes, an incompleteness
coming from the incompleteness of faith in that community.
Stăniloae limits the acceptance of baptism from one tradition to his own (for when he
speaks about the church he speaks of the Ort hodox Church), based on the form of baptism.
The last piece of Stăniloae’s thought on baptism is that of the argument for the necessity of
baptism for salvation and infant baptism. This necessity is connected with the annihilation of
the ancestral sin thro ugh the union of Christ in baptism (John 3: 3 -5). Children also share the
imprint of the ancestral sin even though not through personal sin but by birth (Job 14: 4). 236
Stăniloae continues by saying that the new life in Christ cannot be receiv ed without
baptism, through the confession of faith that opens the being to be entered by Christ.237 In the
case of infants the confession of faith is fr om the family, a faith that will be shared by the
infants at a later time. This is so because the time when infant will start to share the family’s
spirituality is not known. Stăniloae quotes the texts of the New Testament speaking of
baptism as something administered to the entire household (Acts 16: 36; 1 Corinthians 1: 16),
and he quotes also Irenaeus, a spiritual grandchild of the Apostle John, as Irenaeus was a
supporter of infant baptism.238
One last element in the thought of Stăniloae’s view of baptism is added, namely the
sacrament of Chris mation that comes immedi ately after baptism. Stăniloae discuss first, the
connectio n of Chrismation with Baptism considering it “a continuation of baptism.”239 This
act begins with the recitation of a prayer of invocation for the Holy Spirit to come in the life

236 Ibid., 42.
237 Ibid., 43. Also, Basil the Great, On the Spirit . Basil says: „Faith and Baptism are two kindred and
inseparable ways of salvation: faith is perfected through baptism, baptism is established through faith, and both
are completed by the same names. For as we believe in the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, as we are
also baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost; first comes the confession,
introducing us to salvation, and baptism follows, setting the seal upon our ascent.” (Ibid., 18I.)
238 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 44. See also, G.R. Beasley -Murray, Baptis m in the New Testament (Carliste, PA:
Paternoster Press, 1962), 312.
239 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 45.

60
of the baptised, born again in baptism, and now in thi s act, through the prayer of a priest,
empowered and protected by the Spirit. Stăniloae focuses then on the power of the Holy Oil to
start the work of the powers received in baptism, according to the teachings of Nicholas
Cabasilas and Alexander Schmemann.240
Coming to the Scriptures, Stăniloae considers the teaching of Cyril of Alexandria, who
taught that the anointment of Aaron for the priesthood in the Old Testament is the model of
the bap tized persons’ chris mation. In this act, as part of the general priesthood, the baptized
persons are ‘actually” united with the Church of Christ, being until now, through baptism,
“only virtually” united with it. Second, Stăniloae argues the special work of the Holy Spirit in
the sacrament of Chrismation. He again uses the Old Testament act of the anointment of
“prophets, priests and kings,” as a means through which divine power came upon them. He
also considers that Christ is the Anointed One, becoming the Prophet, Priest, and King who
“introduces and keeps in the familiarity of God.”241 Third, Stăniloae argues the significance of
the se en act of Chrismation. He explains the elements of the act, namely, oil, the anointing
and the words spoken “the seal of the Holy Spirit.” The oil, he says, is imbibed in the body
and signifies the assimilation of the new man, whilst the persistence of it on the body signifies
the continuous communion of the Holy Spirit with the baptized person. Also, the odor of the
oil signifies the intimacy of the work of the Holy Spirit in the baptized persons. This odor,
signifies not only the vertical dimension of the work that Holy Spirit in the baptized person,
but also signifies the fact that the person with the pneumatic new life, will express
horizontally, the fruit of the Holy Spirit, in the relationships of this person with others.242

240 Ibid.46. Also, Alexander Schmemann, For the Life of the Word: Sacraments and Orthodox (New
York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1973). Schmemann argues that: „In the Orthodox Church, what we call
today the second sacrament of initiation – that of chrism ation (or confirmation) – has always been an integral
part of the baptismal liturgy…Confirmation is thus the personal Pentecost of man, his entrance into the new life
on the Holy Spirit..it is his ordination as truly and fully man…his ordination to be himself , to become what God
wants him to be…Confirmation is the opening of man to the wholeness of divine creation, to the true catholicity
of life.” (Ibid, 75 -76.)
241 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 48.
242 Ibid., 51.

61
Stănilo ae quotes the Apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 1: 14 -15, and explains it, through
the thought of Chiril of Alexa ndria, who considers that odor is “the state of sacrifice that the
believers live in Christ,” in the mortification of the old man.243 Stăniloae also quotes the
Apostle John, in regard to the persistence of the Spirit in us, as anointment, especially in the
experiential knowledge of God, a knowledge that is to be made known also to others.
Stăniloae considers that the anointment of 1 John 2 : 27 is directly connected with the general
priesthood of all believers.244
Stăniloae continues by arguing the fact that Chrismation is the strengthening of the
baptized in order “to develop the new life through working together of the belie ver with the
Holy Spirit.” This is signified in the practice of Chrismation, with the anointing of all the
important members of the body, including the five senses. The anointment of the forehead
signifies the fact that the mind is imprinted with the Spiri t, the ears’ anointment signifies the
capacity to hear “the divine mysteries,” the nostrils’ anointment signifies the protection
against the “odours that tempt towards evil.” The breast’s anointment signifies the cap acity to
resist evil (Eph 6). Then the a nointment is done on the hands and feet an act that signifies the
predisposition towards doing and walking in good. 245 Stăniloae continues:
Through Chrismation the Holy Spirit enters and is imprinted in these members and organs of
the body and in the powers of the soul that are at the foundation of them, and persists in them
as a good odor like the oil. He is imprinted as a seal not only externally on these members but
also internally, giving to man a united spiritual image…The Spirit produces a n effect or
imprints a bigger power accommodated to that organ…The Spirit produces a special gift in
each man through the strengthening of a certain organ, producing a different gift in each
member of the church .246
3.4. Summary of Chapter 3

I aimed in this chapter to explore the integrative way Stăniloae regards Baptism as part
of the Christian spiritual journey. I have argued from the understanding of the unique way

243 Ibid., 52.
244 Ibid., 52 -53.
245 Ibid., 53.
246 Ibid., 54.

62
Stăniloae’s thought works in concentric circles, no t only in regard with the complementary
work of the Persons of the Trinity, but also in the complementarity of different stages of the
believers’ spiritual journey. Therefore, the first dimension that I explored s that of the frame
of Stăniloae’ s theology of participation. I observed that there are three pillars of Stăniloae’s
theology of participation . I argued that the first pillar is his concept of the being of God, with
its super -essential and spiritual attributes and inner Trinitarian relati ons. The second pillar is
constituted by the super essential attributes of God, namely, infinity, simplicity, eternity,
supraspatiality, omnipotence. And the third pillar is constituted by t he spiritual attributes of
God: omniscience, justice and mer cy, ho liness, goodness and love.
Secondly, I have argued that the heart of Stăniloae’s theology of participation is the
Holy Trinity that is a mystery revealed in multiple directions. The first direction is that the
Holy Trinity is the structure of Supreme Love . Second, the Holy Trinity is the foundation of
our salvation, revealing i tself in the work of salvation. And t hird, the Holy Trinity is the
mystery of perfect unity of distinct Persons, a mystery that is expressed in the human beings,
being foundation of Christian spirituality .
From the understanding of the frame and the heart of Stăniloae’s theology of
participation I proceeded then to explore his thought about baptism as an important initiatory
stage in the Christian spiritual journey. I h ave argued that for Stăniloae, baptism reflects and
expresses the salvific work of the Trinity. This reflection is seen in the complementarity of the
work of the Son and of the Spirit that is the foundation for the redemptive reality in humans.
For Stănil oae, Trinitarian participation in the transfiguration of humanity is the basis
for humanity’s participative answer to God’s participation, in baptism, as expressing the birth
that is the coming out from spiritual death and it is the entrance into the new l ife in God.
Moreover, I argued that, baptism is for Stăniloae the start of the participatory journey of
salvation for the human being, a journey assisted and empowered by the Holy Spirit. Baptism

63
is therefore, first, the death of the old man and resurrecti on, and total submission to God, and
in this way, an immersion into the eternal life of God. Baptism is secondly, in Stăniloae’s
thought the power of continual spiritual growth, shown in the cultivation of Christian virtues .
Third, baptism is the reconstru ction of Christ’s image in a human being and fourth, B aptism is
the entrance door to the church.
Eventually, I have shown the fact that the consistency of Stăniloae’s working in
concentric circles in regard with the complementary work of the Christ and th e Spirit is seen
and reflected in his argument of the complementarity and inseparability of Baptism and
Chrismation, a sacrament that comes immediately after baptism, being in Stăniloae’s view a
continuation of baptism. How Eucharist as a consecutive stage of the Christian spiritual
journey reflect the reality of divine perichoresis, and as such completes and actualizes the
reality of Baptism and Chrismation, will be argued in the next chapter.

64
Chapter 4. Stăniloae’ s Theology of Eucharist as a Reflection of Perichoresis

It could seem odd to argue the reflection of perichoresis in Stăniloae’s thought about
Eucharist, when in Eastern thought, and Stăniloae is not an exception, following Palam as,
there is a distinction between the being or essence of God and the works or energies of
God.247 Accordingly, the concept of perichoresis belongs to the essence of God, and the
human partici pation with or in God is possible by the way of God’s energies. Moreover, it has
been argued that Stăniloae understands the uncreated energies as producing sensitivity in the
human soul,” and as such the energies are „directly connected with the doctrine o f theosis .”248
Speaking about the way Stăniloae sees the concept of perichoresis, Bartoș argues:
Stăniloae closely follows Maximus’s idea of perichoresis as the divine penetration into the
human level… perichoresis means a reciprocity within the divine -human relationship, a double
penetration…Following Maximus, Stăniloae sees in perichoresis the real act of the deification
of human nature. Stăniloae affirms that the divine nature becomes united with the human
nature in the person of the Word by „mutual inherence” or by inter -penetration”249

From the Trinitarian and Christological levels of the reality of perichoresis , Stăniloae
is inspired by its reality when he arg ues the theology of the church. Considering that the use
of Trinitarian perichoresis is „more co nsistent with the way Stăniloae uses the concept of
perichoresis ,” than that of Christological or deification meanings of perichoresis ,250
Mănăstireanu considers as legitimate the use of the perichoresis concept as a model for the
church in Stăniloae’s theology. Mănăstireanu starts from the observation of „the patristic
theme of the Church as an icon of the Trinity…a community defi ned in terms of perichoretic
terms.”251 He concludes:

247 Stăniloae, Viața și învățătura Sfântului Grigorie Palamas , 65.
248 Bartoș, Deification , 59.
249 Ibid., 182 -183. Also, Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 90 -92.
250 Mănăstireanu, PM, 123.
251 Ibid., 125 -127. He argues that according to this concept” the Church has a mimetic relationship with
its archetype, the Holy Trinity. That means that the members of the Church are called to imitate in their
creatednes s, in an iconic manner the relationships existing eternally between the divine persons.” (Ibid., 125).
Quoting Cyril of Alexandria, The Commentary on the Gospel of Saint John , 17. 20 -2, PG. 74. 556D -557A,
Mănăstireanu argues the meaning of the perichoretic al model of the Church: „Being an icon of the Holy Trinity,
the Church is called to reflect in her spatio -temporal reality, in Christ and through the power of the Holy Spirit,
the dynamic relationships existing eternally between the divine persons, as desc ribed by the concept of

65
We favour a view of the Church in which the human members are called to relate
perichoretically to each other, in Christ and through the Spirit – we called this ‚the
perichoretical model of the Church,’ a perspective proper to Stăniloae … At the same time, we
need to keep in mind that this is true only analogically, since a direct transfer from the level of
divine to the human level is not legitimate.252

With these clarifications and fo llowing Mănăstireanu, in the opinion that Stăniloae’s
view about the ecclesial relationships is inspired by the concept of perichoresis , and with
Gunton’s clarification about the analogical use of perichoresis , we will try to explore the way
Stăniloae’s vi ew of Euchar ist, as a constitutive reality for the life of the church, and for
Christian spiritual journey is a reflection of Trinitarian perichoresis .
4.1. The T riad of Baptism, Chrismation and Eucharist

The first dimension in which perichoresis is reflected in the thought of Stăniloae in
regard to the Eucharist is the interpenetration between Baptism, Chrismation and Euch arist, as
three complementary realities of initiatory process in the church. Even though it seems that
the three are consecutive stages, having baptism in the beginning of the process, chrismation
is the middle stage and Eucharist in the end of this process,253 for Stăn iloae , as he works in
concentric circles, they are simultaneously overlapping, interpenetrated and complementary
features of the same reality – that of participation in the divine movement towards humanity,
of the Father, in the Son, through the Holy Spiri t.

Trinitarian perichoresis.” (Ibid., 127). See also, Ion Bria, Spatiul Nemuririi , 21. Bria quotes Stănil oae’s
interpretation of Athanasius : about the church in perichoretical terms: „She is the reciprocal interiority of those
abiding in the reciprocal interiority of the persons of the Holy Trinity, which is brought about in us through
Christ who became human.” (Ibid.,). Also, St Atanasie cel Mare, Scrieri 2, Dumitru Stăniloae (tr) (București:
EIBMBOR, 1988), 85. Also, Ivana Noble, Theo logical Interpretation of Culture in Post -Communist Context:
Central and East European Search for Roots, Ashgate, Farhnam, 2010. She says that “the whole world with all
its diversity has been set on a journey towards greater in God and with each other. Thi s is expressed both in
Dionysius and in Stăniloae by a circular movement, not in order to emphasize repetition, but in order to stress the
perichoretic nature of relationships that are the image of the perichoresis of the Holy Trinity.” (Ibid., 53).
252 Mănăstireanu, P M, 265. Also, Colin E. Gunton, The One, the Three and the Many: God, Cre ation
and the Culture of Modernity (Cambridge: University Press, 1993). Gunton argues that „perichoresis can be
developed to serve as an analogical concept,” (ibid., 164). He continues: „it must enable us to…begin to explore
whether reality is on all its levels ‚perichoretic,’ a dynamism of relatedness,” (ibid., 165), and ask: „Does the
concept enable us to find a framework, or better because more dynamic, coordinates for our human being in the
world?,” (ibid., 166).
253 Stăniloae, TD O, 3, 56.

66
Therefore, For Stăniloae the movement in Eucharist that is the present impregnation of
the final state of perfection, overlap with the movement of developing, through personal
participation, the divine power that is encapsulated within the inner being of the baptised
person. This participation is possible through the complementarity between baptism and
Eucharist, baptism being a reality of the death of the old man, and a reality of permanent
dedicat ion of the entire being to God. As such Baptism is a double reality that opens and
facilitates the reality of participation in Christ’s resurrection that is the Eucharist.254
This is the reaso n why for Stăniloae, Eucharist, is not merely a means to be united
with Christ who was born and died for our sins, it is also a union with Christ who dies and is
resurrected to eternal life. As such Eucharist for Stăniloae “sows in us the power of total
surrender of our existence to God, in order to receive it back full with His eternal life.” From
here Stăn iloae argues that the Eucharist is not concerned with the present life but with the
eternal life, and this is so because, “the new life from Baptism, that follows the death of the
old man, cannot exist without the perspective of the eternal life that is su stained by the
Eucharist.” 255
Eucharist, continues Stăniloae, being an act that makes Christ’s resurrection a reality
interior to us, gives us the power to die to sin and to surrender ourselves to God , and also the
power to receive our real death as Christ accepted it, as a way to the eternal life. Moreover,
the Eucharist is the „medication for eternity”256 and Stăniloae is happy with this remark of the
Fathers that he consi ders is sustained by the sayings of Jesus in John 6: 54 -58). 257
Stăniloae’s thought reflects the theology of perichoresis in this complementarity of baptism
and Eucharist:

254 Ibid., 56 -57.
255 Ibid., 57 -58.
256 Ibid. Also, Clement of Alexandria, „The Instructor,” in Ante –Niceene Fathers, 2: Fathers of the
Second Century (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc, 2004). Clement argues that „to drink the blood of
Jesus, is to become partaker of the Lord’s immortality; the Spirit being the energetic principle of the Word, as
blood is of flesh. Accordingly, as wine is blended with water so is the Spirit with man. And the one, the mixture
of wine and water, nourishes to faith; while the other, the Spirit, conducts to immortality,” (ibid., 242).
257 Stăniloae, TDO, 3, 58.

67
…the mysterious death of Christ, that we share in, through Eucharist, in a more
profound way than in baptism, as preparation for our real death and for the full inner
death after that,…the inner death, the immersion in God,…that is not dissolution…is
immers ion in the infinite life that is in God…258

The mutual interpenetration between baptism and Eucharist, is seen in Stăniloae’s
argument in the fact that the initial forgetting of the old man in baptism is indwelled in the
repeated deaths of t he old man in the repeated Eucharistic acts, and that through each we
realize a discontinuity with the old man. Moreover, Christ’s union with us through His own
body and blood happens as we eat his body and drink his blood, and the resurrected quality of
His body and blood are permeating our body and blood without being confused with each
other.259 In his own words:
The union with the Lord in Eucharist is a full union because He is working in us no t only
through the energy brought to us by the Holy Spirit, but also with His body and blood,
imprinted in our body and blood… And because we are subject to our own body and blood,
and of the works penetrated by the body and the works of Christ, we are tog ether subject with
Christ of our own body, that became also His Body or of His body that became our body.260

From this vertical dimension of the mutual interpenetration, namely Christ’s union
with us and our union with him, in Eucharist, Stăni loae continues with its horizontal
dimension. He argues that union with Christ in Eucharist is the foundation for the union
between the members of the Church, in the interpenetrating participation of each in the other,
without the dissolution of the believ ers’ persons.261 For this mutual participation, to be a
reality in the life of the church, there is necessary, in Stăniloae’s opinion, the concept of the
real presence of Christ, under the image of bread and wine.262

258 Ibid., 60.
259 Stăniloae, TDO, 3, 61.
260 Ibid., 62.
261 Ibid., 62 -63. See also G.W.H. Lampe, “The Eucharist in the Thought of the Early Church,” in
Eucharist Theology Then and Now ” (London: SPSK, 1968). He says: “Commemoration of his passion and
resurrection, participation by faith in his suffe ring, and through the assurance of hope, in his risen life are the
ground and focus of the Church’s Eucharist
” (ibid., 38).
262 Stăniloae, TDO, 3, 64. Also Cyril of Jerusalem, Lectures 22:3, 9 , in Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers,
7, Philip Schaff (Ed). Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1999. 152. He says
that „in the figure of Bread is given to thee His Body, and in the figure of Wine His Blood; that thou by

68
4.2. Real Presence and Human Sacrifice of Submission

The second dimension tha t mirrors perichoresis in Stăniloae’s theology of Eucharist,
is that of the interpenetration of the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in Eucharist,
and of the human sacrifice of submission and surrender to God, as enacted in the concluding
medi ation of the priest and bishop as representatives of both movements, from God to us and
from us to God.263
First, is the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in Eucharist that continues
the renaissance of man from Chr ist that started in Baptism. Eucharist is a feeding of man from
Him, having a double foundation, in the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, and in the perennial
presence of Christ in Eucharist, through His resurrected body and blood.264 Stăniloae
considers that through Eucharist we have the perpetual remembering of Christ’s incarnation,
sacrifice and resurrection, in His unity with us.265 Moreover, Stăniloae says that through
Eucharist “we proclaim” the incarnation, sacrifice and resurrection of the Son of God, and this
reality, constituted by the three acts of Christ, is not only past reality, rather it is a repeated
reality. In fa ct the presence of the pneumatized Christ after resurrection and in Eucharist is,
says Stăniloae, a big mystery, because of the mysterious transformation of the bread and wine
into the real body and blood of Christ.266

partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ, mayest be made of the same body and the same blood with Him. For
thus we come to bear Christ in us, because His Body and Blood are distributed through our members; thus it is
that, according to the blessed Peter, we become partakers of the divine nature… the seeming bread is not bread
though sensible to taste, but the Body of Christ; and that the seeming wine is not wine, though the taste will have
it so, but the Blood of Christ…:” (Ibid.)
263 Stăniloae, TDO, 3, 64 -82.
264 Ibid., 64 -65. Also, Jo seph Cardinal Ratzinger, Called to Communion: Understanding the Church
Today (San Francisco,CA: Ignatius Press, 1996), 36 -37. Ratzinger argues that „the Lord becomes our bread, our
food. He gives us his body, which by the way, must be understood in the lig ht of the Resurrection…Christ gives
himself -Christ, who in his Resurrection has continued to exist in a new kind of bodiliness.” (Ibid.)
265 See also, „Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosantum Concilium)” in The Documents of
Vatican II , Walter. M. Abbott, S.J (Ed) (Baltimore, MD: America Press, 1966),154. The document says that
Christ „entrusted to H is beloved spouse, the Church, a memorial of His death and ressurection: a sacrament of
love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a paschal banquet, in which Christ is consumed, the mind is filled with
grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us.” ( Ibid.)
266 Stăniloae, TDO, 3, 66 -69.

69
The transf ormation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ is another
way in which, in the thought of Stăniloae, the perichoresis is reflected in the Eucharist. The
union of the bread with the body of Christ, as hypostasis of the Word, transforms the bread
into the body of Christ.267 The body of Christ is deified and pneumatized because of his
permanent hypostatic union with God, while our body starts the journey towards deification
and pneumatisation, and both remain distinct bodies. Comin g to the elements of Eucharist,
Stăniloae states:
Bread and wine are nature raised to the status of direct food and drink of our body. Through
the law of the new being from us, our body transforms his substance in these substances. In
the same way Christ t ransforms these substances, into His body. But through His Spirit He
transforms instantly the Eucharistic bread into His body, as a member of manifestation of His
hypostasis and of His Spirit.268

Moreover, Christ does not transform the bread and wine into His body for Himself, but for us,
to offer the possibility for us to participate and share in Him.269 Yet, this participation and
sharing is conditioned by the way the human persons surrender and desire this sharing. This
leads to the second element of the continuum that reflects the perichoresis in Eucharist,
namely, our own sacrifice of surrender and submi ssion to God.270

267 Ibid., 69.
268 Ibid., 70. For a different view see Calvin, Institutes , 1362. He speaks of the “spiritual presence of
Christ,” and about the fact that “from the physical things set forth in the Sacrament we are led by a sort of
analogy to spiritual things. Thus when bread is given as a symbol of Christ’s body, we must at once g rasp the
comparison: as bread nourishes, sustains, and keeps the life of our body, so Christ’s body is the only food to
invigorate, and enliven our soul, When we see the wine set forth as a symbol of blood, we must reflect on the
benefits which wine impart s to the body, and to realize that the same are spiritually imparted to us by Christ’s
blood. These benefits are to nourish, refresh, strengthen and gladden.” (Ibid.)
269 John Karmiris, „Concerning the Sacraments,” in Eastern Orthodox Theology: A Contemporary
Reader , Daniel B. Clendenin (Ed)(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 26. Karmiris argues that „in the
Holy Eucharist the faithful truly participate in the real body and blood of Christ. They are mystically united with
and incorporated into him.” (Ibid.)
270 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 71. Also, Ratzinger, Called to Communion , 37, 39. He argues the concept of
communion in Eucharist in terms that reflect perichoresis: „The outward action of eating becomes the expression
of that intimate penetration of tw o subjects…Communion means that the seemingly uncrossable frontier of my
„I” is left wide open and can be so because Jesus has first allowed himself to be opened completely, has taken us
all into himself and has put himself totally in our hands, Hence, communion means the fusion of existences…”
(Ibid., 37). Speaking about this intimate union of the church with Christ, Ratzinger argues it in perichoretical
key: „the Church is the body of Christ in the way in which the woman is one body with, or rather o ne flesh, with
the man…the Church is the Body, not by virtue of an identity without distinction, but rather by means of the
pneumatic -real act of spousal love…this means that Christ and the Church are one body in the sense in which
man and woman are on e flesh, that is, in such a way that in their indissoluble spiritual -bodily union, they
nonetheless remain unconfused and inmingled.” (Ibid., 39).

70
Stăniloae argues the centrality of Christ in the entire process of bringing us to the
Father and the Father ’s grace to us and he also argues that Christ does not see believers as
objects but as persons.271 He says that the blessed bread of Eucharist is a symbol of the bread
that sustains the life of human beings and through the action of the Holy Spirit this bread is
transformed into the body of Christ and as such it transforms and deifies the life of believers,
and as such the Eucharist is of the Church.272
For Stăniloae the Eucharist is the meeting place between the two inseparable
movements, a descendent movement of God towards believers through His grace, and an
ascendant movement of believers towards God, through sacrifice. As su ch Eucharist is part of
a larger complementarity of the two movements present also in the other sacraments of the
initiation process, namely, Baptism, Chrismation, Repentance, and Priesthood. 273
4.3. Christ, the Priest and the Church

Stăniloae argues for the concluding mediation of the priest and bishop in the
Eucharist. The priest is in Stăniloae’s opinion the seen maker of the Eucharist in his double

271 Stăniloae, TDO, 3, 73.
272 Ibid., 74. Also, Gregory of Nyssa, „The Great Catechism,” 37, in Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers,
506. Gregory says that in Eucharist „He disseminates Himself in every believer through that flesh, whose
substance comes from bread and wine, blending Himself with the bodies of believers, to secure that, by this
union with the immortal, man, too, may be a sharer in incorruption.” (Ibid.). See also, Ioannis Zizioulas, Creația
ca Euharistie (București: Editura Bizantină , 1999). Zizioulas argues for a Eucharistic vision of the world, (ibid.,
17). Also, Paul Evdokimov, L’Orthodo xy (Paris: 1959). Evdokimov, speaking about remembrance in Eucharist
says: “All the holy suppers of the Church are nothing else than one eternal and unique Supper, that of Christ in
the Upper Room. The same divine act both takes place at a specific moment in history, and is offered always in
the sacrament,” (ibid., 241) . Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church (London: Penguin Books, 1987 ). Ware
speaking of Eucharist presents a balanced view when saying that even though the events of Christ’s sacrifice –
the Inca rnation, the Last Supper, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, and the Ascension – are not repeated in the
Eucharist …they are made present, (ibid., 287). Alexander Schmemann, The Eucharist: Sacrament of the
Kingdom (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1988). Schmemann argues that the Eucharist of the
assembly is only the beginning of this sacrament, its culmination being “the manifestation of the presence of the
kingdom of God,” in the Church’s “place and ministry in the world,” (ibid., 29). See also Io an I. Ică Jr.
“Împărtășirea continuă pro și contra – o dispută perenă și lecțiile ei (Continuous Sharing, for and against – a
perennial dispute and its lessons),” in Împărtășirea continuă cu Sfintele Taine (Continuous Sharing with the
Holy Sacraments) (Sib iu: Deisis, 2006), 84.
273 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 72 -74.

71
role as the repre sentative of Christ and of the Church.274 He connects the role of the priest and
the Church, with the fact that in the Old Testament the Pascal lamb could be sacrificed only in
Jerusalem. In the same way he says, the Eucharist cannot happen except in the Church
through the priest.275 This is eventually why, says Stăniloae, the intercommunion with other
faiths (namely other Christian traditions!) is not acceptable for the Eastern Orthodox
Church.276
The essential role of the priest is in Stăniloae’s opinion rooted in the fact that the Holy
Spirit works through his actions and prayers. He says also that the transformation of the
elements of Eucharist (bread and wine) into the body of Christ is the follow -up of the word of
institution said by Christ in the Last Supper, words that operate in and because of the priest’s
prayer called epiclesis .277 To be sure Stăniloae is careful to say that it is not the priest who is
doing the Sacrament, rather the Holy Spirit, even though the role of the priest cannot be
denied, because denying the role of the priest, implicitly, one denies the concretization of
God’s salvific work in the “objective seen work of the priest.”278 Stăniloae tries to supports
his argument with the idea of the consistency between the Old and New covenants. Or in his
own words:
The Law of the New Testament fulfils the one of the Old Testament. In the same way there
were necessary objective sacrific es through priests, here must be brought the sacrifice of
Christ, through the priest.279

He concludes by quoting Cyril of Alexandria, with his opinion that based on Numbers 3: 6 –
10, as the office in the inside part of the Temple is the exclusive prerogative of the priests, the

274 Ibid., 78. Also, Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 153. Also, Weli -Matti Karkkainen, An Introduction
to Eclessiology: Ecumenical, Historical & Global Perspectives (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002),
97.
275 Stăniloae, TDO, 3, 79.
276 Ibid., 79 -80. See also, Kallistos Ware, „Communion and Intercomunion,” in Primary Readings on
the Eucharist , Thomas J. Fusch (Ed) (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2004). He says that „the technical term
‚intecommunion…’ is a word of modern coinage, not to be found in the Bible, the Fathers or the Holy Canons.
The Bible, the Fathe rs, and the Canons know of only two possibilities: communion and non -communion,” (ibid.,
195).
277 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 80.
278 Ibid., 82.
279 Ibid.,

72
office of the priests in the New Covenant should have also the prerogative of the office inside
the Church.
Stăniloae considers that if in the case of Baptism is added an essential sacrament that
completes it, namely the sacrament of Chrismation, in the case of Eucharist it is paired by the
sacrament of Confession or Repentance. For Stăniloae the sacrament of Confe ssion or
Repentance means the forgiveness of sins, of those who confess their sins and are sorry for
them, a forgiveness given by the bishop or priest. Stăniloae argues again for the central place
of the priest in this sacrament as the seen organ of Christ and as a representative of the
Church. The reason the priests have this role is the fact that they are already overcomers of
human sinful flesh and of its passions. 280
As in the case of Baptism that is complemented by Chrismation, Stăniloae argues the
complementarity between the Eucharist and Repentance that includes three elements. The first
element is that of confession, the second is that of repentance and the third is that of priestly
absolution. For Stăniloae confession is a sacrament o f communion between the penitent and
the priest, being not a general confession, rather it is an opening of his soul to the priest in
order for him to look inside.281 The role of the priest is seen in the fact that he needs to follow
carefull y the confession and lead the penitent to the essential elements of his sinfulness in
order for the confession to be appropriate. The aim, says Stăniloae is to re -establish the
communion between the penitent and the priest, as the seen organ of Christ and as the
representative of the Church. Stăniloae says:” No other man could fulfill this role to
intermediate of the extended communion with other people and with God, except the priest in
the sacrament of Confession.” 282 From the first elemen t of confession, Stăniloae continues
with the second element, that of repentance. Stăniloae considers that this element is again the
priests’ prerogative. He says:

280 Ibid., 83 -84.
281 Ibid., 86 -87.
282 Ibid., 87 -88.

73

If in listening to the confession he exercised the role of an understanding f riend, and of a judge
and doctor who evaluate the nature and the gravity of those who confess, now he exercises
especially the role of a judge doubled by that of a doctor, who evaluates the appropriate means
to cure the found weaknesses.283

Therefore the priest prescribes,284 or imposes285 penances or epitimia . Stăniloae
discusses extensively the practice of imposing penances in the history of the church, some of
them connected with the forbidding of sharing in Eucharist. The third element of the
sacrament of confession, in Stăniloae’s a rgument, is that of priest’s absolution. The priest is
praying for the release of the sinner from his/her sin. Stăniloae sees in this the fact that Christ
is forgiving the sin and that „it is the priest’s prayer that effectively makes present the
forgivene ss that comes from Christ.”286 the priest exercising his double spiritual
interpenetration with the believer, and with Christ.287
4. 4. Summary of Chapter 4

I aimed in this chapter to explore the way in which Stăniloae, consistently, continues
to work in concentric circles, in his though about Eucharist. I have argued that for Stăniloae
the inner Trinitarian relations expressed by the concept of perichoresis, constitute the model
of the relations between different stages of Christian spiritual journey.
Therefore, I argued in the beginning that the first dimension in which perichoresis is
reflected in the thought of Stăniloae in regard to the Eucharist is the i nterpenetration between
Baptism, Chrismation and Eucharist, as three complementary realities of initiatory process in
the church. From here I understood that for Stăniloae the movement in Eucharist that is the
present impregnation of the final state of per fection, overlap with the movement of

283 Ibid., 91.
284 Stăniloae, The Experience of God , 5: Orthodox Dogmatic Theology: The Sanctifying Mysteries
(Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2012), 125. (henceforth Mysteries ).
285 Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church , 290.
286 Stăniloae, Mysteries , 131. Also, Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 95.
287 Ibid., 95 -96.

74
developing, through personal participation, the divine power that is encapsulated within the
inner being of the baptised person.
This is the reason why for Stăniloae, Eucharist, is not merely a means to be united
with Christ who was born and died for our sins, it is also a union with Christ who dies and is
resurrected to eternal life. As such Eucharist for Stăniloae sows in us the power of total
surrender of our existence to God, in order to receive it back full with H is eternal life. From
here Stăniloae argues that the Eucharist is not concerned with the present life but with the
eternal life, and this is so because, “the new life from Baptism, that follows the death of the
old man, cannot exist without the perspective of the eternal life that is sustained by the
Eucharist.”
Eucharist, continues Stăniloae, being an act that makes Christ’s resurrection a reality
interior to us, gives us the power to die to sin and to surrender ourselves to God, and also the
power to rec eive our real death as Christ accepted it, as a way to the eternal life. Moreover,
the Eucharist is the medication for eternity. He argues that union with Christ in Eucharist is
the foundation for the union between the members of the Church, in the interpe netrating
participation of each in the other, without the dissolution of the believers’ persons. For this
mutual participation, to be a reality in the life of the church, there is necessary, in Stăniloae’s
opinion, the concept of the real presence of Chri st, under the image of bread and wine.
The second dimension that mirrors perichoresis in Stăniloae’s theology of Eucharist,
is that of the interpenetration of the real presen ce of the body and blood of Christ in Eucharist,
and of the human sacrifice of submission and surrender to God, as enacted in the concluding
mediation of the priest and bishop as representatives of both movements, from God to us and
from us to God .

75
The re al presence of the body and b lood of Christ in Eucharist continues the
renaissance of man from Christ that started in Baptism. As such, Eucharist is a feeding of man
from Him, and through Eucharist we have the perpetual remembering of Christ’s incarnation,
sacrifice and resurrection, in His unity with us. Moreover, through Eucharist “we proclaim”
the incarnation, sacrifice and resurrection of the Son of God.
The transformation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, is another
way in which the thought of Stăniloae, the perichoresis is reflected in the Eucharist. The
union of the bread with the body of Christ, as hypostasis of the Word, transforms the bread
into the body of Christ. The body of Christ is deified and pneumatized because of his
permanent hypostatic union with God, while our body starts the journey towards deification
and pneumatisation, and both remain distinct bodies.
Consistently, Stăniloae works in concentric circles when sees the Eucharist as the
meeting place between the tw o inseparable movements, a descendent movement of God
towards believers through His grace, and an ascendant movement of believers towards God,
through sacrifice. As such Eucharist is part of a larger complementarity of the two movements
present also in the other sacraments of the initiation process, namely, Baptism, Chrismation,
Repentance, and Priesthood. Consistent with that complementarity, Stăniloae argues for the
concluding mediation of the pri est and bishop in the Eucharist, as t he priest is in Stănil oae’s
opinion the seen maker of the Eucharist in his double role as the representative of Christ and
of the Church.
Eventually, I have argued that similar with the complementarity between Baptism and
Chrismation, Stăniloae argues the complementarity betwe en the Eucharist and Repentance ,
that includes three elements. The first element is that of confession, the second is that of
repentance and the third is that of priestly absolution. For Stăniloae confession is a sacrament

76
of communion between the peniten t and the priest, being not a general confession, rather it is
an opening of his soul to the priest in order for him to look inside

77
Chapter 5. Stăniloae’s Theology of Spirituality as Actualisation of the Trinitarian
Christological -Pneumatological Convergence
5.1. The Cruciformity of Christian Spirituality

For Stăniloae, the space where Christian spirituality is emb odied is the world as the
gift of God288 to humanity, and as such the world is the first reality in which God imprinted
the cross.289 The reason for this imprint of the cross on the different domains of life in the
world, says Stăniloae, is the attachment of humanity to the gift, the ephemeral things of the
world, forgetting at the same time the giver, God.290 Stăniloae argues the universality of the
cross that is carried differently by the people of the world. Accordingly, there is a way of
carrying the cross, proper to unbelievers, namely, a cross without the hope of transforming
resurrection, and a way of carrying the cross, proper to believers, namely, a cross with the
hope of resurrection.291
The second reality, on which the cross is imprinted, is that of relationships . Stăniloae
argues that there is a cross and consequently suffering, for the loved ones as they are in
suffering (he gives the example of the parents who suffer for their children), and for the
neighbours, a suffering that mirrors the suffering of Christ “who had pity on those who were
suffering, and wept for those who were dead.” Then, says Stăniloae, there is a cross and
consequently suffering, for the hostile ones , who became our e nemies, “on account of the
noble and high convictions to which we remain faithful. There is also a cross, and
consequently suffering, for the erring ones , with them being “our children…our
brethren…our neighbours,” as we have to “carry their incomprehensio n of our good

288 Stăniloae TDO, 1, 234. Also, Alexander Schmemann , For the Life of the World: Sacraments and
Orthodoxy (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1973), 14. See also, Charles Miller, The Gift of the
World: An Introduction to the Theology of Dumitru Stăniloae (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 58 -60.
289 Stăniloae, TDO , 1, 236. See also, Paul Evdokimov, Vărstele vieții spirituale (București: Christiana,
1993). Evdokimov speaks of the discovery and understanding of your “personal cross” that the spiritual life
does and provide, “introducing, an order, and discovering a rhythm of your own growth, demandin g a
progressive walk,” (ibid., 63 -64).
290 Stăniloae, The Victory of the Cross (Oxford: SLG Press, 2001), 1
291 Ibid., 2. It is here as I mentioned in chapter 5 that Stăniloae argues his theology of the cross that roots
the way in which the Christian life means carrying the cross towards resurrection, that is an important element in
keepng together in their mutual synthesis the incarnation, life, death and resurrection of Christ.

78
intentions. 292Arguing the inevitability of the cross and suffering for authentic Christian
spirituality Stăniloae affirms:
…without the cross there can be no true growth and no true strengthening of the spiritual life.
To avoid the weight of the cross is to avoid our responsibility towards our brethren and our
neighbours before God. Only by the cross can we remain in submission to God and in true
love towards our neighbours. We cannot purify or develo p our own spiritual life, nor that of
others, nor that of the world in general, by seeking to avoid the cross…The way of the cross is
the only way which leads upwards, the only way which carries creation towards the true
heights for which it was made.293

Stăniloae makes a very important distinction between innocent suffering and suffering
because of your own guilt. There has been only one purely innocent suffering, that of Christ,
whose purity was proved in the fact that He carried a cross f or our sins not because of His
own. This is the why, says Stăniloae, in Christ, the cross became the power of God for our
salvation, as in us “purity is always mixed with impurity, innocence with guilt and the cross
comes to us in great part because of our fault, because of our sin…”294
Moreover, from the personal level, that of accepting responsibility for suffering
because of your own sinfulness, Stă niloae brings into attention another important element that
defines the responsibility for the cross in relationships. Many times the suffering of someone
is due to his limitation in regard to others with whom a relationship is not good. There is, says
Stăniloae, almost always a double reason for enmity in relationships, therefore “I bear the
cross for myself…and for them as well, since I carry this cross on account of the kind of
person I am…” In this context for Stăniloae acceptance of the cross means acc eptance of our
own responsibility for others, acceptance of our own guilt, for only as such one can find his
true humanity, be in a dialogical relationship with God, keeping “the ability to hear the word
of God…and “his neighbours word to him.” 295
The third reality on which the cross is imprinted is that of pleasures of the body and
flesh that lead to pain. Stăniloae compares and contrasts the fleshly mechanism to overcome

292 Stăniloae, The Victory of the Cross , 3-4.
293 Ibid., 4 -5.
294 Ibid., 5.
295 Ibid., 6 -8.

79
suffering in life, and the Christlike attitude to suffering. The first one is indulgence in
pleasure as a way to evade pain that produces a new pain,296 the second one is overcoming
pleasure through bearing the cross, meaning a balancing in the human nature between
“excessive sensibility, and re -establishing the pow er of the spirit.” Stăniloae keeps Christ as
the model:
He did not overcome pleasure and pain by a sort of stoic insensibility, an inability to feel; he
mastered them through the strengthening of his spirit…preserving yet transfiguring our full
human sens ibility…His cross means that the spirit is victorious over matter without making
matter of no effect…but by transfiguring the material world through the response of a will
wholly given to God.297

To be sure, Stăniloae distinguishes, following Maximus the Confessor, the type of
pleasure he is speaking of. It is the “blind pleasure” characterized by the absence of “the
vision of the spirit.” Such pleasure will “inevitably bring sorrow,” even though, being
realistic, all human pleasures “tend to b e blind pleasures,” being self oriented, and lacking a
horizon beyond themselves. The pain that comes as a consequence of such blind pleasure is
characterized by a “spiritual feeling of weakness…of matter in the spiritual realm,” as
opposed to the cross th at produces transparency of matter for the spirit, and has as a
consequence an opening of the “eyes of the spirit,” and as such provides an understanding of
the fact that “the cross is given to all of us to lead us towards the life of the spirit and as a
means of re -establishing the dialogue of man with God.”298
From the three realities over which Stăniloae sees the imprint of the cross, namely, the
gift of the world, the relationships between human beings, and the pleasures of the body, he
continues with three meanings of the imprint of the cross on the above realities that are
overlapped in human existence. First, in Stăniloae’s thought, one of the meanings of the cross’
imprint on human existence is the revela tion of God’s transcendence over the gifts that he
offers to the world and humanity. This is especially important in the face of suffering of the

296 Ibid., 8.
297 Ibid., 9.
298 Ibid., 9 -11.

80
innocent, as reflected in the book of Job. In Stăniloae’s perspective, Job’s attitude, in his quest
for an ans wer in regard to his suffering, reveals an important dimension of a human being’s
relationship with God. That is the necessary attachment to God as the Giver instead of
promoting an excessive concern for what He gives, a concern that “puts the gifts above the
giver.”299
The point of view of Job’s wife is basically the same as the point of view of Job’s friends who
say that God gives things to those who remain faithful to him and takes away his gifts when
they become unfaithful. They say esse ntially the same thing because both affirm that man
remains faithful to God on account of his gifts…Satan is a cynic and says that man loves God
merely for the gifts…But God wishes to show by the example of Job that there is such love,
that man is capable of remaining attached to God himself even if he no longer receives his
gifts.300

The second meaning of the cross’ imprint on human existence, argues Stăniloae is the
revelation of God’s sovereignty that provides an understanding of God’s unique ness.
Continuing his reflection on Job’s experience, Stăniloae uses the expression “to see God in all
his greatness and wisdom and marvelous nature.” Like Job, argues Stăniloae, believers need
to travel the road of making an “abstraction of the things of t his world in order to think of God
who is above all human understanding.” Stăniloae continues by saying that sometimes God
himself intervenes in order to interrupt a human being’s attachment to things or to His gifts,
an intervention that is regarded many times, from the human perspective as His abandonment.
In fact it is God’s hiddenness, in order to provide a revelation at a superior level. Only in
these coordinates, says Stăniloae, “we enter into a relationship with God, which is truly
personal, a relati onship which is above all created things.301
The third meaning of the cross’ imprint in human existence is the revelation of the true
love for God as Person , despite the presence or absence of His gifts. It is the love that is, says
Stănilo ae, perfectly expressed by Christ, the one who loved humanity when she was in enmity

299 Ibid., 11 -13.
300 Ibid., 13.
301 Ibid., 16 -18.

81
and rebellion towards God. Stăniloae considers that only a love such as Christ’s is “true love”
because in true love, “a man should transcend himself, go beyond himself.”302 In the light of
the three realities on which the cross is imprinted and of the three meanings for that imprint,
Stăniloae concludes,
We cannot think of the cross without the world as the gift of God. Bu t on the other side we
cannot think of the world without the cross…The cross completes the fragmentary meaning of
this world…The cross reveals the destiny of the world as it is drawn towards its
transfiguration in God by Christ…By the cross the tendency of the whole cosmos to transcend
itself in God is accomplished.303

5. 2. The Telos, the Foundation and the Way of Christian Spirituality

Stăniloae seems to refuse any divorce of theology from spirituality, the union of the
two being so profound, as it mirrors the profundity of the divine person’s communion. For
Stăniloae Christian spirituality has a telos , a way and a foundation . He considers that Christian
spirituality is the process of progressing on the road of perfection in Christ.304 In this regard
the telos of Christian spirituality is the union of a believer with God in Christ,305 through the
work of the Spirit. For this union to become a reality in the life of believers, there is
necessary, says Stăniloae, a series of ascetical efforts, those representing the active dimension
of the spiritual li fe, whilst the passive dimension is the work of God’s grace to which the
believer needs both to be open to and to follow.306

302 Ibid., 19 -20. Also, Christos Yannaras, Elements of Faith: An Introduction to Orthodox Theology
(Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), 5. Yannaras speaks of a “religious need…that is in within man…to relate to
something which surpasses him, to s ome existence much superior to his own.” (Ibid.). This would be very
similar to what the Catholic theologian Karl Rahner calls supernatural existential, the gift of God which enables
us to respond to God’s call to us. See in this regard Karl Rahner, Founda tions of Christian Faith: An
Introduction to the Idea of Christianity (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1978), 126 -128. In
Rahner’s words: „God’s self communication is given not only as a gift, but also as the necessary condition which
makes pos sible an acceptance of the gift…,” (ibid., 128).
303 Stăniloae, The Victory of the Cross, 20-22.
304 Stăniloae, Spiritualitate Ortodoxă: Ascetica și Mistica (București: EIBMBOR, 1992), 5.
305 Stăniloae, “Desăvârșirea noastră în Hristos după învățătura bisericii Ortodoxe,” in Studii și Articole:
Mitropolia Olteniei, Revista Oficială a Arhiepiscopiei Craiovei și Episcopiei Rîmnicului și Argeșului , partea 1,
(Craiova: 1980/.1 -2, 76.
306 Stăniloae, Spiritualitate Ortodoxă: Ascetica și Mistica , 7-8.

82
Ascetical efforts have, in Stăniloae’s opinion, a double role. Firs t those efforts assure
the mortification of the old nature of a believer, being as such a prolongation of baptism.
Second, those efforts assure the participation in Christ’s resurrection. The practical
consequence of this double role of ascetical efforts i s purification from passions and
consequently the possession of virtues, through a double process of unlearning the vices and
learning of virtues. For Stăniloae, in this process, the entire human being is involved, the
human reason and will being permanent ly illuminated by a pneumatic understanding of all
things, towards more and more harmony with the work of the Holy Spirit.307
The union with God that is the telos of spirituality is not for Stăniloae total
identification with God 308 rather it is a process of coming on the coordinates of the
relationship with God, a relationship that would be impossible if it would not be initiated and
maintained by God himself. For Stăniloae this is
a confirmation for the thesis of Ch ristian spirituality, that the vision of God is impossible
without a special grace from Him…and excludes the possibility for our being… to be
absorbed into the being of God.309

The spiritual believer says Stăniloae understands the truth that m akes him humble, the
truth of his total dependence on God for all the things of his life. Stăniloae considers that real
spirituality is that living of the human “I” through Christ without being replaced by Christ’s
“I,” Christ’s life being the power throug h which my life is lived. This is for Stăniloae the
culmination of spirituality in the experience of a believer.310
From the vertical dimension in regard to the telos of spirituality, namely, union with
God, Stăniloae continues with the horizontal dimension, that of a believer’s responsibility in

307 Ibid., 10 – 20.
308 Ibid., 21 -22.
309 Ibid., 22.
310 Ibid., 23. See Also, Stăniloae, Filocalia sfintelor nevoinți ale desăvârșirii , 1 (București: Harisma,
1993). 9. Here Stăniloae says that „the road of purification from passions…is the way constituted by the life of
Jesus Christ..He himself is „the way” and progressing on it is the same as progressing in Him towards the telos
of perfection to which He raised humanity assumed through victory w ith patience of our weaknesses and
passions…” (Ibid.)

83
regard to the c reated order. He considers that instead of promoting an indifferent withdrawal
from the world or from among people of the world, true spirituality is conditioned by such
participation in the preserving and sustaining work of divinity over creation. The aim of such
participation of the believer in creation as a whole or in the life of other human beings is that
of “actualization of the spiritual potencies built in him or in us.” This actualization is
produced, says Stăniloae through a permanent “disciplining ” of our behavior based on a
sustained “carefulness to everything we do, think, and through the good we do to others.”311
Stăniloae says that:
The activity through which we help the formation of our fellows and of us is crystallized in
virtues that culminate in love…Nobody should consider that his work is an end in itself, but it
has the purpose to beautify his nature with the virtues of patience, of self -control, of love for
people, of faith in God, and to open progressively the eyes to see the meanings created by God
in everything. 312

The fact that spirituality is union with God, in Christ, through the Holy Spirit, is for
Stăniloae the reason why the Holy Trinity is t he foundation for Christian spirituality . This is
so, asserts Stăniloae because the personal God is not to be conceived in singularity but always
in a unity of Persons in a relation of love.313 For Stăniloae spi rituality in the life of God as the
Holy Trinity is the foundational base on which Christian spirituality is possible:
Only a perfect community of Supreme Persons could feed with an unending and perfect love,
our thirst of love for it and between us. This feeding cannot be only thought, it should be also
lived.314

In order to avoid the danger of confusing the believer with God in the process of union,
Stăniloae asserts that the Trinity can not be experienced without its uncreated energies, love
being such an energy that irradiates from God toward believers.315
God wanting to spread progressively the gift of His infinite love, to a different ord er of
conscious subjects, namely, created, wants to spread this love in its paternal form, as for sons,

311 Stăniloae, Spiritualitatea Ortodoxă, 24-27.
312 Ibid., 27 -28.
313 Ibid., 29. Also, Stăniloae, Revelation , 245.
314 Stăniloae, Spiritualitate Ortodoxă, 35.
315 Ibid., 36.

84
united with His Son. This is the reason why, after the creation of man, He wants His Son to
become man, for His love towards His Son, as man, to be a lo ve that directs itself towards any
human face, in the likeness of His Son…Together with the love of the Father towards us and
with our love towards the Father, in Christ, overflow upon us the paternal love in the fo rm of
the Holy Spirit overflowed over His Son…316

If the telos of Christian spirituality is union with God in Christ, through the Holy
Spirit, and the foundation of such spirituality is the communion of the Persons of the Trinity,
third, the wa y of this union is Christ. For Stăniloae the Christological character of Christian
spirituality is vital. He considers that “any union with divinity that is not through Christ and in
Christ is an illusion. Christ is the way of our union with God, says Stăn iloae, being
“contemporary” with us at any moment of this process. Christ is present in our lives through a
profound participation in the actualization of His death and resurrection in our lives. The
Christological character of Christian spirituality is co mpleted in Stăniloae’s thought by its
pneumatological character. If baptism and Eucharist are the elements of Christ’s
contemporaneity with us and the force for our ascent in union with God, the Holy Spirit is the
one who brings us into the space where com munion with Christ is possible, namely, the
Church.317

5.3. The Stages of Christian Spirituality

Starting from the classical division of the process of spiritual life, in Eastern thought,
namely, praxis (work) and teoria (contemplation), he considers that there are three phases of
the spiritual life: the active one or the work, the contemplation phas e of nature, and the
theological one or the contemplation of God.318

316 Ibid., 37 .
317 Ibid., 38 – 44. Also, Stăniloae, EG, 5, 2.
318 Stăniloae, Ascetica și Mistica , 51.

85
Purification
The first stage in spiritual life, considers Stăniloae, is that of purification from vices.
Considering the vices as being the lowest level where a being can fall, Stăniloae argues that it
is exactly the fallen human nature that is the source for vices, 319 and defin es them as being
something irrational, some of them being connected with the body, some with the soul and
that they are in a relationship of interconditionality with each other. Also, the essence of the
vices, in Stăniloae’s perspective, is that they produ ce a turning towards him, namely “an
egocentric self -love,” and a pre -eminence of the carnal dimension over the spiritual dimension
of existence. 320
From here Stăniloae continues by distinguishing between vices and affects,
considering that the affects are connected with our basic necessities because they contribute to
the “preservation of our nature.” On the other hand, Stă niloae considers that the affects are not
proper to human nature from the design of creation, rather they became part of the human
nature after the Fall, and this is the reason the affects could become vices, 321 they will not
survive in eternity, and therefore the ascetical efforts have a double aim, to keep the affects
under control and to enhance spiritual growth. He concludes:
Ascetics’ means, in the Eastern thought, to stop and discipline the biological, not fight to
exterminate it. Moreover, ascetics’ means “sublimation” of this element of bodily affection not
its abolition. Christianity does not save man from a certain part of his bei ng, rather it saves
him entirely.322

Moreover, Stăniloae elaborates on the causes and effects of the vices, and he
distinguishes three overlapping causes of vices. First, “the weakening of the mind in its own
and autonomous work,” second, the exacerbation of sensual work escaped “from the control

319 Ibid., 55 -57. Also, Stăniloae, „Desăvârșirea noastră în Hristos după învățătura bisericii Ortodoxe,”
(Our Perfection in Christ according to the teaching of the Orthodox Church), in Studii și Articole: Mitropolia
Olteniei, Revista Oficială a Arhiepiscopiei Craiovei și Episcopiei Rîmnicului și Argeșului , 2, (Craiova: 1980/ 3 –
6, 401.
320 Stăniloae, Ascetica și Mistica , 58-60. Stăniloae follows the classical classification in Eastern
tradition about the passions: Gluttony, Fornication, Avarice, Anger, Accidie (spiritual sloth or sluggishness),
Dejection, Vainglory, and Pride, (ibid .,).
321 Ibid., 61 -62. Stăniloae names the needs: app etite for food, pleasure of eating, fear and sadness (Ibid.)
322 Ibid., 63.

86
of the mind,” and third, the production of “an exclusive and irrational run towards pleasure
and run from pain.” The effects of a vice over the life of human being are in Stăniloae’s
opinion on the co ordinates of disorder at the level of a weakening of human nature, a
fracturing of the harmony between mind and senses that leads to a “dissipation of mind,” to
“forgetting of God,’ and to “conflicts with others,” all of them rooted in a egoistic
preoccupa tion with himself. 323
Considering with the Fathers that “heart” is an expression that refers to the “soul
itself,” Stăniloae, sees similarities between the Christian doctrine of the soul and modern
psychology. He speaks of the subconscious part of the soul as the inferior place of the soul,
where exists the negative content of the being, and abou t the upper place of the soul that he
names, the transconscious or supraconscious part of the soul, the part that not only contains
the “virtual human energies” but also is an open door for the divine energies.324
For Stăniloae the spirit of the soul, or of the mind, the heart ( ς) is the one who
makes contact with the subconscious part and with the external reality as well as the locus
where Christ, through the Spirit, lives.325 He says:
The spirit” is an aspect and nous another of the same simple soul. “The spirit” or the heart
contains in itself “the mind” or “the understanding” and “the reason” as the Holy Spirit
contains the Father and the Son. “The understanding” contains as well in itself “the heart” or
“the love,” and “the reason,” as well as “the reason” contains “the understanding” and “the
love.326

In this context the vices are simultaneously the “effect and the cause of a mind that lacks the
true understanding,” and of the weakening of the will, that leads to a fracture of the reason,

323 Ibid., 67 -70. Stăniloae considers that the “dissipation of the mind” could be overcome only through
the “guarding of the mind” of the Christian ascetics. (Ibid.)
324 Ibid., 72 -73. For Stă niloae, the supraconscious part of the being as “the spirit of the soul or of the
mind” is in fact the heart. (Ibid.)
325 Ibid., 74. Stăniloae sees the similarity between the human spirit with the capacity to go deep in the
human being with the Holy Spirit who has the capacity to go in the d eepness’ of the Divinity.
326 Ibid., 75.

87
with the result that both mind and will become servants of the vice, being transformed in
“unwise reason” and respectively “irrational will.” 327 Stăniloae concludes:
The vices are born by the contribution of all faculties of the soul, through their wrong activity,
indicating an illness of the entire being. They are a turn of the entire being towards external
reality, towards living acc ording to the feelings, a transformation of the entire being in “body,”
in bodily feeling. Vices…represent therefore, a living through the superficial part of our
being…an exit of our being from the region of the ontological truths, from the connection wit h
the springs of existence, a party on the margin of the nothing abyss, from which is coming,
when we wake up from the fire of the vice, a sensation of emptiness, of false, of nothingness
of our existence… 328

From the diagnosis, the description and the features of vices, Stăniloae continues by
saying that purification from them is not simply their elimination through ascetical efforts;
rather it happens by the replacement of vices with the virtues. Stăniloae in sists that, of vital
importance is the order to be followed in this process of replacing the vices with the virtues.
He considers that the primordial condition for this process is faith , obtained and strengthened
at baptism, a faith whose efficacy, admits Stăniloae, depends on our cooperation on the
journey of perfection through virtues. To be sure, Stăniloae affirms, faith is the gift of God’s
grace, and has the role of strengthening the reason, considering the fact that the start of every
sin is a departu re of the reason from the truth. This is the reason faith is to become a life style,
being an intellectual -volitional synthesis, an act that is a solution to the other intellectual –
volitional act that is the fall into sin. Faith is therefore the first act of purification that responds
to the beginning of every fall into sin.329
Second, in its progress, says Stăniloae, “faith becomes fear of God that is the opposite
of the fear of the world.” For Stăniloae, the virtue of the authentic fear o f God (in accordance
with the Heideggerian classification), is the rediscovery of the primordial, spiritual fear that
was in the beginning simultaneously a fear of separation from God into an empty way of

327 Ibid., 76 -80.
328 Ibid., 81 -82.
329 Ibid., 91 -99.

88
existence and a “fear united with the trust in God. ” 330 Therefore, the fear of God, continues
Stăniloae is the fear to sin through union with the world, a revelatio n of a higher authority
than that of the world (the imminent danger), namely God, and the consciousness of the future
danger, that of an “eternal existence that is unauthentic and unfulfilled,” as the result of the
last just judgment of God.331
Third, the fear of God, leads to the virtue of repentance for past sins and self control to
avoid future sins. Considering with the Fathers that repentance is the second grace, a second
reborn and a renewal of Baptism, Stăniloae argues for permane nt repentance, with a
continuous confession of sins, and the patient overcoming of present sorrows, a repentance
that is to be directed to our vices and sins as well as to “our virtues always unfulfilled” There
is, says Stăniloae, a danger of confusing re pentance with discouraging discontentment that is
filled with doubt. Rather, repentance is an acknowledgment of the actual limits, not the
declaration of the final limits. In fact, says Stăniloae, discouragement is the opposite of
repentance, as repentance should be always superior to every moral achievement and as such
“a hand of God’ that raises us and keeps us in an authentic relationship with God.332
Fourth, the next step in the process of purification from vices is the virtue of s elf-
control that helps the believer to see the world in its true light, as a dynamic and transparent
means from God to help him towards God, and not as a world of things and objects. From
here Stăniloae speaks of two forms of self control, a radical one, p ractised by monks, and a
partial one, that of the believers in the world. Of note is the fact that even if Stăniloae
considers radical self -control, that implies an exit from the world as being real, he does not
exclude the possibility of self control for those believers who are in the world as well.

330 Ibid., 100-102. Stăniloae says that there are two types of the fear of God. The first one is the fear of
the slaves, fear of His punishment, and the second one is the fear of love, the fear of being without his (master’s)
kindness…Heidegger distingu ishes, says Stăniloae, between the fear “of something from the world (Furcht) and
the fear of the universal emptiness of the world (Angst) (Ibid.)
331 Ibid., 102 -103.
332 Ibid., 104 -108.

89
However, he says that in order to compensate the limits of the second type, God will permit
more troubles to overtake the believer which he will need to overcome in patience in order to
continue the process of purification from vices in his life. Stăniloae differentiates: “If self
control is the virtue more found in monks, patience is more found in the layman, even though
none of them should forget entirely the virtue of the other.” Stăniloae sees in the three vows of
a monk: that of poverty, chastity, and obedience, the medication for the vices of gluttony,
fornication, avarice and pride, through the practice of fasting.333
Fifth, in the process of purification from vices comes the virtu e of the guarding of the
mind or of thoughts . Stăniloae considers that the mind contains good thoughts coming from
the supraconscious part of the soul that is open to God, as well as wicked thoughts coming
from the subconscious part of the soul connected w ith the biological which is under the
influence of evil spirits. The guarding of the mind aims in Stăniloae’s argument for the
“complete predominance of the good thought produced by the good heart,” namely the
supraconscious part of the soul, in such a way that the wicked heart, namely the subconscious
part of the soul will be under the control of the first. This is to be done, says Stăniloae through
a permanent bringing of our thoughts in connection with the mind of Christ, an idea that
mirrors closely Pauline concepts from Philipians 4: 7 and 2 Corinthians 10: 5, even though
Stăniloae does not connect his argument with that text –the idea is to train your discernment
and that of the peace of Christ that guards the mind. The permanent bringing of our thou ghts
to the mind of Christ is rather, for Stăniloae, done through the permanent remembering of the
name of God in our minds through concentrated and uninterrupted prayer.334

333 Ibid., 116 -120.
334 Ibid., 123 -134. See also Meyendorff, St Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality . He says about
Palamas: „The hesychast doctor justifies the psyco -physical method of prayer in this context, rejecting the
Platonic spiritualism of Barlaamite anthropology for the Biblical concept of man; the body is so far from being a
prison of the soul, for the body itself receives the grace of the sacraments and the pledge of final resurrection,”
(ibid.,109).

90
Sixth, in the process of purification from vices comes the virtue of patience in grief.
Speaking about grief Stăniloae differentiates between two forms of God’s assistance to human
beings in the process of perfection. The first one is the providence of God and the second one
is the judgment of God. One is positive and one is negative. One has to do with the beauty and
the good we experience, being in obedience to God, and the second is the punishment that we
experience as the result of our sins, in order to depart from sin and to stop sinning. Stăniloae
is referring to griev es provoked by other people to a person who is in the process of spiritual
growth, or after some spiritual achievement. For Stăniloae the first way in which we meet the
providence of God, is the way towards God, the way of ascetical efforts, whilst the second
way is the way of returning to God after departure from Him.335 He summarises:
If self control and the guarding of the mind…address the vices of lust (gluttony, fornication
and avarice), patience in regard with the sorrows that are provok ed by people and different
grieve s that come ove r us address espec ially the vice of anger (acidy and dejection)…Usually,
the successes that somebody obtained through self control and through achieving of more
virtues, exposes him to vainglory and pride. This is the reason why God permits over this
perso n troubles from different people and griefs, in order to heal him of this vices… 336

Seventh, in the process of purification from vices comes hope , as a result of the
understanding that comes from the practice of patience in grief . Stăniloae considers that if
“faith is the certainty of some unseen actual realities,” hope is “the certainty of participation
in future realities.” Moreover, for Stăniloae hope is a different way of “being oriented
forward toward the future,” than worrying, even though both have “a common root,” namely,
“preoccupation with the future.’337 He concludes:
Comparing carefully hope and worry, we acknowledge the impossibility of their coexistence
due to the fact that as much evidence as hope contain s, so much uncertainty worry contains.
This is the reason why the uncertainty of worry is present where the evidence of hope is
missing. For the kind of concern that serves hope is not fueled by the uncertainty of worldly
worry, rather it is only careful n ot to lose any part of the sure hope. The assurance of future
good from God and the uncertainty of worldly worry are shown in the tranquillity that comes
from the first and the unstopped turmoil given by the latter .338

335 Stăniloae , Ascetica și Mistica , 134 -135.
336 Ibid., 135 -136.
337 Ibid., 143 -144.
338 Ibid., 144.

91

Eighth, in the process of purification come kindness and humbleness , which are
“flowers that rise from the patience in grief and from hope.” Kindness, says Stăniloae is that
“unmoved disposition of mind in face of critics or praise…it means to be unaffected by the
evils that so meone is producing which are directed toward you…” For Stăniloae kindness, as
opposed to anger, produces simplicity from the inner capacity of “transposing yourself into
the situation of the other” and that it is actually “a wisdom” to judge unpassionately .
Humbleness, on the other hand, is the opposite of pride, and unlike pride that is “the spring of
all vices, humbleness is the “concentration of all virtues,” and as such is the “most complete
reestablishment of the true understanding of natural reality, love being the understanding of
the ones who are above the natural” Stăniloae considers that humbleness is “the supreme
consciousness and living of the divine infinity and personal smallness.”339 He concludes:
Humbleness is in fact a come back of our nature to the state of being a window of infinity and
of being an empty room meant to be filled with the divine light. The window in fact does not
exist for itself, and the room to which God is sending the light doe s not see anything without
the light. In the same way, man, only accepting this role to be nothing else than a reflector and
receiver of the divine light has a great destiny, that of living with the infinity.340

Ninth, in the process of puri fication comes the state of no vices , as the culmination of
the progress through virtues. For someone in this state, says Stăniloae the vices are not, “an
ontological impossibility, as for God. Rather they are a moral impossibility …a freedom from
all vice s and the possession of all virtues.”341
The tenth point342 as preparation for the process of purification, is failure, shame and
despair. Stăniloae speaks of the disillusion consequent to the vices that could open “the spirit
to the truth,” and c onsequently there is the possibility of a “awakening of conscience, that

339 Ibid., 145 -149.
340 Ibid., 150.
341 Ibid., 150 -152.
342 In the one volume called Ascetica și Mistica (IBMBOR, 1992) this tenth step does not appear. In the
two volumes called Ascetica și Mistica (Deisis, 1993) this tenth step closes the process of purification.

92
could lead to the starting point towards freedom.” But with the revelation of sin, says
Stăniloae, comes shame, as on one hand “a warning from God,” and on the other hand, “an
instinc tive reaction of the soul.” 343 Stăniloae concludes:
Shame not only punishes for the past sins, rather it equips one against future sins… Its pain on
one hand followed sin is in remembering, on the other hand it burns sin, keeping it in memory
as a abomination .344

Illumination
The second stage in spiritual life, Stăniloae considers is that of illuminat ion, when the
gifts of the Spirit received in the sacrament of Chrismation, are seen fully after full
purification, through all the virtues. To be sure the Holy Spirit is at work in all the process and
Stăniloae distinguishes between the power of the Spiri t in the process of purification and the
light of the Spirit that comes at the end of the purification process. 345
Stăniloae follows the classical number of seven gifts of the Spirit, connecting the first t wo
with the process of purification and the last five with the process of illumination.346 For
Stăniloae the journey mediated by the gifts of the Spirit is a progressive journey from a partial
knowledge toward a more and more profound knowle dge of God, namely, the knowledge
through the Spirit and in the Spirit that opens the possibility of seeing the hidden reasons of
human beings and their destiny. Moreover, this adequate and true knowledge about yourself is
followed by the profound knowledg e of God within the created order, and consequently an
understanding of the divine design for the world, and the reasons “hidden in the things” by
God the Creator, an awareness of the “structure as symbol of the world.” 347 Stăniloae affirms

343 Stăniloae, Ascetica si Mistica , 1: Ascetica (Alba Iulia: Deisis, 1993), 194 -196.
344 Ibid., 196.
345 Stăniloae, Ascetica si Mistica (1992), 157 -158.
346 Ibid., 158 -159. The seven gifts of the Spirit in Stăniloae’s view are the gifts of fear, of strength, of
advice, of science, of knowledge, of understanding, of wis dom. The classic list of the gifts of the Spirit is
drawn from Isaiah 11:2 -3. See in this regard, D.S. Dockery, „Fruit of the Spirit,” in Dictionary of Paul and his
Letters , Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, Daniel G..Reid (Eds) (Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 317.
347 Stăniloae, Ascetica si Mistica (1992), 160 -167. For Stăniloae knowledge in the Spirit makes possible
a turning inside to the spirit and therefore knowledge in the Spirit.

93
two reasons for the creation of the world, reasons that become clear in this process of
simultaneo us illumination (in the Spirit and through the Spirit):
This is the meaning of the world as a road to God. The existence of the world, proves itself to
have besides other meanings, that of exercising the powers of our soul in our ascent towards
God 348

In fact Stăniloae affirms that the first step in the ascent of illumination is that of the
spiritual understanding of the world, and of its reasons, a knowledge that is not “an irrational
act, rather one that is supra -rational,” meaning not r educing reason to silence, rather it means
to transcend reason, having as a base the intuitive knowledge in which is involved the reason
that is exercised in knowing and doing. Because there is an objective truth attached to every
thing, a deed, says Stăni loae, is rational only if is in congruence with the reason it serves,
otherwise it is irrational. This is the tension a human being faces, because the tendency of the
fallen nature is towards the fulfillment of the irrational egoistic desires of the ego, a nd in the
process, reason is disturbed as it is forced to find fabricated reasons for these egoistic actions.
The necessary thing, says Stăniloae, is to replace the subjective reasons produced by the
egoistic nature, with the objective one of the purified nature, in order to hope for a healthy
development in connection with the universal truth that is “beyond our subjective truths.”349
In Stăniloae’s words:
This exit from yourself in objectivity in order to refind the truth and to practice it as something
proper to the most subjectivity of your own, or better say, with this integral identification of
the self with the objective logos, means at the same time, an exit from isolation and entrance
into the universal, in relation with the Person who encompasses everything…This is the reason
why we can speak of a threefold knowledge of the Logos: in nature, in Scripture and in His
individual human body.350

The illumination process consists in the inner illumination of your own stat us and of
the meaning of created order, and also, in the spiritual illumination of the Scriptures, meaning
to understand the “living words” through the written words of the Scriptures, which is in its

348 Ibid., 168 -169.
349 Ibid., 169 -172.
350 Ibid., 174 -182.

94
turn a symbol, a medium that reflects the “infinite dep ths of the spiritual meanings
communicated by God as Persons.” The spiritual understanding of Scriptures is for Stăniloae
available to persons who have the Spirit in them and are reading the Scriptures through the
Spirit. Stăniloae considers that is the sa me light of the Spirit that illumines the interior of the
being and the meaning of the Scriptures, that has the role to help us in our ascend towards the
infinity of God. This is the why Scriptures are actualized in a personal address by the Spirit, in
discovering new actual meanings that are in harmony with its old meanings.351 Stăniloae
concludes:
For the spiritual man, in the depths of Scriptures, of nature and of creation’ s development in
time, is present and active the same Spirit that is present and active in man’s interior,
sustaining his efforts of purification and illuminating all the things around him to become
transparent symbols of divinity.352

At this stage of entering into the reality of the transparent symbols of divinity, the
ascent of illumination is expressed in pure prayer that is an “ecstasy of the interior silence.”
Stăniloae considers that prayer itself has different qualitative stages that are intimately
connected with the stages of spiritual ascend, from the “inferior prayer that asks for material
goods” to the superior prayer characterized by a more and more profound concentration and a
transcendence of all images and objects, the mi nd becoming full with the reality of God.
The coordinates of such prayer consist not only in emptying of the mind and filling it
with the divine reality, a returning says Stăniloae “of the mind in the heart,” the heart being
the superior dimension of the s oul, where, says Stăniloae, “Christ has been hidden from the
time of Baptism.”353 Therefore, a returning of the mind from external objects and
preoccupation to an inner place (the heart) where Christ lives is for Stăniloae the essence of
pure prayer as mediator of a different and superior knowledge of God:

351 Ibid., 183 -188.
352 Ibid., 188.
353 Ibid., 211 -216..

95
Pure prayer or mental prayer does not mediate a knowledge of God through beings but through
the depth of our own soul, through “the heart.” This means actually to sense Him directly, for
man forgets even the heart when collected in it, he feels himself in the presence of Jesus
Christ, in the atmosphere of the heavenly Kingdom, found in his interior.354

Stăniloae differentiates between mind and reason, considering the mind a s being the
personal subject and the reason the source of concepts. The human mind is the image of the
Father (the divine nous ), and human reason is the image of the eternal Logos emanating
eternally from the Father. From here he continues by arguing the necessity of transcending all
objects (all things that could be defined through reason) to get to our own interiority in order
to understand God, an understanding that is not a comprehension, rather it is a revelation of
divine reality. The mind entering t he heart, says Stăniloae, and therefore contemplating itself,
becomes a mirror in which is contemplated God. This experience says Stăniloae, is possible
only when this disconnection from the worldly things, that is the returning of the mind into
the heart, happens, and also, equally important because the heart is filled with the presence of
Christ, from baptism, kept totally safe by Him.355 He concludes:
In reality the subject returning towards himself does not find only himself, and this ex perience
excludes the distance and also the identification with God. Exactly when we put off the clothes
of the created world, expecting to contemplate our own subject revealed (  s s) and to
experience the feeling of full sovereignty, we realize tha t we are facing a power whose
authority over us reveals itself more mightily and more overwhelmingly than the authority of
the world…Arriving at our own pure intimacy, we experience the infinite but personal
presence of God…356

There is then , a last step in the ascend of illumination, following the transcendence of
the outside objects, and the transcendence of our own subject, and that is the experience of the
love of God, as a form of knowledge that will not be achieved through the “direct p ersonal
subject and the indirect divine object,” but rather is the seeing of the revealed light of God,
that is love.357 This is the first step into the third stage of a spiritual life that is union with
God.

354 Ibid., 216.
355 Ibid., 239 -242.
356 Ibid., 244.
357 Ibid., 252.

96
Union with God
The third stage of spiritual life, considers Stăniloae is that of union with God, which
one can get through pure prayer, a union that is beyond pure prayer, being the pure love that
could not come from man himself but from God. Love for Stăn iloae is the confirmation of
purification, for the vices are an expression of egoism that is the opposite of love.358
Also for Stăniloae, love is the answer coming from God to the pure prayer coming
from man, and this love is actually one of God’s uncreated divine energy,359 and as such is the
one that roots the love of people, that is “the fruit of the love of God.” Moreover the love from
God is for Stăniloae the factor of perfect union for people. The model of this love between
God and man is the perichoretical one and Stăniloae speaks of love without dissolution “as
free subjects,” without separation, and with a communication of energies.
This communication is not unidirectional, from God to man, rather it is bidirectional,
including communication from man to God, a communication of God’s love that was
appropriated by the human being as personal subject, that is in the process of transformation
in the likeness of the Person whose love he experiences.360 Stăniloae reflects again the
perichoretical love of divine persons, as a model for human love:
So, love is realized when two subjects meet in a full mutual experience, in their quality as
subjects, so without mutual reduction to the status of objects, but discovering at maximum, as
subjects, but in spite of that, mutually self -giving into total free dom.361

For Stăniloae, love is not only the supreme union and mutual promotion but also a supreme
kind of knowledge, a knowledge that cannot be contained in concepts.362
Stăniloae admits that the stages of spiritual life cannot be separated except for
methodological reasons, when in fact the reality of such a life is that we are not in an

358 Ibid., 254 -255.
359 Ibid., 255 -256. Stăniloae is in agreement with the Palamite tradition that considers that participation
in the life of the Trinity is possible in the divine uncreated energies, coming from the triune activity, not shari ng
the being as the three Persons share. See also Meyendorff, A Study of Gregory Palamas, 202.
360 Stăniloae, Ascetica si Mistica (1992), 256 -261
361 Ibid., 266.
362 Ibid., 266 -267.

97
uninterrupted ascend, as we go back many times to inferior steps in the ascend, because of our
weakness and the limitations of human na ture. But recovery towards the superior steps of
ascent is easier as we keep the experience of them in our life. Also for him, love is possible in
human communities and communion because of God who is “the spring of such plenary
love…” Stăniloae argues the unifying role of love in inter -human relationships, a love that
facilitates union with God and as such union with others. For Stăniloae the way towards the
reality of union through love is that of practicing the love of people which is a constant
separati on from the egoistic way of living, and as such it is a “strengthening of the sentiment
of our union with them and with God.” 363
For Stăniloae the b est expression of the convergence between love from God and love
for people is life in the home, the reality that is inhabited by the loved one. But “the house” is
the mirroring of God’s House that is His heart in which all people meet unified by His love ,
this being the “most superior and the purest structure of love” in whose image Moses was to
build the tent, and later was to be built the Temple and then the Church.364
Stăniloae insists on the fact that the experience of God is like li ght, and the danger is
that in the replacement of this light of God with concepts of God, and the transformation of
those in the reality of God, that is idolatry. The light that is the experience of God, says
Stăniloae is not “a plain uniformity or lighten ing chaos, rather it is an implicit fullness. 365
This is the why when Stăniloae speaks about the structure of love he does not refer to a
concept, rather he refers to a spiritual reality:
This is the way the loving relationship is struct ured between him and light, or this is the form
taken by his experience. As he is progressing more and more in light, he feels that he
progresses in a holy temple, in a loving intimacy, but that there remains in it eternally a hidden
depth from where all t he light, all the love start as a mysterious infinite, that make possible an
infinite progress of our knowledge, of love between Christ and us.366

363 Ibid., 269 -274. Also , John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent (New York: Paulist Press, 1982).
364 Ibid., 275 -276.
365 Ibid., 294 -297.
366 Ibid., 298.

98
Moreover, this structure of love means intimacy with the reality of “the tent that is not
made by human hands; that is Christ who is also the “Church not made by hands,” the reality
that fulfils and encompasses everything. This the “greater and more perfect tabernacle” in
which Holly’s of Holies Christ entered. IT means in fact, says Stăniloae, the divinity in which
Christ fully entered as man, being our Forerunner, “in which all were created.” 367
Coming to the humans, Stăniloae sta tes that our soul and body in the totality they
represent constitute the “lower tabernacle” made in the image of the “upper tabernacle” that is
the divine Logos. Here steams the reason for the Son’s incarnation, in which the light of the
“upper tabernacle” flooded the “lower tabernacle” of the humanity who had become
darkened.
Moreover, in His resurrection and ascension and in our participation in them is the
“recollection of all in Him…a coming home,” of humanity, that constitutes itself in a “spiritual
structure” that models the entire progress of “ eternity’s pilgrims.” Therefore, in this
continuous process of purification, illumination and union by seeing the divine light, the
believer, says Stăniloae, becomes transparent and spiritualized, being filled with love for God
whose heat transforms in light, having at the same time its spring in the work of the Holy
Spirit.” 368
Finally, for Stăniloae at the end of the process the full spiritualization of humans is
possible through “ divine penetration of man by God,” called theosis or deification, through
divine energies.369 Stăniloae concludes:
Divine energies are nothing else than rays of the divine being shining from the three divine
Persons. And since the Word of G od was incarnated, these rays irradiate through His human
face. On the other hand, it could be said that the entities of the world are images of divine
Logos’ reasons, which are in the same time energies. Through creation God put a part of His
infinite pos sibility of thought and work in existence, in specific form at the level of human

367 Ibid., 299 -300. Stăniloae quotes the text in Heb 9: 11 -12 corroborating it with 2 Co 5: 4, 12: 4 and
with Col 1: 16
368 Ibid., 300 -307.
369 Ibid., 309, 317

99
understanding and work, in order to realize with men a dialogue in which they will ascend
more and more towards the likeness with God and towards union with Him.370

5. 4. Summary of Chapter 5

I have aimed to explore in this chapters the way in which Stăniloae consistently
working in concentric circles develops his theology of spirituality as actualization of
Christological -Pneumatological convergence. I have argued that one of th e characteristics of
Stăniloae’s view of spirituality is its cruciformity. He argues the universal imprint of the cross
on three realities of humanity, namely, the world, relationships and pleasures of life. From
here we observed the preoccupation of St ăniloae to distinguesh between the innocent
suffering that of Christ, and human suffering that is rooted always in the mixture between
innocence and ones own quilt. Stăniloae continues by showing the way the three realities on
which God imprinted the cross, corespond three meaningns of such imprint of the cross,
namely, the revelation of God’s transcendence over the gifts that he offers to the world , the
revelation of God’s sovereignty that provides an understanding of God’s uniqueness, and the
revelation of the true love for God as Person, despite the presence or absence of His gifts.
From the centrality of the cross for Stăniloae’s view of spirituality, I have aimed to
explore the telos , the foundation and the way of Christian Spirituality. In this rega rd the telos
of Christian spirituality is the union of a believer with God in Christ, through the work of the
Spirit. This union with God has not only a vertical dimension, but is expressed in a horizontal
dimension, that of a believer’s responsibility in regard to the created order. The fact that
spirituality is union with God, in Christ, through the Holy Spirit, is for Stăniloae the reason
why the Holy Trinity is the foundation for Christian spirituality, and the way of this union is
Christ. For Stăniloae the Christological character of Christian spirituality is completed its

370 Ibid., 319 . See also, Stăniloae, The Faces of Our Fellow Human Being,” in International Review of
Mission , 1982, 29 -35. Also, Stăniloae, “Image, Likeness, and deification in the human person,” in Communio ,
13/1986, 72.

100
pneumatological character. If baptism and Eucharist are the elements of Christ’s
contemporaneity with us and the force for our ascent in union with God, the Holy Spirit is the
one who brings us into the space where communion with Christ is possible, namely, the
Church.
Eventually, I aimed to explore the stages of Christian spirituality in Stăniloae’s view,
namely, purification, illumination and union. From the diagnosis, the descript ion and the
features of vices, Stăniloae continues by saying that purification from them is not simply their
elimination through ascetical efforts; rather it happens by the replacement of vices with the
virtues. The second stage is that of illumination , when the gifts of the Spirit received in the
sacrament of Chrismation, are seen fully after full purification, through all the virtues. For
Stăniloae the journey mediated by the gifts of the Spirit is a progressive journey from a partial
knowledge towar d more and more profound knowledge of God, namely, the knowledge
through the Spirit and in the Spirit, a spiritual illumination that mediates the spiritual
understanding of Scriptures and of the meaning of created order. At this stage of entering into
the reality of the transparent symbols of divinity, the ascent of illumination is expressed in
pure prayer that is an ecstasy of the interior silence. There is then, a last step in the ascend of
illumination, the experience of the love of God, as a form of kno wledge that is the seeing of
the revealed light of God, that is love. This is the first step into the third stage of a spiritual
life that is union with God which one can get through pure prayer, a union that is beyond pure
prayer, being the pure love that could not come from man himself but from God. Finally, for
Stăniloae at the end of the process the full spiritualization of humans is possible through
divine penetration of man by God.

101
Part Two: The Dynamic of Spiritual Journey in Paul Fiddes’ Theology

In part 1 of the present project I aimed to explore the reasons why Dumitru Stăniloae
could be considered the entrance door for enhancing the conversation between Baptists and
Orthodox in contemporary Romania. I believe that I proved the fact that Stăniloae is a proper
partner for this conversation as a systematic, Trinitarian and ecumenical theologian.
The aim of part 2 of the present project is to show the reasons why Fiddes could be
considered a valuable Baptist partner f or a theological conversation with the Orthodox
theologian Dumitru Stăniloae, on the subjects of baptism, Eucharist and spirituality, as
essential elements of the life long spiritual journey. Therefore, in chapter 6, I will explore the
place of Paul Fiddes within the Baptist world, as well as the dominant influences on Fiddes’
spirituality and theology. In this context then, I will explore the way Fiddes’ view of theology
was built by the development of his understanding of God’s relation with the world and of his
understanding of the dynamics of salvation.
In this framework in chapter 7, I will explore Fiddes’ theology of participation in his
thought about Baptism, trying to see the way Trinitarian participation roots human
participation, the place of bap tism in the process of Christian initiation, in the context of
Fiddes’ theology of participation. In chapter 8, I will explore the way Fiddes’ perichoretical
theology roots his thought about Eucharist, as essential part of the life long spiritual journey.
In the last chapter of part 2, chapter 9, I will explore the way Fiddes’ covenantal theology is
reflected in his thought about spirituality , as a life long reality.

102
Chapter 6. Paul Fiddes’ Spiritual Journey
6.1. Place of Paul Fiddes within the Baptist World

Paul Stuart Fiddes ( born in 30 April 1947), is considered today, one of the most
important Baptist theologians . He started his education in Oxford at Dayton Manor Grammar
School, and b ecause of his early preoccupation with the relation between theology and
literature he decided to focus his studies on Literature and Theology. In 1976 after completing
his doctoral dissertation he spends a year in Germany, fo r a post -doctoral study at the
Eberhard Karls University of Tubingen where he studied with Jurgen Moltmann and Eberhard
Jungel.
After he was ordained as a Baptist minister in 1972, he became in 1975 Fellow and
Tutor in Christian Doctrine at Regent’s Park College in Oxford , being also the Principal of
this institution between 1989 and 2007.371 He was the chairman of the Board of Oxford
Theological Faculty, becoming also in 2002 Professor of Systematic Th eology in the
University of Oxford. His recognition as one of the leading scholars in the fields of theology
and literature was endorsed in 2004 with his election as Honorary Fellow of St Peter's College
in Oxford .372 Also i n 2004 he became an Honorary Doctor of Divinity of the University of
Bucharest and in 2007 Principal Emeritus , Professorial Research Fellow, and Director of
Research, at the Regent’s Park College in Oxford.373
Fiddes’ worldwide recognition as a leading Baptist theologian could be seen also in
the way his scholarship is valorised today, by important i nstitutions. Therefore, he is a
member of the editorial board of Ecclesiology,374 The Journal for Ministry, Mission and
Unity , a consultant editor for Studies in Baptist History and Thought , published by Paternoster
Press, and a series editor of New Critical Thinking in Religion, Theology and Biblical Studies .

371 Pail Fiddes. Contributors , Eclessiology (2011), Vol. 7 Issue 2, p. 137 -139, 137.
372 Ibid., 137.
373 Bill J. Leonard, Baptist Ways: A History (USA: Judson Press, 2003), 374.
374 Paul S. Fiddes, Editorial/Ecclesiology (2012, Vol. 8, Issue 2, p. 153 -161, 153.

103
He is also general e ditor of the Regent's Study Guides Series . Also, Fiddes is a member of
ecum enical study commissions of Churches Together in Britain and Ireland , chairman of the
Doctrine and Worship Committee of the Baptist Union of Great Britain , convenor of the
Division for Theology and Education of the European Baptist Federation , and vice c hair of
the Baptist Doctrine and Inter -Church Cooperation Study Commission of the Baptist World
Alliance. Fiddes is also an Ecumenical Representative to the General Synod of the Church of
England .
Another reason for Fiddes ’ worldwide recognition as one of the most important
Baptist theologians today is his significant volume of writings. Until 2013 Fiddes wrote a
number of 11 books,375 a significant number of chapters in books, an important number of
papers in academic journals, as well as a number of publications as editor.376 From a look on

375 Paul S. Fiddes, Charismatic Renewal: a Baptist View: A Report Received by the Baptist Union
Council with Commentary (London: Baptist Publications, 1980); A Leading Question: The Structure and
Authority of Leadership in the Local Church (London: Baptist Publications, 1986); The Creative Suffering of God
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988); Past Event and Present Salvation: the Christian Idea of Atonement (London:
Darton, Longman, & Todd, 1989); The Trinity in Worship and Preaching (London: London Baptist Preachers'
Association, 1991); Freedom and Limit: a Dialogue between Literature and Christian Doctr ine (Basingstoke:
Macmillan, 1991); Participating in God: A Pastoral Doctrine of the Trinity (London: Darton, Longman, &
Todd, 2000); The Promised End: Eschatology Theology and Literature (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000); Tracks and
Traces: Baptist Identity in Ch urch and Theology (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2003); Seeing the World and Knowing
God: Hebrew Wisdom and Christian Doctrine in a Late -Modern Context (Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2013).
376 Paul Fiddes, "The Theology of the Charismatic Movement," in Martin, David; Mullen, Peter
(Eds), Strange Gifts? A Guide to Charismatic Renewal ( Oxford: Blac kwell, 1984), 19–40; "Covenant – Old and
New," in Clements, Keith; Paul Fiddes, Roger Hayden, Brian Haymes, Richard Kidd (Eds), Bound to Love: The
Covenant Basis of Baptist Life and Mission (London: Baptist Union (1985), 9–23; "The Understanding of
Salvati on in the Baptist Tradition," in Hollenweger, Walter J (Eds), For Us and for Our Salvation: Seven
Perspectives on Christian Soteriology (Utrecht: Interuniversitair Instituut voor Missiologie en Oecumenica,
1994), 15 –37; "C.S. Lewis the Myth -maker" in Walker, Andrew; James Patrick (Eds). A Christian for All
Christians: Essays in Honour of C.S. Lewis (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1990), 132–55 (Reprinted
as Rumours of Heaven: Essays in Celebration of C.S. Lewis (Guildford: Eagle, 1998); "The Status of Wom en in
the Thought of Karl Barth" in Soskice, Janet Martin,(Eds), After Eve ( London: Marshall Pickering. 1990), 138 –
55; "Where Shall Wisdom be Found?' Job 28 as a Riddle for Ancient and Modern Readers" in Barton, John;
Reimer, David (Eds). After the Exile, Essays in Honour of Rex Mason ( Macon, Georgia: Mercer University
Press; 1996); "Facing the End: The Apocalyptic Experience in Some Modern Novels" in Colwell, John (Eds),
Called to One Hope: Perspectives on the Life to Come (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2000), 191–209; "Story and
Possibility: Reflections on the Last Scenes of the Fourth Gospel and Shakespeare's The Tempest" in Sauter,
Gerhard; Barton, John (Eds), Revelation and Story: Narrative theology and the Centrality of Story ( Aldershot:
Ashgate, 2000), 29 –52; "The Story and the Stories: Revelation and the Challenge of Postmodern Culture"
in Fiddes, Paul(Ed), Faith in the Centre: Christianity and Culture ( Oxford: Regent's Park College, 2001), 75 –96
(also published by Smyth & Helwys, 2001); "Creation out of Lov e" in Polkinghorne, John (Ed), The Work of

104
Fiddes ’ impressive bibliography one could have a glimpse to the interdisciplinary
characteristic of Fiddes’ scholarship as well as to the vast range of subjects that his theology

Love: Creation as Kenosis ( Grand Rapids, Michigan and Cambridge: W.B. Eerdmans, 2001), 167 –91 (also
published by SPCK 2001); "Millenium and Utopia: Images of a Fuller Presence" in Rowland, Christopher;
Barton, Joh n (Eds), Apocalyptic in History and Tradition. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha,
Supplement Series ( London: Sheffield Academic Press. 2002), 7 –25; "Baptism and the Process of Christian
Initiation" in Porter, Stanley E.; Cross, Anthony R(Eds), Dimensions of Baptism: Biblical and Theological
Studies (London: Sheffield Academic Press. 2002), 280 –303; "The Quest for a Place Which Is 'Not -a-place': The
Hiddenness of God and the Presence of God," in Davies, Oliver; Turner, Denys (Eds), Silence and the Word:
Negative Theology and Incarnation (Cambridge University Press, 2002), 35–60; "The Canon as Space and
Place" in Wolter, Michael(Ed); Die Einheit der Schrift und die Vielfalt des Kanons (The Unity of Scripture and
the Diversity of the Canon). Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der
älteren Kirche, Bd. 118 (Berlin: W. de Gruyter. 2003), 127 –49; "Baptism and Membership of the Body of
Christ: A Theological and Ecumenical Conundrum" in Lybæk, Lena; Geldbach , Erich; Raiser, Konrad et
al(Eds); Gemeinschaft der Kirchen und gesellschaftliche Verantwortung: die Würde des Anderen und das Recht
anders zu denken: Festschrift für Professor Dr. Erich Geldbach. Ökumenische Studien 30. Münster: LIT Verlag.
2004), 89–93; "On God the Incomparable: Thinking about God with John Macquarrie" in Morgan, Robert, ed. ()
in Search of Humanity and Deity: A Celebration of John Macquarrie's Theology (London: SCM. 2006), 179 –99;
"When Text Becomes Voice: 'You've Got Mail'" in Fiddes, Paul (Ed), Flickering Images: Theology and Film in
Dialogue (Oxford: Regent's Park College, 2006), 97–112. (Also published by Smyth & Helwys, Georgia, 2006.)
"Baptism of Believers" in Best, Thomas F (Ed), Baptism Today: Understanding, Practice, Ecumenical
Implications (Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press. 2008), 73 –80; "Ex Opere Operato: Rethinking a Historic
Baptist Rejection" in Cross, Anthony R.; Thompson, Philip E (Eds), Baptist Sacramentalism 2 (Milton Keynes:
Paternoster2008), 219 –238; "Spiritu ality as Attentiveness: Stillness and Journey" in Fiddes, Paul S (Ed), Under
the Rule of Christ: Dimensions of Baptist Spirituality, Regent's study guides 14. Macon, Georgia: Smyth &
Helwys. 2008), 25–58; "Christianity, Culture and Education: A Baptist Pe rspective" in Ward, Roger; Gushee,
David P (Eds), The Scholarly Vocation and the Baptist Academy: Essays on the Future of Baptist Higher
Education (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 2008); "Something Will Come of Nothing: On A
Theology of the Dark S ide" in Lalleman, Peter J (Ed), Challenging to Change: Dialogues with a Radical Baptist
Theologian: Essays Presented to Dr. Nigel G. Wright on His Sixtieth Birthday (London: Spurgeon's College,
2009); "Daniel Turner and a Theology of the Church Universal" i n Briggs, John H. Y (Ed), Pulpit and People:
Studies in Eighteenth Century Baptist Life and Thought. Studies in Baptist History and Thought 28 (Carlisle:
Paternoster, 2009), 112 –27; "The Body as Site of Continuity and Change" in Anderson, Pamela Sue(Ed), New
Topics in Feminist Philosophy of Religion: Contestations and Transcendence Incarnate (New York: Springer,
2009), 261 –77; "Church and Sect: Cross -currents in Early Baptist Life" in Cross, A. R.; Woods, N. J (Eds),
Exploring Baptist Origins (Oxford: Rege nt's Park College, 2010); "On Theology" in MacSwain, Robert; Ward,
Michael (Eds). The Cambridge Companion to C. S. Lewis. Cambridge Companions to Religion (Cambridge
University Press, 2010); "Dual Citizenship in Athens and Jerusalem: The Place of the Chris tian Scholar in the
Life of the Church" in Cross, Anthony R.; Gouldbourne, Ruth M. B (Eds), Questions of Identity: Essays in
Honour of Brian Haymes. Centre for Baptist History and Heritage Studies 6 (Oxford: Regent's Park College,
2011); "Process Theology" in McGrath, A. E.(Ed). The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Modern Christian Thought .
Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), 471–476; "Suffering, Divine" in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Modern Christian
Thought (Oxford: Blackwell. 1993. pp. 633–636; "Salvation" in Webster, John; Tanner, Kathryn; Torrance, Iain
(Eds), The Oxford Handbook to Systematic Theology (Oxford University Press. 2007), 176 –196; "The Passion
Story in Literature" in Hass, Andrew; Jasper, David; Jay, Elizabeth (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of English
Literat ure and Theology (Oxford University Press, 2007), 742 –759; "G. M. Hopkins" in Lemon, Rebecca;
Mason, Emma; Roberts, Jonathan et al (Eds), The Blackwell Companion to the Bible in English Literature .
(Chichester: Wiley -Blackwell, 2009), 563 –576; 'God and History', Baptist Quarterly 30 (1983), 85 -88;
„Woman's head is man": a doctrinal reflection upon a Pauline text', Baptist Quarterly 31.8 (1986), 370 -383;
„Baptism and the process of Christian initiation', The Ecumenical Review 54 (2002), 49 -65; „B aptist
ecclesiology: a response to David Carter's article review of Tracks and Traces' , Ecclesiology 1 (2005), 87 -100;
„Participating in the Trinity”, Perspectives in Religious Studies 33.3 (2006), 375 -91; 'The place of Christian
theology in the modern uni versity”, Baptist Quarterly 42.2.1 (2007), 71 -88; 'Learning from others: Baptists and
receptive ecumenism', Louvain Studies 33.1-2 (2008), 54 -73; „Concept, Image and Story in Systematic
Theology”, International Journal of Systematic Theology 11.1 (2009), 3 -23; "Ambiguities of the Future:
Theological Hints,” in ‘The Novels of Patrick Wh ite". Pacifica 23: 2010.281 –98; "Christian Doctrine and Free
Church Ecclesiology: Recent Developments among Baptists in the Southern United States". Ecclesiology 7 (2)
(2011), 195 –219.

105
and thought aim to explore. For sure a few characteristics of Fiddes spiritual and i ntellectual
journey could be detected, and these are the subject of the next section .
6.2. Fiddes’ Spiritual and Intellectual Journey

We have seen in the previous section that from his biographical data one could
understand th e way Paul Fiddes’ evolved in his academic career, an evolution that made him
to be a worldwide recognized Baptist theologian today. In this section I aim to explore some
of the influences of Fiddes’ spiritual and intellectual journey. These are in my opin ion
important because they are foundational for the features of Fiddes’ thought and theology.
One important influence that proves to be foundational not only for his academic
career but also for his spiritual and intellectual jo urney is that of the Oxford ecumenical ethos .
Or in Fiddes’ words describing it :
In my own situation, in Oxford, candidates are formed for Baptist ministry in a university
faculty, which includes not only a good number of Baptists, but members of the Unite d
Reformed and Methodist churches, Anglicans…Roman Catholic theologians…and a Greek
Orthodox bishop.377

Fiddes himself confesses that his personality was shaped by this ecumenical context in
Oxford, and he also believes that a multi -denominational rather than a non -denominational
setting is more appropriate for theology in university in England, in order to preserve the
necessary connection of theology with the life and mission of the church in society.378

377 Fiddes, „Theology and a Baptist Way of Community,” in Doing Theology in a Baptist Way , edited
by Paul Fiddes (Oxford: Withley Publications, 2000), 20 -21.
378 Fiddes, „Theology and a Baptist Way of Community,” 21. Fiddes says: For my own part I must say
that this ecumenical context has been a major influence in shaping my writings of Christian doctrine, while at the
same time it has sharpened my awareness of the distinctive features of Baptist life and witness, and has made me
more and not less a Baptist.” Interesting in this context the argument of David Tracy argues that there are „three
publics of theology: society, academy and church.” ( The Analogical Imagination: Chrisitan Theology and the
Culture of Pluralism (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1981), 3.) Also, Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the
Eastern Church (Cambridge: James Clarke & CO.LTD, 1973). Lossky arguing the inseparability between
mysticism and theology affirms that „if the mystical experience is a personal working out of the content of the
common faith, theology is an expression, for the profit of all, of that which can be experienced by everyone.”
(Ibid., 8 -9.) Also, Stăniloae, Revelation. He says that „theology is reflection upon the content of fa ith inherited
from that witness and initial living out of revelation which we possess in the Scripture and in apostolic tradition,”
(ibid., 84).

106
Another important influence that proved to be foundational for Fiddes’ spiritual and
intellectual journey is that of Protestant theology, starting with his post doctoral studies with
Eberhard Jungel, a leading German Lutheran theologian, and with Jurgen Moltmann, a
German Reformed theologian, both of them leading theologians of the University of
Tubingen, German y. The encounter with the two German theologians facilitated to Paul
Fiddes the encounter also with the theology of Friedrich Scleiermacher and with the theology
of Karl Barth, the later, a theologian that exercised a significant influence on the thought o f
the two German theologians, and whose theology became one of the most important
influences for Fiddes himself.
Under the influence of Jurgen Moltmann’s Trinitarian theology the doctrine of the
Trinity became paramount for Paul Fiddes. As well the importance of Patristic theology for
the contemporary theology became more and more acknowledged. Therefore, Fiddes starts his
construct of the theology of the Trinity by reminding us of the fact that from the beginning it
was the experience of the church in regard to the three persons of the Trinity that led to the
crystallization of the doctrine.379
He states from the beginning the relevance of the internal procession in the life of the
Trinity, as the basis for the triune persons’ processions in the world, and that an adequate
image of God is fundamental for the efficacy of the pastoral work of the church. 380 It is
therefore clear, in Fiddes’ approach that we can speak of a double influence, first of the
pastoral experience of the doctrine of God, and second, of the view of the triune God and the
participation in Him, on the way our pastoral practice is conceived.381
Fiddes considers that in the process of the development of the doctrine of the Trinity
there were four contributions that the patristic thinkers made to the understanding of the
dynamic of the life of the Trinity. First, is that of defining the Trinity as one essence in t hree

379 Fiddes, Participation in God , 5.
380 Ibid., 7.
381 Ibid., 8.

107
persons,382 and second, that of rooting the distinctiveness of the three persons in their
relationships w ith each other.383 The third contribution is that of affirmation of the freedom of
the personal God and also of the human persons,384 and the fourth is the affirmation of the
distinct identity and otherness of the three persons as having its meaning in their
relationships.385
From here Fiddes identifies “four pastoral concerns.” First , it is that of the
acknowledgement of the distance between the concept of person and the concept of
personage, namely the being and the roles that it embodies in relationship. Second, it is the
need for “balance between the integrity of the self and openn ess to others. Third, it is the
relation between dependence on others and independence from them, namely the relation
between relationship understood as mutuality, and relatedness understood as relating through
social roles, and, fourth concern is the need for balance between “unity and diversity.” 386
Fiddes considers that the idea of the imitation of God should be completed by the idea
of participation in God, 387 with its relevance for the experience o f God, and for pastoral work,
through an engagement in God’s relation, exemplified by Fiddes with two Trinitarian
practices, the sign of the cross and baptism. 388 Moreover, the engagement in God is the basis
for the engagement in community t hrough “perichoresis,” in personal relationships, by the
way of participation. 389

382 Ibid., 13.Also, Pelikan, The Christian Doctrine , 218. Also, Stephen R. Holmes, The Holy Trinity:
Understanding God’s Life (London: Paternoster Press, 2012). Holmes says referring to the Council of Nicea that
„The Son was confessed to be ‚fr om the ousia of the Father’; the council highlights an unusual word,
homoousios (of the same ousia), to describe the relation of Son and Father…” (Ibid., 87.)
383 Fiddes, Participation in God , 14. Holmes, resuming the Cappadocian Fathers’ (Basil the Great,
Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Naziansus) view of Trinity, insists that: „The Godhead is simple, and exists
thrice -over, in hypostases disting uished by relation of origin…This is Cappadocian Trinitarianism.” ( The Holy
Trinity , 116.)
384 Fiddes, Participation in God , 15.
385 Ibid., 16. Also, Zizioulas, Being as Communion , 17.
386 Fiddes, Participation in God , 19-25.
387 Ibid., 28 -29.
388 Ibid., 30 -34.
389 Ibid., 46 -50. Similarly Colin E. Gunton argues in the same line with Fiddes that the concept of
perichoresis as it „opens up all kinds of possibilities for thought…can be d eveloped to serve as an analogical
concept…the concept of perichoresis is of transcendental nature status, it must enable us..to explore whether

108
On these foundations Fiddes promotes what he calls an “ecclesiology of participation,
showing that the church is called to mirror the life of the Trinity. Th e deep involvement of the
three persons of the Trinity in the constitution and life of the church is argued by Fiddes, by
reminding the reader of three biblical metaphors of the church, namely, the body of Christ, the
temple of the Holy Spirit, and the peo ple of God. 390 He says:
The metaphor of the body begins with the Son, as the church is identified with Christ. The
image of the temple directs our attention first to the Spirit, indwelling the church. The image
of the people of God begins from a relationship to God the Father, Fa ther now not of one
nation alone but of all humankind.391

The influence of German theology, via Schleiermacher and Barth, is seen in the way
Fiddes underlines three features of theology in its vital connection with the life of the
church.392 First, following Schleiermacher,393 Fiddes considers that theology is shaped by the
experience of the community, in i ts practice mirroring the values of the Kingdom of God.394
The prese nce of the Kingdom in community, says Fiddes, is embodied in the unique rule of
Christ over the Church, a rule that in fact makes the Church as the body of Christ to be the
embodiment of episcopate , or general spiritual oversight of all over all, even thou gh this will
not exclude the ministry of an individual.395 Fiddes argues for a balance between the
“corporate and individ ual oversight,” in order to avoid disastrous disequilibrium in the life of
the church.396

reality is on all its levels ‚perichoretic,’ a dynamism of relatedness.” ( The One, The Three and the Many: Go d,
Creation and the Culture of Modernity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 993), 163 -165.)
390 Fiddes, Participation in God , 65-68.
391 Ibid., 70.
392 Here we have another meeting place between Fiddes and Stăniloae, as the second considers that
„Orthodox theology is a theology of spirituality and of communion, and inasmuch as it is theology of the
Church, it is at the same time a theology of the mystery of God’s activity in men and of the growth of men into
God.” (Stăniloae, Theology and the Churc h (Yonkers, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1981), 218.)
393 Friedrich Schleiermache r, Christian Faith (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1968), 88 -93.
394 Edward Schillebeeckx, Church: The Human Story of God (London: SCM Press, 1990), 116 -118. He
speaks of „Jesus’ praxis of the kingdom of God,” as the model for his followers. (Ibid., 116).
395 Speaking about the exercise of authority in the church, Jonathan Lamb argues „the model of
authority: the gentleness of Christ… the foundation for exercising authority: the gospel of Christ…the purpose of
authority: building up the body of Christ…the context of authority: a life like Christ’s,” ( Integrity: Leading with
God Watching (Nottingham: Inter -Varsity Press, 2006), 69 -74).
396 Fiddes, Theology and a Baptist Way of Community , 22.

109
Then, Fiddes analyzes the life of discipleship of the church, as expressed in baptismal
practice in which the be liever confesses his dedication to a life of participation in Christ. For
Fiddes this is connected with the prophetic ministry of the community that through its
confession of the Lordship of Christ over all, challenges the powers.397 Finally, Fiddes points
to the diakonia of all members of the community through the charismata given to all for all,
for assistance in the worship of God.398 The authority of Christ as the base for the mutual
pastoral ministry of the church, the discipleship life of the church and the togeth erness of the
worship of the church, are all dimensions of the experience of the church that shapes its
theology.
From the connection of theology with the experience of the community, Fiddes
continues with the connection of theology with the confession of the community. Fiddes
agrees with Karl Barth in affirming that theology “is the confession of the church in response
to God’s self -revelation.”399 From Barth, Fiddes understands the need of differentiation
betw een “the first -order theology that is church confession, and the second -order theology
that is an examination of the confession of the church.”400 Fiddes also notices th e distinction
between the confession and the creed of the church, the creeds being “seen as binding belief
and conscience,” and confessions as being “associated with the covenant” of members of a
community, without being a condition for “walking together.”401 Third, Fiddes connects
theology with the stories of the community. In this regard Fiddes, following McClendon’s
insight about the immediacy in which a community lives the biblical story, says that theology
is about “interaction of the story of scripture with the story of the community.”402

397 Ibid., 22. This confess ional dimension of baptism will be explored extensively in chapter 7 of the
present project.
398 Ibid., 23. This diakonal and charismatic dimensions of Christian life will be explored in chapter 9 of
the present project.
399 Ibid., 24. Also, Barth, CD 1/1 (2010), 4.
400 Fiddes, Theology and a Baptist Way of Community , 24. Also Barth CD 1/1 (2010), 71 -86.
401 Fiddes, Theology and a Baptist Way of Community , 24-25
402 Ibid., 26. Also, McClendon, Ethics , 31

110
Stating the Baptist way of doing theology as “a continual re -making, a collegiality, a
living in the bibli cal story, a g enerous pluralism. ”403 Fiddes affirms what he believes is the
central theme of Baptist theology, namely, the concept of the covenant,404 that intersects and
mirrors in the community life the characteristics of the eternal covenant of God with
humanity.405 Fiddes lists the three characteristics:
First it is God’s making peace with humanity, through the sacrifice of Christ; second it is
God’s agreement to take the Church as God’s own peopl e; and third…it is the agreed purpose
within the very triune life of God, the intention established between Father, Son and Spirit, to
create and redeem humanity.406

The concept of the covenant concludes Fiddes, roots the role of theology to “reflect”
the vital connection “between human community and divine communion.”407 Also, the
concept of covenant circumscribes the concern of theology with the “relat ion between divine
grace and human freewill,”408 and finally, it opens the possibility for theology to explore “the
theme of promise in society and fostering a renewal of mutual trust.”409 How the influences
explored above shaped the development of Fiddes’ theology will be explored in the next
section.

403 Fiddes, Theology and a Baptist Way of Community , 32, Also, McClendon, Ethics . McClendon in fact
defines theology as being: “ The discovery, understanding, and transformation of the conviction of a convictional
community including the discovery and critical revision of their relation to one another and to whatever else
there is.” (Ibid., 23.). Ivana Noble speaks of theology as a “triple critical reflection : Theology originates in
experience. In continuity with the patristic tradition, we can say that it is an experience of encounter with God,
and an experience of the believing community that, with all available help, strives to ho ld together orthodoxy
(the correct way of belief) and orthopraxis (the correct way of life). Theology reflects on that experience, and on
the tradition that the experience both initiates and continually challenges. Furthermore, this reflection is critical.
It means that theology not only collects data about the experiences but also examines the patterns or norms
implicit in the experiences and measures them against its own accumulated principles…Theology as a triple
critical reflection seeks, deciphers, and puts together traces of God in the transfiguration of human ways of
being.” ( Tracking God , 5, 14)
404 Fiddes, Theology and a Baptist Way of Commu nity, 32. Also, Nigel G. Wright, New Baptists, New
Agenda (London: Paternoster Press, 2002), 79.
405 Fiddes, Theology and a Baptist Way of Community , 33. Also, Barth, CD 4/1 , 22.
406 Fiddes, Theology and a Baptist Way of Community , 33.
407 Ibid., 34. Also, Alan J. Torrance, Persons in Communion: Trinitarian Description and Human
Participation (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996. Analyzing Moltmannian way of integrating doxology and theology,
Torrance affirms that „Christian worship shares in a human – Godward movement that belongs to God and
which takes place within the divine life. It is precisely into and within this that we are brought by the Spirit to
participate as a gift of grace,” (ibid., 314).
408 Fiddes, Theology and a Baptist Way of Community , 34.
409 Ibid., 35.

111
6.3. Fiddes Theology

For Paul Fiddes, God is not a reality disconnected fro m the world and the problems of
humanity. He starts the discussion of God’s relation with the world, the concept of the
suffering God. Fiddes points out the presuppositions of his theological construct of the
suffering God. First, the supremacy and univers ality of God’s suffering,410 second, the
particularity of God’s suffering in the cross of Christ411 and third, the entire suffering of the
world that is taken into God through the death of Christ.412
In Fiddes’ thought construct there are four answers to the question of the necessity for
believing in a suffering God. The first answer is connected with the meaning of the love of
God that cannot be conceived outside its relationship with the suffering of God for the loved
one, namely, hum anity.413 The second answer, in Fiddes’ thought is connected with the
central place of the cross,414 as it is “the most dense concentration of the suffering of God,”415
and also “the actualization in our history of what is eternally true of God’s nature.”416 Fiddes’
third answer is connected with human suffering, namely, the affirmation of God’s suffering
“with humanity.” 417 For Fiddes this ide a has two effects. First, it provides a consolation in
human suffering due to the fact that God “understands it from within,” and second, will
prevent any “theological argument of God directly causing suffering,” even though “he may
allow it.”418 Third, the idea of God’s suffering with the world will assure “credibility to a

410 Paul Fiddes, The Creative Suffering of God (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), 2.
411 Ibid., 3.
412 Ibid., 10. See also Jurgen Moltmann, The Crucified God: The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and
Criticism of Christian Theology (London: SCM Press, 1974). Moltmann argues that: „ In the passion of the Son,
the Father himself suffers the pains of abandonment. In the death of the Son, death comes upon Himself, and the
Father suffers the death of his Son in his love for forsaken men.” (Ibid., 192)
413 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 16.
414 Ibid., 25. See also, Stăniloae, The Victory of the Cross (Oxford: SLG Press, 2001), 1 -5. Here is one
of the meeting places of Fiddes with Stăniloae as the later is also arguing for the centrality of the cross in the
world, mirroring the innocent suffering of Christ.
415 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 10.
416 Ibid., 29.
417 Ibid., 31.
418 Ibid., 31 -32.

112
defense of the world as God’s creation.”419 The fourth answer to the question of why to
believe in a su ffering God is connected with the picture of the world today.420 For Fiddes “the
model of the world as organism” opens the possibility to speak of God as a “suffering God as
its creator and sustainer.”421 The presupposition for this possibility is explicated by Fiddes:
Through his work both in the cross and creation God can manifest himself as ‘the one who is
hidden in suffering’ and thus theology of nature and ‘theology from the Cross’ ought to join
hand s, though so far they hardly seem to have touched fingertips. There can also be an
integration between natural theology and existential theology which begins from reflection
upon human experience since both are concerned with forms of organic community.422

The second question that Paul Fiddes discusses is “How does God suffer?” The issue
in discussion is that of the change in God that the suffering seems to presuppose.423 Fiddes
discusses the concepts of God’s immutability and impassibility,424 on the coordinates of this
suffering as feeling and constraint. He is challenging the separability of feeling and constraint
in regard to God’s suffering, in traditional theology,425 considering that p erhaps the view of
‘an apathetic God’ makes apathetic believers.426

419 Ibid., 33.
420 Ibid., 37.
421 Ibid., 40.
422 Ibid., 39 -40.
423 Ibid., 46. The argument about a God who is not passible to the suffer ing of the humanity, in Fiddes’
thought, is a sample of engaging, as a Baptist in England, with Protestant -Anglican theology. See in that regard,
Thomas G. Weinandy, Does God Suffer? (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000). He says: „The passibility of God, was
first advocated within an English Anglican setting of nineteenth -century and early twentieth centuries. With the
demise of nineteenth -century optimism and in the face of the social suffering caused by the Industrial Revolution
and the agony of World War I, th e passibility of God found a cultural climate in which to sprout.” (Ibid., 2)
424 Constantin Galeriu, Jertfă si răscumpărare (București: Harisma, 1991). Speaking about God’ s
immutability he says that „God is immutable in the sense that he is absolute stability in good, truth, but not
immobility…he is unmoved, unchanged in his nature, but he is movement, is activity, as a living and vivifying
principle, as person,” 127.
425 Galeriu, Jertfă și răscumpărare , 19-20. Also Weinandy, Does God suffer? Weinandy is
summarizing the argument of the theologians who argue for the „passibility of God,” against the theologians
who argue the „impassibility of God:” „The static, self -sufficient, immutable, and impassible God of Platonic
thought, hijacked, via Phi lo and the early church Fathers, the living, personal, active, and passible God of the
Bible…The Fathers of the church too uncritically accepted the immutable and impassible God of the Greeks and
in so doing distorted the Christian God of revelation,” (i bid., 19, 20). See, also, Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian
Doctrine: A History of the Development of Doctrine: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100 -600)
(Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1971). Speaking about the relation of Greek phil osophy with
Patristic theology, in regard to God’s immutability, Pelikan says: „Whether theologians found Platonic
speculation compatible with the gospel or incompatible with it, they were agreed that the Christian
understanding of the relation between Cre ator and creature required‚ the concept of an entirely static God, with

113
Fiddes affirms the “unity of suffering and change” in God,427 discussing his
affirmat ion in conversation with Patristic and process theology in regard to the issues of
potentiality and actuality in God. Accordingly, he compares Aquinas and Hartshorne, and
considers that if Aquinas “forbids the movement of suffering in God because it is a m ovement
from potentiality to actuality,”428 for Hartshorne this movement is crucial. Fiddes concludes:
God grasps all potentialities and all actualities, but he does not grasp potentials as actuals. This
idea is basic to process theology, but it is also an insight which I believe is basic to any
assertion of the suffering of God…A suffering God is one who has potentialities within him
which he has not actua lized; only in this way we speak of God who suffers change in
suffering.429

The second layer of the discussion on the issue of potentiality and actuality is that of
the knowledge of God. Fiddes proposes a distinction between what “God knows perfectly in
potentiality, and what he knows perfectly in actuality as it happens.”430 In this way Fiddes
considers that we can describe the suffering love of God as a “pilgrimage of trust and risk,”
without which “there will not be reconciliation.”431 Moreover, in the context of creation
Fiddes affirms that God “creates one who is other than himself, a stranger of his being, and
goes on pilgrimage with him. The very act of creation is a kenotic event for God.”432 Fiddes is
opposed to the idea of imaginative sufferi ng that “suggests that God feels suffering, but is not
changed in any way at all,”433 the idea of the redemptive suffering, that suggests that God
is under constraint from suffering, but it has not power to overwhelm him because he has
freely chosen it as part of his being. He triumphs over suffering because he chooses it for a
purpose.434

eminent reality, in relation to an entirely fluent world, with deficient reality” – a concept that came into Christian
doctrine from Greek philosophy.” (Ibid., 53).
426 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 48. Also Dorothee Soelle, Suffering (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress
Press, 1975). She is arguing that the view of an apathetic God roots „the apathy Christian s practiced,” and the
fact that in the contemporary world of suffering „Christianity has become a stranger to pain.” (Ibid., 41).
427 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 49.
428 Ibid., 52. Also, Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964 -), 12:
9.1-2.
429 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 52.
430 Ibid., 55 . See also, Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine
(Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1994). He says: „God’s knowledge may be defined as follows: God fully knows
himself and all things actual and possible in one simple and ete rnal act.” (Ibid., 190).
431 Ibid., 56.
432 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 55.
433 Ibid., 58.
434 Ibid., 62.

114

Besides the affirmation of the unity between feeling and constraint, between
potentiality and actuality, and the affirmation of the freedom of Go d in choosing to suffer for
the world and with the world, Fiddes affirms also the unity of the will and nature of God,435
considering “that the key to divine suffering lies in God’s desire for fellowship beyond
himself.”436 Fiddes concludes:
If God suffers then he is changed by the world, and he can only be changed to become more
truly himself; but he opens himself to this suffering because he chooses mankind for
fellowship, and so chooses to be fulfilled through his creatio n. While this suffering love is a
matter of free choice of God, it is at the same time a desire in which there can be no question
of God’s not longing for our love.437

Speaking about the future of a suffering God,438 Fiddes brings the perspective of the
glory of God, namely the “fu lfilled desire” of God in regard to his desire for fellowship with
humanity. For God suffering means, in Fiddes’ opinion “the unfulfilled desire” in the present,

435 Ibid., 68.
436 Ibid., 71.
437 Ibid., 75. See also, John M. Frame, No Other God: A Response to Open -Theism (New Jersey: P&R
Publishing Company, 2001). Admitting that the Scripture speaks of a change in God’s attitude, Frame illustrates
the way this happens. He says: „When God ‚changes’ his attitude from wrath to favor, it is because the creature
has moved from the sphere o f Satan to the sphere of Christ,” (ibid.,171). Yet he continues to argue the fact that
„God is unchanging in his essential attributes ,” (ibid.,172) „is unchanging in his decretive will ,” and „is
unchanging in his covenant faithfulness ,” (ibid.,173). Also, Grudem, Systematic Theology . He differentiates
between the incommunicable attributes of God, namely, independence, unchangeableness, eternity,
omnipresence, and unity, (ibid.,150 -180). The communicable attributes of God in Grudem’s argument are
systematize d under three rubrics: Attributes Describing God’s being (spirituality, invisibility), Mental attributes
(knowledge (or omniscience), wisdom, truthfulness (and faithfulness), Moral attributes (goodness, love, mercy
(grace, patience), holiness, peace (or or der), righteousness (or justice), jealousy, wrath), Atrributes of Purpose
(will, freedom, omnipotence (or power, and sovereignty) and „Summary” Attributes” (perfection, blessedness,
beauty, glory), (ibid., 160 -221). He defines the unchangeableness of God, arguing that: „God is unchanging in
his being, perfections, purposes, and promises, yet God does act and feel emotions, and he acts and feels
differently in response to different situations. This attribute of God is also called God’s immutability,” (ibid.,
163). Grudem, as a Baptist theologian is influenced in his systematization of the attributes of God by the
Reformed theologian Louis Berkhof. See in this regard Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (London: The
Banner & Truth Trust, 1958). He speaks also of the incommunicable and communicable attributes of God, (ibid.,
57-81). For an Orthodox view see Stăniloae, The Experience of God: Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, vol 1.
Revelation and Knowledge of the Triune God (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1998 ). Stăniloae
speaks of super – essential attributes of God (infinity, simplicity, eternity, supraspatiality, and omnipotence) and
of spiritual attributes of God (omniscience, justice and mercy, holiness, goodness and love), (ibid., 141 -243). A
more detail ed analysis of Stăniloae’s view of God’s attributes and the way they root his theology of
participation, will be provided in chapter 4 of the present project .
438 Dorothee Soelle, Christ The Representative: An Essay in Theology after the „Death of God ”
(London: SCM Press, 1967). She argues in regard to the future of a suffering God that „In Christ God himself
left the immediacy of heaven, abandoned the security of home, for ever,” ( ibid., 141), and that ‘God has a future
in Christ,” “as“as Christ took over God’s role in the world, but in the process it was changed into the role of the
helpless God,” (ibid., 148,150).

115
for this fellowship with humanity,439 connected with H is protest against this present
situation.440 Fiddes also speaks of God’s defeat of suffering,441 through experiencing it in
present time, “redeeming the past and anticipating the future in a new harmony.”442 Fiddes
concl udes that instead of being fulfilled by the suffering in the world and with the world, God
is fulfilled by the fulfillment of his desire to bring humanity into fellowship with Him, even
though this could be realized through His suffering.443
Trying to answer the question of how God can suffer and remain God, Fid des, brings
in discussion Barth’s thought of the Trinity, comparing it with the thoughts of process
theology and of Jurgen Moltmann. Fiddes observes that Barth makes space for immutability
in God, in what is called immanent Trinity, as well as for mutabili ty in God in the economic
Trinity, preserving the unity of the Trinity by arguing “the whole Trinity in God himself, and
the whole Trinity in action in the world, in order to speak of the worldly suffering of both the
Father and Son”444 This Patristic principle of the indivisibility of the Trinity, that Barth
adopted, is the basis for the dialectic of impassibility and passibility of God:
God can immerse himself in the finite, God can suffer, God can die. The God who is
impassible in hi mself can also be passible in the world… God suffers in his divine being when
he takes on the ‘form of a servant’ in the world.445

439 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God, 85.
440 Ibid., 88.
441 Ibid., 100.
442 Ibid., 104.
443 Ibid., 109. Also, Clark Pinnock, „Systematic Theology,” in The Openness of God: A Biblical
Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God , Clarck Pinnock, Richard Rice, John Sanders, William
Hasker, David Basinger (eds) (Carliste, PA: Paternoster Press , 1994), 118. Pinock affirms that „The suffering or
pathos of God is a strong biblical theme…God suffers when there is a broken relationship between humanity and
himself.” (Ibid.)
444 Fiddes, Creative Su ffering of God, 115. Also, Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics IV/1, G.W.
Bromiley&T.F. Torrance (eds) (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Marketing, LLC, 2010). (henceforth
CD). Barth says: „Even in the form of a servant, which is the form of His presence and action in Jesus Christ, we
have to do with God Himself in His true deity. The humility in which he dwells and acts in Jesus Christ is not
alien to Him, but proper to Him…It is His sovereign grace that He wills to be and is amongst us in humility, our
God, God for us, as that which He is in Himself, in the most inward depth of His Godhead…The One who
reconciles the world with God is necessarily the One God Himself in His true Godhead,” (Ibid., 193). It is
interesting that this distinction in God between essence and work in Barth’s theology, that Fiddes detects, is
mirrored in the distinction of Stăniloae between „the being and the operations of God,” probably under the same
influence of Patristic theology. See in this regard also Stănilaoe, EG, 1 , 125.
445 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 115.

116
The process theologians, says Fiddes, assert that God “ suffers in his contingent nature,
but remains untouched by the world in his transcendent nature,”446 a separation in God that
makes room for a concept of “a dipolar God.”447 God is in process though t, “impassible
within himself, and supremely passible for us.”448 Fiddes’ own opinion in this regard is that a
Trinitarian understanding of “the personal analogy of God,” rather than a dipolar
understanding of God, proposed by process thought, avoids the danger of equating
“transcendence with immutability and impassibility,” with the consequence of “diminishing
the reality of suffering.”449
Commenting on Moltmann’s view of the unity between immanent and economic
Trinity,450 Fiddes acknowledges the similarity of Moltmann’s view with that of Rahner.451
The direct consequence of Moltmann’s view is that t he experience of economic Trinity is
experienced in the immanent Trinity.452 Moreover, to the Moltmannian view of the “social
analogy of the Trinity,” and his insistence on the “inter -personalness” 453 in the detriment of
the “persons as relations” of Augustine and Aquinas,454 Fiddes prefers the Barthia n view of
“persons in God as modes of being characterized by their mutual relationship,” 455 and the
reason for that preference is the fact that only in this way “to think of God as a complex
relationships,” including “our participation in God.”456 Moreover, Fiddes is arguing that the

446 Ibid., 124.
447 Ibid., Also, Weinandy, Does God suffer? , 23.
448 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 125.
449 Ibid., 131. See also, Bruce A. Ware, God’ s Lesser Glory: The Diminished God of Open Theism
(Illinois: CrossWay Books, 2000). He warns about the danger of an excessive immanentism and argues that even
though God „is intimately involved in the affairs of human history,” we should regard His immanen ce „from the
standpoint of undiminished and fully glorious transcendence,” (ibid., 141).
450 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 135. Also, Moltmann, The Crucified God: The Cr oss of Christ as
the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology (London: SCM Press, 1974), 240.
451 Rahner, The Trinity , 22.
452 Moltmann, The Crucified God , 241.
453 Fiddes, Creative Suff ering of God , 139. Also, Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom of God , 171,
174-178.
454 Augustine, The Civitate Dei , 11: 10. Also, Aquinas, Summa , 12: 40.
455 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God, 140. See also, Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics I/1 (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), 375, and Alan Torrance, „ The Trinity,” in The Cambridge Companion to Karl
Barth , John Webster (ed) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 81.
456 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God, 141.

117
Barthian concept of “God as event” described “in terms of personal relationship,”457 opens the
possibility for an understanding of God’s tra nscendence as “transcendent suffering not
transcendence beyond suffering.”458
For Fiddes, the concept of a suffering God is a corrective for what he calls “the
concept of a dominating God.”459 The power of God instead of being one of domination, is
according with Fiddes, that of “persuasive influence,”460 expressed through “the story,” and
“the situation” of a suffering God. The story of a suffering God, on one hand, is a story that
provides a meaningful perspective on human suffering, 461 and the situation of the suffering
God, on the other hand provides the possibility of inclusion of the human history of
suffering.462
Fiddes states that “the cross is ‘the moment when the distance separating Father and
Son has been widened to embrace the whole world,”463 and this inclusion of humanity “takes
form in forgiveness.”464 In this loving giving of himself, God opens the possibility of human
beings to “share in his own love of himself within the Trinity.”465
There are other two dimensions of the connection of God’s suffering in, for and with
the world. The first, in Fiddes’ thought is the experience of death and the second is the
experience of alienation. The experience of death for God is in Fiddes’ thought the experience

457 Ibid. , 142.
458 Ibid., 143.
459 Ibid., 145. Also, Sallie McFague, Models of God: Th eology for an Ecological, Nuclear Era
(Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1987), 63, 65. She speaks of a monarchical model of God and argues that „in
the monarchical model, God is distant from the world, relates only to the human world, and controls that wo rld
through domination and benevolence.”
460 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 146. Also, Fiddes, Participation in God: A Pastoral Doctrine of
the Trinity (London: Darton, Longman and Todd Ltd, 2000), 37.
461 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 147.
462 Ibid., 151. Also, Soelle is arguing that „God in the world has been, and still is , mocked and tortured,
burnt and gassed: that is the rock of the Christian faith which rests all its hope on God attaining his identity . In
this faith, Christians know that God is helpless and needs help. When the time was fulfilled, God had done
something for us for long enough. He put himself at risk, made himself dependent upon us, identified himself
with the non -identical. From now on, it is high time for us to do something for him …” ( Christ the
Representative , 151 -152).
463 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 151.
464 Ibid., 169.
465 Ibid., 171.

118
of “non -being,” in entering through the death of Christ in “human desolation and
estrangemen t.”466 The second dimension of the connection of God’s suffering with humanity
is the participatory aspect of suffering in the experience of alienation. The suffering of this
experience takes two forms. The first is that of God’s relation with creation and the second is
that of the inner life of God. Suffering in connection with the alienation of creation takes the
form of total identification with the creation that has as a consequence that God makes the
alienation of creation his own, through what could be called God’s kenosis .467 Fiddes
concludes that assuming death and alienation through Christ’s cross, God conquered death
and alienation generated by sin, through resurrection, opening the possibility of human
response. For Fiddes,
It is true that resurrection happens, overcoming death, because death has entered into the being
of God…by responding to the self -giving love displayed in God’s encounter with death, we
are enabled to co -operate with God in new possibilities for life which he eternally offers to
human personalities in t his life and the life to come.468

Paul Fiddes starts his journey of exploring the dynamics of salvation by a diagnosis of
the human condition. In his description of the human condition in relation to God, Fiddes
points out three elements that are in interdependence with each other. First, the ‘sense of
alienation and estrangement, translated in the expression of human beings as “lost,” second,
the “loss of potential” of human beings in fulfilling the purpose of God for them, and third,
the rebellion of human beings that takes the form of breaking down of the horizontal
relationship between human beings, and of the vertical relationship between humans and
God.469

466 Ibid., 205.
467 Ibid., 230. Also, Galeriu mentions the fact that the Russian Orthodox theologians „see in creation the
manifestation of the Trinity’s kenosis ,” (Jertfă și răscumpărare , 50).
468 Fiddes, Creative Suffering of God , 267.
469 Paul Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation: The Chri stian Idea of Atonement (London: Darton,
Longman & Todd Ltd, 1989), 6. Stăniloae argues the consequence in a fashion close to Fiddes: „Christian
teaching maintains that through the fall into sin, creation has changed from being a transparent means of love
between humans and God into what is now largely an opaque wall separating humans from one another, and all

119
Fiddes continues by naming the generic term that describes the human condition
circumscribed by the three elements of alienation, loss and rebellion, namely, sin. He also
analyzes the understandin g of this concept of sin and salvation in a historical perspective. He
affirms that if in the New Testament period, sin was seen as impurity and atonement “was
portrayed as sacrifice,” in the period of the Church Fathers, sin was seen as caused by the
hostility of negative powers and salvation was seen as rooted in Christ’s victory over “the
devil and the hostile powers.”470
Fiddes continues his analysis of the understanding of sin and atonement in a historical
perspective in the period from the early Church Fathers to the Enlightenment. The first period
under scrutiny is that of the centuries till the Middle Ages. In this period, due to the influence
of Platonism, the human condition in sin was regarded as roote d in the pressure and captivity
of the mortal body on the immortal soul, and salvation was regarded as renewal of “the image
of immortal God in the whole human being.”471 In the middle Ages, sin was regarded as
caused by “a disturbance of order ” imprinted by God into the world, and salvation was
regarded as a payment of the debt impossible to be paid by human beings.472 In the twelfth
century the cause of the human condition was “a loss of love,” consequently, salvation was
regarded a s returning human beings to love.”473 The Reformation saw the cause of the human
condition as rooted in breaking of the law given by God to humanity, and salvation was seen
as satisfaction of God’s Law.474 In the Enlightenment period the cause of the human
condition was seen as the failure to reach moral standards “to which the mind bore witness,
and salvation meant the change in human beings.”475 The last period to which Fiddes refers,
is that of modern times, where the cause o f the human condition is seen as the conflict

humans together from God .” (Stăniloae, The Experience of God , 2: The World: Creation and Deification
(Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2005), 198).
470 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation, 7.
471 Ibid., 7 -8.
472 Ibid., 8.
473 Ibid., 9.
474 Ibid..
475 Ibid 10.

120
between freedom and limitations that generate anxiety, and salvation is regarded as healing of
the fragmentation and alienation.476
From here Fiddes focuses his discussion on the vital connection between the past
event of the cross and the present reality of salvation. He starts by affirming that salvation
happens “here and now,” being a “continuous process,”477 and there are four reasons for that.
The first reason is the truth of salvat ion as restoration of relationships that involves healing,
and the response of human beings in the present is vital.478 The second reason is th e unity of
creation and redemption,479 as reflected in the permanent work of God in history to redeem
the creation,480 and expressed continuously in the meaning and elements of the Eucharistic
event.481
The third reason for the view of salvation as a continuous process is, in Fiddes’
opinion, the continual suffering of God for human beings.482 The dimensions of God’s
suffering are expressions for the acceptance of the cost of redemption of humankind, together
with God’s total identification with the estrangement of human beings, his being there with
and for human beings.483 The fourth reason for the present reality of salvation is the answer to
the proclamation of the cross that facilitates transformation in the present of humans’
thoughts, views and lifestyles in connection with God and the surrounding world.484

476 Ibid., 10 -11.
477 Ibid.,14.
478 Ibid., 14 -15. Also, David Peterson says: „Genuine repentance, however, is not simply a matter of
turing from evil with sorrow. It is a m atter of turning to God in Christ and placing one’s life under his rule and
control.” ( Possesed by God: A New Testament Theology of Sanctification and Holiness (Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995). 131.)
479 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation, 17.
480 Ibid., 19.
481 Ibid., 21.
482 Ibid., 22. Jon Sobrino, S.J, argues that „The Father suffers the death of his Son and takes upon
himself all the sorrow and pain of history. This ultimate solidarity with humanity reveals God as a God of love in
a real and credible way rather than in an idealistic way.” ( Christology at the Crossroads: A Latin American
Approach (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1978), 371.)
483 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation, 23.
484 Ibid., 24.

121
Stating the vital connection of the decisive act or event of the cross and the continual
process of the Spirit’s work of reconciliation,485 Fiddes considers that the starting point of
discussion about salvation, namely, the objective dimension of salvation, is to be located in
the past event of the cross, as an event that is the foundation of the subjective dimension of
salvation, that is its experience in the present. 486 Affirming the need to integrate the two
dimensions of salvation, Fiddes speaks about “the power of the cross” to enable the present
experience of salvation.487 He also connects the past, present and future dimensions of
salvation by saying that “the power of future salvation is the present,” as expressed in the
Eucharist.
Eucharist…celebrates the three tenses of salvation. There is a remembrance of God’s
redemptive act in the past, an encounter with the crucified and risen Christ who shares table –
fellowship with his disciples in the present, and a longing for the final coming of the kingdom
of God, expressed in the words of institution that the celebration is to continue ‘until he
comes.’488

Fiddes identifies the key element for the harmonization and integration of the
objective and subjective dimension of salva tion which is the permanency of faith, a reality
that is not disconnected from history, yet not enslaved by history.489 Rather, says Fiddes, “we
should place historical facts… alongside the insights of faith.”490 Fiddes continues on these
lines showing the fac t that the historical revelation of God in Scriptures with its culmination

485 Ibid., 25. The preoccupation to argue Christology in a vital connection with P neumatology is a
common feature of Stăniloae’s and Fiddes’ thought. The way this synthsis is a meeting point between Fiddes and
Stăniloae, and the way this Christological – Pneumatological synthesis is foundational for their view of
spirituality will be e xplored in chapter 6 of the present project.
486 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation, 26.
487 Ibid., 27.
488 Ibid., 30. Also, Moltmann, The Church in the Power of the Spirit: A Contribution to Messianic
Ecclesiology (London: SCM Press, 1992). He says that „the Lord’ s Supper is the sign of the actualizing
remembrance of the liberation suffering of Christ ( signum rememorativum ). As such it is the prefiguration of
Christ’s redeeming future and glory ( signum prognosticum ). In the coincidence of remembrance and hope,
history and eschatology, it is the sign of present grace, which confers liberty and fellowship ( signum
demonstrativum ). (Ibid., 243.)
489 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 36.
490 Ibid., 38. Also, Christopher J.H. Wright writes that „salvation is experienced through faith,”
(Salvation Belongs to God: Celebrating the Bible’s Central Story (Nottingham: Inter -Varsity Press, 2008), 123).

122
in the life and ministry of Jesus Christ,491 redefines and reinterprets, in the light of the reality
of God’s kingdom,492 the way in which God’s relationship with humanity is intensified. For
Fiddes, the event of the cross of Christ “sums up and completes the whole course of Jesus’
life.”493 Moreover, the unique relation, communion and identification of the Father with the
Son in the Christ event and in the cross reveal the real communion desired by God with
humanity and also reveal a God deeply involved and participating in the suffering of the
world.”494 The proof for this participation is the common suffering of the three Persons of the
Trinity, in the cross.
The cross reveals the nature of God, not as an invulnerable Absolute, immune from all
suffering and change in our world, but as a Father who suffer s the loss of His son, a son who is
forsaken by his Father, and the Spirit of love and self -giving that moves through this event…If
we let this shape our faith, we must understand atonement as the bringing of many human sons
and daughters into the fellowsh ip of God’s own life. This confirms once again that happens
here and now. 495

There are four images that Fiddes identifies as being key elements for a complete view
of salvation. First, is the image of sacrifice , seen in a biblical and patristi c perspective. Fiddes
prefers the concept of expiation for the concept of propitiation, arguing that in the case of
expiation the cost of sacrifice is on “God as well as man,” while propitiation points to an
allegedly “hostile attitude” of God towards huma n beings.496 Moreover, the expiatory
sacrifice of Christ is the means that enables the human being’s right answer to God.497
The second image for a complete view of salvation is that of justice . Fiddes considers
that the demand of justice makes necessary the condemnation and death of Christ as the
foundation of our acquittal and new life in relation with God.498 Christ assumes in his death
on the cross, the judgment of God as a conseq uence of God’s wrath, which is not a penalty of

491 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 42-43.
492 Ibid., 44.
493 Ibid., 47.
494 Ibid., 57.
495 Ibid., 58.
496 Ibid., 75.
497 Ibid., 79.
498 Ibid., 88.

123
God, rather it is God’s acceptance of the consequences or results of human sin.499 In this
regard, Fiddes p refers the view of atonement as a response to “the aims of justice”500 rather
than a payment of “a debt to justice,”501 for the former view is in harmony with the concept of
God’ s continuous suffering in and with the world, in his identification and sharing in the
human condition with the desire for its healing and transfiguration.502
The third image for a complete view of salvation is that of threefold victory of Christ
over sin, satan and powers.503 Fiddes discusses the victory of Christ over sin in its connection
with the internal dominion over human beings, of its connection with the bondage of human
life to the law,504 and in its connection with the tyranny of death.505 Christ’s victory over satan
and powers is analyzed by Fiddes in the light of the Gospel, first in the direct conflict and
provocation that the life and ministry of Christ brought to the kingdom of evil, and in the final
defeat of satan and powers on the cross.506 Fiddes concludes by underlying the uniqueness of

499 Ibid.,93. Karl Barth insists that in Christ’s crucifixion, „God is supremely God…in this death He is
supremely alive…there is fulfilled in it the mission, the task and the work of the Son of God. There takes place
here the redemptive judgment of God on all men…We are dealing here with sin…the corruption which God has
made His own, for which he willed to take responsibilit y in this one man. Here in the passion in which as Judge
He lets Himself be judged, God has fulfilled this responsibility. In the place of all men He has Himself wrestled
with that which separates them from Him.” ( CD IV/1 , 247).
500 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 104.
501 Ibid., 96.
502 Ibid., 109.
503 Ibid., 114. Also, in Barth’s thought: „The passion of Jesus Christ is the judgment of God in which
the Judge Himself was the judged. And as such it is at its heart and centre the victory which he has won for us, in
our p lace, in the battle against sin…As the passion of the Son of God who became man for us it is the radical
divine action which attacks and destroys at its very root the primary evil in the world; the activity of the second
Adam who took the place of the fi rst, who reversed and overthrew the activity of the first in this place, and in so
doing brought in a new man, founded a new world and inaugurated an new aeon -and all this in His passion.”
(CD IV/1 , 254.)
504 Ibid., 115.
505 Ibid., 116. For Dietrich Bonhoeffer, „God’s love has become the death of death and the life of
man…The miracle of Christ’s resurrection makes nonsense of that idolization of death which is prevalent among
us today. Where death is the last thing, fear of death is combined with defiance. Where death is the last thing,
earthly life is all or nothing…But wherever it is recognized that the power of death has been broken, wherever the
world of death is illuminated by the miracle of resurrection and of the new life, there no eternities are demanded
of life but one takes of life what is offers, not all or nothing but good and evil, the important and unimportant,
joy and sorrow…It is from beyond death that one expects the coming of the new man and of the new world, from
the power by which death has been vanquished,” ( Ethics (London: SCM Press, 1955), 59 -60).
506 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 118.

124
God’s victory in Christ, circumscribed by the truth of the victory through suffering,507 and the
truth of victory through weakness.508
The fourth image for a complete view of salvation, in Fiddes’ view is that of love.
Fiddes speaks of the redemptive power of God’s love,509 in its sacrificial dimensionof this
love that is in Fiddes words, “the means as well as the motive of redemption.”510 For Fiddes
the cross is the event that reveals the love of God,”511 a God who “loves in freedom,”512 and
opens himself to humanity,513 for the transformation of humanity through Christ,”514 in the
power of the Spirit.”515 The corollary of the present experience of salvation is the permanency
of the reality of forgiveness, acts of political engagement and the protest against, presence in,
and the acceptance of suffering.
Fiddes explores the issue of forgiveness, acknowledging the aim of forgiveness that is
reconciliation, blockages of forgiveness, namely the barriers which hinder the relationship and
the need for healing of relationship.516 For these to be realized, says Fiddes, a reciprocal
journey of forgiveness is necessary,517 that involves two dimensions, an active, that of
“sympathy” that comes from an understanding of the reasons and resorts of the offence, and a

507 Ibid., 125.
508 Ibid., 126.
509 Ibid., 141.
510 Ibid., 143.
511 Ibid., 148.
512 Ibid., 158. F iddes takes this expression from Barth: See Barth, CD II.1 , 257.
513 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 160.
514 Ibid., 166. Fiddes is close here with Stăniloae’s argum ent of this transformative identification of God
with humanity. Stăniloae says: „In Christ we see how God overcame death by uniting Himself with humanity
through love, Rather than arbitrarily using the omnipotence to defeat death, He made us beloved by God and
capable of receiving His power so that we too can defeat death through His love:” Stăniloae, The Holy Trinity : In
the Beginning There was Love (Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2012), 43; also, Stăniloae, Sfănta
Treime sau La Inceput a fost I ubirea (București: Ed IBMBOR, 1993), 52.
515 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 167.
516 Ibid., 172. Also, Trudy Govier, Forgiveness and Revenge (London: Routledge, 2002). She defines
forgiveness as “a matter of dealing with anger and resent and attitudes while reconciliation is a matter of dealing
with rem aking a relationship,” (Ibid., 77).
517 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 173.

125
passive one, that of “endurance,” coming from “a submitting to the consequences” of the
offence.518
This practice of forgiveness mirrors the vertical dimension of forgiveness that implies
a journey of the offended God for and with the offending fallen humanity. Fiddes exemplifies
the twofold journey of forgiveness in the way of God’s offering of reconciliation in Christ
through the cross.
Through the twofold jou rney of forgiveness, through the stages of awakening awareness and
absorbing hostility, the forgiver is learning how best to win the offender to himself. The fruit
of agonizing journey is the ability to draw a hostile and stubborn heart into forgiving
love…God’s Spirit is able to wrestle with human spirits today and draw them into
reconciliation because he has made the journey of discovery in the cross. God’s approach to us
is shaped to our needs because it is marked by the experience of Calvary; the God wh o comes
to us here and now is the one who was then in the cross and who has been marked eternally by
it.519

For Fiddes this vertical dimension of forgiveness is of paramount importance not only
because it is a model for the horizontal dimensio n, but also because it is a resource for
overcoming guilt. This guilt is expressed in not accepting forgiveness for oneself, leading to
hostility and anxiety.520 Fiddes argues for the need to overc ome the temptation of refusing

518 Ibid., 174.
519 Ibid., 178.
520 Fiddes, Past Event , 179. It is important the way Fiddes argues the synthesis between vertical a nd
horizontal dimensions of forgiveness, for the risk is that of captivity of the concept in its vertical dimension. See
in this regard, Geiko Muller -Fahrenholz, The Art of Forgiveness Theological Reflections on
Healing and Reconciliation (Geneva: WWC Pub lications, 1996). The author signalizes the same danger: “This
vertical reduction of forgiveness between sinner and God” ignore the “its effect and impact in the social and
natural realms,” placing the sinner at the centre of theology and spirituality, not the victim, the one who is sinned
against…This reductionism led to the privatization and spiritualization of sin and forgiveness” “it left the
concerns of salvation, including forgiveness, to the realm of the gospel, whereas the concerns of the “world”
including economics and politics, belonged to the realm of the law,” (Ibid., 12 -13). See also, Christopher Jones,
„Loosing and Binding: The Liturgical Mediation of Forgiveness,” in Forgiveness and Truth: Explorations in
Contemporary Theology , Alister McFayden, Marcel Sarot, and Anthony Thiselton (Eds) (Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 2001). Jones points out to the same major problem of contemporary Christian communities that is
reflected in Fiddes’ preoccupation for arguing the horizontal dimension of forgiveness as a resource for
overcoming guilt, namely, „ the Churches failure to mediate forgiveness in their worship and corporate life,”
(Ibid., 31). Also, Lesley Carroll, „Forgiveness and the Church,” in Forgiveness: Embodying Forgiveness
(Belfast: Cen tre for Contemporary Christianity in Ireland Howard House, 2002). She is arguing that
“Unforgiveness in the life of the church, lack of teaching about forgiveness and lack of community in which
forgiveness can be facilitated either formally or informally, damages the relationship of the community to its
God. Unforgiveness also disables relationships between community members and ultimately the ability to
continue Christ’s mission of forgiveness in the world,” (ibid., 6).

126
responsibility of true guilt, by finding justifications,521 or the temptation of being trapped in a
false guilt and feeling responsibility for the effects of our limits.522
Fiddes considers that the way God offers His forgiveness, “for a life of freedom from
our past history and our present character,” should be a resource for distinguishing between
true and false guilt, and should lead to the courage to assume ou r true guilt, namely, “the
sense that “I” am less than I can be,” and “I need not have done what I did,” and repent, 523
understanding that in spite of our guilt we are accepted by God “being generous in our
penitence, as God is generous in hi s forgiveness.524
If the experience of salvation here and now is a reality, based on the past event of the
cross, then this experience has as its consequence social involvement in addressing the
injustices and evil in the world. Fiddes argues t hat this is a natural participation in the way
God is related to the actual world.525 The model for this attitude is God’s own “immersion
into the situation of human sin,”526 having as a result the crucifixion of the Son “by h uman
hands.”527
Moreover, the entire life of Christ shows the coordinates of God’s involvement in
society, in the” dialectic of action and submission,” where the silence of the cross was
“preceded by a minist ry of action.” 528 In our participation in this dialectic is the

521 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 179 -180.
522 Ibid., 181.
523 Ibid., 182.
524 Ibid., 183.
525 Ibid., 190 -192.
526 Haddon Willmer, „Jesus Christ the Forgiven, Christology, Atonem ent and Forgiveness,” in
Forgiveness and Truth: Explorations in Contemporary Theology , Alister McFayden, Marcel Sarot, and Anthony
Thiselton (Eds) (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2001 ). Medit ating to the same reality described by Fiddes as the
immersion of God into the situation of sin, Willlmer focuses the discussion on the concept of Christ made sin for
us, and connects this reality with the possibility of forgiveness: “If ‘being made sin’ calls those who live within
that ‘making’ to take responsibility for sin, they are eligible for forgiveness…The forgiven one forgives and in
forgiving his being forgiven is actualized,” (ibid., 26 -27).
527 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 193.
528 Ibid., 201.

127
understanding of the “meaning of atonement,” that enables us “to find the meaning of
reconciliation.” 529
Fiddes concludes:
God gives the cross meaning, as he reveals himself to have been present there, making the
furthest journey of discovery into his creation. He makes this story, written in human flesh and
history, available so that all other human stories can acquire meaning also. This past event has
a creative powe r upon the present…530

6. 4. Summary of Chapter 6

I aimed in this chapter to argue first, the place o f Paul Fiddes in the contemporary
Baptist world. In this regard we have seen that the recognition of Fiddes, as one of the most
important contemporary Baptist theologian could be seen in the development of his academic
career and the positions he was appoi nted in during this career. I have also argued that the
recognition of Fiddes as one of the most important contemporary Baptist theologians, is
shown by his significant number of books, article, chapters written on various subjects that
are connected with the relation between theology and literature, church and society,
Trinitarian and ecumenical theology.
Secondly, I aimed in this chapter to show several influences that shaped Fiddes’
spiritual and intellectual journey. I argued that one important influen ce is that of the Oxford
ethos with its interdisciplinary, ecumenical dimensions. Another important influence is the
encounter with leading Protestant theologians as Karl Barth, Friedrich Schleiermacher,
Eberhard Jungel and Jurgen Moltmann,
Following thes e formative encounters and influences, Fiddes developed progressively
as systematic, Trinitarian and ecumenical theologian. His systematic theology evolved in the
way his perspective on God roots his view of human beings and salvation, and of the way in
which he views the development of God’s relationship with the world and of the world with

529 Ibid., 203.
530 Ibid., 220.

128
God. Fiddes tries to build his theological construct on two pillars, namely, Scripture and
tradition and he tries to avoid the often present sterile Biblicism of many t heological systems.
Fiddes’ ecumenical thought, developed based on his ecumenical perspective on the ology,
namely the multidenominational, pluralistic and inclusive way of doing theology, in dialogue
between Scriptures and tradition and in conversation wit h other traditions from the Christian
family.
Fiddes tries to argue a concept of God that is not disconnected from the suffering of
God. In spite of his critique of impassibility of God understood as immobility, Fiddes seems
to be aware of the fact that t he Fathers, by maintaining the doctrine of the immutability and
impassibility of God, preserved the truth of the transcendence and immanence of God,
without undermining one for the other. Also, they preserved the doctrine of creation ex nihilo
as opposed t o the Platonic philosophy,531 affirming the dependence of the created order on
God, without God being dependent on the created order. They affirmed the eternity,
perfection, omnipotence and goodness of God, and the incorpor eality, incomprehensibility,
infinity and omnipresence of God.532 All these attributes are speaking in the Fathers’ thought
of the mystery that God is, in his otherness.533 Yet, one could detect some possible issues that
are pointed out rightly by Fiddes’ doctrine of God.
First, Fiddes’ construct of the doctrine of God, based on the present situation in the
world today, is a sample of the necessary permanent struggle of the ology to proclaim a God
who is not disconnected from the suffering of the word. Second, even though Fiddes could be
categorized among the process theologians,534 the way he argues proves that he is not captive
to process theology and he still c ontinues a theological dialogue with theologians who are not

531 Weinandy, Does God Suffer? , 109.
532 Ibid., 109 -110.
533 Ibid., 112.
534 Ibid. , 21.

129
process theologians even though they argue the pathos of God, in, for and with humanity.535
For Fiddes, God, instead of being defeated by suf fering as He is not defeated by sin, is
permanently responding to these issues transforming evil into good,536 and “Jesus and His
redemptive work is the Father’s full and decisive response to human suffering and its
causes…”537
Fiddes as a Trinitarian theologian, evolved from his perspective on the life of the
triune God, characterized by a perichoretical movement, that opens the divine life towards the
world, a movement that become the basis for the human peri choretical movement towards
God, and towards each other, in a world that is the Body of God, having the Church as the
sacrament of the entire world. And the church as th e embodiment of the Triune life538 is a
instrument of the Father’s continual assistance and address of the suffering in the world, an
assistance based on the redemptive wor k of Christ, through the Body of Christ, the church, is
the context of the Father’s invitation for the entire world to return in relationship with Him.
Jurgen Moltmann, for example, that:
In the movements of the Trinitarian history of God’s dealings with t he world the church finds
and discovers itself, in all the relationships which comprehend its life. It finds itself on the
path traced by this history of God’s dealings with the world, and it discovers itself as on
element in the movements of the divine se nding, gathering together and experience.539

The Church as the embodiment of the Trinity’ s openness in the perichoretical
movement is also an offer of God to the entire world to enter the restoration and the process

535 Karl Barth , CD IV/1 and Moltmann, The Crucified God .
536 This pattern of God’s act in regard to the evil is seen in Exodus 8, in the impossibility of the
Pharaoh’s magicians to stop the evil of the plagu e (yet they could amplify it, verse 7), only God could stop it
(verse 8).
537 Weinandy, Does God Suffer ?, 214 -216. He says that “The Son did no t assume some generic,
antiseptic or immunized humanity, which would quarantine him from sinful human history and condition, but
rather he assumed a humanity which bore the birthmark of sinful Adam, and so entered into our human history
as one like ourselv es.’ (Ibid, 216)
538 Miroslav Volf, After Our Likeness: The Church as the Image of the Trinity (Michigan: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998), 204.
539 Moltmann, The Church in the Power of the Spirit , 64.

130
that amplify this relationship through the participatory dimension of Christ’s death and
resurrection as celebrated in the Lord’s Supper. Moreover,

the persons of the Trinity perfectly possess all goods as fully actualized, they are incapable of
suffering within their divine nature for they never suffer, unlike human beings, the loss of
some good…this lack of suffering within t he Trinity actually purifies their love of all selfish
concerns, and so allows it to be thoroughly altruistic. The Trinity loves freely and never in a
manner that would benefit themselves – such as to relieve their own suffering…Thus all facets
of love are fully in act – goodness, commitment, affection, joy, kindness, as well as mercy,
compassion, grief, and sorrow.540

How Fiddes spiritual journey developed along the systematic, Trinitarian and
ecumenical characteris tics of his theology are reflected in his view of Baptism, Eucharist and
spirituality as vital elements of the long life spiritual journey, will be explored in the
following chapters of part 2.

540 Weinandy, Does God Suffer ?, 226 -227.

131
Chapter 7. Fiddes’ Theology of Participation in His Thought about Baptism
7.1. Trinitarian Participation as the Atmosphere for Human Participation

Fiddes considers the life of the Trinity as being of paramount importance for the
Christian life. He acknowledges the fact that the issue of human participation in the life of the
Trinity was a perennial preoccupation in the Christian thought from the Fathers to
contemporary days. By showing the hesitation of many Fathers to affirm the possibility for
human beings to participate in the inner life of the Trinity, Fiddes appreciates the fact that
there was a unitary reaction of the Fathers towards the Arian conception of the inferiority of
the Son in regard to the Father under the influence of Neo -Platonism.541
Moreover, Fiddes notes the fact that the Fathers preferred to use the concept of
generation in describing the relationship between the Father and the Son, whilst the concept of
participation was used in regard to the relationship of creatures with God.542 The debate is
somehow concluded by Gregory Palamas with his distinction between the essence of God, in
which human beings cannot participate, and the uncreated energies of God, the only reality
through which human beings could participate in God.543
Besides the Eastern formulations, Fiddes continues, there are also Western attempts to
explain the concept of participating in God. He notes that Aquinas tried to understand this
concept in a different manner than th e Eastern tradition, arguing for the possibility of human
beings to share in the essential life of God, by the way of knowledge, in a “space of
encounter,” superior to mind, since the mind cannot contain what cannot be contained,
namely God. Aquinas speaks of that movement in which intellect is “raised above its nature”

541 Fiddes, „Participation in the Trinity,” in Perspectives in Religious Studies 33: 3 (2006), 375 -376.
Also, Athanasius, „Defence of the Nicene Definition,” in Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers , 163. Athanasius
argued about the Son that: „He was of the essence of the Father…being alone truly for God…in all things exact
and like the Father.” (Ibid.)
542 Fiddes, „Participation in the Trinity,” 377. Also, Meyendorff, A Study of Gregory Pal amas . He
describes Palamas’ view of participation in God: „Thus, also, through each of his energies one shares in the
whole of God…the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,” 220. See also, Stăniloae, Viața și învățătura sfântului
Grigorie Palamas , 244.
543 Fiddes, „Participation in the Trinity,” 378.

132
by the “created grace” of God, and in this way opening the possibility “of a direct vision of
the uncreated essence.”544 But even with Aquinas’ view, the possibility for direct
participation, says Fiddes, remains only an eschatological hope, and with this
acknowledgment Fiddes proposes that a real Trinitarian understanding of participation means
that
Human persons are involved… in the interweaving, mutual relations of the Trinity. It is as if
God “makes room” within God’s own self for created beings to dwell, in the midst of et ernal
relations of self – giving and other -receiving love between the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Spirit.545

Fiddes notes the actuality of the discussion of the participation in Trinitarian life in the
thought of Alan Torrance who speaks of “doxological and semantic participation in God,”546
and Miroslav Volf’s opinion that there is no interior participation of human beings in the
divine life, rather “human beings indwell the life – giving ambience of the Spirit.”547 In his
turn Fiddes considers that a key concept for the problematics of participation is that of divine
persons as “subsistent relations,”548 or a concept of God as an “event of relationships,”549 and
Fiddes argues that mirroring the Barthian concept of God as “event.”550
Talk about God as “an event of relationships” is not therefore the language of a spectator, but
the language of a participant…Thus, through our participation, we can identify three distinct
movements of speech, emotion and act ion which are like relationships “from father, to son,”
“from son to father” and a movement of “deepening relations…”551

Fiddes continues by exploring the way in which mystical theologians bridged the gap
betwe en the divine being and human beings, in their synthesis between “positive and

544 Ibid., 378. Also, Aquinas, The Summa Theologica (Encyclopedia Britanni ca, 1952), 52. He argues
that „in order to see God, there must be some likeness on the part of the seeing power whereby the intellect is
made capable of seeing God….Therefore it must be said that to see the essence of God there is required some
likeness in the seeing power, namely, the light of divine glory strenghtening the intellect to see God …”
545 Fiddes, „Participation in the Trinity,” 379.
546 Ibid., 380. Also, Alan Torrance, Persons in Communion. Trinitarian Description and Human
Participation (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996), 362.
547 Miroslav Volf, After our Likeness: The Church as the Image of the Trinity (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1998), 211.
548 Fiddes, Participating in the Trinity , 380.
549 Ibid., 381.
550 Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics 2: 1 (Edinbu rgh: T&T Clark, 1936 ), 263.
551 Fiddes, Participating in the Trinity, 382.

133
negative, affirmations and denials, word and silence,” and he notes that for them the two
approaches, namely, kataphatic and apophatic are in a direct interaction.552 From here Fiddes
argues that the concept of perichoresis is the best way to express the theology of
participat ion.553 The concept of perichoresis describes the uniqueness of communion between
the three persons of the Trinity, their participation in each other, their reflection in each other,
without the dissolution of one in the other and without confusion of one with the other. It also
prevents, Fiddes says, any concept of God, “as a dominating authority whose power lies in
immobility and in being secure from being affected by the changing world.”554 Moreover, the
unique dynamics of the communion in the inner Trinitarian life is expressed in Eastern
tradition by the perichoresis as a dance, whilst the Western tradition goes so far as to consider
the common nature of the Three Persons as the perichoresis of perso ns.555 Fiddes s eems to
favor the view of the Eastern tradition, in his understanding of the Western tradition’s view as
being followed by a dangerous possibility to regard the inner Trinitarian communion a
“closed circle,” not open to any partners from outside, namely, h umanity.556 However, Fiddes
affirms the contribution of both traditions, Eastern and Western, to the understanding of the
theology of participation, understanding the way the two complement each other:
Tracing the Western pattern, we find ourselves participating in a movement of mutual giving
and receiving; following the Eastern pattern we find ourselves involved in the mission of God
to the world .557

From here Fid des argues the participation of all creation in the divine perichoretical
dance,558 not through an authoritative intervention of God in creation, but through His

552 Ibid., 384. Also, Denys Turner, The Darkness of God: Negativity in Christian Mysticism
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 160 -163.
553 Fiddes, Participating in the Trinity, 385
554 Ibid., 386
555 Ibid., 387. Also, Mănăstireanu, PM, 77. He says that „perichoresis derives from the Greek noun
chora (
), meaning „space” or „room” and from the verb chorein …, which can be translated as „to
contain,” ‚to make room’ or ‚to go forward.’
556 Fiddes, Participating in the Trinity,” 387.
557 Ibid., 388.
558 Mănăstireanu, PM, 78-79. He says that the metaphor of „divine dance’’ is „based on a confusion or,
at best, on a play of words. Thus the verb chorein…, meaning ‚to contai n’ is confused with the Greek word

134
embracing of the world in the divine persuasive influence, through the Holy Spirit. Fiddes
sees this reality expressed in God’s covenant with creation (Genesis 9: 8) a nd in the
expectation of the entire creation for God’s redemption (Romans 8: 19 -22).559
However, this participation of the entire creation in God, initiated and sustained by the
persuasive influence of God in the entire creation, through the Holy Spirit, is differentiated,
by what Fiddes calls, “an conscious relationship of trust, expressed i n the “yes” to the Father
through the Son,” and the relationship with God of those who continually say “No” to God. It
is the “humility of God” in the world that allows human beings to say “no” to Him, and if
these movements of saying ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to God are realized in the encompassing movement
of the Trinitarian life in creation, the ‘yes’ or ‘no’ is spoken in the Trinity.560 However, the
‘yes’ of human beings to God, is spoken in the ‘yes’ of the Son to the Father, and mirrors his
self-givin g and obedience to the Father, opening the way in which the participation in God
informs and frames the participation of human beings in each other
Wherever, then, in the world people give themselves to others or sacrifice themselves for
others, these acti ons match the movement in God which is like a Son going forth on mission in
response to the purpose of a Father; their acts share in the patterns of love of God, and so in
them we can discern the body of Christ…At the root of participation in others there is
participation in God. To see another object or another person without attempting to control
them is to share in the triune life of God. The turning of the self towards an object, and the
return to oneself, takes part in those eternal movements in God th at we call the mission of the
Father and the obedience of the Son. Yet knowledge is always at the same time mystery, since
the depths of the beauty in the world derive from the fathomless depths of the personality of
God.561

choreuo…, meaning ‚to dance,” from which is derived from perichoreuo …, meaning ‚to dance around.’
However, he says, agreeing with Fiddes, that the metaphor is a good illustration of the dynamism of the
perichoretical reality.
559 Fiddes, Participating in the Trinity, 388.
560 Ibid., 389.
561 Ibid., 390 -391.

135
7. 2. Baptism and the Process of Christian Initiation

In regard to baptism, Fiddes considers that a holistic understanding of it could be
achieved through a bifocal lenses provided by the tandem of creation an d redemption.562 This
bifocal view opens the possibility for a plurality of images that in their togetherness will give
a deeper understanding of baptism.563 The first image that describes baptism, in Fiddes
thought, is that of birth “often associated with a re turn to the womb, and so with regeneration
and the renewal of life.”564 The image of birth from and through the water, is, in Fiddes’
opinion, vitally connected with the birth of creation “from the cosmic womb,” in the act of
creation, with the redemption of Israel through God’s “pains of childbirth,” and is explicated
fully in Jesus’ baptism that confirms Him as the begotten Son of the Father.565
The second image that describes baptism, in Fiddes’ thought, is that of spiritual
cleansing, that points to the universal need of humans for cleansing, expressed in the
“universal use of water for washing.”566 Starting from the centrality of washing in all aspects
of Israel’s worship life, in the tandem of water and blood, Fidd es shows how the expiatory
sacrifice of Christ, through his blood, maximizes, completes and concludes the theme of
washing, starting from the inner life and continuing with the external life.567
The third image that describes baptism, Fiddes considers, is that of conflict. Baptism is
an evocation of the spiritual conflict with the hostile powers, as well as an evocation of the
believer’ s victory over them in Christ.568 He shows the way in which the Old Testament

562 Fiddes, „Baptism and Creation,” in Reflections on the Water: Understanding God and the World
through the Baptism of Believers , edited by Paul Fiddes (Macon: GA, Smyth & Helwys Publishing Inc, 1996),
47.
563 Ibid., 48.
564 Ibid., 49.
565 Ibid., 49 -50.
566 Ibid., 51.
567 Ibid., 51 -52. See also, Calvin, Institutes , 2, 1325. He says:t hat „Scripture declares that baptism first
point sto the cleansing of our sins, which we obtain from Christ’s blood; then to the mortification of our flesh,
which rests upon participation in his death and through which believers are reborn into newness of life and into
the fellowship of Christ.”
568 Ibid., 53.

136
connection between conflict, victory and redemption is clarified in Christ’s victory over the
principalities and powers, named by Fiddes the “idols and the tyrants tha t they are.” 569
With the fourth and fifth images in describing baptism, those of journey and
refreshment, Fiddes shows the vital connection and continuity between the reality of our past
salvation, described by the previous images, and the reality of our present salvation. The
image of journey speaks of a clear separation between the life of the past life characterized by
alienation from God and the present life, characterized by a life of fellowship with God, as an
expression of “a new cov enant relationship.”570 The image of refreshment on the other hand,
points to another dimension of the present salvation that is the permanent “renewal of
energies,” in the actuality of the “pouring out” of the Spirit.571
Fiddes describes baptism as a “boundary -marker,”572 underlying the fact that
believers’ baptism is “an act which includes and embraces the professing disciple in
fellowship life.” This inclusion d oes not, says Fiddes, mean an exclusion of those on the way
to faith, namely, children, and adults who were baptized as children. 573 Fiddes argues for a
theology of integration based on a view of salvation as process, the key concept being that of
initiation.
If we are to speak of a process of initiation in which baptism may stand either near the
beginning (infant baptism) or near the end (believers’ baptism), we need constructively to
develop a theology of initiatory process…The boundary t hen does not seal off the community
of the baptized from others…Baptism is indeed a boundary, but is also a witness that crosses
all boundaries. 574

569 Ibid., 53 -54.
570 Ibid., 55. Also, Richard L. Pratt Jr., „Baptism as a Sacrament of the Covenant,” in Understanding
Four Views on Baptism, John H. Armstrong (ed) (Michigan: Zondervan, 2007). He says: „ the covenant of grace
was initiated immediately after the fall into sin, extending from the point in the OT to the end of the
NT…Baptism administers the NT dispensation of the covenant of grace.” See also, Berkhof, Systematic
Theology, 272..
571 Ibid., 56 -57.
572 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces: Baptist Idenitty in Church and Theology (Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster,
2003), 125
573 Ibid., 126 -139.
574 Ibid., 145, 155 -156.

137
Considering the fact that in accepting the concept of “common baptism,” even if it
shows the starting point of a believers’ union with Christ and with each other in the body of
Christ, it proved unproductive for the application of this “commonality” for other areas where
Christians from different tradition are still separated. From this r eality he considers that there
is still much to be said about the potential the “common baptism” concept could have, if one
moves from the common moment of initiation, namely, baptism, to the common process
whose start baptism should be.
Fiddes points out the fact that for the Eastern Orthodox (especially the Romanians!)
this is exactly the meaning of the process of initiation that is intimately connected to
chrismation and Eucharist. For Baptists too it is clear that between conversion, a reality
initiated by the grace of God the Father, through the Holy Spirit into communion with Christ,
and baptism, there is a process that should be acknowledged.575 From this participation of the
Trinity in the life of believer, we can speak of the believer’s participatory response to God’s
saving grace:
…a strong and continuing stream within the Baptist tradition has regarded baptism in a
sacramental way as an encounter between the faith of the believer and the transforming grace
of God…Placing saving faith before baptism is bound therefore to result in an understanding
of “becoming a Christian” as something characterized by process.576

However Fiddes is prudent, understanding the differences in regard to the elements
contained in the process of initiation, differences that exist in the views of Protestant
paedobaptist churches and of Baptists, but he thinks that it could be possible to “a ffirm
theologically a “completeness” in baptism…which do es not exclude its being only a part of a
complete journey of initiation.”577 Fiddes analyzes what he calls “the language of process,” in
different ecumenical documents578 as he aims to discuss “baptism as process”579 towards a

575 Fiddes, „Baptism and the Christian Initiation,” in The Ecumenical Review , Jan – Apr 2002; 54, 1/2,
48-49.
576 Ibid., 49.
577 Ibid., 50.
578 Ibid., 55. He anal yses the following documents: Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry 1982 -1990: Report
on the Process and Responses, Faith and Order paper 149, Geneva, WCC Publications, 1990; Christian

138
“theology of process.”580 Baptism as process means that baptism is not only a moment but
also a “life -long growth into Christ.”581 This reality is encompassed by the idea of Christian
discipleship, that includes “the formation in faith,”582 in order to follow Christ in His mission
through the church in the world: “While baptism at whatever age, certainly contains some
aspects of formation in faith, initiation requires a more extended process of this formation
which includes personally owned faith.”583

7. 3. Baptism in the Context of the Theology of Participation

Fiddes speaks of what he calls “a theology of initiatory process,” as a necessary
framework for the concept of “baptis m as process.” Here, in the developing of the theology of
initiatory process is one of the dimensions of Fiddes’ theology of participation. Fiddes’
proposal for the elements of this theology of process is summarized in what he calls the “three
dynamics,” namely, the “interplay of grace and faith,” the “interplay of spirit and water,” and
the “interplay of Christ’s body and church.” 584
First, Fiddes considers the interplay of grace and faith in the journey of Christian
initiation, a journey i nitiated by God through God’s prevenient grace.585 This grace is a deep
desire of God to be in fellowship with humans. The p roper answer of humans to this
movement of God’s prevenient grace is that of faith. In the case of infant baptism or the

Initiation in the Anglican Communion. The Toronto Statement „Walk in Newness of Life”: The Findings of the
Fourth International Anglican Liturgical Consultation, Toronto 1991, David R. Holeton, ed., Grove Worship
Series no. 118, Bramcote, UK, Grove Books.1991; Baptism and Confirmation: A Report Submitted by the
Church of England L iturgical Commission to the Archbishop of Canterbury and York in November 1958 ,
London, SPCK, 1959.
579 Fiddes, „Baptism and the Christian Initiation,” 56.
580 Ibid., 58.
581 Ibid., 56.
582 Ibid., 57.
583 Ibid., 58.
584 Ibid., 58 -61.
585 T.C. Hammond , In Understanding be Man: A Handbook of Christian Doctrine (Leicester: Inter –
Varsity Press, 1968), 137. Hammond defines prevenient grace as meaning “anticipating, predisposing…” It
describes a special work of the Spirit of God whereby, before there is any human will to good, the Holy Spirit
recreates in a man the desire to be reconciled to God and to do His will.” (Ibid.)

139
blessing of a child this faith is the corporate faith of the community or the vicarious faith of
parents, godparents etc. Prevenient g race and corporate/vicarious faith are two concentric
realities that overlap being “aspects of participation in God,” indicating the participatory
movements from God to human beings and of human beings towards God.586 Prevenient
grace and cor porate/vicarious faith are continued in the journey of Christian initiation with
what is called “transformative grace” and faith of the community and “owned faith,” of the
individual believer, all these being realities that overlap and are expressed either in believer’s
baptism or in a practice of confirmation or commitment.587
Moreover, as the prevenient grace and transformative grace are to be seen as
“continuum,” in God’s participation in human beings, so vicarious faith and owned faith
toget her with the faith of the community should be seen as stages of the initiatory process of
the journey of a believer towards the status of being a disciple. Adding the fact that the daily
“baptismal process,” is a journey of salvation,588 Fiddes concludes:
In the case of infant baptism the later moment of freely accepted discipleship will belong to
the foundation of the beginning of the Christian life, Eucharist and confirmation (or some
other rite of laying -on of hands) will not complete baptism, but they w ill complete initiation .
In the case of believer’s baptism, the apprehending of the person by God’s grace before
baptism, prior faith and first communion are all part of the process.589

Second, Fiddes considers t he interplay of spirit and water, starting with the tradition of
interpretation of relationship between “the seal of the spirit” and water baptism.590 From here

586 Ibid., 58 -59.
587 Ibid., 59.
588 Ibid., 59 -60. Fidde s differs here from Augustine who considered baptism as nothing else than
“salvation” and the sacrament of the body of Christ nothing else than “life:” St Augustine, “Treatise on the
Merits and Forgiveness of Sins and on the Baptism of infants” in Nicene a nd Post -Nicene Fathers, volume 5,
Saint Augustine’s Anti -Pelagian Works , edited by Philip Schaff (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc,
1995), 28.
589 Fiddes, „Baptism and the Christian Initiation,” 60. In arguing these vi tal connections and mutuality
between God’s actions and human beings’ faithful response, Fiddes mirrors a Petrine theological idea: “His
divine power has given us all we need for life and goodliness….For this reason, make every effort to add to your
faith goodness, and to goodness, knowledge, and to knowledge, self -control, and to self control, perseverance,
and to perseverance godliness, and to godliness, brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness, love (2 Peter 1: 3,
5-7).”
590 Ibid., 60. Fiddes starts with the Pauline concept of the „seal of the Spirit” showing the fact that most
New Testament theologians consider the sealing as happening in the water baptism. Yet, there are theologians
(such as Karl Barth and James Dunn) who consider the sealing and water baptism as separate stages, with the

140
Fiddes considers the continu um of God’s participation in the process of salvation in Christ
through the Spirit, and considers that is logical to think of “different comings of the Spirit,”
appropriate to various stages of the process of initiation. Fiddes insists that this is the hea rt of
participation in God’s triunic life, a continual, progressive, and deeper immersion in the life of
the Trinity that opens the possibility for God to equip the believer, through charismata , in
order to participate in God’s mission in the world. He con cludes:
Just as in baptism the Spirit takes an element of in the natural world – water – and uses it as a
place of encounter with God for renewal of life, so the Spirit takes natural human faculties and
opens them up as a place to manifest spiritual gifts. When this begins to happen it is the end of
the “beginning,” the end of laying foundation: a woman or man has become a disciple.591

Yet, giving preeminence to the action of the Spirit, Fiddes is close to Stă niloae when arguing
that the water is “a place of encounter with God for renewal of life.” However, Fiddes tries to
keep the balance by the discussion about the interplay of Christ’s body and church that will be
analyzed below.
Third, Fiddes considers th e interplay of Christ’s body and church, remembering the
fact that in the New Testament the concept of the body of Christ has “three meanings,”
describing three realities “interweaving, overlapping and conditioning each other,”592 and we
can see here a correspondence of the perichoretical dim ension of the Triune life as a model
for the life of the church. Fiddes develops further on this venue of the theology of
participation stating that according to the first meaning of the concept of “body of Christ,”
that of the risen Christ, the believer e nters the participatory reality of “being drawn more
deeply into the interweaving movements of the triune life.” According to the second meaning,
that of the community of the church, the theology of participation is expressed by the fact that

precedent of either over the other. For the Eastern Orthodox tradition, the sealing is something that comes after
baptism, in chrismation, the same for the Pentecostal -Charismatic tradition, the sealing comes after baptism as „
a second blessing.” (Ibid.)
591 Ibid., 61
592 Ibid. The three meanings o f the biblical concept of the „body of Christ” are: the risen and glorious
body of Christ who was crucified, the community of the church and the Eucharist bread in which the community
shares.

141
the believer/ believers are “being conformed to the movement of relationship in God which is
like a Son relating to a Father, characterized by a self giving…and a newness of life.”
According to the third meaning, that of the Eucharisti c bread shared in the community , Fiddes
considers that all who are members of the body and “on the way to being disciples, may share
in the Eucharistic body. Fiddes concludes:
At the end of the process of initiation…a person relates to the body of Christ as a disciple,
commissioned for serv ice. The disciple is in a covenanted relation with other disciples in the
community of the church, and exercises the spiritual gifts. 593

7.4. Summary of Chapter 7

I aimed in this chapter to explore Fiddes’ theology of participation in his thought about
baptism. I argued that for Fiddes Trinitarian participation is the atmosphere for human
participation, having perichoresis as a key reality. I observed that Fiddes a rgues the
participation of all creation in the divine perichoretical dance, not through an authoritative
intervention of God in creation, but through His embracing of the world in the divine
persuasive influence, through the Holy Spirit. This giving of the Father i n the Son through the
Spirit opens the way in which the participation in God informs and frames the participation of
human beings in each other.
In this framework I observed that Fiddes considers that a holistic understanding of it
could be achie ved through a bifocal lenses provided by the tandem of creation and
redemption, rooting the possibility for a plurality of images for a deeper understanding of
baptism.
He uses the images of birth, spiritual cleansing, conflict, journey and refreshment,
considering baptism as a boundary -marker in the life of believers. He argues for a theology of
integration based on a view of salvation as process, the key concept being that of initiation.

593 Fiddes, Baptism and the Christian Initiation, 62.

142
Therefore baptism could be regarded not only as a moment but also a s a life -long growth into
Christ.
From here I explored Fiddes’ view on baptism in the context of the theology of
participation, I observed in the developing of the theology of initiatory process is one of the
dimensions of Fiddes’ theology of participatio n. Fiddes’ proposal for the elements of this
theology of process is summarized in what he calls the “three dynamics,” namely, the
interplay of grace and faith, the interplay of spirit and water, and the interplay of Christ’s
body and church.

143
Chapter 8. Fiddes’ Perichoretical Theology in His Thought about Eucharist
8.1. The framework of Fiddes’ Theology of Eucharist in a Perichoretical Key

The first element of the framework of Fiddes’ theology of Eucharist is that of a
synthesis between creation and redemption, that has its focus in the sacraments of the churc h,
as reminders of the action of God to redeem the fallen creation.594 This redemptive action, a
process that has a past, a present and a future, has as its central focus the cross of Christ, an
“enabling event ” not only for God’s victory but also for the human “response to the forgiving
love of God”595 Eucharist is in this context, for the Christian community, a celebration of the
“three tenses of salvation.” In Fiddes’ words:
There is remembrance of God’s redemptive act in the past, an encounter with the crucified and
risen Christ who shares table -fellowship with his disciples in the present, and a longing for the
final coming of the kingdom of God, expressed in the words of institution that the cele bration
is to continue ‘until he comes’596

The second element of the framework of Fiddes’ theology of Eucharist is its connection with
the idea of communion and sacrificial living. He connects it with the communion meal eaten
“in front of God” in Exodus 24: 11 that seems to become the model for the primitive Christian
communities’ celebration of Eucharist:
The followers of Jesus eat and drink in the presence of their risen Lord, and as the bond of the
new covenant, the Eucharist focuses the natu re of all of life as a costly but joyful fellowship
with God and other people.597

The model for this desired reality in the life of God’s people and communities is the sacrifice
of Christ that “ enables and creates our gift -offerings and communion -offerings.”598

594 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 27.
595 Ibid., 29.
596 Ibid., 30.
597 Ibid.,78. In connecting Eucharist with sacrificial living for Christ he is close to Stăniloae who, as we
have seen above, connected the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in Eucharist, and of human
sacrifice of submission and surrender to God. See also, Max Thurian, „The Eucharistic Memorial, Sacrifice of
Praise, and Supplication,” in Ecumenical Perspectives on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry , Max Thurian (Ed)
(Genev a: World Council of Churches, 1983), 96.

144
The third element of the framework of Fiddes’ theology of Eucharist is that of the
transformative victory of Christ on the cross, a costly victory,599 a decisive victory over satan
and his power,600 and a transformative victory.601 This victory is transformative because
Christ’s victory “c reates victory” in believers “making possible their response in faith.” 602 If
faith in the heart is the internal result of Christ’s vict ory, the gathering of these people of faith
in the “community of the crucified” is the external result, as this community is the community
in which Christ’s victory is actualized and repeated.603 This identification with the Crucified
and Risen Lord is not only the way in which we participate in His death, dying to sin, and His
resurrection, living as new humanity (Romans 6: 7 -9), but also the deeper fulfillment in the
Eucharist of the command “do this in remembrance of me” (Luke 22: 19).
The fourth element of Fiddes’ framework of Eucharist is Christ’s transformative
presence . Christ is present in the church “in word and example”604 in the outpouring of love
from God to believers, in the “dwelling of Christ is poured in our souls,” as Abelard taught.
Christ is also present in a corporate way in the community of believers (Sc leiermacher), and
in “the form” of the church in the world, hidden in a humble way in the believers whose
condition is that there are redeemed persons yet still sinners (Bonhoeffer). 605
8. 2. The Heart and Dimensions of Fiddes’ Theology of Eucharist

For Fiddes the Trinity with the perichoretical relationships between the Father, Son
and Holy Spirit, is the model for the life of the church. Fiddes writes:

598 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Sal vation , 79. See also, J.M.R. Tillard, „The Eucharist, Gift of God,”
in Ecumenical Perspectives on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry. He argues that Eucharist is „gift of God to the
Church..gift received in thanksgiving,” (ibid., 104, 115).
599 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation, 125.
600 Ibid., 129 .
601 Ibid., 135.
602 Ibid., 136.
603 Ibid., 137. Again here is a meeting point of Fiddes with Stăn iloae in keeping the vital connection
between the cross of Christ and the ressurection of Christ, in the memorial of Eucharist..
604 See also, Simon Chan, Liturgical Theology: The Church as Worshiping Community (Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006), 63. He says that the Reformer’s understanding of the church was that „the
church is constituted by Word and Sacrament.” (Ibid.)
605 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 161 -164.

145
The metaphor of body begins with the Son, as the church is identified with Christ. The image
of temple directs our attention first to the Spirit, indwelling the church. T he image of the
people of God begins from a relationship to God the Father, Father now not of one nation
alone but of all humankind.606

He considers that the development of the theology of perichoretical relationships between the
Father, Son and Holy Spirit is a synthesis of the thought of the Church Fathers in concordance
with the New Testament. As such any discussion about the Trinity is not to be done in “a
language of observa tion,” for this is not proper to the thought of the Fathers, rather it is to be
done in “a language of participation” with a direct correspondence with the “activity of the
triune God through the church, namely, the activity of “economic Trinity” 607 Moreover, the
economic Trinity cannot be separated from immanent Trinity, or action cannot be separated
from being, because being is action and action is in being.608
Mirroring this triune reality, the church’s being is in action and her action is in being,
but the action and being of the church are not invented by it, rathe r are of God:
The church which acts as body, temple and priestly people in practical ways in the world has
the power to serve, to focus the presence of the Spirit and to mediate blessing only because it
is caught up in the life of the triune God. It does n ot have its own mission, but shares in the
mission of God towards the world, God’s ecstatic movement of love which draws the creation
into fellowship with God’s own self.609

One of the important subjects in which Trinitarian thought brings an i mportant
corrective, is that of authority. By saying that the theology of the Trinity is a potential
corrective for the “domination of the One,” Fiddes explores the process that led to this state of
affairs, praising the way the Early Fathers resisted the idea of what is called “the theological
monarchianism,” and expresses his sadness that they were not so consistent in resisting “the

606 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 70.
607 Ibid., 71.
608 Ibid., 72. The unity between imanent and economic Trinity embraced by Fiddes is anot her meeting
point with Stăniloae and also with Rahner, both arguing in a simmilar manner this unity. It is a sample of how
Trinitarian theology could be a great resource for providing meeting points between theologians from different
tradition, as in this case Stăniloae, an Orthodox, Rahner, a Roman Catholic and Fiddes, a Baptist meet in
agreement.
609 Ibid., 73.

146
ecclesiastical monarchianism” based on a “theology of subordination,” and leading to “a
hierarchy of submission.” 610 The corrective for this is in Fiddes’ opinion, the theology of
participation, mirroring the divine perichoresis , as the essence for “relations which are not
absorbed,” and “a Fatherhood which does not oppress.” 611 Fiddes also identifies three areas
of domination: of the state, in the church, and of gender discrimination, 612 and affirms that
the “engagement in God,” brings “the discovery of the power of suffering to change events,”
and “ the experience of participation in the making of freedom.” 613
Fiddes continues to show how the participatory perichoretical theological idea, could
inform the practice of our prayers. There ar e three ideas that Fiddes evaluates critically
through the lens of our engagement in God. First, is the idea of prayer as a means to obtain
what is prepared by God for us, and second is the idea of prayer as a means for our internal
transformation,614 the latter bringing in Fiddes’ opinion some important insights. The third
idea under scrutiny in Fiddes’ critique is that of prayer as a means to make God to pay special
attention to a certain situation or person.615 Eventually, Fiddes proposes a concept of prayer
that he thinks harmonizes the best with the concept of the perichoretical movement of the
Trinity in creation, namely, the concept of prayer as an entrance into the partnership of God’s
love and suff ering influence and persuasion in the world. He says:
Like God’s own presence in the world, there is a ‘mediated immediacy’ of our presence to
others. Intercession becomes the enfolding of someone in the interweaving currents of the love
of God, and encou raging them to find the movements of health and healing that are already
there…Our prayer is not needed to get God started, after which we can stand back; God
always draws near to people with persuasive love, with or without us, and God’s grace will be
the major factor in transforming human life; but our intercessions still make a difference to
what God achieves, though we be the minor partner.616

610 Fiddes , Participation in God, 65-67.
611 Ibid., 71 -89.
612 Ibid., 96 -101.
613 Ibid., 97 -98. Also, Wright, Free Church, Free State , 234 -249.
614 Fidde s, Participation in God, 121-125.
615 Ibid., 129.
616 Ibid., 137 -138.

147
Fiddes continues by considering the world as the body of God and the church as the
living sacr ament of God in the world, affirming that sacraments are “doors into the dance of
perichoresis in God.” The incarnation of Christ is, for Fiddes, the paradigm, the lens, and the
key, for a complete understanding of the world as the body of God. Church as s acrament in its
practical ministry, circumscribed by the synthesis between being and doing, is a doorway to
and embodiment of the triune life, as well as an encounter place 617 with the movements of
the divine life. The church does this al ways mirroring the way the triune God acts for and in
the world, “being there,” understanding from within, and touching deeply.”618 Fiddes
concludes:
The sacramental life is one that is open to the presence of God, and can o pen a door for others
into eternal movements of love and justice that are there ahead of us, before us, and embracing
us. This openness can be felt as an invitation to a dance, but sometimes as the raw edges of a
wound. This is participation in God. This i s theology .619

This is the reason why Eucharist should not be seen as a static reality, focused on the
substantiation of God’s presence, rather it should be focused on the uninterrupted movement
of God’s presence that the church should see and reveal in the midst of the broken and needy
world.620 Only as such is the church a Eucharistic community, and this is the subject of the
next section where we discuss the dimensions of Fiddes’ Eucharistic theology.
The first dimension that Fiddes underlines is that of Eucharist as constitutive for the
life of the church. 621 This conception is based on the biblical text of Matthew’s Gospel
chapter 18 verse 20: “where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the
midst of them.” For Baptists, says Fiddes, Christ is present in His authority exercised through
the three offices, priest, prophet and king, as well as He is present in the Eucharist, in the

617 Ibid., 280 -296.
618 Ibid., 296 -297.
619 Ibid., 302.
620 Fiddes, Participation in God , 182 -183.
621 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 157. Again here Fiddes is close to Stăniloae’s view of Eucharist as being
constitutive for the church, and with Zizio ulas’ view that the Eucharist „is a foundational act of the church, the
act that makes the church.” (Ibid.). See this in Karkkainen , An Introduction , 96.

148
materi al elements of it, as well as in the church as a body.622 Baptists in their history, argues
Fiddes, embraced a synthesis of the thought of Calvin and Zwingli, considering that the
presence of Christ in the Eucharist is a spi ritual one, as the resurrected body of Christ is in
heaven, and cannot be present at the same time on earth. This spiritual presence is, for
Baptists in the past, says Fiddes, made possible through the Holy Spirit. For Baptists from the
seventeenth century to today the spiritual nourishment that the Eucharist represents is along
the eating of the elements of bread and wine, and for some eating in faith opens the possibility
for this spiritual nourishment 623
Further developments on these lin es led Baptists in the past to speak of the sharing of
the Eucharistic as a means to grow, as the sacrament is a call for a closer fellowship with
Christ,624 and with each other in the unity of one body.625 Fiddes understands th at there are
differences of emphasis between different groups of Baptists, ones that will agree more with
an insistence on the elements of Eucharist and others that will insist more on the spiritual
reality that they describe and lead to.
However, it is c lear, says Fiddes, that for both accents, the elements of both bread and
wine are connected with the spiritual nourishment of believers by Christ through the Holy
Spirit. A radicalization for a looser connection of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist i s
connected, as Fiddes argues, with a revival of a sacramentalist view in the Protestant and
Catholic traditions of the nineteenth century, a radicalization that led even to an equation of
the preached word with the Lord’s Supper in regard to the presence of Christ. This viewpoint
soon opens the way for the conception of the Lord’s Supper as being a symbol of Christ’s
presence. 626

622 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 158.
623 Ibid., 159 -164.
624 Ibid., 165.
625 Ibid., 165 -166.
626 Ibid., 166 -167. Sunday School Chronicle , 17 February 1882, ‘Spurgeon’s Scrapbooks, Numbered
Volumes’ , Vol. 6, 8. Spurgeon argued that „there is no sermon like the Lord’s Supper.” (Ibid). See also Peter

149
The second dimension of Fiddes’ understanding of Eucharistic theology is that of the
Eucharist as a door for a deepening of God’s presence in His community, and a more
profoundly transformation of the community as “the body of Christ br oken for the life of the
world”. This is so because Baptists keep together the vertical and horizontal dimension of the
communion, as communion with Christ is always vitally connected with communion with
each other. Second, through participation in the Bod y and Eucharist the believers are also
becoming a sacrament for the world, pointing to the presence of Christ, not only in the
microcosm of the church but also in the macrocosm of the whole world, “becoming doorways
into the flowing relationships that we c all Father, Son and Holy Spirit, entrances into the
dance of their perichoresis of love.”627
Fiddes continues by arguing the fact that this double communion with Christ and with
each other is also powerfully connected with the anamnesis of the community of believers,
because is the redemptive story of each individual with Christ and the common story of God’s
presence, through Christ in the Spirit that the community shares. This is culminated with the
sharing in the Euc harist by remembering the story of Christ’s work for them and in them. In
this dynamics of transformative anamnesis , in which Christ is present as the believers share
the Eucharistic bread and wine, the believers, argues Fiddes, become, for Christ, and in
submission to His lordship, “means of his presence in the world. 628 Fiddes says:

Morden, „The Spirituality of C.H. Spurgeon: II Maintaining Communion: The Lord’s Supper,” in Baptistic
Theologies 4: 1, Spring 2012, Tim Noble, Keith G Jo nes, Parush R Parushev (Eds) (Praha: International Baptist
Theological Seminary, 2012), 49 -50. Morden concludes his analysis of Spurgeon’s theology of Eucharist:
„Spurgeon believed that the Lord’s Supper should be celebrated often. He stressed the importan ce of frequent
celebration because he believed the Supper was central to the Christian life, a belief which was based, in
significant degree, on his experience at the Table. Spurgeon also believed the Supper should be celebrated
simply and with other Chris tians Approaches which detracted from this simplicity or the corporate nature of the
Lord’s Supper……Several of Spurgeon’s central emphases concerning the Lord’s Supper are present in this
extract. The Supper as an accessible, effectual means of communi on with Christ is one such emphasis; the
Supper as a place where Christians know fellowship with each other is another. At the Table Spurgeon believed
that the walls that separated believers from other believers could be broken through and (although he did not say
so explicitly in this extract) the walls that separated believers from Christ too. The Lord’s Supper thus takes us to
the heart of Spurgeon’s spirituality. As the bread was broken and the wine poured out Spurgeon knew
‘communion with Christ and hi s people.’ (Ibid.)
627 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 168 -174.
628 Ibid., 169 -170.

150
Just as Christ uses the physical stuff of bread and wine as a meeting -place between himself
and his disciples, so he uses their bodies as a means of encountering them through each other,
and as a meeting – place with those outside the church. If we underst and the sacraments as
doorways into the fellowship of God’s triune life, then the community itself is being made an
entrance, for its members and for all others.629

Pointing out that the concept of church as sacrament is a common belief for the
Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant traditions,630 Fiddes considers that there two reasons why
this concept is proper for Baptists. First, is the way the church gathers to find the mind of
Christ631 in the knowledge of Christ imparted horizontally through the decision of all
believers, making their common baptism as “an ordination.” Second, it is this ordination that
bestows “responsibilities of active discipleship” for each baptized member to exercise their
gifts and calling to find and fulfill Christ’s will for their lives a nd mission.632
The openness of the Trinity, in this perichoretical dance, to the entire creation, is for
Fiddes the model of the transformation of the Eucharist as an open communion within the
multi -traditional Christian family. He agrees wit h Daniel Turner that “it is the duty of all
Christian churches…to lay the table ‘as open as possible to the free access of ALL, who
appear to love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity.”633 Such openness, argues Fiddes, is to be
based first, on the mutual recognition of a common pattern of Christian initiation,634 and
second, on the discernment of “different ways of belonging to the ‘body of Christ”
appropriate to “the different stages in the process of initiation.”635 Again for Fiddes this
theological attitude of the Christian community is to be rooted in the perichoresis of the
Persons in the Trinity .

629 Ibid., 170. See also Fiddes, Participation in God, 281-283.
630 „Lumen Gentium 1: 9 and 48,” in The Documents of Vatican II , Walter. M. Abbott, S.J (Ed)
(Baltimore, MD: America Press, 1966). A lso, Walter Kasper, Theology & Church (London: SCM Press, 1989),
111-127. He speaks of the church as „a universal sacrament of salvation.” (Ibid., 111). See also, Karl Rahner,
Theological Investigations, 4 (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1966), 36 -73.
631 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 171.
632 Ibid., 123.
633 Ibid., 177. Also, Daniel Turner, A Compendium of Social Religion (Lond on: John Ward, 1758), 119.
634 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 182.
635 Ibid., 183.

151
Together in commun ity they make up the whole body; so the life of the community, mapped
onto the life in God, is not just ‘like’ a body – it is the body of Christ. Likewise the actions of
breaking of bread and the pouring of the wine can fit into the movement of self -breaki ng and
self-outpouring within God, becoming the place where we encounter in an ever deeper way of
the self -giving of Christ.636

The third dimension of Fiddes’ Eucharistic theology is that of Eucharist as defining
membership in the church. Fiddes observes that in their history even though they stressed the
importance of adult baptism, Baptists did not make it mandatory for membership in the
church. He shows that Particular Baptist theologians from the seventeenth century (John
Bunyan, Henry Jessey), through eighteen century (Robert Robinson), to the nineteenth
century (Robert Hall) accepted baptized infants for Eucharistic communion, even though they
regarded them as “unbaptized.” 637
Fiddes adds the fact that for Particular Bap tists open communion was acceptable for
all believers from other Christian traditions, believers who showed the “marks of faith.” The
General Baptists, on the other hand, continues Fiddes, opposed the practice of open
communion on the basis of the connecti on they saw between adult baptism and Eucharist,
rather than to look at obedience to Christ as the Particular Baptists did. 638 However, for
Fiddes, the reason for Baptist ‘open communion is the need to preserve “the unity of church in
the bon d of love.” He argues that this is based on the theology of the church universal and on
the catholic ecclesiology that led to a theological synthesis to regard the body of Christ in its
double, local and universal dimensions.639 Fiddes conc ludes:
The Supper, shared with all Christians, is both a way of manifesting unity now and a foretaste
of the future oneness of the church. Likewise, as Spurgeon pointed out, the use of bread, wine
and water in the sacrament is an anticipation of the “lifti ng up” of matter in the final
glorification of the whole creation.640

636 Ibid., 189 -190.
637 Ibid., 175.
638 Ibid., 176.
639 Ibid., 176 -178.
640 Ibid., 178 -179. Also, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, “The Double Forget -Me-Not,” in Metropolitan
Tabernacle Pulpit , LIV, nr. 3.999, 5 July 1874 (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1908), 315.

152
Fiddes is aware of the fact that the discussion of open communion among Baptists is a
complex one, theologians who are on both sides for and against, have continually debated it,
but he brings into attention another argument on which believer in open communi on have
based their thought, namely the need to respect and acknowledge the freedom of personal
conscience of all believers.641 This is so, they say, because everybody will be accountable to
Christ.642 Fiddes observes that for those who believe in open communion paedobaptism could
have been acceptable enough for being considered a member of the church, without denying
their deep conviction for adult baptism.643 He concludes from here that it is clear from the
argument of the Baptists who favored open communion, that baptism is the formal
incorporation into the body of Christ, being as such the beginning of the communion in the
body of Christ.644 In the words of Daniel Turner:
Our Paedobaptist Brother pleads, ‘That he believes that he is rightly baptized -that if he is
mistaken, it is an Error of his Head, not of his Heart…That is…does not affect the Institution
itself, which he reveres, but only the Subject and Mode of it – That he…feels in his
Conscience the same obligations to Holiness of Life, which are the Essentials of Baptism…645

From these observations and considerations Fiddes elaborates the connection of
Eucharist and membership in the body of Christ, with the process of initiation. He starts from
his idea of “mutual recognition of a ‘common pattern of Christian initiation,’646 that will focus
not on the “mode” of baptism but on the entire process of Christian initiation. This process of
initiatio n, Fiddes argues,
must include the prevenient grace of God working deep within the human heart, some act of
blessing and welcome of infants by the church corporately (where children in the church are
on the journey of faith), formation of faith, an obedien t “yes” to God in Christ for oneself,
immersion or sprinkling with water in the triune name, a first sharing in the Lord’s Table, a

641 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces, 179
642 Ibid., 180.
643 Ibid., 181.
644 Ibid., 181 -182.
645 Daniel Turner, Charity the Bond of Perfection. A Sermon, The Substance of which was Preached at
Oxford, November 16, 1780, On Occasion of the Re -establishment of a Christian Church of Protestant
Dissenters in that City (Oxford: 1780), 26 -27.
646 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 182 -183.

153
moment of making covenant relationship with other Christians and the receiving of spiritual
gifts for the ministry of God in the world.647

Fiddes continues by arguing the necessity for a theology of the body, as meaning that
there are “different ways of belonging to the ‘Body of Christ that should inform the
incorporation in this body.” Distinguishing between the “ incarnate, Eucharistic, ecclesial and
secular” body of Christ will help us to see the way they relate with each other without being
confused with each other. The model taken into consideration is that of the “indwelling of the
divine Logos” in the “body of Jesus, the church, the substance of bread, the body of the
world.” 648 However, as helpful as this model could be, it should not be considered as a static
reality, for only keeping the relational dimension of it versus the dualistic one wo uld help us
to avoid the error of separating the activities of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Fiddes says:
To speak of God as Father, Son and Spirit is to say that there are relationships in God;
There are flowing movements of giving and receiving in love, like the father sending out a son
on a mission of reconciliation in the world, a son responding in loving obedience to a father,
and a spirit of discovery, always opening up the relations to new depths and a new future.649

Through this lens, of God’s indwelling in us/world and of us indwelling in God, we
are able to see more clearly both “the connection, and difference, between different bodies.
On the one hand, the physical body of Jesus Christ in total surrender and obedience to God
corresp onds totally to the “movement of responsive loves within God’s dance of life.”
Moreover, it is in full correspondence with our participation in this movement of the ‘yes’ of
the Son to the Father, as children of God, through our call to the Father, and thi s space of
encounter between us and God in the dynamics of this relationship which is,” Christ –
shaped.”650

647 Ibid., 183.
648 Ibid., 183 -186.
649 Ibid., 189.
650 Ibid. Also, Moltmann, The Church , 260. He argues that „as a feast open to the churches, Christ’s
supper demonstrates the community’ s catholicity. As a feast open to the world it demonstrates the community’s
mission in the world. As a feast open to the future it demonstrates the community’s universal hope. It acquires
this character from the prevenient, liberating and unifying invitati on of Christ.” (Ibid., 260).

154
On the other hand, the Eucharistic actions “of breaking the bread and pouring of wine”
correspond to the “movement of self -breaking and outpouring within God,” and correspond
also to the giving of believers in obedience in th e framework of the covenant with God.
Moreover, these correspondences with the movements in God could be seen also in the world
in every action of sacrificial self –giving. Fiddes concludes by saying that the common
feature of all these correspondences in different bodies, that reflect the perichoretical
movements of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, is the unique space in which they happen: “In
all of them Christ can be embodied…Through all of them the gracious presence of God can
be experienced.” There ar e also differences between these different bodies in which Christ’s
body could be manifested, because “only the church…is a Eucharistic community,” whilst the
secular communities could become “occasions” of Christ’s embodiment, and as such be
“sacramental” communities. 651 This is because the church “is formed by the actions of the
two sacraments which recall the story of Jesus,”
The church can discover more about the meaning of its story through finding Christ embodied
outside its walls; it may, for example, find out more about the meaning of salvation and
healing in life as it experiences movements for social justice and liberation. But as a covenant
community it has a particular witness to the story, and has an inescapa ble duty to go on telling
it652

This “telling” of the story of Christ should be done at the junction of the church’s threefold
call, to unity, communion and mission. The exploration of these issues, according to Fiddes’
theology, is the subjec t of the next section.
8.3. Fiddes’ Eucharistic Theology in an Ecumenical Perspective

In light of the present situation of ecumenical dialogue between different traditions of
the Christian family, Fiddes regards the unity of the church in three dimensions, namely, unity
from the roots, unity as full communion and unity in diversity. These are, in Fiddes’ opinion,

651 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 190 -191.
652 Ibid., 191.

155
three present trends in the life of the churches in the world. First, unity from the roots means
“sharing of resources for worship, witness and social action at local and regional levels.” Also
it means in many cases “engagement in theological education, mission and even shared “local
campai gns against injustice. 653 Second, unity as full communion, means, taking into account
the “variety of churches, each with their own heritage, tradition and emphases,” and the
acknowledgment that if each church is in communion with God, then all “ are already ” in
communion with each other. Third, unity in diversity means to accept the “diversity in unity”
based on the “true diversity” shown in the inner Trinitarian relat ionships that inform a
“legitimate” or “reconciled” diversity. 654 Fiddes summarizes: “The sense of ecumenical call
which is widespread at present is a calling to work from the roots, to work towards full
communion, and to live with diversi ty, painful though it is.”655
From the Pauline text in Ephesians 4 Fiddes continues by extracting three theological
ideas that he explores regarding the above discussion, namely, the idea of one body, one
fellowship, and one covenant. First, the idea that the body of Christ, is one, says Fiddes, an
idea that is central for Paul in 1 Corinthians 12. Fiddes connects the idea of the church as the
visible body of Christ with the visibility of Christ as testified by John in 1 John 1: 1 -4, and in
the context of this connection, it is about the universal church as attested in the connection of
the church with the cosmic Christ in Ephesians 1: 22 -23. This is supported, says Fiddes, by
the use of the word “all” by Paul as he writes in 1 Corinthians 12: 13. 656
Next to the visibility of the church universal in the church local, Fiddes argues the
manifestation of the church universal in the local church. For Fiddes this freedom of God to
make Christ the head of the church universal that is made visible in diverse forms within local
churches, should lead to a hermeneutics of humility in regard to one’s tendency to connect the

653 Ibid., 193 -194.
654 Ibid., 195 -196.
655 Ibid., 197.
656 Ibid., 197 -198.

156
church with “territorial jurisdiction.” The visibility of Christ, implicit in the visibility of the
church, argues Fi ddes, is to be found in the exercise of the charismata of all members of the
church towards the fulfillment of ‘God’s ministry of reconciliation,” 657 and through a
continuous cultivation of an exercise of hearing the word of God through th e ears of one
different from one’s own tradition.
The second theological idea that Fiddes explores is that of the call to one fellowship.
The fellowship concept, or koinonia , meaning “sharing, participation and communion” is a
reality “existent before us,” (the church), and it is a reality of God’s inner Trinitarian life and
of His relationship with the created world, “as broken as the world is.658 With the model of the
Father’s koinonia with the Son and the Spirit, and of the Father’s fello wship with the world
through the Son in the Spirit, mirrored in her theology, the church “is the foretaste of
koinonia” only if she will “embody it”659 This embodiment should be seen in the unity of
addressing the exclusion of different Christian groups from the Christian family, on the basis
of a negative nationalism rather than mirroring the image of the Trinity.660 Fiddes expresses
the way the perichoretical relationships of triune fellowship should be mirrored in the
fellowship of the church and churches:
Fellowship is a rich ha rmony of stories, a mutual indwelling of stories, a weaving together of
the stories of one’s own life, church and nation into a greater story. This common story is the
drama of God’s creative and redemptive acts in the universe…661

From here comes naturally the third theological idea that Fiddes explores, namely that of one
covenant. Fiddes considers that there are two dimensions of the concept of covenant, the

657 Ibid., 198 -210.
658 Ibid., 214 -215.
659 Ibid., 215. Also, Colin E. Gunton, „The Church on Earth: The Roots of Community,” in On Being
the Church: Essays on the Christian Community, Colin E. Gunton & Daniel W. Hardy (Eds) (Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1989), 78. Gunton argues that „the being of the Church should echo the interrelation between the three
persons who together constitute the deity. The Church is called to be the kind of reality at a finite level that God
is in eternity.” (Ibid.)
660 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 215 -216.
661 Ibid., 216

157
dimension of walking together and the dimension of watching over each oth er.662 Fiddes’
covenantal theology and the way it roots his view of spirituality will be explored in chapter 8
of the present project.
8. 4. Summary of Chapter 8

I aimed in this chapter to explore the way the thought of Paul Fiddes on the Eucharist
reflects his understanding of perichoresis . I started the exploration by arguing that there is a
framework of Fiddes’ theology of Eucharist in a perichoretical key. This framework, we
observed, has four elements , namely, synthesis between creation and redemption, idea of
communion and sacrificial living, the transformative victory of Christ on the cross, and
Christ’s transformative presence.
From the framework of Fiddes’ theology of Eucharist, with its four elem ents I
continue d by exploring the heart of Fiddes’ theology of Eucharist, namely the Trinitarian
perichoretical relationships, as a model for the life of the church, a reality that centers the
three dimensions of Fiddes’ theology of Eucharist. These three dimensions are: Eucharist as
constitutive for the life of the church, Eucharist as a door for a deepening of God’s presence
in His community, and Eucharist as defining membership in the church.
The exploration ended with Fiddes’ theology of Eucharist in an ecumenical
perspective. We observed that for Fiddes there are three dimensions of church unity, namely,
unity from the roots, unity as full communion and unity in diversity, as three present trends in
the life of the churches i n the world.
In this context we observed that Fiddes connects the idea of the church as the visible
body of Christ with the visibility of Christ. This visibility of Christ implicit in the visibility of
the church, argues Fiddes, is to be found in the exer cise of the charismata of all members of
the church towards the fulfillment of God’s ministry of reconciliation, and through a

662 Ibid., 221

158
continuous cultivation of an exercise of hearing the word of God through the ears of one
different from one’s own tradition. The second theological idea that Fiddes explores is that of
the call to one fellowship. With the model of the Father’s koinonia with the Son and the
Spirit, and of the Father’s fellowship with the world through the Son in the Spirit, mirrored in
her theology, the church is the foretaste of koinonia only if she will embody it. From here
comes the third theological idea of Fiddes that we observed, namely that of one covenant.
However, Fiddes’ covenantal theology and the way it roots his view of spirituality will be
explored in chapter 9 of the present project.

159
Chapter 9 . Fiddes’ Covenantal Theology in His Thought about Spirituality
9.1. The Concept of Covenant as a Framework for Fiddes’ Theology of Spirituality

The first dimension of covenant as a framework for Fiddes’ theology of spirituality is
that covenant is a reality of covenanting pilgrims , a pilgri mage that involves a bi -dimensional
dynamic. Fiddes starts his argument about covenant with the distinction between the Old
Testament types of covenants. First is the “Davidic type,” in which “the covenant is made
between God and a representative leader of the community,” and second, the “Sinaitic type,”
made with the entire community who constitute the people of God. 663 The latter, is in Fiddes’
view, a model appropriated by Baptists, with its emphasis on “personal faith and obedience,”
translated practically in “d ependence upon God. This dependence on God is to be expressed
first, in a permanent awareness of the will of God, materialized in “God’s new acts with his
people” and second, a continuous “pilgrimage to discover what it means to be called into
relationship with God.”664 Fiddes says:
To be a covenant people is to be a pilgrim people. At the heart of this is the faithfulness of the
God of promise, for the people of Israel had to learn through the ages that God was free to
fulfill his promises in unexpected ways.665

The second dimension of covenant as framework for Fiddes’ theology of spirituality is
that of the climax of the theology of covenants in the newness of New Covenant , the reality of
Jesus Christ. He is, says Fiddes, the fulf illment “of the hopes of Israel for a new covenant,”666
“the primary sign of hope”667 for the people of God in the world of God. Christ is also the
person who is the model of how a relationship with God should be, “living in the spirit of

663 Fiddes, “The Covenant – Old and New,” in Bound to Love: The Covenant Basis of Baptist Life and
Mission , edited by Paul Fiddes, R. Hayden, R. Kidd, K. Clements, and B. Haymes (London: Baptist Union,
1985), 13.
664 Ibid., 15 -16.
665 Ibid., 17.
666 Ibid., 18.
667 Fiddes, “The Signs of Hope,” in A call To Mind: Baptist Essays Towards a Theology of
Commitment , with Keith Clements, Roger Hayden, Brian Haymes, and Richard Ki dd (London: Baptist Union,
1987), 37.

160
Christ.”668 In Fiddes’ view, Christ is not only the model of how the spiritual life of the people
of God should be, but also, how the life of God is lived in relationship with humanity. Christ’s
sacrifice is the ratification of the covenant, and it is the demonstrati on of God’s own
pilgrimage of suffering for the fallen humanity, as well as the deepest expression of the loving
mutuality of such a covenant whose newness culminates in its cosmic addressability that
needs to be embraced in the though, life and message of the church.669
The third dimension of covenant as a framework for Fiddes’ theology of spirituality is
that of covenant’s horizontal coordinates vitally connected with its vertical coordinates .
Fiddes shows that this connection of the vertical and horizontal coordinates of the covenant,
expresses the share of the “covenant fellowship of local Christians…in the covenant
fellowship of God’s own life.670 Also, he sho ws that the concept of the covenant offers a
solution to the dilemma of the connection “between divine action and human freewill,” by
keeping together “human responsibility” and “divine initiative.”671 Further, the horizontal
dimension of the c ovenant is conditioned by the vertical dimension, which defines the journey
of covenanting pilgrims,672 being the recollection, envisage and renewal of the vertical
dimension of the covenant without changing it.673
For Fiddes, the horizontal dimension of the covenant as conditioned by its vertical
dimension is embodied in two domains of human existence. First, is the familial domain, with
the promotion of a non hierarchical partnership between husband and wife, expre ssed in what

668 Fiddes, “The Covenant – Old and New,”18 -19.
669 Ibid., 19 – 23. Fiddes says that “While the covenant is not mutual in the sense of an equal status of
members, it is mutual and reciprocal in that each member is affected by the other. A relationship of love cannot
be otherwise. To love anoth er is to suffer with him and for him. So, as the prophets reflect upon the disaster
which Israel has brought upon herself through the breaking of the covenant, they also affirm the agony of God’s
heart as he feels for his people suffering the consequences of their actions….”(Ibid., 20). “Through his supreme
servant, Jesus, God brings salvation to all nations: nor do they need to keep the laws of the covenant which Israel
had received from Moses… the purposes of God reach even beyond all mankind to the whole universe…all
creation will be transformed as mankind responds to God in trust and obedience.” (Ibid., 22)…to take our place
in God’s covenant community is to take responsibility for our world, to look for ways in which God’s kingship
can be extended in al l society…” (Ibid., 23).
670 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces, 18.
671 Ibid., 19.
672 Ibid., 29.
673 Ibid., 34.

161
was called “submission of equality,”674 as opposed to “a hiera rchy of submission,”675 and the
“second is the ecclesial one, with the promotion o f a non -hierarchical partnership between
members of the Christian community. The key expressions of such mutual partnership are
baptism and the Lord’s Supper, being “the base for making the new community, the body of
Christ which is the church.”676 The inter -conditionality of the two domains in which is
expressed the bi -dimensionality of the covenant is argued by Fiddes in the perennial principle
of wholeness, 677 of the entire reality, a principle that is to be embodied as humanity is called
to participate in the journey towards wholeness, in a hermeneutic of love that will root a
cosmology of love,678 expressed in the superlative in the inner Trinitarian life imagined by
Fiddes as a conversation:
The voices that weave together in the to -and-fro of human spe ech need not be imposing
themselves on each other; they can be responding in a sensitive way, aware of difference of
the other and his or her particular contribution to the whole. When this happens they are
sharing in the life and the love of God…The “pers ons” in God, three movements of self –
giving love, are utterly different from each other, emptying themselves out for the sake of each
other, yet at the same time one in creative purpose. We catch the echoes of their
“conversation,” movements of love which are like a father speaking to a son and the son
responding with a glad “yes…”679

9. 2. The Story of Christ as the Centre for Fiddes’ Theology of Spirituality

Fiddes considers stories as being formative for human spiritual experience and being a
“path to mat urity,” and to the desired wholeness in life.680 For Fiddes the story of Christ is “in

674 Fiddes, “Woman’s head is Man,” in Baptist Quarterly 31 (8) (1986), 373. Also, C. K. Barrett, A
Commentary of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (London: A&C. Black, 1968), 250.
675 Fiddes, “The Theology of the Charismatic Movement,“ in Strange Gifts? A Guide to Charismatic
Renewal , edited by David Martin and Peter Mullen ((Oxford: Blackwell, 1984), 36.
676 Fiddes, Tracks and Traces , 53.
677 Fiddes, “Old Testament Principles of Wholeness,” in Iosif Ton: O rizonturi noi in Spiritualitate si
slujire (Oradea : Cartea Creștină , 2004), 46. Fiddes says: “ Old Testament ideas of wholeness by the individual
personality extending not only through the immediate family…but into the entire covenant community…If
people ar e to be made whole they must share in the making of the wholeness, becoming self -creative, otherwise
even the gift of freedom will be experienced as something imposed upon…” (Ibid.)
678 Fiddes, “The Root of Religious Freedom: Interpreting Some Muslim an d Christian Sacred Texts, in
Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, vol 1, No. 1 (2012), 176 -177.
679 Fiddes, “When Text Becomes Voice: You’ve Got Mail,” in Flickering Images: Theology and Film in
Dialogue , with Anthony J. Clarke (Oxford: Regent's Park College; Macon, GA: Smyt h & Helwys, 2005), 108.
680 Fiddes, “Introduction: the novel and the spiritual journey today,” in The Novel, Spirituality and
Modern Culture: Eight Novelists Write about their Craft and their Context , edited by Paul S. Fiddes (Cardiff:
University of Wales Press, 2000), 3

162
itself a form of culture,” that gives coherence to the Christian story that “embraces “history
and the cosmos,”681 shapes the life of Christian community, that is called to represent Christ
through “action (praxis)” based on reflect ion, and “ redescribe reality.” 682 The Christian story,
that has the revelation of God in Christ, as its center,683 is for Fiddes the judge “of the
predominant spirit” of idolatry in society, through revealing “the healing reality ” of God ‘s
permanent presence, who opens “God’s own self to human hearts and they respond in
questions, protests, and prophetic voices.”684
Yet, the paradox of revelation, says Fiddes, is that when God reveals Himself he “veils
the divine self, “even though God has the “freedom to be unveiled as well as veiled.”685 The
consequence of such a paradox is that humanity is permanently called to transformation from
merely observer of God to participant in God,686 participation through which we are invited
into “this interweaving or perichoresis of relationships,” a “story of a Father who sends out a
Son in a Spirit of love,” a story in which we are called “to incorporate our own stories.”687
This ca ll to participation is illustrated by Fiddes, with the story in John 20, when appearing to
the disciples after resurrection “the risen Christ invites his disciples to participate in his own
story of relationship to the Father.”688

681 Fiddes, „The Story and the Sto ries: Revelation and the Challenge of Postmodern Culture,” in Faith
in the Centre: Christianity and Culture, edited by Paul S. Fiddes (Oxford: Regent's Park College; Macon, GA:
Smyth & Helwys, 2001), 80 -81. Fiddes defines culture as being „ the stories th at people tell about themselves in
order to understand where they have come from, where they are, and where they are going.” (Ibid., 80).
682 Fiddes, “Story and Possibility: Reflections on the Last Scenes of The Fourth Gospel and
Shakespeare’s The Tempest ,” in Revelation and Story: Narrative Theology and the Centrality of the Story , edited
by Santer Gerhart and Barton John (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), 33, 38.
683 Nigel Wright, “Spirituality as Discipleship: the Anabaptist Heritage,” in Under the Rule of Christ:
Dimensions of Baptist Spirituality , edited by Paul S. Fiddes (Oxford and Macon, GA: Regent’s Park College
with Smyth & Helwys Publishing Inc, 2008), 82.
684 Fiddes, “The Story and the Stories,” 84.
685 Fiddes, “Story and Possibility,” 43.
686 Fiddes, “Concept, Image and Story in Systematic Theology,” in International Journal of Systematic
Theology, 11/ 1 January 2009, 23.
687 Fiddes, “Story and Possibility,” 44.
688 Ibid., 44 -45.

163
The fact that revelation is “an invitation to participate in the story of the triune
God,”689 has as a consequence not only that “we may envisage new possibilities…emerging
from the interaction between creator and the created,” but also an awareness of “what happens
when a reader engages with a text,” in “the dialogue with the story of the scripture.”690 This
engagement is to be done or promoted in such a way as to avoid the danger of being trapped
“in the world of the text” with the conseq uence that the relevance of the text to today is
shadowed as the connection of the world of the written text with the actual world of the
readers is not visible.691
Fiddes looks at the text in 2 Corinthians 3: 6 as an example from Paul’s rhetoric of
how the divorce from the world of the written text and the actual world of the readers, could
be avoided. If Paul’s concern was to provide for his audience an acknowledgment for the
necessity to transcend the literal meani ng towards the spiritual meaning, Fiddes acknowledges
himself the shift from “the letter kills but the spirit gives life,” proper to the Jewish way of
interpretation, to “spirit kills and the letter makes alive,” proper, to post modernity.692 He
says:
The letter kills’, when a leg alistic principle which merely protects the self is applied within a
network of signs, whether a religious text or the life of a community uses age -old images and
symbols .693

Fiddes, admits the fact that narrative the ology, meaning “telling the story of God,’ or
metaphorical theology is attractive, providing the framework for the vital connection between
biblical truths, contained in the images and the stories of the Bible, and “the life and practices
of the Christian community.” Yet he considers that if should be crystal clear that the Scripture

689 Ibid., 45.
690 Ibid., 45 -46.
691 Fiddes, When Text becomes Voice , 100.
692 Fiddes, When T ext becomes Voice ,”103. Also, Fiddes, “Concept, Image and Story.” Here Fiddes
argues the promise of narrative or metaphorical theology that “ aims to be more biblical, elaborating, enlarging,
interpreting and connecting together the images and stories contained in Scripture as a framework for the life and
practices of the Christian community,” (ibid., 7).
693 Fiddes, When Text becomes Voice, 104.

164
is the primary witness to God’s revelation but that does not exclude other avenues for God’s
revelation. 694 He suggests that there is place for the integration of extra -biblical narratives
that could be considered means of God’s revelation, and this for two reasons. First, says
Fiddes, doctrines are anyway, “a second -order language,” and second, there is need for such
dialogical integrat ion because of such differences for example as that between literature and
doctrine, namely the different tendency in regard to the meaning of the former towards
openness and of the latter towards closeness. However, he is realistic in acknowledging the
danger of reconstructing meaning in accordance with a certain ideology, 695 and in that, as
Francesca Murphy has said, there is an intrinsic danger that “a narrative theology without a
metaphysic simply dissolves God into the story.”696 Fiddes’ argument is that in the light of
the dangers, we have to look for “a mutual influence between literature and theology which is
without separation and without confusion, even though keeping the distinctions in roles of the
two, literature’s to inform the doctrinal formulations and theology’s to “provide a perspective
for the critique of the literary texts.”697 He distillates this mutuality:
In poetry, drama and novel the imagination reaches out towards mystery, towards a reality for
which we feel an ultimate concern, but which eludes empirical investigation…There is then, a
universal revelat ion giving rise to a knowledge of God which is non -conceptual, and non –
objective; Rahner identifies this as ”transcendental’ revelation…of God which happens in the
human orientation towards mystery. By contrast, there are also moments when the self –
giving of God takes form in historic events and gives rise to deliberate concepts (what Rahner
calls ‘categorical’ revelation). Some events ‘stand out’ as decisive moments of disclosure,
insisting that they be noticed and calling for a whole reorientation of l ife from the
participant…The movement of the human spirit towards self -transcendence is bound to
overlap with the theological understanding of the human spirit as being grasped by
transcended reality.698

694 Fiddes, “Concept, Image and Story,” 6 -8.
695 Ibid., 8 -9.
696 Ibid., 10. Also, Francesca Ann Murphy, God is Not a Story: Realism Revisited (Oxford: University
Press, 2007), 10 -16.
697 Fiddes, “Concept, Ima ge and Story,” 11.
698 Ibid., 12 -13.

165
9.3. The Poles and the Coordinates of the Embodiment of Christian Spirituality

Fiddes considers that one of the first important developments in the life of faith, a life
under the rule of Christ over the entire life, is that of attentiveness, in its vertical dimension,
namely the awareness of God,699 that roots its horizontal dimension, that is awareness of
Christ and the ones who are in Christ, 700as well as awareness of God’s self revelation in
created order701 and human culture.702 This attention that is central for spiritual life assures not
only the dynamics in the process of harmonisation of one’s life with that of Christ’s,703 but
also the ability to see “the traces” of God in His hiddenness in the world.704 If Christian
spirituality is “cultivating attentiveness,”705 or “attentiveness to the infinitely Other,” Fiddes
considers that there are two images that best express this reality, namely, stillness and
journey, being the “two modes of giving attention to the other, this be finite others or the
infinitely Other.”706
The first image is that of stillness,707 and for Fiddes in accordance with Christian
tradition stillness is the framework for contemplation of God as well as for “seeing” the signs
of God’s presence in others and the created orde r. The second image is that of journey and for
Fiddes, it is also essential for any discussion of the subject of spirituality in the Christian
tradition. Moreover, for Fiddes, it is in accordance with the Christian tradition the

699 Fiddes, “Spirituality as Attentiveness: Stillness and Journey,” in Under the Rule of Christ:
Dimensions of Baptist Spirituality , edited by Paul S. Fiddes (Oxford & Macon, GA: Regent’ s Park College with
Smyth & Helwys Publishing Inc, 2008), 25.
700 Ibid., 26.
701 Fiddes, “When Tex t Becomes Voice,” 104.
702 Fiddes, “Concept, Image and Story,” 16.
703 Fiddes, “Spirituali ty as Atentiveness: Stilness and Journey,” 26.
704 Ibid., 27.
705 Fiddes, “Introduction: the Novel and the Spiritual Jo urney Today,” 11.
706 Fiddes, “Spirituality as Attentiveness: Stillness and Journey,” 29, 30.
707 The idea of stillness is proper to hesychasm, and so Fiddes comes close to Stăniloae and Palamas in
this regard. See, Stănil oae, Viața și Învățătura sfântului Grigorie Palama , 32-33. See also, Meyendorff, A Study
of Gregory Palamas , 134. He says that hesychasm „had become a technical term to designate the state of inner
rest and silence which victory over the passions gained f or a monk and so allowed him to proceed to
contemplation.” (Ibid.)

166
understanding of the “the t wo forms of spirituality, as interconnected, one leading to the other
and vice versa. 708
Fiddes acknowledges the merit of the mystical tradition in providing the directions of
the spiritual journey in the framework of stillne ss, namely the journey of “into the depths of
the soul” and “upwards” towards the presence of God where there is the experience of “the
silence of the spirit and the end of all images and words. Also, he considers that the mystical
tradition provides the p roper vocabulary for spirituality, “the seeing” of the divine light
“experienced by the eyes of the soul as the deepest darkness,” as well as the relation between
darkness, stillness, and vision of God, and “the journey to the centre of the self.” Moreover , if
attentiveness is essential for spirituality, it implies not only a journey inward or upwards but
also, to the self of others, being a journey of “forgiveness,” “empathy,” “moral
transformation,” and “mission.” 709
From the tw o poles of spirituality, namely, stillness and journey, Fiddes continues
with the coordinates on which spirituality is embodied. The first one is the practice of
praying , “free prayer” or “from the heart,” a prayer that requires “purity of heart,” is shaped
by scripture, and is a “representative prayer,” as it is acted in the interdependency of the
members of the Christian community encompassed by their dependence on God.710 Such a
prayer is, in Fiddes’ interpretation, mor e connected with the concept of journey than with that
of stillness, as through prayer “we are drawn into the person’s journey of experience,
the person’s journey into the world as he or she leads us in intercession for others who are
encountered in daily work or social life. It may be his or her journey through the text of
scripture. It may even be a journey deep into the heart of the self in confession or up to the
heights of Mount of Tr ansfiguration in praise, and so we may find that the journey leads us
finally into the silence of encounter with God.711

708 Ibid., 29 -30.
709 Ibid., 30 -33.
710 Ibid., 34 -37.
711 Ibid., 37.

167
The second coordinate of spirituality is that of witness , as part of Baptist worship. For
Fiddes witness is an invitation for the recipient, be it an individual or a community “to give
attention” to the person who witnesses and to the way the person embodies the rule of Christ
in his or her life. Also witness is an invitation for the recipient “to share” and “to follow” the
story of Christ at work in the life of the one who witnesses, “showing” the way one could
come from recipient of a witness to one who in his turn is a witness. Witness is a way of
“seeing Christ” by participation not by observation, both for the one who wi tness and the
recipient, and as such is a synthesis between journey and stillness.712
The third coordinate of spirituality is that of singing , as a way of “being attuned to the
movements of love and relationship in the life of the triune Go d,” as well as “giving attention
to each other,” listening to each other, in the search of harmony as the community tries to sing
together.713 For Fiddes singing situates the community and its members at the intersection of
journey and still ness, as
In worship we find that Christ is our new social space…This space offers moments of
stillness; we live before the many faces which are internalized in our hearts, but we only
worship the face of Christ who can be trusted to relate all other faces . Worship is an inclusive,
yet uncrowded, space to be, as singing takes up the whole body into the rhythm and movement
of the divine song. Yet this is inseparable from journeying…singing opens up the borders
between ourselves and other human beings.714

The fourth coordinate of spirituality is that of Eucharistic communion , as the
“sacramental encounter with God in the gathering of disciples of Christ. The concept of
journey is valued as communion involves a voyage “of remembrance into the pas t,” and a
voyage “into the self in self – examination.” The concept of stillness, in its connection with
that of journey, is also visible, through “attention to the elements” of bread and wine,” as
expressions of Christ’s real and spiritual presence, in th e gathering of the community.715

712 Ibid., 38 -42.
713 Ibid., 43 -44.
714 Ibid., 45-46.
715 Ibid., 46 -49.

168
The fifth coordinate of spiritua lity is that of reading the Bible that is central for
spirituality from a Baptist perspective, having authority over the lives of the ones constituting
the community. The reading of the Bible in worship, says Fiddes, first, “enables” participation
in the B iblical story, and the exposition of the Bible “calls” to a journey into God’s mission
that need to be appropriated by the community in society.716
The synthesis of the two elements of journey and stillness are underlined by the
practices of public reading, exposition and preaching, as well as by the private reading of the
scripture as a framework for community’ s role in judging the preaching in the community, in
order “to gain a common mind of the meaning of scripture.”717 Fiddes concludes the
discussion of the interconnection between journey and stillness as key features of spirituality:
The still point must always be part of a journey…It is a sense of being held within God who is
on journey, always voyaging out of God’s self in to the desolation of the world…The stillness
comes…not by escape from time but by our working with God in taking up the past, present
and future into the wholeness which does not cancel time but heals it. This is only possible by
attention to God and to ot hers, measuring all things by the rule of Christ.718

9.4. Summary of Chapter 9

I aimed in this chapter to explore Fiddes’ covenantal theology in his thought about
spirituality. I observed that the concept of covenant constitutes the framework of Fiddes’
theology of spirituality. There are three dimensions of covenant that Fiddes underline:
covenant as a reality of covenanting pilgrims, the climax of the theology of covenants in the
newness of New Covenant, covenant’s h orizontal coordinates vitally connected with its
vertical coordinates, embodied in two domains of human existence, the familial domain, and
the “second is the ecclesial one,
From the concept of covenant as framework for Fiddes’ theology of spirituality, I
continued by exploring the centre of Fiddes’ theology of spirituality, namely, the story of

716 Ibid., 49 -50.
717 Ibid., 51.
718 Ibid., 53.

169
Christ. We observed that in Fiddes argument the story of Christ is in itself a form of culture,
that gives coherence to the Christian s tory, that in its turn is the judge of the predominant
spirit of idolatry in society.
The last step in my exploration was that of observing the poles and the coordinates of
the embodiment of Christian spirituality. We have seen that for Fiddes spirituali ty is
cultivating attentiveness, and that for him there are two images that express this reality, and
constitute the poles of Fiddes’ theology of spirituality, namely, stillness and journey. We also
observed that for Fiddes there are five coordinates on wh ich spirituality is embodied: the
practice of praying, witness, singing, Eucharistic communion, and reading the Bible .

170
Part Three: Conclusions

Chapter 10. The Dialogical Dimension of Spiritual Journey: Results of the Conversation
10.1. Theology of Participation and the Spiritual Journey

The first thing to be noticed, is that both thinkers, Stăniloae and Fi ddes, are systematic
Trinitarian thinkers, trying to develop a theology of participation desired to be the
foundation for the Christian life and for the church. The way they are doing this reflects
their faithfulness to their own traditions. However, is no ticeable the way in which in the
case of Stăniloae the preeminence of tradition, with few exceptions, roots his use of
Scriptures. In the case of Fiddes it is noticeable the way in which different from the
traditional baptistic insistence solely on Scriptu res, he shows ability to understand the
value of Patristic theology that brings the necessary balance in the interpretation of
Scriptures.
For both of them one could detect as a common feature, the understanding of the
interpr etive key role of Fathers for contemporary understanding of Scripture. And this is one
of the most necessary acknowledgments in the contemporary Romanian theological arena.
First, the necessary reminder for many in the Orthodox tradition, that the Fathers were
profoundly Biblical in their formulations.
Second common feature is the fact that they were able to interact with the philosophy
and culture of their times without being enslaved by the secular patterns of thought. And third
feature is that for them Scriptures were the controlling element of the veracity of any
theological formulations.719 On the other hand for man y in the Baptist tradition, a necessary
reminder should be that even though the Scriptures are normative for the Christian life, their

719 St. Athanasius, „On The Incarnation of the Word.” In Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers , 4, 36 -67. As
a constant feature of Athanasius’ way of theologizing is his consta nt return to Scripture for validation of
theological argument. See also, „Defence against the Arians,” in Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers , 4, 100 -147.
And also, Basil: „The Hexameron,” in Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers , 8, 51 -107.

171
interpretation should always be developed in the light of what has always been believed,
thought and confessed.720
Second, even though Stăniloae and Fiddes frame their theology of participation
differently, they have in common the premise of the centrality of the doctrine of the Trinity.
For both of them the saying of Catherine Mowry LaCugna is true: „The doctrine of the Trinity
is ultimately a practical doctrine with radical consequences for the Christian life.’721
Stăniloae’s framework starts from the being of God with its super essential, spiritual
attributes and inner Trinitarian relations. Fiddes, in his turn, starts from the concept of
perichoresis reflected in the three dynamics of what he calls the interplay of grace and faith,
the interplay of spirit and water, and the interplay of Christ’s body and church. However, both
theologians are thin king in a way in which they try to demonstrate that the perichoretical
relationships between Father, Son and Holy Spirit, inform the relationship of God with
humanity and the relationships within the church . This truth of correspondence between the
Trinity and the church, which Stăniloae and Fiddes agree on, is well expressed by Nigel
Wright:

As the people of God the church is called together by the Father; as the body of Christ
the church exists in, for and through the Son who is its head; as the temple of the Holy
Spirit the church is indwelt by the Spirit of God who gives life to all722

From the exploration of the previous chapters I understand that both theologians seem
to be in agreement on the fact that baptism is an important stage in the process of Christian
initiation. Both of them agree also on the importance of faith in the act of baptism, of the
person baptized or of the pe rsons who present him or her for baptism. While Stăniloae insists

720 Pelikan , The Christian Tradition , 1. Defining doctrine as „what the church believes, teaches and
confesses on the basis of the word of God,” Pelikan continues: „the form which Christian doctrine, so defined,
has taken place in history is tradition…Thus traditio n means the handing down of Christian teaching during the
course of history of the church, but it also means that which is handed down,” 6 -7.
721 Catherine Mowry LaCugna, God For Us: The Trinity and Christian Life (San Francisco, CA:
HarperSanFrancisco, 1993), 1.
722 Nigel G. Wright, Free Church, Free State: The Positive Baptist Vision (Carlisle, Cumbria:
Paternoster Press, 2005), 4.

172
on the importance of infant baptism for its role in the annihilation of ancestral sin, Fiddes
speaks about both forms of baptism, infant or adult, yet, without forgetting the importance of
personal or corporate faith.
Stăniloae, even though insists on baptism as the beginning of this process, considers
also that baptism together with Chrismation is the moment when Christ gives faith and the gift
of the Spirit to the baptized. He creates sp ace for the conception of process in regard to
baptism when he speaks time after time about the actualization of baptismal power in later
life, through active faith and obedience. Fiddes in his turn, insists on the precedence of faith
over the act of bapti sm, and speaks about the role of the church’s faith in keeping the
candidate in the actualization and confession of his faith.
Moreover, first, in the case of Fiddes, it is clear that he regards baptism as a process,
yet his view is not dependent on process theology, even though he interacts with it, rather his
influences come from the biblical theology of participation in Christ’s death and resurrection
and its consequences for the entire Christian life723 and he also seems to be aware of the fact
that there are Patristic resources that sustain such a concept. A sample of such a Patristic
resource that Fiddes acknowledges, is expressed by Gordon S. Mikoski in his analysis of the
thoug ht of Gregory of Nyssa on baptism who says: “ Baptism for Gregory was not merely a
one-time event. It forms the architectonic pattern for the entirety of the life of the church and
those who are members of it.”724
Second, in the case of Stăniloae, the fact is clear that he is characterized by
conservatism in his view of the way other traditions see and practice baptism, a cons ervatism
that characterizes his entire ecclesiology, that make some to charge him of spiritual

723 Corneliu Constantineanu, The Social Significance of Reconciliation in Paul’s The ology: Narrative
Readings in Romans (London: T&T Clark International, 2010). Constanti neanu argues that „through baptism,
the believers are incorporated ‘in Christ’ and so in their new life they are animated by the same life of obedience
to God manifested through a renunciation of their own desires and a concern for the needs of others… life which
is totally defined and shaped by their union with Christ, in the pow er of the Spirit,”136.
724 Gordon S. Mikoski, „Baptism, Trinity, and Ec clesial Pedagogy in the Thought of Gregory of Nyssa,”
in SJT 59 (2): 175 –182 (2006), 177.

173
reductionism725 and clericalism.726 However, one would agree with the fact that this
conservatism is not only proper to Stăniloae, it being a feature of the contemporary situation
in the Romanian Orthodox Church. Yet, in spite of his conservatism Stăniloae seems to be
aware of the complexity of the discussion in the theological arena of the larger Christian
family.
Another meeting point between Stăniloae and Fiddes is their sacramental view of
baptism. For Stăniloae saving grace is already present in the baptismal water that was
transformed in a salvific medium through the touch of the Holy Spirit. For Fiddes, the
baptismal water is the place of encounter with the grace of God. Stăniloae considers that the
grace of God produces the faith that is be stowed on the baptized in the act of baptism. Also he
considers that grace is strengthened by the act of Chrismation as a continuation of baptism,
and is maintained and actualized by the Eucharist.
Fiddes speaks about the prevenient grace of God’s initia tive that matches the corporate
faith of the church and/or the vicarious faith of parents or godparents, in the case of infant
baptism or of children raised in the church. The prevenient grace is continued by the
transformative grace that permits the growt h of vicarious faith into the owned faith of the
believer who is baptized or commits to conscious faithful obedience. The equilibrium between
the grace of God’s initiative and the response of faith of the believer/believers seems to be
kept, or at least de clared by both, Stăniloae and Fiddes, this necessary complementarity
between the initiative of grace of God and the answer of the believers’ faithful obedience727

725 Emil Bartoș , Deification, 335. And, Bartoș , Conceptul îndumnezeirii în Teologia lui Dumitru
Stăniloae (Oradea: Cartea Creștină , 2002), 437.
726 Mănăstireanu, PM, 283.
727 Edwin A. Blum, “2 Peter,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, New Testament , edited by
Kennet h L. N. Barker & John R. Kohlenberger III (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Corporation, 1994), 1065.
Also, Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove: IL,
Intervarsity Press, 1993), 726. J.C. Beker, “Second Letter of Pet er,” in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible
(Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1962), 769.

174
and trust,728 in a life -long process that confirms the past cleansing in his life.729 Moreover,
Stăniloae and Fiddes, both are rightly saying that faith is a gift from God. Yet, God gives the
gift of faith, not automatically from the church, pneumatized as she is, to th e person, 730 but
rather through the hearing of the Word of Christ, through a pneumatized proclamation.731
Stăniloae sees the “water” in John 3 as being the baptismal water transformed by the
pneuma tized Christ,732 whilst Fiddes considers that the water is “a place of encounter with
God for renewal of life.”733 We have also noticed that Stăniloae considers that Christ is
leading the process of salvation through the Spirit, from and in the temple of our being.
Fiddes on the other hand, speaks of different comings of the Spirit, appropriate to various
stages of the process of initiation . For Stăniloae baptism is vital fo r the annihilation of and

728 Ben Witherington III, Paul’s Narrative Thought World: The Tapestry of Tragedy and Triumph
(Westminster : John Knox Press, 1994), 265.
729 The Petrine text speaks of the necessary complementarity between God’s actions and the believer’s
response: „His divine power has given us everything we need for life and goodliness th rough our knowledge of
him, who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious
promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world
caused by evil desires. For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness, and to goodness,
knowledge; and to knowledge, self -control; and to self -control, perseverance; and to perseverance, goodliness;
and to goodliness, brotherly kindness; and to b rotherly kindness, love. For if you posses these qualities in
increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive, in your knowledge of our Lord
Jesus Christ. But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been
cleansed from his past sins (2 Pe 1: 3 -9)”
730 C.H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans (London: Hodder, 1932), 16. Also, John Ziesler ,
Paul’s Letter to the Romans (London: SCM Press, 1989), 69. See also. David Wenham, Paul: Follower of Jesus
or Founder of Christianity? (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995). He says that
faith for Paul is not something for which we deserve any credit,”68.
731 Markus Barth, Ephesians: Int roduction, Translation, and Commentary on Chapters 1 -3 (New York:
Doubleday & Company, Inc, 1974). He says: “the saving grace itself opens a wide field of “good works” as “our
way of life” (Eph 2: 5, 8, 10),” 249. And the Pauline text: … That is the word of faith we are proclaiming: That if
you confess with your mouth “Jesus is the Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the death,
you will be saved…How can they believe in the one they have not heard? And how can they hea r without
someone preaching to them? Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard
through the word of Christ… (Ro.10: 8 -9, 14, 17).
732 See also, Alexander Schmemann, Din Apă și din Duh: Studiu Liturgic al Botezului (Of Water and
the Spirit) (București: Symbol, 1992), 38.
733 For a different view see F.F Bruce, The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1983), 84. Also, Bruce Milne, The Message of John: Here is Your King (Leicester: Inter –
Varsity Press, 1993), 76. Scott M. Lewis, The Gospel Accord ing to John and the Johannine Letters
(Collegeville, MI: Liturgical Press, 2005). He says that the expression “water and spirit” could refer to natural
birth (water) and rebirth (spirit) even though a reference to baptism could not be excluded, (ibid.,20). For a view
of the baptismal water as a signifier and birth from above as the reality signified, see Leslie Newbigin, The Light
has come: An Exposition of the Fourth Gospel (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1982), 39. In the same line see Merril C. Tenney “John” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, New Testament ,
edited by Kenneth L. N. Barker & John R. Kohlenberger III (Grand Rapids, MA: Zondervan Corporation, 1994),
304.

175
cleansing from ancestral sin, and for Fiddes it is a symbol of spiritual cleansing, as he
considers that “Paul speaks of sin as if it has a kind of objective existence “reigning” in our
bodies, making us slaves…”734
Conclusions

We have tried in this section to reflect on the common features of Stăniloae’s and
Fiddes’ understandings of baptism as the beginning of the process of Christian initiation.
Even though they represent two traditions that differ significantly in their way of regarding
baptism, we could find many meeting points between Stăniloae and Fiddes that could be
valuable for the dialogue between Orthodox and Baptists in Romania. In our anal ysis we
understood that both of them regard baptism as a dynamic reality being simultaneously an act
and a process through which a person becomes part of the people of God, is integrated the
body of Christ and is transformed as the temple of the Spirit. H ow these Trinitarian features of
baptism, detected in the thought of Stăniloae and Fiddes, could inform a theology of baptism
as a way of life and how the dimensions of baptism as a way of living could be used to
articulate a transformative way of regardin g baptism in the Romanian Christian communities
will be argued in the first part of chapter 11 in the present project.

10.2. Perichoretical Theology and Spiritual Journey

The first thing to be remarked in comparing Stăniloae an d Fiddes in their thinking
about Eucharist is that both of them argue from the perspective of the entire Christ event,
keeping together the incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection. If one of the reasons for
Stăniloae’s insistence on the resurrection in r egard to Eucharist is rooted in his disagreement
with the insistence of Protestantism on the cross of Christ, the other could be that in the
Scriptures Eucharistic theology is argued from the perspective of the resurrection of Christ.

734 Fiddes, Past Ev ent and Present Salvation , 115

176
For Fiddes, on the ot her hand, keeping together the elements of Christ event is rooted in his
understanding of the redemptive story of the Scripture, from creation to eternity. The direct
consequence of the intrinsic complementarity between incarnation, life, death and resurre ction
of Christ is that it helps maintain the necessary horizontal dimension of the Eucharist, as an
occasion to celebrate in the togetherness of the spiritual community the uniqueness of the God
of love, embodied in Christ, and to make this celebration a meaningful resource to imitate his
example in concrete social mission and ministry.
Moreover, a common feature of Stăniloae and Fiddes is that they do argue from the
perspective of the three aspects of redemptive actions of God that are celebrated in Euch arist.
First, in regard to the remembrance of God’s past redemptive acts, the incarnation is
underlined. Second, both of them acknowledge the significance of the Eucharist in the present
for the edification of the church, and third, they acknowledge the es chatological significance
of the Eucharist. Stăniloae speaks of Eucharist as a feeding for the eternal life and Fiddes
speaks of the Eucharistic communion is as a sign of the covenant with God, through Christ, in
the Holy Spirit, that not only operates her e and now in the life of believer, but is a reflection
of the future Eucharistic feast of God’s Kingdom towards which Jesus himself pointed out in
His Eucharistic discourse in the Upper Room.
This common view of the two theologians, in regard to the unity of Christ’s event,
namely incarnation, death and resurrection, is very important for the theological conversation
between theologians of the two traditions they represent. Even if their emphases are different,
they are not contradictory, but rather comple mentary. The Orthodox could be enriched, in
their important insistence on resurrection, by the Baptist’s insistence on the cross because the
entire Christian family constantly need a profound theology of the cross as a lens through
which the real difficult ies and hardness of life can be regarded in the hope of resurrection.
Stăniloae is profoundly concerned with the imprint of the cross on all realities of life, as we

177
will have seen in chapter 5 of this project. At the same time Baptists in Romania with the ir
important insistence on the cross could be enriched by the Orthodox insistence on resurrection
as a vital reminder that the suffering of the cross in Christian life is always followed by the
joy of resurrection.
For both, Orthodox and Baptists, it cou ld be an important reminder, that as there is no
cross for Christ without the incarnation of Christ, there is no resurrection without the cross.
The three should be kept together even though the writers of the New Testament, not without
acknowledgment of t his continuum, emphasize one or another depending on the needs of their
communities. When was necessary to balance a theology of the cross with a theology of glory,
in order to promote courage in hard times, the writers emphasized the resurrection, as for
example in the community addressed by the Gospel of Mark,735 whilst when it was necessary
to balance a theology of glory with a theology of the cross, they emphasized the crucifixion,
as for example the community addressed by Paul’s letter to the Corinthians.736
One of the other areas of agreement between Stăniloae and Fiddes is that of the
centrality of Christ’s presence in Eucharist. Both of them see Eucharist as the reality where
Christ’s presence is a real presence, a transformative spiritual presence, as part of the process
of transformation in which believers are being co nformed with the image of Christ. 737
And this is an important reminder of the vital importance for the life of believers of the
real, pneumatic, sanctifying communion with Christ, mediated by the Word. On the other
hand for both, Orthodox and Baptists Romania, it could be an important reminde r that the
Eucharistic communion should be encompassed by a daily appropriation of Christ’s life, in an
Eucharistic way of living, led by the complementary work of the Spirit of God and the Word

735 Gundry, Robert H. Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross . Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993. He says: Mark corrects the theology of glory with the theology of cross,”
(ibid., 2).
736 Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corint hians (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1987). He speaks of the problematic Corinthians “who have an exaltation Christology that
avoided the cross,” (ibid., 58).
737 Seyoon Kim, Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel
(Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002), 172 -173.

178
of God. Third, as such for both, Orthodox and Baptists, there is a necessary reminder that the
Eucharist is to be seen as the “climax of the table fellowship, which Jesus had had with
publicans and sinners, “738 a new covenant – making event,”739 a “constant renewal of the
covenant between God and the church,”740 and “a kingdom -anticipating, kingdom -producing
event”741
Moreover, for both, Orthodox and Baptists in Romania, the above comparative
considerations underline an important reminder in regard with the Word of God, as a form of
God’s revelation. This is the need for the continual balance between the normative role of the
Word of God as a form of God’s revelation, whilst it is also important to regard carefully the
interpretative role of Tradition, for the life of the Church. This practice was vital for the
Fathers of the Church in the first centuries of the Church’s history, whose vigilance provided
the possibility to answer heresies and consequently to promote and pr eserve a healthy
spirituality for the life of the church, as a necessary foundation for a meaningful mission of
the church.742
It was considered in previous studies that one of the major problems of Stăniloae’s
theology is that connected with his view of the nature of sin. In this regard Bartoș argues that
the „aspect of sin as a violation of God’s standards is secondary in Stăniloae’s approach, with
clear effects on his view on the doctrine of redemption and justification…an authentic and

738 R. S. Wallace, “Lord’s Supper,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology , edited by Walter A. Elwell
(Grand R apids, MI: Baker Books House, 1984), 652. Also, Peter Toon, “Lord’s Supper,” in Baker Theological
Dictionary of the Bible , edited by Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996), 492.
739 David Wenham, “How Jesus Und erstood the Last Supper: A Parable in Action,” in Churchman, vol.
105 Number 3, 1991, 254.
740 M.E. Osterhaven, “Views of Lord’s Supper,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology , edited by
Walte r A. Elwell (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1984), 653.
741 Wenham, “How Jesus understood,’ 255.
742 In this regard Ivana Noble argues that „the renewed emphases, one on a living personal relationship
with God, instead of on a set of rules, and the other on the interdependence between the two material authorities,
Scriptures and tradition, though the supremacy of the Scriptures remained, opened up new ecumenical
possibilities.” See, Noble, Tracking God, 118.

179
holistic understanding of deification must deal with the objective reality of guilt and not
merely with the subjective experience of feelings of guilt.” 743
Yet, we need to remember as we argued in chapter 4, that Stăniloae distinguishes
between ancestral sin, a reality that is ann ihilated by Christ, in baptism, and sins after baptism
that are annihilated, as we have seen in chapter 5, through faith that becomes fear of God, a
fear to sin, a fear that leads to repentance. In the same chapter we have seen also that
Stăniloae argues for permanent repentance, directed to our vices and sins, in the process of
purification. Moreover, Stăniloae prefers to speak of shame consequent to sin, shame being,
an spiritual instinct of the soul in regard to past sins and a help in avoiding the futu re sins.
The permanency of repentance in the spiritual journey of life, is underlined even in the
Eastern Orthodox tradition, by the “prayer of the heart:” Lord Jesus have mercy on me, a
sinner! However, Stăniloae’s consideration that the efficiency of th e penances depends on the
degree the believer practices the recommendations of the priest in his own spiritual life,744
could be something hard to accept for Baptists in Romania. They will insist on the personal
dimension of confessi on and repentance. Yet, the emphasis on obedience in the Orthodox
tradition, which is a concretisation of obedience to God, as seen in Stăniloae’s view of sin and
repentance, could constitute an important reminder about the need to speak and promote
repent ance that is embodied in obedience to a concrete and sinful person and community, that
is the church.
Moreover, Stăniloae discusses the idea of confession in front of the priest. First, he
discusses the text in James 5: 14, and his perspective could be a n important reminder for
Baptists in Romania, about the often forgotten and not very much promoted dimension of
confession, that to another person. Many Baptists in Romania would agree that this is
necessary, especially in the case of repeated sins, the sp iritual assistance of a fellow believer

743 Bartoș , Deification , 317.
744 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 95.

180
is of paramount importance, in overcoming sin as a way of living, as a close reading of the
text from James could reveal that it is concerned with the pastoral work of believers to each
other too. They will agree als o with Fiddes in his argument about corporal oversight of the
believers.745
The second text that Stăniloae uses in order to support his affirmations about the
confession of sins is the text about the case of Ananias and Sapphira (Ac 5: 3). Stăniloae uses
this text to prove the practice of confessing sins in front of the apostles. From here it would
also be appropriate to consider that Luke is concerned with the comparison between two ways
of practicing charity. One, a practice of charity that is transparent and not rooted in the need
and desire to impress but rather to help, represented by Barnabas (Acts 4: 36 -37). The other,
under the direct confrontation of the Apostle Peter, is that based on wrong motivations as
proved by the liars, Ananias and Sapphira (Ac 5: 1-11). The result of this public confrontation
is a good sample of the primitive church’s preoccupation with genuine service for Christ and
his church. This is a very important dimension of the ecclesial life that should constitute a
perennial preoccupa tion for the churches from both traditions in Romania.
In regard to repentance in connection with Eucharist, Stăniloae does not discuss the
Pauline corrective for the practice of the Eucharist in the Corinthian Church in which Paul
exhorts the believers i n Corinth to participate in the Eucharist but to do that examining
themselves and distinguishing the body of Christ (1 Co 11: 27). This is relevant, for it could

745 One of the examples is the exhortation of the author of Hebrews: “ See to it, brothers, that none of
you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. But enco urage one another daily, as long
as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness” (Heb 3: 12 -13). “Let us not
give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another” (Heb 10: 25). “Se e
that no one is sexually immoral, or is godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold its inheritance rights as the
oldest son” (Heb 12: 16). These texts show the fact that there is a corporate responsibility for encouragement,
confrontation and help that is to be assumed by all believers. This reality is assisted by God, His Spirit and Word
and through His Son: „For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double -edged sword, it
penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart
(Heb 4: 12).”

181
be plausible that the corrective is directed to those who stop themselves and others from
sharing in the Eucharist.746 What is clear from the entire message of the New Testament, and
this is a common feature for the thought of Stăniloae and Fiddes, is that repentance is not
once for all or is not something that the believers should do only regarding the Eucharist,
rather, repentance should be a permanent reality, a once and always practice. This reality of
permanent sinfulness in the mirror of God’s character is the reason why a believer should be
in a permanent state of repentance. Another important acknowledgment and reminder for the
ecclesial communities from the Orthodox and Baptist traditions in Romania, is in this context,
the discussion about the internal work of the Holy Spirit in revealing personal sin and in the
conviction about sin, promoting the confessio n of it, as the Gospel of John underlines.
Fiddes’ concept of repentance is not connected with Eucharist. He connects it with the
requirement of God’s justice which is not asking for “payment but repentance.” The Father,
says Fiddes “is finally “satisfied ” not by any penalty but by the change of heart to which a
penalty is intended to lead.”747 Fiddes continues his argument in a way that is a deeper
reflection of perichoresis , naming the cross of Christ “the g reat confessional” where through
the penitence of Christ on our behalf,” He “wins us to repentance.” 748 In fact, Fiddes
continues, the repentance of believers is “a share in the penitence of Christ” under “the
influence of the penitential spirit of the crucified Jesus.”749 Baptists in Romania, will interpret
the Scripture as arguing that it is the prerogative of the Holy Spirit to reveal the sinfulness of

746 Jurgen Moltmann, The Church in the Power of the Spirit: A Contribution to Messianic Ecclesiology
(London: SCM Press LTD, 1977). He says: “The Lord’s Supper is not the place to practice church
discipline…Christ’s original feast of j oy is then unfortunately transformed into a meal of repentance where
people beat their breasts and gnash their teeth. This moral legalism spoils the evangelical character of the meal
just as much as dogmatic legalism…The acknowledgment of a “special minist ry” obscures Christ’s giving of
himself “for all” and the fellowship of brothers and sisters into which all are to enter. Hierarchical legalism
spoils the evangelical character of the Lord’s Supper just as much as dogmatic and moral legalism” (Ibid., 245 –
246).
747 Fiddes, Past Event and Present Salvation , 104.
748 Ibid., 105. He quotes P.T. Forsyth, The Work of Christ: lectures to young ministers (London: 1938),
150.
749 Fiddes, , Past Event and Present Salvation, 106.

182
human beings, according to the sayings of Jesus to his disciples about the coming and the
work of the Holy Spirit 750
Embra ced in this complementary work of the Spirit and the Word, the believer is then
reminded that “nothing is hidden for God to whom we must give account”751 and that
eventually sins are correctly dealt in the framework of our intimation with th e merciful High –
Priest, Christ, the base on which we can “approach the throne of grace with confidence so that
we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.”752 Fiddes speaks of the
double meaning of koinonia or communion that Fiddes considers is attested by the Johanine
theology when the Apostle John writes that the love for God that believers confess should be
proved in their sacrificial love for each other which should mirror the love that God showed
us in Christ, making us his children.753 This overlapping action of the two realities is for John
the way the church could avoid a practice of a spirituality that is not a mirror of God’s love,
namely, to “love with words and tongue” rather than “with actions and in truth.”754
Conclu sions
I have aimed in this section to explore the way the concept of perichoresis , expressing
the reality of Trinitarian Persons to be mutually indwelt by each other, without confusion,
contradiction or separation is reflected in the thought of Stăniloae and Fiddes. I have seen that
the first area in which the reflection of perichoresis constitutes a common feature of both
theologians is that of the unity of the Christ event. We can conclude that will be instructive
for the conversation between Baptists an d Orthodox in Romania, this common feature of the
two theologians thought, as keeping together the incarnation, life, death on the cross and

750 John 16: 8 and Hebrews 4: 12 -13.
751 Hebrews 4: 13.
752 Hebrews 4: 15 -16. The same reality is described in the Johannine theology of repentance:
„If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all
righteousness…if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defence – Jesus Christ, the
Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole
world.”(Jn 1: 9; 2: 1 -2).
753 1 Jn 4: 20.
754 Jn 3: 18.

183
resurrection is an important constitutive dimension for a balanced Christology that will root a
holistic ecclesiolo gy.
We have also seen that the second area in which the reflection of perichoresis
constitutes a common feature of both theologians is that of Christ’s real presence in Eucharist.
Here we observed that Fiddes’ move from a symbolic view of Christ’s presence , towards a
more sacramentalist view of this presence, that situates him close to the Eastern view
represented with fidelity by Stăniloae. This observation points to a necessary clarification for
Baptists in Romania, as in their majority they regard the pr esence of Christ in Eucharist as
being symbolic. It is also interesting that Fiddes is close to Stăniloae’s view only regarding
the mode of Christ’s presence in Eucharist.
When it comes to the centrality of the priest for confession before Eucharist and t he
vital role of priest in administering the Eucharist, Fiddes remains in the mainstream of the
Baptist view just as Stăniloae does this in regard to the Eastern view. We can conclude that
the understanding of Stăniloae’s view, as well as of Fidde s’ view o f Christ’s presence in
Eucharist will be beneficial for Baptist communities in Romania, and a good platform for a
necessary redefinition of the spiritual role of Eucharist in the life of Baptist communities in
Romania.
Also, Stăniloae’s insistence and Fid des’ resistance for the centrality of the ministerial
priesthood in Eucharist could constitute a good reminder that this is one of the important
differences between the two traditions in Romania. The consistency of Fiddes’ view on the
general priesthood o f all believers could constitute a good example for the Baptists in
Romania, especially because one could detect a subtle tendency towards a hierarchical view
of the s tructure of the church, that could be considered contradictory with a healthy emphasis
on the general priesthood that imparts the responsibility for ministry and mission on each
believer in the Body of Christ.

184
As an overall conclusion, we could affirm that regardless of the meeting points
between Stăniloae and Fiddes in their view of Eucharis t, there are still huge differences of
accent and conce ption between the two views of Eucharist. We believe that by detecting the
common features of the reflection of perichoresis , namely, the unity of Christ’s event, the real
presence of Christ and the ro le of Eucharist in the life of the church for enhancing spiritual
life, we have shown a path which could open the way towards discovering the reasons for
open communion between the two churches in Romania. A proposal for a possible further
direction in dev eloping the platform for this communion will be the subject of one of the
sections of chapter 11 in this project.
10.3. Trinitarian Theology and the Spiritual Journey

The first thing to be noted after the comparison of Stăniloae ’s and Fiddes’ thought on
spirituality, is the fact that they meet on the common ground of their Trinitarian thinking.
When Stăniloae considers that the Holy Trinity is the foundation for Christian spirituality he
develops his thought in three directions. First, he argues the spiritual life of the Trinity in the
communion of the plurality of three divine Persons. Second, divine spirituality shared by the
three Persons is the model for the spirituality of Christian communities, and third, the model
of Christ ian spirituality that is divine spirituality is infused through divine uncreated energies,
love being one of them. Moreover, Stăniloae argues elsewhere that the uncreated energies are
inseparable from the Spirit, as the Spirit is the vehicle for the uncrea ted energies.755
For Fiddes the foundational importance of the model of Trinity for Christ ian
spirituality is expressed in the call of such a model for a transformation from observer to
participant in the spiritual mission of the Father, through the Son in the Spirit, a mission in the
world and for the world. The aim of such a participative jo urney with God is that of

755 Stăniloae, Rugăciunea lui Iisus și experienta Duhului Sfânt (Jesus’ Prayer and the Experience of the
Holy Spirit) (Sibiu: Deisis, 2003), 112.

185
transforming the fractured realities of the world through a wholeness that is proper to the
divine life. The way this journey towards wholeness in the image and likeness of Holy
Trinity is developed by Fiddes on the coordinates o f covenant and communion with God, with
its vertical and horizontal dimensions, is what could be called in a Baptist way, theosis ,
meaning not being like God but “sharing to the most intimate degree in the fellowship of the
divine life.756
Fiddes and Stăniloae meet in agreement, when arguing from the perspective of the
perichoresis concept that speaks of no confusion, no contradiction and no separation, as both
of them consider that participation in divine life is not alt eration of the “I” of the believer757 or
confusing God with created order, the participation of the believers being always fractured in
the present life.
These Trinitarian -framing and Spirit -based common features of the two theologians
views of spirituality is an important reminder and an important reflective theme for Baptists in
Romania, where there is a necessary reformulation of a theology of the Spirit that will keep in
their vital connectio n not only the three Persons of the Trinity, but also the Person, work, fruit
and gifts of the Spirit.

The second important thing to be noted in a comparison of Stăniloae’s and Fiddes’
thought is that of Christ’s centrality for Christian spirituality. If for Stăniloae the centrality of
Christ is translated in the cross of Christ that is present in all realities of life and the world, for
Fiddes the centrality of Christ is the foundation for the hope of the new people of God in the
actual world of God. Stăn iloae sees the imprint of the cross, in the world, the relationships
between human beings, and the pleasures of the body. For him the growth and development of
Christian spirituality is conditioned by the adoption of a Christlike attitude to the cross, in
accepting it. For Fiddes Christ and His life are the starting points of authentic spirituality.

756 Fiddes, Track and Traces , 18, 19.
757 Stăniloae, Spiritualitate Ortodoxă: Ascetica și Mistica, 23.

186
Christ is also the model of how the relationship with God should be, as well as the
demonstration of God’s own covenantal pilgrimage of suffering for fallen hum anity.
Stăniloae continues from the vertical dimension of Christ’s centrality for Christian
spirituality to the horizontal dimension that is translated in the believers’ responsibility for the
creation in general and for other persons in the world in part icular. He affirms the importance
of these responsibilities in order to address a possible misunderstanding of Christian
spirituality, that of withdrawal from the world into a state of indifference. Rather he affirms
that the authenticity of the vertical d imension of Christian spirituality is proved in spiritual
living as participation in the work of divinity in preserving and sustaining the created order.
Such participation is for Stăniloae the way of releasing the spiritual potencies that God in his
initial design imprinted on human beings.
Moreover, Stăniloae argues that this identification with Christ is materialized in ascetical
efforts that aim at the mortification of the vices, reflecting identification with Christ’s death,
and in replacing the vices with virtues, reflecting the identification with Christ’s resurrection.
This process of identification started at Baptism and continues with Eucharist, both being
forms of Christ’s presence and assistance in our ascent towards God.
This presence, says St ăniloae, is embodied through the work of the Spirit in the space
of communion with Christ, namely, the Church. Besides the important role of Baptism and
Eucharist for the ascent journey, both of them being sacraments that are ecclesially bounded,
Stăniloae seems to promote an innovative personalism in line with the prevalent personalism
of 20th century Orthodox theology, as a reaction to „the reductionist challenge of modernity,
with its different expressions of nihilism and atheism, liberal individualism a nd totalitarian
Marxist collectivism.”758

758 Rogobete, O ontologie a iubirii , 22.

187
For Fiddes’ theology of spirituality, the horizontal dimension of it is vitally connected
with its vertical dimension. But different from Stăniloae, he brings into view the con cept of
covenant that expresses the intimate connection between God’s initiative and actions as well
as human responsibility and response. For Fiddes, all these are embodied in familial life and
ecclesial life. Both domains, again, different from Stăniloae , are, in Fiddes’ view conditioned
by the model of divine life as reflected in a non -hierarchical partnership between husband and
wife, expressed in what was called “submission of equality,”759 as opposed to “a hierarchy of
submission.”760 He tries to base his line of thought on a close reading of New Testament
Scriptures as for example the Pauline concept of wholeness of the entire reality that ov erlaps
the divine, the familial and ecclesial realities, the vertical and horizontal dimensions of
spirituality and the divine and human participation in the macrocosm of the ecclesial
community as well as in the microcosm of ecclesial reality that is fami ly, in the necessary
journey towards what Fiddes calls the “cosmology of love:” 761
Another meeting point for Stăniloae and Fiddes in their reflection on Christian
spirituality is the fact that both of them affirm the centrality of Christ for the revelation of God
and for union with God. In Stăniloae’s argument this is seen in the threefold meani ng of the
cross’ imprint on human existence, namely, the revelation of God’s transcendence over the
gifts that he offers to the world and humanity, the revelation of God’s sovereignty that
provides an understanding of God’s uniqueness, and the revelation o f the true love for God as
Person, despite the presence or absence of His gifts. One of the things to be noted is that
Stăniloae roots his reflections on the three meanings for the imprint of the cross on human
existence on a profound scriptural reflection of the book of Job.

759 Fiddes, “Woman’s head is Man,” in Baptist Quarterly 31 (8) (1986), 373. Also, C. K. Barrett, A
Commentary of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (London: A&C. Black, 1968), 250.
760 Fiddes, “The Theology of the Charismatic Movement,“ in Strange Gifts? A Guide to Charismatic
Renewal , edited by David Martin and Peter Mullen ((Oxford: Blackwell, 1984), 36.
761 Fiddes, “The Root of Religious Freedom: Interpreting Some Muslim and Christian Sacred Texts, in
Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, vol 1, No. 1 (2012), 176 -177.

188
Fiddes in his turn considers that the revelation of God in Christ is central for the
Christian story and as such roots the prophetic ministry of the Christian community in the
world against the idolatry in society. The power of this r evelation, in Fiddes’ opinion, is not in
the fact that God forces Himself over humanity, rather this power consists in the endurance
with which God invites humanity to participate in “this interweaving or perichoresis of
relationships,” a “story of a Fathe r who sends out a Son in a Spirit of love,” a story in which
we are called “to incorporate our own stories.”762 Moreover, in Stăniloae’s thought, the
centrality of Christ is seen in his affirmations about the union wit h God through the
identification with Christ. This identification is not the replacement of the believers’ self with
that of Christ, rather Christ’s life becomes the power by which a believer lives.
For Fiddes, Christ’s centrality for the union with God through identification with
Christ is seen in his argument about the rule of Christ over the life of the community. This
rule is to be translated into awareness of Christ, expressed in two modes: stillness that will
enable the contemplation of God and, jou rney in ascent towards God. Fiddes’ argument about
the complementarity of the two is very close to that of Stăniloae, when arguing the two
dimensions of the journey, namely, the inward one, into the depths of the soul, and the
upward one, in the silence o f the spirit.
At this point in his discussion about the body, heart soul and spirit, Stăniloae has a
threefold contribution. First, in the discussion of the difference of soma – sarx, when arguing
that vices are irrational deformations that have connectio ns with the body and the soul, he
provides some important corrections for ascetical practices oriented towards the body without
the vital connection with spiritual education and disciplining of mind and will. Second, he
discusses the difference between sub limation and abolition when speaking of bodily affects
that need to be kept under control not extinguished. His third contribution is important in

762 Fiddes, “Story and Possibility,” 44.

189
clarifying the theological vocabulary for the concepts of soul, heart, mind, etc in conversation
with modern psychology.
Another common thing to be noted is that for both, Stăniloae and Fiddes, spirituality is
a dynamic reality that develops on the trajectory of the ascent towards God. Stăniloae speaks
of stages or phases of the ascent journey, from purification from vices that are replaced by
virtues, through illumination by the light of Spirit, to union with God in love. Fiddes on the
other hand speaks of this journey in the terms of embodiment of attentiveness to God and to
the others who are in Christ, namely , between two poles, stillness and journey.
Stăniloae argues the pneumatic unity of the ascent through all the stages in the life of a
believer and he sees distinctions between the power of the Spirit and the light of the Spirit
consequently to the movemen t from purification towards union, through illumination. Fiddes
also seems to be close to a integrative conception of the work of the Spirit in the life of
believers in the necessary continuum of the individual and communal dimensions, when he
argues the i nterdependence of the coordinates of embodiment of spirituality, namely, prayer,
witness, singing, Eucharistic communion, and reading of the Bible, all those expressing the
unifying role of the Spirit in the life of community.
Another difference to be no ted is that even if both theologians seem to agree about the
vital role of faith in the ascent of spirituality the apparent mechanicism of the process of
purification seems to be overcome by Stăniloae’s consideration of the importance of grace as
God’s emp owering initiative with the conclusion that faith is simultaneously the gift of God
and answer to human obedience and permanent repentance. Stăniloae argues admirably that
faith has the role of strengthening reason and is to become a life style and a fear of God, yet
he sadly does not show the way in which the actualization of faith reality in the life of the
believer and community is to happen.

190
Complementarily, Fiddes understands the importance of the word of God and of
fellowship in prayer, worship and Eucharistic communion in a community context for the
strengthening of faith towards more and more spiritually mature participation in mediation of
“seeing Christ” through a necessary move from being witnessed to, towards being a witness to
Christ. This is for Fiddes, a way to participate in God’s mission in the world. Stăniloae too
speaks of „seeing” differently the meaning of your existence, of the created order and the
spiritual meaning of Scriptures. These different seeing is done through the work of the Spirit
in illumination, on the coordinates of pure prayer. Here Fiddes adds another vital element for
the spiritual journey that of a pure heart as a vital ingredient for true prayer shaped by
scripture and encompassed by the koinonia of community. .
Conclusions

Overall, in regard to the dynamics of the ascent’s trajectory in spirituality, we can
conclude that for both theologians a preoccupation with stating the unity in the work of the
Spirit in different aspects of the journey, and in keeping the necessary balance between the
individual and the communal aspects of spirituality in their interdepe ndence, is evident. This
could be a salutary corrective for the excessive individualism proper to many baptistic
communities in Romania in regard to spirituality as well as an important example for the way
the Trinitarian theology of participation could an d should inform spiritual life and its
interpretation in baptistic communities in Romania
Moreover, first, the way Stăniloae sees the dynamics of ascent in spirituality though
following a hesychastic path and through the complementarity of ascetic and myst ique
mirroring the Christological – Pneumatological convergence , brings a fresh perspective that
could be a useful corrective for the two possible extremes in regard to spirituality in
contemporary Orthodox communities in Romania, that of mechanical ascetic s without any

191
spiritual content and significance, and that of excessive mystical orientation without any
connection with the necessary mission in the real life of society.763
Second, Fiddes’ engagement with mystical theology is a model of the necessary
theological engagement of Baptist theology with theologies from other Christian traditions
within the Romanian Christian family. Also, the hesychastic elements in the thought of both
theologians are an important reminder for be lievers from both traditions about the fact that the
Christian life is a shared journey, assisted by God in Christ through the Spirit. Also it is a
reminder that the shared journey of Christian life means growth into the likeness of Christ,
and that activi sm should always be balanced by contemplation, action by understanding, and
ministry by spirituality. The theme of Christian life as a shared journey will be explored in the
last section of chapter 11 in this project. .

763 See also, Ion Bria, Romania: Orthodox Identity at a Crossroad of Europe (Geneva: WCC
Publications,, 1995), 43. He argues against the movement „calling for a return to the spirituality of the so -called
„Eastern Mysticism,” which promotes detachment from historical events and isolation of the people from civic
affairs…the task of the church is precisely to help the society to shape a new economic system, to promote
alternative structures that will enhance social and economc justice and lead to a genuine community of
democracy.” (Ibid.)

192
Chapter 11. The Transformative Dimension of the Spiritual Journey: Lessons from the
Conversation
11.1. Baptism as a Way of Living

In chapter 10, of this work we understood that Stăniloae a nd Fiddes are in agreement
and bring into full attention the importance of the Holy Trinity, for our participative progress
towards God, as “the foundation, infinite reservoir, power and model of our growing eternal
communion,”764 and as the foundation of Christian spirituality,765 and having the concept of
perichoresis as the best way to express the theology of participation.766 I also argued that the
two theologians meet in agreement, on the fertile terrain of a dynamic view of baptism,
having faith as the essential element not only for baptism as a starting place but also for the
“continuation and actualization of baptism,”767 a process of a “life -long growth into
Christ,”768 led by Christ,769 and empowered by the Holy Spirit. 770
There are a few important possible developments from the conversation of the two
theologians’ thoughts about Trinitarian participation that are of real significance for the model
of the church as a community that mirrors the divine perichoresis , which we would like to
explore in the following section. As already observed in the analysis of Stăniloae’s and
Fiddes’ views of the economic Trinity, Christ is the meeting place of the Father and the Spirit,
and the meeting place of divinity and humanity. The direct consequence of these realities is
the reality of Christ as the meeting place of believers with each other as the people of God,
having Christ in the center, as in Christ we meet the Fa ther in the Spirit. Therefore progress
in understanding baptism not only as a static reality of immersion in water, but also towards a

764 Stăniloae, Revelation , 247 .
765 Stăniloae , Spiritualitatea Ortodoxă, 29.
766 Fiddes, Participating in the Trinity , 385.
767 Stăniloae , Spiritualitatea Ortodoxă, 44.
768 Fiddes, „Baptism and the Christian Initiation,” 56.
769 Stăniloae , Spiritualitatea Ortodoxă , 43.
770 Stăniloae, TDO , 3, 25. Also, Fiddes, „Baptism and the Christian Initiation,” 61.

193
dynamic lifelong reality of immersion in the divine perichoresis , is possible only when Christ
is the center.
Based on this important finding in the exploration of chapters 3 and 7, we aim to argue
the way those findings could be applied in a possible reformulation of the theology of baptism
for baptistic communities in Romania. This is necessary because in Romania one of the major
disagreements between the Orthodox and Baptists is in their view of Baptism. Yet, as we have
seen in chapter 10 in the comparison of Stăniloae’s and Fiddes’ views on baptism, there are
areas where the two traditions could be in agreement. Those i ntersections of agreement I aim
to reveal in the present section of chapter 11.
Thus, in the present section I want to explore, first the constitutive dimension of
Baptism for being the people of God, second, the confessional dimension of Baptism for
beco ming the Body of Christ and third, the missional dimension of Baptism in the ordination
of the church as the Temple of the Spirit. In light of the conversation between Stăniloae and
Fiddes we will argue that being the people of God is based on Christ’s Per son, work and
status, being the Body of Christ, requires our participation, and being the Temple of the Spirit
means to be immersed in God’s mission in the world through the Son in the Holy Spirit. This
concentric character of the church’s mission is expre ssed in the kerygmatic dimension of
Christian discipleship, the koinonial character of Christian prayer, and the kenotic
embodiment of Christian diakonia .771

The Constitutive Dimension of Baptism: Being the P eople of God

The constitutive dimension of baptism could be seen in the fact that being the people
of God is possible only if Christ is in the center as the premise for our participation in the

771 Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralistic Society (London: SPCK, 1992), 131. He says: „ The
missionary movement at the present time suffers from the running battle between those who make this emphasis
on the primacy of evangelism, of the declaratory function of the Church, and those who insist that the first
priority must be given to action f or challenging injustice, prejudice, and oppression, action for justice and
peace…If we turn to the Gospels we are bound to note the indissoluble nexus between deeds and words.” (Ibid.)

194
movement of the Father towards the Son in the S pirit, and of the Spirit towards the Father
through the Son. To participate in this reality means to be embraced by the Father, as He
embraces the Son, and to be embraced by the Spirit as He embraces the Father through the
Son. This participation that is c entered in Christ is fundamental for a dynamic encounter with
one another as the people of God.772 Human persons centered in Christ cannot remain captive
in the privacy of their individuality, for if they a re immersed in the divine Persons’
movements towards each other, the human persons “meet” with each other as they share in
the center that is Christ, share the embrace of the Father in Christ, and share the embrace of
the Spirit in Christ. It is a perichor esis of movements that has Christ as the center, a
perichoresis that mirrors the divine perichoresis in which each divine Person makes the other
the center, being fulfilled by the Other without being dissolved in the Other, fulfils the Other
without confus ion with the Other, and centers the Other without being separated from the
Other.773
Therefore, the unifying center of the perichoretical church, in its vertical and
horizontal dimensions, is the Christ, meaning to put Christ in the center, as The Father pu t
Him in His plan. In fact the Son Himself, in His person and work, mirrors the character of the
Father and fulfils the Father’s plan. On the other hand, to put Christ in the center should
mirror the way the Spirit put Him in His work, a reality shown in t he fact the Spirit Himself in

772 Leslie Newbigin, The Household of God: Lectures on the Nature of the Church (London: SCM Press
Ltd, 1964), 25. He says: „The Church is the pilgrim people of God…Therefore the nature of the Church is never
to be finally defined in static terms, but only in terms of that to which it is going.” (Ibid.)
773 Stăniloae, The Holy Trinity, 23, 27. Speaking about the centrality of the Other for each Person in the
Trinity as an open experience for us, Stăniloae argues: „…the Fathe r does not want to miss out on experiencing
the Son’s love for Him, as He unites His feelings as Father toward the Son with the experience of the Son’s love
for Him, without thereby confusing Himself with the Son. The Father experiences the Son’s feelings toward Him
as a subject, without becoming confused with the Son. We see the unconfused unity of the Father with the Son in
this relationship…We experience this fact even in our relationships among each other.. (Ibid., 23). „We too live
this phenomenon in part, but we are limited, dependent, created beings, and we cannot fully appreciate
infinity…(Ibid., 24). „The mode in which the Holy Trinity is united is thus the origin and the eternal helper in
creating unity between conscious things.” (Ibid., 27). S ee also, Ben Witherington III and Laura M. Ice, The
Shadow of the Almighy: Father, Son, and Spirit in Biblical Perspective (Grand Rapids,MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 2002), 63 -64. He argues the centrality of the Son for the Father is the thought of the New
Testament writers: „the relationship of early Christians with God made possible by Jesus and enabled by the
Holy Spirit. The Father is seen through the eyes of the Son and on the basis of the teaching.” (Ibid.)

195
His person and work mirrors the Son’s character and reveals the Son’s work.774 This is the
constitutive dimension of the Church as the People of God, constituted by God through the
Son in the Spirit,775 a participation that starts in water baptism and continues in baptism as a
way of life, namely the immersion of the life of the church in the perichoretical movements of
the Trinity, on the coordinates of God’s will and mission, promoted in Christ and after the
model of Christ’s appropriation of God’s will and of the Holy Spirit’s work,776 an immersion
that imprints the model and the likeness of Christ in the people of God.
Christ first ha s to be in the center, because, Christ is the One who redefines the people
of God in His Person, becoming, in his incarnation and life, not only the second Adam ,777 but
also the New Israel .778 He is, in the argument of the Synoptic Gospels, the true Israel ,779 and
the One who “reinstates” the true people of God.780 Christ fulfils the will of God as the
representative of the people of God, a direct critique of the failure of Israel to fulfill the
mission of God as His representatives in and for the world. Therefore, Christ’s exemplary life
is the model of the true people of God, who continue to embody in an obedient and faithful

774 Daniel G. Oprean, Comuniune și participare: Reflecții teologice cu privire la dimensiunea spirituală
a existenței (Communion and Participation: Theo logical Reflections on the Spiritual Dimension of Existence
(Timișoara: Excelsior Art, 2011), 95.
775 We have noticed in the previous c hapters the fact that Stăniloae and Fiddes are in agreement with the
fact of the double constitution of the church, in a Christological –Pneumatological synthesis. In this chapter we
want to explore further how this synthesis could inform a sketch of a the ology of baptism as way of living.
776 Sergius Bulgakov, The Orthodox Church , 1. He says: „The Church of Christ is not an institution; it is
a new life with Christ, and in C hrist, guided by the Holy Spirit.” (Ibid.). See also, James J. Stamoolis, Eastern
Orthodox Mission Theology Today (New York: Orbis Books, 1986), 123.
777 Norval Geldenhuys, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm, B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1977), Also, Michael Wilcock, The Message of Luke: The Saviour of the World (Leicester:
InterVarsity Press, 1979), 60.
778 N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God (London, SPSK, 1992), 408 . Also, Wright,
Jesus and t he Victory of God (London: SPSK, 1996),. 481.
779 R. Alan Cole, The Gospel According to Mark (Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 110. Also,
Donald English, The Message of Mark: The Mistery of Faith (Leicester: InterVarsity Press), 44. And, R. T.
France, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1985), 97.
780 NT.Wright, The New Testament and the People of God , 320. Also, George Eldon Ladd, The
Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Rralism (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1974), 252.

196
lifestyle, the reality of which water baptism is a sign, picture, and representation,781 a reality
of a continual immersion in the reality of the triune life, will and mission.
The people of God are thus constituted in this dynamic encounter with the obedient
Son who glorifies the loving Father, living in the Holy Spirit. The encounter with the loving
movement of the Father towards the Son in the sanctifying transparency of the S pirit, and of
the obedient movement of the Son towards the Father through faithfulness produced by the
Spirit, is the atmosphere to be breathed by the people of God, is the reality that the people of
God should embody, and is the dynamic in which the peopl e of God should live as a
perichoretical church.
Christ has to be in the center, second, because Christ is also the One who forms the
people of God through His work , through which He reforms the people of God, in the
formation of His Body. The people of God, as Christ’s body are not formed on the national
and ethnic specificity of Israel as a nation,782 rather they are a multiethnic, multinational
people, as Paul understood it, the mystery of God, revealed in the Gospel,783 by the revealer
who is the Holy Spirit.
Christ has to be in the cen ter, third, because, He is the One who is the head of the
people of God by His status . Christ is the Son of God,784 ‘very God of very God.”785 Christ is
also as King, Prophet, and High Priest.786 He is first the King whose reign should be not only
declared but also recognized. The resurrection of Christ is proof that in the eterna l plan of the
Father, the Kingdom was inaugurated. The truth of Christ’s reign is echoed in the first
proclamation of Peter in Jerusalem after Pentecost: “God has made this Jesus, whom you
crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2: 36). Paul also understoo d and developed the

781 Ibid. ,14.
782 Gordon D. Fee, Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God (Peabody, MA: Hendricksen Publishers, Inc,
1996), 64.
783 Charles Hodge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians (London: The Banner of Truth Trust,
1964), 162.
784 Stanley Hauerwas, Matthew (Ada, MI: Brazos Press, 2006), 20.
785 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, 1169.
786 Calvin, Institutes , 1, 494 -503. Also, Stăniloae, EG, 3, 85 -155.

197
concept of Christ’s reign inaugurated in His resurrection (Ephesians 1: 18 -23), a reign rooted
in His sacrifice and acknowledged in His ascension (Philippians 2: 6 -11).
Christ is, second, the Prophet of God,787 a Prophet whose message should be
acknowledged. The Synoptics acknowledge this truth that was tes tified by the Father to the
disciples in the experience of Christ’s transfiguration (Matthew 17: 2, Luke 9: 29) when the
Prophets and the Law (represented by the appearance Moses and Elijah) where fulfilled in
Christ’s office as Prophet and Message. This i s declared by the Father Himself: This is my
Son, whom I love; with Him I am well pleased, Listen to him!” (Matthew 17: 5, Luke 9: 35).
Christ is also the prophet whose message should be obeyed. The Synoptics picture this truth
in the story of Christ’s tri umphal entry into Jerusalem (Matthew 21: 11 -13, Mark 11: 15 -17,
Luke 19: 45 -48). After His resurrection, Christ proves that He is the Prophet whose message
must be acknowledged and obeyed because it is true (Luke 24: 19 -27).
Christ is, third, the High Pri est whose sacrifice should be understood in its uniqueness
and definitiveness and baptism is “a living and expressive representation of Christ’s high –
priestly death and resurrection.”788 He is a unique High Priest789 because He is not like the
other high -priests of the Old Covenant priesthood. Christ is not characterized by the same
weaknesses that the other high -priests shared with the people they served, and consequently in
need of offering substitutionary sacrifices for themselves (Hebrew 5: 2 -3). Instead, His sinless
life became an offering to the Father (Hebrew 5: 7), thus He is also the Sacrifice for the
salva tion of humanity.
To sum up, the constitutive dimension of Baptism for the people of God could be
understood with Christ in the center as the one who is consubstantial with the Father through
His divinity and also consubstantial with us through His humani ty. He is the necessary center

787 Oscar Cullmann, The Chri stology of the New Testament (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press,
1963), 44. He says that „The aut hority of Jesus was… that… of the “final Prophet.” (Ibid.)
788 Karl Barth, The Teaching of the Church Regarding Baptism, 18.
789 N.T. Wright, The New Testament and The People of God ( London: SPCK, 1992), 410.

198
because Christ assures the Trinity’s participation in humanity and humanity’s participation in
God. He is the necessary center because He redefines, reforms and leads the people of God.
In His person Christ is the recapitula tion of Israel, being at once the true, obedient and
faithful Israel and also the foundational model for the new people of God. In His work Christ
is the One who forms the new people of God, as a multinational, multiethnic, multiracial790
reality over which He is the Head and is all in all (Col 3: 11). In His status Christ is the King
of kings and the Lord of lords, being also the embodiment of th e Kingdom. He is the Prophet
who recapitulates the message of God’s prophets being the final Prophecy of God, and is the
unique High Priest of God who replaces the human high -priest’s office, being also the once
for all Sacrifice.791

The Confessional Dimension of Baptism: Becoming the Body of Christ

The confession of the Christian communities is first, a threefold confession. First, it
contains the declaration that there is a unique God in three persons, Father, Son and Holy
Spirit. Second, it contains the declaration that the true church is of those called to a personal,
real and live relationship with the Father, Son and Ho ly Spirit. The third dimension of this
confession is the declaration that Christian communities do not exist separately from each
other, but they exist in communion with each other, united in the same Spirit, under the
lordship of the same Lord, and in the embrace of the same Father, the One who is the Father
of all, the One who is over all, and works in all.
The confession of the Christian communities is second, a permanent confession based
on the threefold declaration in Christ’s baptism; that is His pro found and unique identification

790 John R. W. Stott, The Message of Acts: To the Ends of the Earth (Leicester: Inter Varsity Press,
1990), 40 -44.
791 Ivana Noble, “How to A void Grand Narratives in Christology: A Challenge of Postmodern
Hermeneutics,” in Milltown Studies 65 (2010), 3. Ivana Noble warns rightly about the danger of transforming
Christology in ideology. She also says that one of the ways to avoid this danger is to never separate what Christ
is from what Christ does, Christology from soteriology. This is what we tried to do following. also what we
have learned from the thought of Stăniloae and Fiddes that, keeping Christology in its vital connection with
Pneumato logy and especially with the doctrine of the Trinity is of similar importance.

199
with humanity. In Christ’s own baptism are three declarations. The first declaration in Christ’s
baptism is that of the Son, in regard to the fact that His identification with humanity is real.
His identification with humanity was neither merely apparent, nor superficial, but a real one
in that He was made sin for us.792 The Son of God as Christ had to travel the entire journey of
fallen humanity, being exposed to sin, standing in front of sin, being tempted to sin, assuming
the sins of humanity, yet without sin every moment of His life. As such He was made the
promoter of our salvation793 that is rooted above all in Christ’s identification with us. He
embraced our fallen humanity cleansing it, redeeming it and sanctifying it from inside out in
His life.
Through incarnation Christ brings a revolution in the understan ding of salvation and of
sanctification, for his holiness was not one of separation from people, things, and realities, but
an internal holiness based on His unique love for His Father, on His unique understanding of
the heart of the Father, and on His par ticipation in the Father’s pathos for fallen humanity.
Christ took the cross from the Father’s heart and made it His own. He walked on the Father’s
Via Dolorosa , making it His own path from the Father to the Father, from incarnation to
resurrection.794
The second declaration is that of the Spirit that the identification of the Son with
humanity is total (Mt 3. 16 and 1 Jn 5: 6). There is no domain of our humanity that His
identification does not immerse (Heb 2: 14, 17 and Ro 8: 3) There is no sin to which in His
identification with humanity He would not be tempted, therefore there is no sin that is not
forgiven potentially in His sacrifice and reality in our repentance. This is the reason salvation

792 Stăniloae, Chipul evanghelic , 31. He says that Christ ’s “solidarity with us was not only juridical but
also real, for He appro priated not only our passions and death because of sin, and also of the repentance as man,
for our sin.” (Ibid.). See also, Wilmer, Christ the Forgiven , 26-27.
793 Raymond Brown, The Message of Hebrews: Christ Above All (Leicester: Inter -Vars ity Press, 1982),
101.
794 Stăniloae, Iisus Hristos sau Restaurarean Omului (Craiova: Omniscop, 1993), 256. Commenting on
the communion of suffering in the life of the Father and the Son in the Spirit, Stănilae says: „Love, sacrifice,
communion are all together. One is in the other as a re Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Ibid.)

200
in Christ is an offer for all people as potential, yet it is to be appropriated personally in our
identification with Christ.
The third declaration in Christ’ s baptism is that of the Father, that the Son’s
identification with humanity is admissible . Only the Son could have saved us. Only One who
is like the Father, only someone who comes from the Father, someone who is the form of the
Father, the One who is the image of the Father,795 only the One who comes from the perfect
communion and love of the Father, could have saved us.796 This admission came on the path
of the Son’s kenosis , in order to become like man, and was permanently actualized in His
humble obedience (Php 2: 8) becoming “the autho r” of our salvation (Heb 2: 10), “the source
of eternal salvation, for all who obey Him” (Heb 5: 8 -9).
Christian baptism should be a continuous mirroring of this identification through the
confession of Him in a threefold testimony. First is the testimony of the Spirit, which is the
internal declaration of life , connected with the work of the Spirit, that is inclusion in Christ797
which testifies to the metamorphosis , through the word of Christ that became reality in our
lives in the work of the Spirit (Ro 6). This transformation about which the Spirit testifies is
that produced by the immersi on of our lives in the life of Christ. But this is only the beginning
not the end of a process. The declaration of the Spirit, in regard to the internal, unseen
transformation, called generically, being born again, is not only in regard to a change of
direction in life, it is not a static reality. It starts with an analysis operated by the Spirit over an
entire life with all its domains, and continues with the dynamics of walking towards God.

795 N.T. Wright, Collosians and Philemon (Leicester: Inter -Varsity Press, 1986), 68. Commenting on
the concept of the „image of God in Col 1: 15, Wright argues that „Paul uses the present tense ( ‘is’) to refer to
him as having taken th e place of world sovereignity marked our of humanity (‚the image of God’) from the
beginning ( cf. Eph 1: 20 -23).” (Ibid.)
796 Ben Witherington III and Laura M. Ic e, The Shadow of the Almighty , 85. He says: „the language is
covenantal, denoting a special relationship between God and His Son, The word agapatos literally means
‚beloved’ but it can connote ‚unique’ or ‚special’ on occasion…What we see here is the con firmation given to
Jesus of who he is in relationship to the heavenly Father.” (Ibid.)
797 Leslie Newbigin, The Household of God . His answer to the question of „what is the manner of our
ingrafting in Christ?” is threefold: first „we are incorporated in Christ by hearing and believing the Gospel,”
second, „we are incorporated by sacramental participation in the life of the historically continuous Church,” and
third, „we are incorporated by receiving and abidin g in the Holy Spirit,” (ibid., 30)..

201
Therefore, repentance is one stop on the road of walking from God , a turn, and the start of
walking towards God, with Christ in the Spirit.
Second is the testimony of the water (baptism), that is the external declaration of life ,
that is not only the moment of water baptism, rather is walking in the reality of baptism ,
walking in and with the Lord of baptism ( Ro 10: 6 -13 1 Pe 3: 21 -22). Third, is the testimony
of blood (the agent of cleansing in the New Covenant) that is the permanent declaration of
life, that of cleansing in the blood of Christ, a reality of sanctifi cation, of a life covered with
the blood of Christ (1 Jn 1: 9), a repentant confession that is not once for all, rather is once
and always. Authentic Christian life, is lived in the expiration of sins and inspiration of the
Spirit. Arno C. Gaebelein is rig ht when affirming:

Faith and repentance are not successive stages on the road of life, they are not independent
guides to direct the pilgrim’s path; they are not separate acts to be successively accomplished
by the sinner as a condition of his salvation . But, in different phases of it, they represent the
same Godward attitude of the soul, which the truth of God believed produces. ..Jordan is
always in the Word a type of death….The people came, confessed their sins, seeing then their
true position, what they were and what they deserved…They heard, they believed, they
confessed and witnessed to it outwardly…Christian baptism is unto Christ’ s death, who has
taken our place and died for us. 798

Yet, the question could be how all these concentric confessional and declarative
realities find their expression in the communal thought and life of the church? The church’s
identification with the death of Christ should find expression in “the taking off the old clothes
of the old Adam.” The church first needs to take off, paradoxically, the “cloth” of her pride of
being the people of God . That will mean real identification with Christ in his death. As for
Christ, renouncing to himself was a permanent reality beautifully expressed in the Pauline
Christological hymn in Philippians 2, from incarnation to ascension, so the church should
follow Christ, denying herself and daily taking up the cross in a “ hermeneutics of

798 Arno C. Gaebelein, The Gospel of Matthew: An Exposition (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1961),
65, 67, 68.

202
humility,”799 in regard to her life and her mission. The church would do that by being ready to
acknowledge and deal with her id ols of power and influence which mirror the secular
ideologies of the day, rather than the perennial example of servanthood expressed in the
superlative in the thought, life and work of her Master. For this church needs to return to a
theology of permanent repentance that means turning again and again, from secular ways of
thinking to the mind of Christ.
Only such repentance will reveal the second “cloth” that the church needs to put off,
namely, the pride of being saved that leads many times to categorizations of people into
“saved” and “lost.” The salvation that the church’s people experience would be genuine only
if such an experience would lead to thankfulness to God, in the acknowledgment that
salvation is entirely God’ s work, in His Son, through the Spirit. Thankfulness rooted in the
recognition of our dependency on God would then be translated not in “professing a great
faith while living by small concepts,”800 but in a life that would mirror the reality of faith.
The third „cloth” the church needs to put off in her authentic identification with the
death of Christ is that of the pride of being spiritual . Spirituality of the church should be the
product of her theology that comes from the interaction of the Word and of the Spirit. Yet,
such spirituality is not something to be proud of in such a way that will lead to isolation fr om
other people who are not spiritual.” This was the way the Pharisees developed their
spirituality that became pathological and was disapproved by Christ, for it led to a „holiness”
of separation, based on a sterile external conformation to a set of rules not rooted in an
internal transformation as a life -long process.801 Christ’s own spirituality was a powerful
corrective to t heir pathological spirituality:

799 Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Is There A Meaning in This Text? (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1998), 463.
800 William M. Pickard, Rather Die Than Live – Jonah (New York: Education and Cultivation Division
Board of Global Ministry, 1974), 39.
801 Daniel G. Oprean, When Salt Looses its Saltiness: Causes of Spiritual Abuse within the Church ,
Unpublished paper (Osijek, 2003).

203
For Christ holiness was not only external but internal, grounded in his relationship with God.
For Jesus separation is a ‚separation to rather than separation from.’ Jesus is holy not because
he isolated himself from either people or the world, nor because of some elaborate system of
ritual purification. He is holy because he is consumed with passion for both God and the
world. Because the love of God is burning in his heart, Jesus is holy. And because he is holy,
the entire world has become clean to him802

Christ’s spirituality was one of humbleness, rooted in a „theology of the towel” (John 13),803
and accordingly, the spirituality of the church that means the taking off of pride to be
spiritual and be in “ful l identification with Jesus,”804 a spirituality of discipleship, 805 that
produces Christlike, kenotic and pneumatic communities. Only as such could the church li ve
as Christ lived on the earth “full of grace and truth.” Living the truth not in proudness but in
humbleness, a kenotic spirit being the framework of every action of the church in the world.806
The things that the church should put on in her identification with the resurrection of Christ
will be explored in the next section.

802 Ridell Michael, Threshold of the Future: Reforming the Church in the Post – Christian West (London:
SPCK, 1998), 80.
803 Daniel G. Oprean, Reconciliation in Church and Society :Church’s Ministry as God’s Reconciliation
Agency Unpublished paper (Osijek, 2003).
804 Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrac e: A Theological Exploration of Identity, , Otherness, and
Reconciliation (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1996), 92. He describes the mechanism of the identification
with Christ: „The Spiri t enters the citadel of the self, de -centers the self by fashioning it in the image of the self –
giving Christ, and frees its will so it can resist the power of exclusion in the power of the Spirit of embrace. It is
in the citadel of the fragile self that t he new world of embrace is first created (2 Corinthians 5: 17). It is by this
seemingly powerless power of the Spirit – the Spirit who blows even outside the walls of the church – that selves
are freed from powerlessness in order to fight the system of exc lusion everywhere – in the structures, in the
culture, and in the self.” (Ibid.)
805 Myron Augsburger, The Robe of God: Reconciliation, the Believers Essential (Scottdale, PA: Herald
Press, 2000) 136. First, it “ is based on a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ, (ibid., 140). Second, a
spirituality of discipleship requires the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, (ibid., 142. Third it identifies us with
Christ, spirituality as seen in Incarnation that is not withdrawal from the material; instead it makes all of life
sacred, (ibid., 144). Fourth, a spirituality of discipleship places priority on the kingdom of Christ. It is a life style,
(ibid., 145). Fifth, it is expressed by involvement in the community of Christ,” (ibid., 146). He concludes: “In
fact we do unbelievers the most good by maintaining our integrity and living out the love of Christ,” (ibid., 148).
806 Paul Tillich, Love, Power, and Justice (London: Oxford Univer sity Press, 1954), 121. He says:
“Spiritual power through words or thought, through what he is and what he does, or through the surrender of
them or through the sacrifice of himself. This is the power which elevates the holy community above the
ambiguities of power.” (Ibid.). Also, Barth, Against the Stream . “How extraordinary the Church’s preaching,
teaching, ministry, theology, political guardianship and missions would be, how it would convict itself of
unbelief, in what it says, if it did not proclaim to all men that God is not against man but for man. It need not
concern itself with the ‘No’ that must be said to human presumption and human sloth. This ‘No’ will be quite
audible enough when as the real Church it concerns itself with the washing of feet an d nothing else. This is the
obedience which it owes to its Lord in this world,” (ibid., 73).

204
The Missional Dimension of Baptism: Ordained as the Temple of the Spirit

As Christ’s baptism was His ordination for ministry, from the Father, through the
Spirit, so Christian baptism should be regarded as the ordination of believers for Christian
ministr y. In fact Christian ministry as well should be regarded as participation of believers in
God’s mission, through the Son, in the Spirit, a mission of God in the world and for the world.
In this section we will explore some of the dimensions of the life of the church as the Temple
of the Spirit and also some coordinates of a Christlike pneumatic ministry of the Church in the
world.
The dimensions of the life of the Church as the Temple of the Spirit will be explored
in the framework of the “church’s “puttin g on” the character of Christ imprinted in the life of
the church through the Spirit. The first new “cloth” that the Spirit needs to put on in the life of
the church is the humbleness of continual transformation through a fresh understanding of
her way of living in the society , expressed in the Pauline concept of the circumcision of the
heart, a recurrent theme in regard to the people of God.
The second new “cloth” that the Spirit needs to put on in the life of the church is the
reality of koinonial discip leship. The first dimension of koinonia in the life of the church as
the Temple of the Spirit is kerygma, considered traditionally, “the proclamation of the saving
act of God in Christ.” and also “ the phenomenon of the call which goes out and makes a claim
upon the hearers.”807 The Church has to aim this highest p erformance of its proclamation,
namely, to facilitate for the hearers not only the intellectual understanding of the Gospel, but
also the event of the Word.808 Because Christ “continues to teach His Church (as Prophet),809

807 C. Brown, “Proclamation, Preach, Kerygma,” in Dictionary of New Testament Theology , vol.3,
edited by Collin Brown (Exeter, The Paternoster Press, 1971), 53. Also, J. S. Baird, “Preaching .” in Evangelical
Dictionary of Theology edited by Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books House, 1984), 869.
808 Karl Barth, God Here and Now, Religious Perspectives, (New York: Harper and Row Publishers,
1964) . “The essence of the Church is the event in which God’s Word and revelation in Jesus Christ, and the
office of Jesus as God’s ordained Prophet, Priest and King, is accomplished to the extent that it becomes a Word
which is directed toward, reaches, and to uches certain men. The essence of the Church is the event in which the
Holy Scriptures as the prophetic -apostolic witness to Jesus Christ carry through the ‘demonstration of the Spirit

205
the Word comes alive for the listener.810 It becomes the space of meeting God in the power of
the Holy Spirit.
The second dimension of koinonia in the life of the church as the Temple of the Spirit
is prayer, an important practice of the primitive church (Acts 2:42). Prayer should be a
Christlike practice following the model of his life and office as the High Priest. Christ the
High Priest is “at the same time the one who brings the sacrifice and the sac rifice itself,”
being the model and basis for our sacrifice.811
That leads to the third dimension of koinonia that constitutes also the third „cloth” that
the Spirit needs to put on in the life of the church, namely, the humbleness of a kenotic
diakonia in the world. For as Christ became the Temple of God, a reality of mediation
between God and humanity, so the church as the Temple of The Spirit is cal led to be the
reality of mediation between God and the world. Diakonia of the Church is rooted “in the
person of Jesus Christ and His example.
Christ’s diakonia was His way of fulfilling His office as King. Christ’s diakonia was
not a theoretical concept , or an administrative one, but a participative one. His diakonia was
God’s diakonia812 in the entire history of humankind. Accordingly, the Church as the agent of
God’s reconciliation for the world, as the body of Christ for the world, and as the Temple of
the Spirit for the world, has to follow the pattern Christ’s diakonia showed forth in His entire
ministry. Therefore diakonia of the Church in the world means first a presence of faith .
The aim of the Church’s pre sence in the world should be the promotion, mediation,
cultivation and strengthening of faith in the lives of the people of this world. The presence of

and power’ for particular men, so that these men receive the freedom to know themselves as men enlightened
and overcome by this witness, by Him to whom this witness points.” (Ibid., 63 -64).
809 Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 231. Also, Danut Manastireanu, “Dumitru Stăniloae’ s Theology of Ministr y,” in
Dumitru Stăniloae, Tradition and Modernity in Theology , Edited by Lucian Turcescu (Iasi: The Center for
Romanian Studies, 2002), 133.
810 Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, vol.1, 752. “Jesus Ch rist in the power of His resurrection is present
wherever men speak really of God.” (Ibid.).
811 Stăniloae, TDO , 2, 232 -233. Also, Manastireanu, “Dumitru Stăniloae’s Theology of Ministr y,” 133.
812 K. Hess, “Serve, Deacon, Worship,” 547.

206
the church in the world does not mean only to facilitate the „hearing” of the gospel, as
important as th is should be, but also the kind of presence that embodies the gospel. Moreover,
diakonia of the church in the world that means first presence of embodied second means
action in love.
The action of the church is possible only when the theology of the church is a holistic
one. This means that the church has to regard as valuable in human beings not only the soul
but also the whole, body -spirit. Although Christians no longer live under the tyranny of sarx,
for them soma is still important. Once the church is c lear in its theology concerning its social
role it will be able to see the needs. When it sees the needs it can start to elaborate strategies
for social assistance. Especially in the Third and Fourth World countries,813 the Christian
gospel should mean actions rather than merely words, food in soup -kitchens not merely
prayers, shelters for the homeless not merely sermons, so cial programs for development not
merely evangelistic strategies. All of these would be true expressions of Christian love.
When the church has the conviction that doing the things needed for the poor, oppressed,
homeless, sick is all for Christ, then tru ly the church is the embodiment of God’s Kingdom.
These considerations lead to the third ministry of the church in the world, her prophetic
ministry, as a sign of hope.
The church as the presence and embodiment of the values of the Kingdom of God is a
sign of hope for and in the world. Yet besides its presence the church is to point to the One in
whom all things are possible. Pointing to God and what He has done in Christ means bringing
hope in the midst of world despair.814 The prophetic ministry of the church is based in the all –
encompassing work of Christ to reconcile humankind to God. This hope is to be offered to the
people of the world by bringing acknowledgment of God’s love and His deep interest in

813 Ronald J. Sider, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger: A Biblical Study (Illinois: Inter -Varsity Press,
1977), 33.
814 Ivana Noble, Tracking God , 9. Sh e argues that „the Scriptures depict hope as a still deeper insight
into God’s promise, an insighr that does not necessarily come up with coherent solutions, but functions as
medicine for a wounded life without future.” (Ibid.)

207
human beings into public arena. The prophetic ministry of the church means therefore for the
church to be that community that illumines this truth of the gospel to the world. This is the
universal hope (contained in the prophetic ministry of the church) that in regard to our
sinfulness and slavery to sin, God does not leave us alone. He offers Christ as the one who is
the Victor . This is enough for the church and for the world.
Summary
The aim of this section was to explore three dimensions of baptism as a way of life in
a perichoretic church, namely, the constitutive dimension of baptism, the confessional
dimension of baptism and the missional dimension of baptism. Corresponding to the three
dimensions, we argued, are three coordinates in which the divine Trinitarian life embraces and
participates in the life of the church, namely, the church’s being the People of God, the
church’s becoming the Body of Christ and the church’s ordination as the Temple of the Spirit,
all these overlapping realities being mediated from the center who is Christ.
In regard to the constitutive dimension of baptism of the church as People of God , we
argued that Christ redefines the people of God in His Person, forms the people of God through
His work, and is the head of the people of God by His status. Christ is the King whos e reign
should be declared and recognized, He is the Prophet of God, whose message should be
acknowledged and obeyed, and He is the High Priest whose sacrifice should be understood in
its uniqueness and definitiveness.
In regard to the confessional dimens ion of baptism for the church as the body of
Chris t, we argued that the confession of the Christian communities is first, a threefold
confession, containing a declaration of a unique God, in three persons, Father, Son and Holy
Spirit, a declaration that th e true church is of those called to a personal, real and live
relationship with the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and a declaration that Christian
communities do not exist separately from each other, but exist in communion with each other,

208
united in the sam e Spirit, under the lordship of the same Lord, and in the embrace of the same
Father.
Second, we argued that the confession of the Christian communities is a permanent
confession based on the threefold declaration in Christ’ s baptism, first of Himself that His
identification with humanity is real, second the declaration of the Spirit that the identification
of the Son with humanity is total, and third the declaration of the Father that the Son’s
identification with humanity i s admissible . Then this threefold declaration in Christ’s baptism
should be continually mirrored in Christian baptism, in the testimony of the Spirit, which is
the internal declaration of life , the testimony of the water (baptism), that is the external
declaration of life , and the testimony of continual cleansing through the blood of Christ that
is the permanent declaration of life .
We continued by arguing that all these concentric confessional and declarative realities
have to find their expression in t he communal thought and life of the church. First, the
church’s identification with the death of Christ should find expression in “the taking off the
old clothes of the old Adam.” The church needs to take off the “cloth” of her pride o f being
the people of God , second, the church needs to put off the pride of being saved, and third, the
church needs to put off the pride of being spiritual .
The missional dimension of baptism for the church as the Temple of the Spirit was
argued from the perspective of the “church’s “putting on” the character of Christ imprimed in
the life of the church through the Spirit. The Spirit needs to “put on” in the life of the church
the humbleness of continual transformation through a fresh understanding of her way of living
in the society, second, the Spirit needs to put on in the life of the church the reality of
koinonial discipleship and third the Spirit needs to put on in the life of the church, the
humbleness of a kenotic diakonia in the world . These actio ns will make the church a presence
of faith that will act in love being a sign of hope.

209
11.2. Eucharist as a Perichoretical Reflection

In chapter 10 of the present project we have seen that Stăniloae a nd Fiddes are in
agreement in regard to Christ’s presence in Eucharist, as a real, transformative, spiritual
presence. We have also seen that their dynamic view on Eucharist would be important for the
conversation between Orthodox and Baptists in Romania, as an important reminder of the
importance, in the journey of life, of the real, spiritual, sanctifying communion with Christ,
mediated by the Word. Also, we have argued that this fact could be an important reminder
that Eucharistic communion should be en compassed by a daily appropriation of Christ’s life,
in an Eucharistic way of living, led by the complementary work of the Spirit of God and of
the Word of God.
In the present chapter we will try to explore three key dimensions that overlap what
God has d one in Christ, through the Spirit, and what we are, do and promote in Christ through
the Spirit. This will be a way to show how the centrality of Christ’s presence should be
reflected in the status and relationships of Christian communities. We hope that t he
exploration of this chapter will move attention away from issues in regard to Eucharist that
build walls against mutual communion (as for example what happens with the elements and
worthiness to attend communion) towards an understanding that will give preeminence to the
real subject of Eucharist, Christ and what he does for us in the journey of Christian life.
The first dimension that could be acknowledged as valid by both traditions, Orthodox
and Baptists in Romania, is that of remembering Christ’s sh aring in us, in our humanity, in
our sinfulness and in our spiritual redemption, and the fact that He initiated a new covenant
that is eternal and definitive. The second dimension, that could also be considered valid for
the two traditions, is that of discerning our sharing in Him, in his death, resurrection and life.
The third dimension, which could also be considered common for the two traditions, is that of
proclaiming God’s share, in Christ through the Spirit in the su ffering and life of th e world.

210
The Covenantal Dimension of Eucharist: Remembering Christ’s Sharing in Us

The institution of the Eucharist by Christ was his last act before the crucifixion, an act
that points further to the culmination of the salvific embrace in Christ of our humanity by God
in order to redeem it. In this regard Karl Barth says that Jesus Chri st
lets himself be taken prisoner in the power of the god of this world, and in doing so strikes
him down and dispatches him once for all. But that which was accomplished in God’s Son
Jesus Christ in our nature was done in our place and therefore for us.. .Everything else is a
repetition of this first thing.”815

The crucifixion, to which the Eucharist then and there was a pointer, is also the culmination
of Christ’s identification with us that opens the possibility of our identification with Him, in
the context of the cosmic salvation that Christ accomplished in His Person, life and work.816
Christ’s identification with humanity comes by way of the consubstantiality of His divine and
human nature, mirroring the cons ubstantiality between Him and the Father.817 In the union
between his divine and human nature Christ experienced humanity from within:
…by assuming an Adamic „sinful humanity,” the Son did not quaranti ne himself from our
sinful and suffering plight, but instead immersed himself within it…the human experiences of
the Son were neither anaesthetized by his divinity nor desensitized by some generic or
pedigreed humanity which differed from our own. Rather , this fallen humanity was united
immediately and intimately to the Son as he exists personally in as God…The Son of God,
within the unmediated immediacy of his own human „I,” experienced the totality of suffering
entailed in being affiliated with the fa llen race of Adam.”818

Moreover, in the redemptive act, in His Son incarnated, God himself demonstrates
“the closest possible proximity,”819 entering and sharing the human condition.820 Through His

815 Karl Barth, God Here and Now , 15-16.
816 Ibid., 30, 32. Barth says that „coming into the depths of the human existence in Jesus Christ, God
wanted to “make it like Himself “ and doing this to be “the guarantor of the future of man and His universe…In
the incarnation of the Word of God, in the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ, was universally decided, in the
middle of human history, that we men are not given over and left to ourselves, to our misery, even to our own
inclinations ” (Ibid.). Also, Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church , 137. Lossky says:
On the cross He unites paradise, the dwelling place of the first men before the fall, with the terrestrial reality
where the fallen descendants of the first Adam now dwell…” (Ibid.).
817 Lossky, Mystical Theology , 143.
818 Thomas G. Weinandy, Does God Suffer? , 212.
819 Stăniloae, EG, 181.
820 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962), 10. He says: „He Himself
enters into the life of man as man and takes upon Himself and carries in the flesh the nature, the character, and

211
righteous life Christ represented humanity in her fidelity to God and through His sacrifice
Christ overcomes “the triple barrier which separates us from God – death, sin and nature,”821
transforming, in Himself, human nature,
The work accomplished by Christ is related to our nature, it is no longer separated from Christ
by our fault. It is a new nature, a restored creature which appears in the world. It is a new
body, pure from all taint of sin, free from all external necessity, separated from our iniquity
and from every alien will by the precious blood of Christ. It is the pure and incorruptible realm
of the Church where one attains union with God.822

In Eucharistic celebration then and there , with His disciples, in the sadness and the
suffering of the very close re jection, mocking and crucifixion that He needed to face, Christ
states the coordinates of the new covenant that has the relationship with Him as the center,
His life infused in the life of the church as the atmosphere in which the church breathes and
his sacrifice as the base for the church’s redemption and sanctification. This reality of infusion
from Him to us mirrors the interpenetration of the Father’s life with the Son’s life and of the
Son’s activity with the Father’s activity. And it should be mirror ed in the interpenetration of
the Son’s life with the church’s life and of the church’s activity with the Son’s activity, the
One that implicitly energizes both realities being the Holy Spirit.
All these truths constitute the foundation for the celebratio n of Eucharist here and
now, a celebration first of the permanent embrace of us by the Father through the Son in the

the guilt and suffering of man. Out of love fo r man God becomes man. He does not seek out the most perfect
man in order to unite Himself with him, but he takes human character upon Himself as it is.” (Ibid.). Also,
Thomas G. Weinandy, In the Likeness of Sinful Flesh: An Essay on the Humanity of Christ (Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1993). And also, Haddon Willmer, “Christology, Atonement and Forgiveness” in Forgiveness and Truth:
Explorations in Contemporary Theology, edited by Alister Mc.Fayden, Marcel Sarot, and Anthony Thiselton
(Edinburg : T&T Clark, 2001 ), 17-18.
821 Lossky, Mystical Theology 136.
822 Ibid., 155. Here Lossky’ s overrealized eschatology is expressed in undermining the fact that even if
in Christ the believer is a new creation, the old has gone and the new has come (2 Co. 5:17), the tense of the verb
speaks of a continual process of transformation towards union w ith God, rather than a past transformation,
whether circumscribed by baptism or the ecclesial hypostasis. Moreover, this necessary continual transformation
is worked by the Holy Spirit, in the likeness of Christ (Ro. 8:29), not without human cooperation (2 Pe 1: 3 -4).
Consequently, the final transfiguration will take place, according to the Johannine report, when we will see Him
(1 Jn 3:2).

212
Spirit , an embrace that is proclaimed “through ‘memorial’ and ‘remembrance,”823 realized by
the Spirit through the Word. The celebration is the communal expression of the shared
experience of God’s transforming presence, the spiritual inhabitation of obedient believers by
the Father, Son and Spirit. The Eucharist here and now is the celebration of God with us ,824 a
presence that is the medication for the loneliness of humanity.825 Or in the words of James
Wm. McClendon, Jr:
By presence is meant quite simple the qualit y of being there for and with the other…We
remember that God’s presence with us is one of the great gifts of the gospel, associated with
the incarnation of the Word, the giving of the Spirit and the return of the Lord; we recall that
in Christian history his presence is celebrated in every eucharistic meal, invoked at every
baptism, and claimed anew at every gathering of disciples.826

In Eucharist here and now we celebrate second, the sacrifice of God for us, in Christ
through the Spirit that made possible the new covenant of God with us. The broken bread is „a
picture of His taking common flesh…and allowing it to be „broken” for humankind,” and t he
sharing of the wine „stands for the shed blood of Jesus.”827 This was possible because of
Christ’s salvific assuming of the disfi guration of God’s image in a human being.828

823 Peter Toon, “Lord’s Supper,” in Baker Theological Dictionar y of the Bible , edited by Walter A.
Elwell (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996) , 492.
824 Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics 1: 1 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2010), 319. He says:
“But just because Immanuel had been unconditi onally fulfilled in Jesus, the crucifixion of Jesus was bound to
mean something different from the stoning of even the greatest prophets, namely, the end of history of Israel as
the special people of revelation, the destruction of the house of stone as the dwelling of the name of the Lord, the
free proclamation, not of a new Gospel but of the one ancient Gospel to both Jews and Gentiles…Christ the telos
of the Law (Ro. 10: 4). We see here the theme of the great battle which Paul above all others fought at t he rise of
the Church. It was not a battle against the Old Testament, but was like the battle of Jesus Christ Himself, to
whom he simply wishes to testify, it was a battle for the Old Testament, i.e., for the one eternal covenant of God
with men sealed in time, for acknowledgment of the perfect self -unveiling of God.” (Ibid.)
825 We have observed in chapter 5 that Stăniloae argues that Eucharist is medication for eternity. Yet we
argue here th at the presence of God in Christ through the Spirit provides the necessary foundation for a healing
view for the entire humanity through the eucharistic community.
826 James Wm. Mc. Clendon, Jr, Systematic Theology: Ethics (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1986),
106.
827 R. Alan Cole, The Gospel According to Mark: An Introduction and Commentary (Leicester: Inter –
Varsity Press, 1989), 292 -293.
828 What happened with the image of God in human being after the Fall is another matter of
disagreement between different Christian traditions…Yet even in the context of this unsolved disagreement, all
Christian trad itions would agree with the fact that Christ is the one who restores God’s image in humanity, being
at once the second Adam and a human being as it should be in relationship with God. The dynamics of
transformation after the likeness of Christ will be ana lysed in chapter 3 of Part 3 of this dissertation.

213
To sum up, these are the elements of the New Covenant of God with humanity. First,
the permanency of God’s presence with us, through Christ in the Spirit. Second, the
permanency of God’s being for us thr ough Christ’s sacrifice that provides the forgiveness of
sins. Third, the permanency of God’s transforming work in us through the Spirit in the
likeness of Christ. Therefore the New Covenant is the recapitulation and fulfillment of all the
covenants that w ere initiated by God for enhancing communion with humanity. All covenants
are coordinates of a trajectorial development for God’s revelatory actions,829 and are
occasions for the revelation of some aspects of God’s revelatory character.830 From the
beginning God’s will was that human persons would participate in “the divine covenant of
grace,”831
The uniqueness of the New Covenant in the Christ event is that God Himself in His
Son embraced humanity from within, by becoming a man. The incarnation of the Son of God
is the revelation of the climax of God’s revelatory activity. From then on, God knows
humanity from inside, opening through the Holy Spirit the possibility for man to know God
from within. The shalom of creation is in this way restored through the koinonial dimension

829 Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology: The Theology of Israel’s Historical Traditions ,vol 1
(London: SCM Press Ltd, 1975), 129. He says „The most striking decisive moments of this kind are the making
of covenants by Yahweh.” (Ibid.). Also, William Dyrness, Themes in Old Testament Theology (London:
Paternoster Press, 1998), 85. He says that a covenant is „the core of the Hebrew understanding of their
relationship with God.” (Ibid.)
830 Walther Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Teatament , vol 1 (Philadelphia, P A: The Westminster Press,
1961), 37.
831 Barth, CD, III/3 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1966), 80. Also, Fiddes, Tracks and Traces . For Fiddes
there are two d imensions of the covenant that mirror and are in a vital connection with the eternal covenant of
grace that God made with humankind. The first dimension of covenant is that of walking together, He says: “In
this drama of the ‘solemn covenant of the church, ’ the members are not just recalling that they have been
included in God’s eternal covenant, but envisage themselves as somehow entering it at that very moment (Ibid.,
34). The second dimension is that of watching over each other expressed in the three dim ensions of the episkope :
personal, collegial and communal, the communal oversight being the responsibility of the entire community, the
personal oversight being the responsibility of persons with special commissions, and the collegial oversight
being the r esponsibility of a team of persons with special commissions (Ibid., 221). This three -dimensional view
of episkope is an important reminder for the complex reality of oversight and of direct relevance for the
Romanian baptistic communities where personal ov ersight is the only dimension represented. It has been
observed that, unfortunately, the lack of the other two dimensions of episkope lead to a more and more present
separation between “clergy” and “laity,” that is in dissonance with most of the confession s of faith in the
baptistic communities that affirm the priesthood of all believers and reject any idea of clericalism.

214
of the relationship of God with man that encompasses human beings as well as the entire
creation.

The Koinonial Dimension of Eucharist: Discerning our Share in Christ
The second important dimension of Eucharist is that of discerning our share in Christ
as members in the body of Christ.832 In this context the Eucharist is the representation and
revelation of the Church as the Body of Christ,833 and this is so because the corporeal
dimension of Christian life, grounded in the individual’s status of being in Christ, is
important. Christ himself guarantees the balance between the individual and corporeal
dimensions of being in Christ.
Furthermore, the unity of the Church as the body of Christ is circumscribed b y the
experience of identification with Christ (in his death, resurrection and suffering), that even if
it is experienced as personal transformation should be followed by the integration in the
community of those who experienced the same transforming ident ification with Christ.834
Therefore, being in Christ cannot mean at all to remain in the individuality of this experience,
rather it is completed by integration in the body of Christ. In regard to that Mc Clendon says:
In such a context, the ideas to which we are naturally led are those of group solidarity,
of an identity that includes rather than excludes, that inclusion being the incorporation
of the lives of the gathered disciples not only into their crucified and risen Lord, but
also into one another.835

832 Zizioulas, Being as Communion , 53. He affirms that i f through birth the human being enters
biological existence, he becomes a person through ecclesial existence, which he enters through baptism. The
human being transcends biological existence towards the status of pe rson by becoming an ecclesial hypostasis, a
member of the church, where through the Eucharist communion between being and truth receives its maximal
expression. Also, Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, vol 1:1 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1936), 40. He speaks of
“believing existence,” an expression that seems to be more adequate as a description of the believer’s status in
Christ and in the church. This is important in the context of Zizioulas’ theological construct that has been
criticized as not having space for the faith at all (Volf, After Our Likeness , 95).
833 Lucian Turcescu, “Eucharistic Ecclesiology or Open Sobornicity?,” in Dumitru Stă niloae ,
Tradition and Modernity in Theology , Edited by Lucian Turcescu (Iasi: The Center for Romanian Studies, 2002),
92. Here Turcescu quotes John Zizioulas’ “Eucharist and Catholicity.”
834 Ziesler, Pauline Christianity , 58.
835 McClendon, Systematic Theology: Ethics, 216.

215
Moreover, the manifestation of the Body of Christ is the proclamation of Christ’s lordship
upon the individuals, and as Ernst Kasemann puts it: “ the Body of Christ is the real concretion
before the Parousia of the universal sovereignty of Christ.”836 It is this very practice of
Eucharist in the Church with its intrinsic message, precisely, that emphasizes the corporeality
of being in Christ. No individual could alone share in the Eucharist, it being always a
corporate action.
Yet, there is another important dimension connected with the Eucharist, namely, the fact
that the Eucharist is the communal expression of individual participation in the death of
Christ. In the r emembering of Christ’s sacrifice and the giving of His body, we also remember
our identification with Him in His death. Moreover, if identification with Christ’s sufferings,
for the individual was by the way of a kenotic attitude,837 this seems to be th e case also in the
horizontal interpersonal relationships in the Body of Christ, the Church and with the larger
society. This leads to another important dimension of the Eucharist that points to the future.

The Social Dimension of Euchari st: Proclaiming Christ’s Sharing in the World

In the previous sections we argued that the Eucharist as an all -encompassing reality for
the life of the church has a covenantal dimension that should be always acknowledged on the
coordinates of remembering the salvific activity of Christ in the synthesis of what He has
done then and there and what church is here and now. Second, we have seen that in the
koinonial dimension Eucharist pictures the reality of the present through discernment of the

836 Ernst Kasemann, Essays on New Testament Themes (Philadelphia,PA: Fortress Press, 1982), 68.
Also, W.G. Kummel, The Theology of the New Testament: Accor ding to its Major Witnesses Jesus – Paul – John
(London: SCM Press Ltd, 1974), 210.
837 Speaking about t he kenotic attitude of the Christian community as a mirroring of Christ’s kenosis,
we need to understand what kenosis means for Christ. We agree with those who favour a relational
understanding of kenosis opposed to a substantial understanding of it. In t his regard see, Vanessa Herrick and
Ivan Mann, Jesus Wept: Reflections on Vulnerability in Leadership (London: Darton, Longman, and Todd Ltd,
1998), 13 -14. The authors compare the Kenoticists’ substantial view of kenosis in Christ, that allows an
understa nding of human nature and divine nature as being in contradiction, with the Barthian view that is
relational. See also, Barth, CD, IV/1, 180. He says that „the kenosis consists in a renunciation of his being in the
form of God alone.”

216
church’s call as community, and a call to participate in Christ’s death, resurrection and
suffering. Third, as will be argued in the next section, Eucharist has a social dimension,838
being the church’s proclamation of the future of humanity. Furthermore, the proposal in this
section is that the church’s Eucharistic proclam ation is one that mirrors Christ’s brokenness,
in self denial, character and integrity.
The first domain in which the church’s Eucharistic proclamation mirrors Christ’s
brokenness is a personal one, through acceptance of the brokenness in Christ -like self denial.
That means to respond in fear of the Lord, to God’s giving in Christ through the Spirit in
daily care and in the infusion of Christ’s life in us. These are the coordinates of spiritual
medication for the fear of tomorrow, which is denial of God’s care, the fear of men, which is
denial of God’s lordship, and the fear of death, which is denial of God’s life through Christ.
There is a second domain in which the church through her Eucharistic proclamation
can mirror Christ’s brokenness, in what cou ld be called a togetherness of faith. In the words
of Christ, the Eucharist is participation in the New Covenant, sealed with the blood of Christ.
The third domain in which the church’s Eucharistic proclamation mirrors Christ’s
brokenness is the familial one, through the promotion of brokenness in Christ -like integrity,
expressed in the development of familial relationships that reflect Christ’s relationship with
his church.839

838 Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 152. He says that in the early church Eucharist was a… a public
work, for all the Christians from a city. Also, Barth , God Here and Now , 65-66. He says: “The essence of the
Church is the event in which these many men, as often as they have all received the bread and the cup of the
Lord’s Supper, anticipating the power and joy of the future revelation, share already here and now in the “feast
of the Lamb…This community must be open to the world in order to make visible, with its proclamation of the
kingdom of God, the clear , but also severe limits of all human movement and effort, progress and regress,
ascents and descents. The Church does not exist by pondering, studying, discussing, and preparing itself for this
relationship to the world. The Church exists in actually acco mplishing this relationship in each time with the
appropriate sense of security, realism, and necessity.” (Ibid.)
839 Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing House, 1975), 308. „On the one hand the unity of Christ and the church therefore receives its
explanation from the mysterious unity of husband and wife in marriage…conversely, the unity of Christ and the
church throws light on the tr ue experience of the unity of marriage.” (Ibid.). Also, John Piper, Desiring God:
Meditations of a Christian Hedonist (Oregon: Multnomah Books, 1986), 181. Amazingly, Nikolai Berdiaev

217
This familial reflection of the relationship between Christ and the Church is meant to
extends from the relationship between partners in marriage, to relationships between children
and parents, and between masters and slaves in that cultural context in which many times the
slaves were considered part of the family.840
The Eucharistic proclamation of the church should be always at the intersection of
what we are at the personal level, do at the community level and promote at the familial level.
The church should always ask how much all these elements of our proclamation mirror the
giving of the Christ who we remember when we break the Eucharistic bread. The new
creation in Christ whose first fruits are the believers who form the Body of Christ is, i n the
world, a presence that brings a new alternative way of living. This new alternative
illustrates the two kinds of people of society in the world, belonging to two ways of living, in
“bondage and liberation, guilt and justification, estrangement and re conciliation, deformity
and transformation.”841

Summary

What we have tried to argue in this chapter is in light of one of the necessary changes
in the life of baptistic communities in Romania which would be in regard to the Eucharist.
Based on the comparison between Stăniloae’ s and Fiddes’ view of Eucharist and following
what they have in common in their views, namely, the centrality of Christ’s presence, we
proceeded to sketch a possible way of understanding the Eucharist rooted in the centrality of
Christ, and as reflection of the reality of perichoresis .
This we considered as necessary for the baptistic communities in R omania, for it was
observed that many times the Eucharistic communion is an occasion of excluding other

considers that the New Testament denies the family, an institution that is a worldly establishment: Nikolai
Berdiaev, Sensul Creatiei: Incercare de indreptățire a omului (București: Humanit as, 1992), 196, 198.
840 Derek Tidball, The Social C ontext of the New Testament (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 1983), 81.
841 Wayne A. Meeks , The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press, 1983), 184.

218
believers rather than including them into the fellowship of the church. One of the reasons
could be the inappropriate understanding of the Eucharist as being rather centred in what the
believers are and do than in what Christ is, has done and does, as premises for what the
believers are, do and should become. Therefore, we aimed to bring to attention some key
dimensions that the centrality of Christ in th e Eucharist communion features and which the
church in her life should reflect.
First, we argued the covenantal dimension of Eucharist through remembering Christ’s
share in us, in our humanity and in our lives as members of the people of God. We have
observed that the New Covenant instituted by Christ in the Eucharistic meal with His
disciples on His last night with them is the conclusion and culmination of all the covenants of
God with humanity.
We have also observed in a perichoretical key that this New Covenant contains a
threefold reality, the permanent presence of God with us through Christ in the Spirit, the
permanence of God’s being for us through Christ’s sacrifice that provides the forgiveness of
sins, and the permanence of God’s transforming work in us through the Spirit in the likeness
of Christ.
Second, we argued the koinonial dimension of the Eucharist in discerning our share
in Christ that pictures the reality of the present through discernment of the church’s call to be
a community and to p articipate in Christ’s death, resurrection and suffering. We have seen
that the discerning has to do with two realities, the reality of His body broken on the cross and
the reality of His body that we are, at the corporate level through our identification with Him
on the personal level. The Eucharist therefore shows the corporeality of being in Christ. We
have also argued that this corporeal participation in Christ has to be experienced in a kenotic
attitude in the interpersonal relationships in the Body of Christ, as a reflection of Christ’s own
kenosis .

219
Third, we argued the social dimension of the Eucharist, being the church’s proclamation
of the future of humanity, a proclamation that mirrors Christ’s brokenness, in self denial,
character and integrity. W e have also argued that the Eucharistic proclamation of the church
should be always at the intersection of what believers are on the personal level, do at the
community level and promote at the familial level. The church should always ask how much
all thes e elements of our proclamation mirror the giving of Christ who we remember when we
break the Eucharistic bread.

11.3. Spirituality as a Shared Pilgrimage

We have seen in chapter 5 that Stăniloae’ s view of spirituality is an actualized
reflection of the Christological Pneumatological convergence. Also, we have seen in chapter
9, how Fiddes’ view of spirituality is framed by the concept of covenant, is centered in the
story of Christ, and should be embodied in the life long spiritual journey of the believers.
In chapter 10, we concluded that the Trinitarian -framing, Christologically -centered
and Pneumatologically -based common features of the two theologians’ view of spirituality is
an important remi nder and an important reflective theme for Baptists in Romania where there
is a necessary reformulation of a theology of the Spirit that will keep in their vital connection
not only the three Persons of the Trinity, but also the Person, work, fruit and gif ts of the
Spirit.
Based on the conclusions of chapter 10, the aim of the present chapter is that of
reflecting on the theme of the Christian spiritu al life as an expression of participating in the
indissoluble togetherness of the work of the Father, through the Son. That will hopefully show
the importance of Trinitarian Christological Pneumatology for the necessary theological
reformulation of dimensi ons of spiritual life in the baptistic communities of the Romanian

220
third millennium, a spirituality that will mirror the life of the Trinity, and will embody the
loving embrace of the Father in the Son through the Spirit.
Accordingly, in the first sectio n of this chapter we will argue the dimension of
spiritual life as a shared journey that is restoration of the imago Dei , a journey from an
existence characterized by the absence of God, to a living with and for God. The second
section will focus on the di mension of spiritual life as a shared journey that is transformation
into the likeness of Christ, a journey from being in Adam to being in Christ. The last section
will focus on the dimension of a spiritual life as a shared journey from emptiness of the
human condition to the fullness of the Spirit, a journey in which the Spirit infuses the
character of the Father, in the fruit of the Spirit, that is revealed in the life of Christ, and
imprints the life of Christ, that reflects the character of the Father, in the Spirit’s gifts,
manifested in Him.

Spiritual life as a shared journey from a life without God to a life with and for God.
Restoration of Imago Dei

If the spiritual life is a life long journey of believers, it is first a journey of restoration
of the imago Dei in human beings. In fact says Miroslav Volf “the triune God stands at the
beginning and at the end of the Christian pilgrimage…,”842 therefore this restoration m eans a
move from a living without God into a more and more profound life with and for God. All
human beings start their lives on the earth being inheritors of “an empty way of life,” a life
without God, a life of “a suffocating loneliness,”843 a life from w hich human beings need to
be redeemed.844 Miroslav Volf describes this life in this way

842 Miroslav Volf, „Being as God is: Trinity and Generosity,” in God’s life in Trinity , Miroslav Volf and
Michael Welker (eds) (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2006), 3. Henri J. M. Nouwen, Reaching Out: The
Three Movements of the Spiritual Life (New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc, 1966), 14

844 1 Pe 1: 18 -19. See Peter. H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990), 71. He says: “This “way of life” which included not just their religious
but also their e thical values and actions…by which Peter means that it was worthless, futile and empty of hope
and value when viewed in the light of the gospel.” (Ibid.). See also, Edmund Clowney, The Message of 1 Peter:

221
…a way of life characterized by the lack of knowledge of God and by misguided
desires… the transitoriness of the present world in which all human efforts ultimately
end in death…the meaningless of sin and hopelessness of death845

One of the metaphors used in the New Testament by Paul to describe life w ithout God
is that of darkness. Paul speaks of a darkened understanding,846 of being darkness, of
producing fruitless deeds of darkness, 847 and being under the dominion of darkness.848 This is
the reason metanoia is crucial in order that the new life from God replaces the old life without
God. The new creation in Christ implies a new understanding of self,849 others and of Christ,
a spiritual understanding that replaces the darkened understanding.
But what is the model for this new relationship with God that human beings enter
through the sacrifice of Christ? A possible answer is that the life of the Trinity is the model of
how redemption should be embodied authentically. Therefore, looking at the w ay the
relationship of the Father, Son and the Spirit promote and fulfill the work of redemption in

The Way of the Cross (Leicester: Intervarsity Press , 1988), 69. He argues that “the way in which Peter speaks of
our redemption here shows how central it was to the apostolic gospel.”(Ibid.). Also, I. Howard Marshall, 1 Peter
(Leicester: Intervarsity Press, 1991), 55. He argues that “the way in which Peter frames the thought makes it
clear that the reminder is not so much of the redemption itself but rather of the cost of the redemption.” (Ibid.).
845 Miroslav Volf, Captive to the Word of God: Engaging the Scriptures for Contemporary Theolog ical
Reflection (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010), 71 -72. See also, Karen H.
Jobes, 1 Peter (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 117. She says that Peter wants to remind the
Christians that “Christ’ s redemption has delivered them from the bondage of the sin that characterized their
former way of life and that continues to be practiced all around them in pagan society.”(Ibid.)
846 Eph 4: 18. Also, Markus Barth , Ephesians: Translation and Commentary on Chapters 4 -6 (New
York: Doubleday & Company, Inc, 1974), 500. He argues that “When knowledge is identified wi th light and
ignorance with darkness, then the previously mentioned ontological dimension of the mind’s activity is made
apparent. Just as knowledge means participation in life and obedience to God, so ignorance equals the inability
to live, to grow, to ac t sensibly.” (Ibid.)
847 Eph 5: 8, 11, and Romans 13: 12 Markus Barth, Ephesians , 4-6, 569 -570. He argues that “the
fruitless deeds of darkness stand in contrast to the “fruit of the Spirit” des cribed in Gal 5: 22 -23.” (Ibid.). Also,
John Ziesler, Paul’s Letter to Romans (London: SCM Press, 1989), 320. He argues that the expression “let us
cast off the works of darkness and put on the armour of light…is the language of Christian catechesis…in whi ch
converts were urged to get rid of old habits, goals, and practices, and to adopt new ones appropriate for
Christians.” (Ibid.).
848 Col 1: 13. Markus Barth and Helmut Blanke, Colossians: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary (New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc, 1994), 188. Commenting on the structure of this verse he
argues that “ Basilea …means the kingly realm of the Messiah. Analogously, exousia means the dominion of
darkness.” (Ibid.). Also, J. B. Ligh tfoot, St Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (London:
MacMillan and Co, 1875), 207. He explains that the verse should be understood in this way: “We were slaves in
the land of darkness. God rescued us …He transplanted us…and settled us as free colonists and citizens in the
kingdom of His Son, in the realms of light.” (Ibid.)
849 Dietrich Von Hildebrand, Transformation in Christ: On the Christian Attitude (San Francisco, CA:
Ignatius Press, 2001). He considers that “true self -knowledge is an important instrument of sanctification, (ibi d.,
44), fruitful knowledge, (ibid., 47) which grows out of man’s self -confrontation with God,” and leads to “true
self-surrender” to God, (ibid., 48).

222
their journey of togetherness to, with and for humanity, we could find a meaningful model for
the Christian communities in their shared journey of restoring the Imago Dei . For Martin
Lloyd -Jones the affirmation by Paul of this model,
…is the highest statement of Christian doctrine that one can conceive of or even imagine
…Paul seems to me to be laying down what is after all a principle that governs
everythin g…We must look at God and consider His being and nature. If I am to imitate God I
must know something about Him.850

First, when we look at the relationship between the Father and Son in the Spirit we
contemplate a unique way of self giving that is in contrast with the inherited human tendency
to self -centeredness and self -absorption.851 Human beings as masterpieces of creation are
created in their uniqueness ,852 and autonomous from created order and other human beings, in
interdependence with them, and in dependence of God.
To be made in the image in G od’s image means something like the idea that one can look in
the mirror as a human being and see traces of the divine being who designed us. We resemble
God in our capacity to love, to reason, to feel, to relate to other creatures, to imagine, to plan,
to create, to contemplate…Another key aspect of the image of God has to do with a unique
responsibility before God and in relation to all creatures.853

This reality from the beginning mirrors the way the Father and the Son work together
through the Spirit, revealing not only the uniqueness of God’s character but also the will of
God for t he functioning of everything in creation. Moreover, the way in which each divine
Person uniquely makes the Other the centre of her being is the perennial challenge for the
communal life of humanity. The entire history of humankind from a spiritual perspect ive is a
history of redemptive acts of the Father through the Son in the Spirit. This redemptive work in
the interdependence of three Persons is revealed by the fact that the Father is the One who

850 D. M. Lloyd -Jones, Darkness and Light: An Exposition of Ephesians 4: 17 -5: 17 (Edinburgh: The
Banner of Truth Trust, 1982), 291 -292.
851 Michael L. Lindvall, The Christian Life: A Geography of God (Louisville, KY: Geneva Press, 2001).
He says tha t: “the way home begins here, in the radical reorientation that is death to self -orientation,” (ibid., 28).
852 Robert W. Jenson, Systematic Theology: The Works of God , vol 2 (Oxford: Oxford Univeristy Press,
1999), 53.
853 David P. Gushee, Only Human: Christian Reflections on the Journey Towards Wholeness (San
Francisco, CA: Jossey -Bass, A Wiley Imprint, 2005), 16 -17.

223
redeemed us from the dominion of darkness and moved us into the Kingdom of the Son of His
love.854
The Son, who is “the image of the invisible God” a concept that summarizes “the
fullness of divinity that dwells bodily in the Lord Jesus,855 and “the first born over all
creation” is not only preexistent to created o rder, or the agent of all created things seen or
unseen, but is the cohesive principle of all creation and of all redemption, the One who
contains the entire redemption, and the One who contains the entire fullness of God.856
The Eternal Father made the Eternal Son in the Eternal Spirit to be the center of His
entire activ ity before the creation of the Universe, in creation and in history. Similarly, the
Eternal Son, through the Eternal Spirit made the Eternal Father’s plan the reason of His
existence,857 being the image of the Father, the agent of the Father, and the unifying and
sustaining principle of the Father’s work in eternity, creation and history. Consequently, the
restoration of the Imago Dei that is one of the important dimensions of the Christian life as a
shared journey is to be embodied at the community level through imitation of God in

854 Col 1: 12 -13. Also, Jurgen Moltmann, God in Creation: An Ecological Doctrine of Creation
(London: SCM Press, 1985), 17. He says: …all relationships which are analogous to God reflect the primal,
reciprocal indwelling and mutual interpenetration of the Trinitarian perichoresis . God in the world and the world
in God; heaven and earth in the kingdom of God, pervaded by his glory; soul and body united in the life -giving
Spirit to a human whole; woman and man in the kingdom of unconditional and unconditioned love, freed to be
true and complete human beings…All living things – each in its specific way – live in one another and with one
another, from one another and for one another.” (Ibid.). See also, Barth, Churc h Dogmatics 1/1, 360. He says:
„The divine modes of being mutually condition and permeate one another so completely that one is always in the
other two in the one. Sometimes this has been grounded more in the unity of the divine essence and sometimes
more in the relations of origin as such. Both approaches are right and both ultimately saying the same thing.”
(Ibid.)
855 Boris Bobrinskoy, The Mistery of the Trinity: Trinitarian Experience and Vision in the Biblical and
Patristic Tradition (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1999), 123.
856 Col 1: 14 -23. Also, Michael P. Knowles, „Christ in You the Hope of Glory: Discipleship in
Collosians, ” in Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament , Richard N. Longenecker (ed) (Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company , 1996). Knowles says that for Paul „Christ is the ontological,
epistemological and soteriological focus of all human thought and experience. Christ is the foundation of reality
itself..,” (ibid., 180).
857 Jurgen Moltmann, „God in the World – The World in God: Perichoresis in Trinity and Eschatology,”
in The Gospel of John and Christian Theology , Richard Bauckham and Carl Mosser (Eds) ( Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company , 2008), 372 -375. Speaking about the Gospel of John and the
perichoretic way of thinking, and commenting on the text in John 17: 21, Moltmann argues that „the
perichoretical unity of the divine Persons and Spaces is so wide open that the whole world can fi nd room and
rest and the fullnesss of eternal life within it.” (Ibid.)

224
reflecting the Son’s centrality for the Father in all things in the centrality of Christ in all the
Christian communities think, speak or do.
These overlapping of movements of the divine reality and ecclesial reality, have three
important consequences for the life of Christian communities in their shared journey of
Christian living. First, th e sovereignty of Christ from eternity communicates for the Christian
community the sufficiency of redemption through Christ in history as a means for a spiritual
understanding for the vital necessity of taking off what we have been in Adam and putting on
what we have become in Christ. Second, the centrality of Christ in the church communicates
the importance of the continuous work of Christ through the Spirit as a means for spiritual
growth of Christian communities. Third, the fullness of Christ in creation and redemption
communicates the necessity of Christ’s Lordship over the entire reality as a means for the
foundation of deep spiritual convictions in the life of Christian communities. We can speak
therefore about a participative model of spiritual restor ation that is aimed at reestablishing of
a meaningful relationship with God of human beings.

The fellowship which God seeks and creates with the human subject through the event of
revelation, the Christ event, is fellowship through participation with hims elf, the God who is
fellowship and partnership.858

Spiritual life as a shared journ ey from Adam to Christ. Transformation in the Imago Christi.

In the last section we argued, following closely Stăniloae and Fiddes, that the model
for Christian life is the life of the Trinity.859 The three Persons in their self giving to the
Others and to humanity constitute the model for the journey of Christian communities from

858 Paul M. Collins, Trinitarian Theology: West and East: Karl Barth, the Cappadocians Fathers and
John Zizioulas (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 228.
859 We have seen in chapter 6 that for Stăniloae the Holy Trinity is the foundation for the Christian
spirituality. See, Stăniloae, Spiritualitate Ortodoxă: Ascetica și Mistica , 35. Also, we have seen in chapter 6 that
according to Fiddes, humanity is permanently called to transformation from merely observer of God to
participant in God, participation through which we are invited into “this interweaving or perichoresis of
relationships,” a “story of a Father who sends out a Son in a Spirit of love,” a story in which we are called “to
incorporate our o wn stories.” See in this regard, Fiddes, “Concept, Image and Story in Systematic Theology,” 23
and Fiddes, “Story and Possibility,” 44.

225
darkness to light, from self -absorption to self giving. The aim of this section is to answer the
question, “What is the dynamics of this threefold shared journey?”
The first coordinate of such a dynamic would be an existence centred in th e fullness of
Christ that involves a receiving of Christ in order to live in Him, being rooted and built in
Him, strengthened in faith, being given the fullness of Christ. He is not only the foundation of
existence but also the resistance structure of it a s the receiving of Christ is authenticated and
validated by the following of Christ. Also, rootness in Christ is validated through being filled
with Christ, and third, growth in Christ is realized through knowledge of Christ. 860 Paul
contrasts the two ways of living which are possible for humanity, or humanity’s „two possible
manifestations,”861 namely, “in Adam” and “in Christ.”862 Moreover, Adam „is… the type of
Him who was to come. Man’s essential and original nature is to be found, therefore, not in
Adam but in Christ.”863
Being “in Adam” means to live as an old self who is not crucified an d therefore to
live as a slave of sin, living according to the sinful nature, and being subject to death. In
contrast, being “in Christ” means to live as a new self born from the crucifixion of the old
self, living according to the Spirit, and being subjec t to life. In this context Paul develops what
has been called “the interchange in Christ.”864 The main idea in this interchange, is th at
“Christ became what we are in order that in him , we might become what he is.” Therefore the

860 Col 2: 6 -10. See Ralph. P. Martin, Colossians: The Church’s Lord and the Christian Liberty (Exeter,
UK: Paternoster Press, 1972), 72.
861 John Ziesler, Pauline Christ ianity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), 57.
862 Ro 5:12 -20. Also, Karl Barth, The Epistle to the Romans (Oxford: University Press, 1933), 181. He
says: “Adam is the ‘old’ subject, the EGO of the man in the world… Christ is the ‘new’ subject, the EGO of the
coming world.” Also, Mark Strom, Reframing Paul: Conversations in Grace & Community (Downers Grove, IL:
Inter -Varsity Press, 2000), 92.
863 Karl Barth, Christ and Adam: Man and Humanity in Romans 5 (New York: Harper & Brothers
Publishers, 1956), 29.
864 Ro 6: 6 and Ro 8: 5 -6. And, Morna D. Hooker, From Adam to Christ: Essays on Paul (Cambridge:
University Press, 1990), 13.

226
profound reality of Christ’s identification with humanity opens the possibility for what could
be called „conformity to Christ”865
This leads us to the second coordinate of the dynamics in the shared journey of the
Christian life, that of a life embraced by the life of Christ . This embrace is a overlapping of
movements in which the church is invited to participate in her mission in the world. First, the
incarnation of the Son of God gives visibility to the eternal embrace for the Son of the Via
Dolorosa of the love of Father in the history of humanity. The Son assumes the crucifo rm
mission of the Father in history866 making His own, assumes the suffering from the Father’s
heart making it His own suffering for the salvat ion of humanity. The Son lovingly accepted
the call, through incarnation, life and death on the earth, to mirror the way God has been
wearing the cross for humanity from eternity.867
Second, the cross of Christ is the conclusion of the Son’s Via Dolorosa in which the
church is called to participate. It is the suffering of transformation from the image of the
earthly man in order so that the image of the heavenly man can be imprinted. It is a cruciform
journey of transformation in accordance with the will of God as opposed to conformation „to
the pattern of this world.”868 Therefore, the call of the Father for the church is to mirror the
Son’s entire life through the power of the Holy Spirit and this is to be done in the spirit of the
Via dolorosa in the world.
In a Christian theological perspective, th e world and the self are really related as coexistents.
Both are really related to the God who, as Love, is their beginning and their end. That God as
Love affects all and is affected by all. That God, in the decisive self -manifestation of who
God is in t he proleptic event of Jesus Christ, also discloses who we are in our real -as-graced
possibility and what the world is in its graced reality. By the emancipatory power of that

865 L.Ann Jervis, „Becoming like G od through Christ: Discipleship in Romans,” in Patterns of
Discipleship in the New Testament , Richard N. Longenecker (ed)( Grand Rapids, MI: William B.Eerdmans
Publishing Company , 1996), 154. Also, Wolfhart Pannenberg, Christian Spirituality (Philadelphia, PA: The
Westminster Press, 1983), 104.
866 Here we recall Stăniloae’ s view about cruciform living as having Christ as model, that we analyzed
in chapter 6.
867 Jurgen Moltmann speaks of “the pathos of God…in his passion and in his int erest in history.” In
Jurgen Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom of God: The Doctrine of God (London: SCM Press, 1981), 26.
868 Ro 12: 2.

227
revelation, the Christian faith is a risk taken in the trust that, in spite of al l, the self and the
world are held in the always -already, not yet reality of God’s redemptive love.869

Third, the resurrection of Christ as a result of the Via Dolorosa of the Spirit870 is His
declaration with power of the divine Sonship of Christ.871 The Spirit Himself traveled the
journey of the Son into the deepness of humanity’s estrangement from God. The Spirit
Himself was a witness of the Son’s total and perfect obedience to the Father’s will, a unique
obedience through which the Son is proved by the Spirit the One worthy to become „the
source of eternal salvation for all who obey him.”872 The call of the testimony of the Spirit
from the Via Dolorosa of the Son is that only the cross assumed fully and carried to the very
end of existence, in obedience and in accordance with the will of the Father embodied in the
Son, makes the resurrection possible in us and in the world we live in.873
These are the coordinates of the new creation after the likeness of Christ as revealed
by the Spirit according to the plan of God for humanity. Yet there are important consequences
for the life of Christian communities as they dare to travel on the Via Dolorosa of the Father,
in the Son through the Spirit. Living in the reality of the new creation in Christ is translated
first in the permanency of Christ’s truth in relation to others as a consequence of the taking off
of the lies in relationship with God and self.874
Furthermore, living in the reality of the new creation in Christ is translated in the
embodiment of Christ’s forgiveness in the way in which forgiveness is practiced in ecclesial

869 David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism (New
York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1981), 438.
870 Ivana Noble speaks of the kenosis of the Spirit considering that „the kenosis of the Spirit
complements the kenosis of the Son.” (Ivana Noble, Theological Interpretation , 176-177).
871 Douglas Moo, Romans 1 -8, The Wyccliffe Exegetical Commentary, Keneth Barker (Ed) (Chicago,
IL: Moody Press, 1991), 40.
872 Peter T. O’Brien, The Letter to the Hebrews ( Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company , 2010), 201
873 Stăniloae, The Victory of the Cross, 2. He argues that the believer is carrying the cross with the hope
of transforming resurrection and a s I mentioned in chapters 5 and 6 this is the way the theol ogy of the cross is
vitally connected with the theology of ressurection. This is an important element in keepng together in their
mutual synthesis the incarnation, life, death and ressurection of Christ, with direct relevance to the way believers
should se e their carrying of the cross.
874 James D.C. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary on the Greek Text
(Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company , 1996), 219-221.

228
relationships rooted in love. Moreover, living in the reality of the new creation in Christ is
translated in the ru le of Christ’s peace and dwelling of Christ’s word in the synthesis of the
individual life and communal life, as well as in familial and social life. 875 In the words of
Michael J, Gorman:
To be „in Christ” is to live within a community that is shaped by his story, not merely to have
a „personal relationship” with Christ. The corporate character of being in Christ corresponds
to the inherently relational character of cruciformity. Cruciform faith is not comp lete until it
issues in cruciform love for others, Cruciform love and power are ways of being for others,
expressions of commitment to the weak, to a larger body, and to enemies, Even cruciform
hope requires a vision of the future much broader than the fat e of the self alone.876

Spiritual life as a Shared Journey from Spiritual Emptiness of the Human Existence to the
Fullness of the Spirit.

We have seen in the first two sections of this chapter, following Stăniloae and Fiddes,
that the Christian life as a shared journey starts with the restoration of the Imago Dei
materialized in t he likeness of Christ877 in the life of Christian communities in a ll domains of
societal life. In this section we will explore a possible answer to the question, „How did the
restoration of the Imago Dei and growth into the likeness of Christ become visible in the life
of Christian communities?”
If in their life the divine Persons, of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not separated,
confused or contradicted in their essence and work, the same could be affirmed about the
internal reality of each divine Person and work. As the person of the Son is constituted only in
relation to the Father and the Spirit, so the Person of the Spirit is constituted only in relation to
the Father and the Son. Consequently, the Holy Spirit is revealed as the Spirit of God the

875 Ibid., 231 -244.
876 Michael J. Gorman, Cruciformity: Paul’s Narrative Spirituality of the Cross (Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company , 2001), 350.
877 We have seen in chapter 6 that for Stăniloae, Christian spirituality is the process of progressing on
the road of perfection in Christ and for him the telos of Christian spirituality is the union of a believer with God
in Christ, through the work of the Spirit. See in this regard, Stăniloae, Spiritualitate Ortodoxă, 5. And Stăniloae,
“Desăvârșirea noastră în Hristos după învățătura bisericii Ortodoxe,” 76. We have also seen in chapter 6 that for
Fiddes in his turn, Christ is the person who who is the model of how the relationship with God should be lived in
the spirit of Christ. See in this regard, 877 Fiddes, “The Covenant – Old and New,”18 -19.

229
Father, being sent by Him,878 and the Spirit of Christ,879 through the revelation of the Son,880
who in His turn reveals the Father.
In the light of the above considerations we can reach the conclusion that not only the
three Persons in their essence and work are unseparated, unconfused and uncontradicted, but
also in the work of each Person the Others are fully revealed. From here follows the fact that
the Person of the Holy Spirit reflects the Persons of the Father and of the Son, as well as the
work of the Holy Spirit reflects the work of the Father and of the Son.
The way in which the Spirit, in His Person and work, reflects the Persons of the Father
and of the Son becomes evident in the fruit of the Spirit, as revelation of the qualities of the
Father revealed in and by Christ, a fruit that is the framework validating the appropriation of
the charisms of the Spirit. Therefore, the Person and the work of the Spirit in their
inseparability in regard to the Persons and work of the Father and of the Son, constitute the
centre of the understanding of the manifestations ( charismata ) of the Spirit.
Accordingly, this reality of the Spirit’s fullness blossoms from the work of the Spirit’s
fruit in us according to the model of the work of the Spirit’s fruit in the life of Christ. For, all
the characteristics of the Spirit’s fruit are proper as well in th e life of the Father as in the life
of the Son and the Spirit expressing the moral attributes of divinity: kindness expressed in
love, mercy, grace, long enduring patience, righteousness, truth, justice.881 These qualities are
then shown in the life of the incarnate So n: love, joy, peace, long enduring patience, kindness,
faithfulness, gentleness, and self -control.882

878 John Wijngaar ds, The Spirit in John (Wilmington, DE, Michael Glazier, 1988), 38.
879 N. T. Wright, John for Everyone , 2: Chapters 11 -21 (London: Society for Promoting Christian
Knowledge, 2002), 63.
880 Ibid., 86.
881 T. C. Hammond, In Understanding be Man: A Handbook of Christian Doctrine (Leicester,
InterVarsity Press, 1968), 47. Also, Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (London, The Banner of Truth Trust,
1939), 70 -73.
882 Oprean, Comuniune și participare, 99.

230
This reality of the fruit of the Spirit in the life and the work of Christ needs to be
reflected in the life of Chr istian communities through the work of the Spirit.883 But the fruit of
the Spirit is not an impersonal work of the Spirit, it necessitates a believer’s participation
through renunciation of walking in the ways of disobedience and a perseverant walk on the
way of obedience of God. In the last instance, t he fruit of the Spirit is the expression of the
Holy Spirit’s life, „a metaphor used by Paul to describe the virtues that manifest the realities
of Christ’s life,”884 the reality that demonstrates „the work of the Spirit in believers,”885 and
that characterizes the way of living for the one indwelt and empowered by the Spirit.886
The nine features of the fruit of the Spirit even though they are representative and not
exhaustive,887 mirror the imago Christi in all domains of Christian life. All these
representative features of the fruit of the Spirit are not only expressions of the internal life of
believers they are also expressions of the relational life in the body of Christ and in society.888
All these dimensions of the fruit of the Spirit are a rejection of the egocentric closure towards
himself, and promote the altruism that opens towards the other, a truth that is foundational
not only for the fruit of the S pirit but also for the manifestations ( charismata of the Spirit)889
Another key dimension in regard with charismata is the togetherness of the Father, the
Son and the Spirit in their work. This work together is seen first, in the fact that the Father is
the One who gives the Spirit, charismata being manifestations of the Holy Spirit.890 Second,
charismata or the manifestations of the Spirit mirror the character of God expressed in his

883 Gordon D. Fee, Paul, The Spirit and the People of God , (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson 1996), 112.
Also, Fee , God ’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul( Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
1994), 882.
884 D. S. Dockery, „Fruit of the Spirit,” în Gerald F. Hawthorne și Ralph P. Martin (eds), Dictionary of
Paul and His Letters (Leicester, InterVarsity Press, 1993), 316.
885 Ibid., 318.
886 F. F Bruce, Commentary on Galatians ( Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans , 1982), 251.
887 Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 444.
888 Fee, Paul, The Spiri t and the People of God , 115.
889 Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 446.
890 Robert L. Thomas, Understanding S piritual Gifts (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1999),
11. He argues that the triune God is the unified source of spiritual gifts.

231
attributes as sp irituality, omniscience, wisdom and veracity.891 Third, charismata are
embodied in the Son, his life and His work on the earth.892
Summary

We argued in this section that the Christian life as a shared journey happens at the
intersection of the work of the Father, through the Son in the Holy Spirit. The overlapping of
the divine persons’ movements is a reality in their work from creation to re storation, from fall
to redemption and from estrangement to transformation in the life of Christian communities.
As a consequence, the restoration of the imago Dei, the transformation after the imago Christi
and the embodiment of the fruit of the Spirit is a perichoretical reality in the synthesis of its
vertical ascendant dimension and its horizontal ecclesial dimension.
The inseparability of the three divine Persons is the reflection of the inseparability of
each Person’s work understood in relationship w ith the Others. Therefore, in the work of the

891 Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 65-69 and T. C. Hammond, In Understanding Be Men , 46.
892 There are many occasions in which the manifestations of the Spirit are seen in the life and work of
Christ. For example, in His answers to the questions of the teachers in the Temple (Lk 2: 40 -52), Christ exercises
the charismata of the message of wisdom t hat we meet constantly in His ministry (Mat 7: 28 -29) From this
posture, Christ says to His disciples when He prepares them for the coming times of persecution: „For I will give
you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or c ontradict” (Lk 21:15). For the
apostle Paul, Christ „has become for us the wisdom of God,” (1 Co 1: 30) and as such He is the source of
wisdom in Christian life: „so that you may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the
treasures of wisdom and knowledge.”(Col. 2:2 -3). Then, in the meeting with the Samaritan women (Jn 4: 17 -18),
Christ manifests the charismata of the message of knowledge (1 Co 12: 8). This manifestation of the Spirit in
Christ could be detected in the meeting with the invalid at the Bethesda pool (Jn 5: 6) and in Christ’s
confrontation with the teachers of the law ( Mk 2: 8 and Mt 9: 4) . Moreover, Christ Himself teaches His disciples
about the conditions of their mission in the world. He tells them that in the world there will be adversities
and they will be interrogated but they are not to worry because it „will be given what to say, for it will not be you
speaking but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you” (Mat 10: 19 -20). This participatory dimen sion of
the overlapping of God’s foreknowledge poured in the words of believers’ messages and knowledge is very well
illustrated by the word of knowledge that Paul addressed in the desperate situation of shipwreck on the Adriatic
sea ( Ac 27: 22 -26). The charismata of faith ( 1 Co 12:9) , also accompanies the work of Christ, as for example in
the episode with the resurrection of Lazarus ( Jn 11: 41 -42). The participative dimension of such a charismata is
revealed in the episode experienced by two disciples in their ministry when they declare with conviction the
healing of a crippled man in the name of Jesus Christ ( Ac 3: 1 -6). The charismata of healing (1 Co 12: 9), is also
a reality in the life of Jesus Christ ( Mt 8: 14 -16), and through its manifestation the f ulfillment of the Old
Testament prophecies is revealed ( Mt. 8:17 and Is 53:4). The charismata of miraculous powers (1 Co 12: 10)
which means the powerful intervention of God in the natural realm (resurrection of death persons and exorcism)
is a manifestati on of the Spirit present in the life of Christ ( Mk 5 and Jn 11) and of his disciples ( Ac 5: 12 and
19:11) . These three charismata , faith, gifts of healing and miraculous powers are miraculous manifestations that
express the power of the Spirit, and the mes sage of wisdom, the message of knowledge, prophecy, speaking in
different kinds of tongues and the interpretation of tongues are manifestations of the inspiration of the Spirit.

232
restoration of imago Dei the Father’s plan is that this restoration be done in the likeness of His
Son, the One who is the image of God the Father, in the Spirit, and the One who reflects the
Father’s character and will. At the same time the Son’s likeness is worked out according to
the will of the Father, by the Spirit of the Father who is simultaneously also the Spirit of
Christ. In His work to transform human beings into the likeness of the Son, the Spirit im prints
the fruit of the Spirit which is nothing else than the expression of the Father’s moral attributes,
lived out in the Person and work of His Son, through the Spirit. Moreover, the charisms of the
Spirit as expressions of the Father’s spiritual attrib utes, embodied perfectly in the Person and
work of Christ, are produced in human beings on the basis of the profound operation of
Christ’s work of transformation in their lives in accordance with the will of the Father.

233
Chapter 12. General Conclusion

We started our present study with a desire to answer the question of how the existent
theological resources could be used for the enhancement of the theological conversation
between Or thodox and Baptists in Romania. We also started with the premise that in the
contemporary society of Romania, the baptistic communities would benefit substantially if
they could be provided with the understanding that being open to conversation with the
Orthodox theology would be enriching and would contribute to the strengthening of their own
ecclesial life. Our premise is rooted in the understanding of the fact that there are valuable
theological resources not only for the enhancement of theological conve rsation between
Orthodox and Baptists in Romania, but also for the strengthening of the ecclesial life of
baptistic communities in Romania.
12. 1. Summary of the Thesis

I started the actual project wi th an introduction that states first, the context of
Romanian Baptists and their need for a non -reductionist understanding of baptism, Eucharist
and spirituality as important elements for a holistically understood process of the spiritual
journey. Also, in the introduction I stated my hypothesis that ecclesiology, via the
conversation between an Orthodox theologian, Dumitru Stăniloae and a Baptist theologian,
Paul Fiddes, could contribute to that.
In Part one of the present project, I explored the dynamic o f spiritual journey in
Stăniloae’s theology. Accordingly, in chapter 2 I focus on Stăniloae’s spiritual journey, and I
started with a description of the spiritual and intellectual climate in Romanian Orthodoxy at
the beginning of the 20th century. Then I c ontinued with an exploration of St ăniloae’s
biography, spiritual legacy and theology. In chapter 3 I focused on the way Stă niloae’ s
theology of participation informs and roots his view of baptism as the first step in the spiritual

234
journey of a Christian. In chapter 4, I focused on the way St ăniloae ’s theology of Eucharist
reflects the concept of perichoresis and in chapter 5, I focus ed on the way in St ăniloae ’s
theology of spirituality, the Christological -Pneumatological convergence is actualized.
In Part two explored the dynamic of spiritual journey in Fiddes’ theology.
Accordingly, in chapter 6, I started with Fiddes’ spiritual j ourney, and I understand his
worldwide recognition as a leading theologian in the contemporary Baptist world. Following
that I have shown some influences that I consider being important for his spiritual and
intellectual journey. In this context I explored the way his theology developed. In Chapter 7, I
focused on the way Fiddes’ theology of participation informs his thought about baptism. In
chapter 8, I focused on the way Fiddes’ perichoretical theology informs his thought about
Eucharist and in chapter 9 I focused on the way his covenantal theology informs his thought
about spirituality
In Part three, the conclusions, underlined, based on the conversation between Stăniloae
and Fiddes, the dialogical and the transformative dimensions of the spiritual journ ey.
Therefore, in chapter 10, I focused on the way theology of participation, the perichoretical and
Trinitarian theology are connected with the spiritual journey. In chapter 11, I focused on the
subjects of baptism as a way of living, Eucharist as a peric horetical reflection, and spirituality
as a shared pilgrimage.

12.2. Conclusions

The first conclusion that I reached after the present research is that of the truth of
theology as a dialogical disciplin e. I learned, from Stăniloae and Fiddes that when theological
discourse is rooted in an interdisciplinary conversation with philosophy, history, literature and
psychology the possible result is that theological formulations are relevant and productive in
their aim to transform the ecclesial reality. I am pleased to conclude that both Stăniloae as an

235
Orthodox theologian and Fiddes as a Baptist theologian proved to have the capacity for
conversation with other disciplines as a common feature of their thought. This is due, in my
opinion, to their permanent struggle for knowledge. We have also learned from both Stăniloae
and Fiddes that conversation with other traditions from the Christian families could prove to
be instrumental for strengthening one’s own spiri tual journey. Knowing the other,
understanding the differences of the other, is a meaningful way of knowing oneself. As a
respected Orthodox thinker of the 20th century stated in the title of one of his books, Through
others to yourself!893 Therefore, I conclude that dialogical theology edifies Christian life.
The second conclusion that we reached during the present research is that theology
produced in an interdisciplinary manner and in conversation with representatives of other
Christian traditions could reveal areas where the differences should be not only ac knowledged
but also accepted. I learned from Stăniloae and Fiddes that ecumenical encounters should not
have as their purpose the changing of ones own options and practices, but with the purpose of
deepening mutual understanding and when this understanding will be profound then even the
critique will be adequate and informed. Therefore, we conclude that dialogical theology
enriches Christian living.
The third conclusion that I have reached during the present research is that Trinitarian
theology is a solid affirmation of the Christian family. Even though Christians from different
traditions will interpret differently the mystery of the Holy Trinity, there is a general
agreement on the formative role of this doctrine for Christian theology. Therefore, we
conc lude that Trinitarian theology unites the Christian family.
Overall, during the present research we reached the understanding that theology done
in conversation with other traditions could be an enriching experience not only for theologians
but also for th eir communities of reference. There are the great themes of Christian theology,

_ Nicolae Steinhar t, Prin alții spre sine (București: Ed. Eminescu, 1988).

236
namely, Trinity, Christology, Pneumatology, Soteriology, Sanctification, Eschatology,
Ecclesiology that wait to be treated in theological conversation in Romania. What I have t ried
to show in this actual research was one of the many ways in which Baptists and Orthodox in
Romania should converse with each other. The only hope at the end of this research is that
even as limited as it is, this work will be a brick in the foundation for the enhancement of the
conversation between Orthodox and Baptists in Romania. This can be a desired conversation
of mutual understanding, respect and love, in such a way that we will be, even in the
fractureness of our fallen humanity, participants in the Father’s embrace of the entire world,
in the Son through the Spirit.

237
Bibliography

Andronovien ė, Lina and Parush Parushev, “Church, State, and Culture: On the Complexities
of Post -soviet Evangelical Social Involvement,” Theological Reflections, EAAA
Journal of Theology, # 3 (2004), 194 -212.

Aquinas, Thomas. The Summa Theologica . Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952.

______________. Summa Theologiae . London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964, 12: 9.1 -2.

Areopagite, Dyonysius the. The Divine Names and Mystical Theology . London: SPCK, 1975.

Atanasie St cel Mare. Scrieri 2 , Dumitru Stăniloae (tr). Bucuresti: EIBMBOR, 1988.

Athanasius, St. „On The Incarnat ion of the Word.” In Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers , 2.
Athanasius (saint), Philip Schaff (Ed). Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson
Publishers, 1999, 183 -237.

___________. „Defence against the Arians.” In Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers , 2.
Athanasius (saint), Philip Schaff (Ed). Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson
Publishers, 1999, 277 -349.

___________ . „Defence of the Nicene Definition.” In Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers , 2
Athanasius (saint), Philip Schaff (Ed). Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendricks on
Publishers, 1999, 350 -386.

Augsburger, Myron. The Peace Maker . Nashville: Abington Press, 1987.

________________. The Robe of God: Reconciliation, the Believers Essential . Scottsdale,
PA: Herald Press, 2000.

Augustine, St. “Treatise on the Mer its and Forgiveness of Sins and on the Baptism of
infants.” In Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers, volume 5, Saint Augustine’s Anti –
Pelagian Works , edited by Philip Schaff. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers,
Inc, 1995, 15 -78.

Baban, Octavian. “The Bible in the Life of the Orthodox Church.” In Ian Randall (ed.),
Baptists and the Orthodox Church: On the Way to understanding. Prague:
International Baptist Seminary, 2005 , 15-29.

Baird, J. S. “Preaching .” In Evangelical Dictionary of Theology edited by Walt er A.
Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books House, 1984, 948 -950.

Balz, Horst. “  ” In Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Horst
Balz and Gerhard Schneider, vol. 3. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1993, 164.

Baptism and Confirmation: A Report Submitted by the Church of England Liturgical
Commission to the Archbishop of Canterbury and York in November 1958 , London:
SPCK, 1959.

238

Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry 1982 -1990: Report on the Process and Responses, Faith
and Order paper 149. Geneva: WCC Publications, 1990.

__________. A Commentary of the First Epistle to the Corinthians . London: A&C. Black,
1968.

Barth, Karl. The Wo rd of God and the Word of Man . New York: Harper& Brothers
Publishers, 1928.

________. Church Dogmatics, 1:1. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1936.

________ . Church Dogmatics , 2: 1 . Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1936.

________ . Church Dogmatics, 1:2. Edinburgh: T&T Clar k, 1956.

________. Christ and Adam: Man and Humanity in Romans 5 . New York: Harper &
Brothers Publishers, 1956.

________ . Church Dogmatics , 3. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1961.

________. Church Dogmatics: A Selection . New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1962.

________ . God Here and Now, Religious Perspectives. New York: Harper and Row
Publishers, 1964.

________. Church Dogmatics , 3: 3. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1966.

________. Church Dogmatics , 4: 4. Edinburgh: T &T Clark LTD, 1969.

________. Church Dogmatics 1:1. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004.

________ . Church Dogmatics 1:1. Second Edition. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers,
2010.

________. Church Dogmatics , 4:1. Second Edition. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers,
Marketing, LLC, 2010.

Barth, Markus and Helmut Blanke. Colossians: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc, 1994.

Bartoș, Emil. Deification in Eastern Orthodox Theology: An Evaluation and Criti que of
the Theology of Dumitru Stăniloae . Carliste, PA: Paternoster Press, 1999.

________. Conceptul indumnezeirii în Teologia lui Dumitru Stăniloae. Oradea: Cartea
Creștină , 2002.

________. „Salvation in the Orthodox Church.” In Ian Randall (ed.), Baptists and the
Orthodox Church: On the Way to understanding . Prague: International Baptist
Seminary, 2005, 46 -63.

239

Basil the Great, „On the Spirit.” In Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers, 8: Basil: Letters and
Selected Works, Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (Eds). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, Inc, 1995, 1 -50.

________. „The Hexameron.” In Nicene and Post -Nicene Fathers , 8. Basil: Letters and
Selected Works, Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (Eds). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, Inc, 1995, 51 -107.

Beasley -Murray, G.R. Baptism in the New Testament . Carliste, PA: Paternoster Press, 1962.

Beker, J.C. “Second Letter of Peter.” In The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible .
Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1962, 767 -771.

Berdiaev, Nikolai. Sensul Crea tiei: Incercare de indreptatire a omului . Bucuresti:
Humanitas, 1992.

Beyer, “
.” In Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament , vol. 2, edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, translated by
Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Gr and Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Company, 1964,
81-93.

Bianchi, Eugene C. Reconciliation the Function of the Church. Sheed and Ward, Inc, 1969.
Bloesch, D. G. “Prayer,’ in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology edited by Walter A.
Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books House, 1984.

Blum, Edwin A. “2 Peter.” In The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, New Testament , edited
by Kenneth L. N. Barker & John R. Kohlenberger III. Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan Corporation, 1994, 255 -289.

Blumenfeld, Bruno. The Political Paul: Justice, Democracy and Kingship in a Hellenistic
Framework . Sheffield: Academic Press, 2001.

Bobrinskoy, Boris. The Mistery of the Trinity: Trinitarian Experience and Vision in the
Biblical and Patristic Tradition. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press,
1999.

Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. The Cost of Discipleship . New York: SCM Press Ltd, 1959.

________________. Ethics. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1962.

Bordeianu, Radu. Dumitru Stăniloae: An Ecumenical Ecle ssiology . London: Bloomsbury
T&T Clark, 2011.

Breck, John. Scripture in Tradition: The Bible and Its Interpretation in the Orthodox Church .
New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001.

Bria, Ion. Spațiul nemuririi sau eternizarea umanului în Dumnezeu î n viziunea teologică și
spirituală a Părintelui Stăniloae . Iași: Trinitas, 1994.

240
________. Romania: Orthodox Identity at a Crossroad of Europe . Geneva: WCC
Publications, 1995.

Briggs, John. „Evangelicals and Orthodox.” In Journal of European Baptist Studies, vol
12, No.1/September 2011, 5 -19.

Brown, C. “Proclamation, Preach, Kerygma.” In Dictionary of New Testament Theology ,
vol.3, edited by Collin Brown. Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1971, 57 -68.

Bruce, F. F. Commen tary on Galatians. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982.

Brueggemann, Walter. A Social Reading of the Old Testament Prophetic Approaches to
Israel’s Communal Life, edited by Patrick D. Miller. Minneapolis,MI: Fortress Press,
1994

Bulgakov, Sergius. The Ort hodox Church . New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1988.

Bunaciu, Otniel Ioan. “The Meaning of Tradition.” In Ian Randall (ed.), Baptists and the
Orthodox Church: On the Way to understanding . Prague: International Baptist
Seminary, 2005, 30 -45.

Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, 1 . Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press, 1960.

Carroll, Lesl ey. „Forgiveness and the Church. ” In Forgiveness: Embodying Forgiveness
Belfast: Centre for Contemporary Christi anity in Ireland Howard House, 2002, 2 -11.

Chan, Simon. Liturgical Theology: The Church as Worshiping Community . Downers
Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2006.

Christian Initiation in the Anglican Communion. The Toronto Statement „Walk in Newness of
Life.”The Findings of the Fourth International Anglican Liturgical Consultation,
Toronto 1991, David R. Holeton, ed., Grove Worship Series no. 118.
Bramcote, UK: Grove Books, 1991.

Clement of Alexandria, „The Instructor.” In Ante –Niceene Fathers, 2: Fathers of the
Second Century . Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc, 2004, 207 -296.

Climacus, John. The Ladder of Divine Ascent. New York: Paulist Press, 1982.

Cole, R. Alan. The Gospel According to Mark: An Introduction and Commentary
(Leicester: Inter -Varsity Press, 1989.

Collins, Paul M. Trinitarian Theology: West and East: Karl Barth, the Cappadocians
Fathers and John Zizioulas . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Constantineanu, Corneliu. The Social Significance of Reconciliation in Paul’ s Theology:
Narrative Readings in Romans . London: T&T Clark International, 2010.

Constantinescu, Emil. “Pr. Prof. Dr. Dumitru Stăniloae: profil de teolog și filosof creștin
ortodox.” In Persoană și Comuniune: Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profesor

241
Academician Dumitru Stăniloae la înplinirea vârstei de 90 de ani . Sibiu: Editura
Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe, 1993, 90 -93.

Conzelmann, Hans. ‘
 ” In Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament , vol. 9, edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, translated by
Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing House,
1974, 359 -376.

__________. A Commentary of the First Epistle to the Corinthians . Philadelphia, PA:
Fortress Press, 1975.

Cullmann, Oscar. Christ and Time . London: SCM Press Ltd, 1951.

________. The Christology of the New Testament . Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press,
1963.

Cyril of Alexandria. The Commentary on the Gospel of Saint John , 17. 20 -2, PG. 74.
556D -557A.

Cyril of Jerusalem. Lectures 22:3, 9 , in Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, Cyril of
Jerusalem, Lectures 22:3, 9 , in Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, 7. Philip Schaff
(Ed). Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1999.

Davids, Peter. H. The First Ep istle of Peter . Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1990.

Dockery, D. S. „Fruit of the Spirit.” In Gerald F. Hawthorne și Ralph P. Martin (eds),
Dictionary of Paul and His Letters . Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1993, 316 -319.

Dodd, C.H. The Epistle of Paul to the Romans . London: Hodder, 1932.

Donaldson, Terence L. „The Origin of Paul’s Gentile Mission.” In The Road from
Damascus: The Impact of Paul’s Conversion on His Life, Thought, and Ministry .
Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans Publ ishing Company, 1997, 62 -84.

Dumitrescu, Sorin. 7 dimineți cu părintele Stăniloae . București: Anastasia, 1992.

Dyrness, William. Themes in Old Testament Theology . London: Paternoster Press, 1998.

Ebeling, Gerhard. Theology & Proclamation . London: Collins, 1966.

Eichrodt, Walther. Theology of the Old Teatament , vol 1. Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster
Press, 1961.

Elliott, Neil. Liberating Paul: The Justice of God and the Politics of the Apostle . Sheffield:
Academic Press, 1995.

_____ ___. „The Anti -Imperial Message of the Cross.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and
Power in Roman Imperial Society, edited by Richard A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA:
Trinity Press International, 1997, 167 -183.

242

Ellis, E. Earle. Pauline Theology: Ministry and So ciety . Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1989.

English, Donald. The Message of Mark: The Mistery of Faith . Leicester: InterVarsity Press,
1992.

Evdokimov, Paul. L’ Esprit Saint dans le tradition orthodoxe . Paris: 1967.

________. Vârstele vieții spirituale . Bucuresti: Christiana, 1993.

Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids, MI: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987.

________. God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul. Peabody,
MA: Hendrickson 1994.

Felici, Pericle. „Lumen Gentium 1: 9 and 48.” In The Documents of Vatican II , Walter. M.
Abbott, S.J (Ed). Baltimore, MD: America Press, 1966, 14 -101

________. Paul, The Spirit and the People of God . Peabody, MA: Hendrick son 1996.

Fiddes, Paul, S. Charismatic Renewal: a Baptist View: A Report Received by the Baptist
Union Council with Commentary. London: Baptist Publications, 1980.

__________. 'God and History', Baptist Quarterly 30 (1983), 85 -88

__________. “The Theology of the Charismatic Movement.” In Strange Gifts? A Guide
to Charismatic Renewal , edited by David Martin and Peter Mullen. Oxford:
Blackwell, 1984, 19 -40.

________. “The Covenant – Old and New.” In Bound to Love: The Covenant Basis of
Baptis t Life and Mission , edited by Paul Fiddes, R. Hayden, R. Kidd, K. Clements,
and B. Haymes. London: Baptist Union, 1985, 9 -23.

________. “Woman’s head is Man.” In Baptist Quarterly , 31, 8, 1986, 370 -383

________. A Leading Question: The Structure and Au thority of Leadership in the Local
Church. London: Baptist Publications, 1986.

________. “The Signs of Hope.” In A call To Mind: Baptist Essays Towards a Theology of
Commitment , with Keith Clements, Roger Hayden, Brian Haymes, and Richard Kidd.
London: Baptist Union, 1987, 33 -45.

________. The Creative Suffering of God . Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.

________. Past Event and Present Salvation: The Christian Idea of Atonement . London:
Darton, Longman & Todd Ltd, 1989.

243
________. "C.S. Lewis the Myth -maker" in Walker, Andrew; James Patrick (Eds). A
Christian for All Christians: Essays in Honour of C.S. Lewis. London: Hodder &
Stoughton, 1990, 132–55.
________. "The Status of Wom en in the Thought of Karl Barth" In Soskice, Janet
Martin,(Eds), After Eve ( London: Marshall Pickering. 1990, 138 –55.

________. The Trinity in Worship and Preaching . London: London Baptist Preachers'
Association, 1991.

________. Freedom and Limit: a Dialogue between Literature and Christian Doctrine .
Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1991.

________. "Process Theology" in McGrath, A. E.(Ed). The Blackwell Encyclopedia of
Modern Christian Thought . Oxford: Blackwell, 1993, 471–476.

________. "Suffering, Divine" in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Modern Christian Thought .
Oxford: Blackwell. 1993, 633–636.

________. "The Understanding of Salvation in the Baptist Tradition." In Hollenweger, Walter
J (Eds), For Us and for Our Salvation: Seven Perspectives on Christian Soteriology .
Utrecht: Interuniversitair Instituut voor Missiologie en Oecumenica, 1994, 15 –37

________. „Baptism and Creation.” In Reflections on the Water: Understanding God and
the World through the Baptism of Believers , edited by Paul Fiddes. Macon: GA,
Smyth & Helwys Publishing Inc, 1996, 47 -67.

________. "Where Shall Wisdom be Found?' Job 28 as a Riddle for Ancient and Modern
Readers" in Barton, John; Reimer, David (Eds). After the Exile, Essays in Honour of
Rex Mas on (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press; 1996.

________. Rumours of Heaven: Essays in Celebration of C.S. Lewis . Guildford: Eagle, 1998.

________. „Theology and a Baptist Way of Community,” in Doing Theology in a Baptist
Way, edited by Paul Fiddes. Oxford: Withley Publications, 2000, 19 -38.

________. Participation in God: A Pastoral Doctrine of the Trinity. London: Darton,
Longman and Todd Ltd, 2000.

________. “Introduction: the novel and the spiritual journey today.” In The Novel,
Spirituality and Modern Culture: Eight Novelists Write about their Craft and their
Context , edited by Paul S. Fiddes. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 2000, 1 -21.

________. “Story and Possibility: Reflections on the Last Scenes of The Fourth Gospel and
Shakespeare’s The Tempest .” In Revelation and Story: Narrative Theology and the
Centrality of the Story , edited by Santer Gerhart and Barton John. Aldershot:
Ashgate, 2000, 29 -51.

________. "Facing the En d: The Apocalyptic Experience in Some Modern Novels"
in Colwell, John (Eds), Called to One Hope: Perspectives on the Life to Come .
Carlisle: Paternoster, 2000, 191–209

244

________. The Promised End: Eschatology Theology and Literature . Oxford: Blackwell,
2000.

________. „The Story and the Stories: Revelation and the Challenge of Postmodern
Culture” In Faith in the Centre: Christianity and Culture, edited by Paul S. Fiddes.
Oxford: Regent's Park College; Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2001, 75 -96.

_______. " Creation out of Love" in Polkinghorne, John (Ed), The Work of Love: Creation as
Kenosis ( Grand Rapids, Michigan and Cambridge: W.B. Eerdmans, 2001), 167 –91
also published by SPCK 2001.

________. "Millenium and Utopia: Images of a Fuller Presence" in Rowl and, Christopher;
Barton, John (Eds), Apocalyptic in History and Tradition. Journal for the Study of the
Pseudepigrapha, Supplement SerieS. London: Sheffield Academic Press. 2002, 7 –25.

________. "Baptism and the Process of Christian Initiation" in Porter , Stanley E.; Cross,
Anthony R(Eds), Dimensions of Baptism: Biblical and Theological Studies . London:
Sheffield Academic Pr ess. 2002, 280–303.

________. "The Quest for a Place Which Is 'Not -a-place': The Hiddenness of God and the
Presence of God.” in Davies, Oliver; Turner, Denys (Eds), Silence and the Word:
Negative Theology and Incarnation. Cambridge University Press, 2002, 35 –60;

________. „Baptism and the Christian Initiation.” The Ecumenical Review , Jan – Apr 2002;
54, ½, 48 -65.

________. Tracks and Traces: Baptist Identity in Church and Theology . Carlisle: Cumbria:
Paternoster, 2003.

________. "The Canon as Space and Place" in Wolter, Michael(Ed); Die Einheit der Schrift
und die Vielfalt des Kanons (The Unity of Scripture and the Diversity of t he Canon).
Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der
älteren Kirche, Bd. 118 . Berlin: W. de Gruyter. 2003, 127 –49.

________. “Old Testament Principles of Wholeness.” In Iosif Ton: Orizonturi noi in
Spiritualitate ș i slujire . Oradea: Cartea Creștină, 2004, 15 -48.

________. "Baptism and Membership of the Body of Christ: A Theological and Ecumenical
Conundrum" in Lybæk, Lena; Geldbach, Erich; Raiser, Konrad et
al(Eds); Gemeinschaft der Kirchen und gesellschaftliche Verantwortung: die Würde
des Anderen und das Recht anders zu denken: Festschrift für Professor Dr. Erich
Geldbach. Ökumenische Studien 30. Münster: LIT Verlag. 2004, 89–93

________. “When Text Becomes Voice: You’ve Got Mail.” In Flickering Images:
Theology and Film in Dialogue , with Anthony J. Clarke. Oxford: Regent's Park
College. Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2005, 97 -111.

________. „Baptist ecclesiology: a response to David Carter's article review of Tracks and
Traces' , Ecclesiology 1 (2005), 87 -100.

245

_______. "On God the Incomparable: Thinking about God with John Macquarrie" In Morgan,
Robert (Ed) in Search of Humanity and Deity: A Celebration of John Macquarrie's Theology .
London: SCM. 2006, 179 –99.

_________. „Participation in the Trinity.” Perspectives in Religious Studies 33: 3 (2006),
375-391.

_________. "Salvation" In Webster, John; Tanner, Kathryn; Torrance, Iain (Eds), The Oxford
Handbook to Systematic Theology . Oxford University Press. 2007 , 176 –196

_________. "The Passion Story in Literature" In Hass, Andrew; Jasper, David; Jay, Elizabeth
(Eds) The Oxford Handbook of English Literature and Theology. Oxford University
Press, 2007, 742 –759.

_________. 'The place of Christian theology in th e modern university”, Baptist Quarterly
42.2.1 (2007), 71 -88

_______. “Spirituality as Attentiveness: Stillness and Journey.” In Under the Rule of
Christ: Dimensions of Baptist Spirituality , edited by Paul S. Fiddes. Oxford &
Macon, GA: Regent’ s Park College with Smyth & Helwys Publishing Inc, 2008,
25-57.

________. Ex Opere Operato: Rethinking a Historic Baptist Rejection" In Cross, Anthony R.;
Thompson, Philip E (Eds), Baptist Sacramentalism 2. Milton Keynes: Paternoster ,
2008, 219 –238.

_______ . "Christianity, Culture and Education: A Baptist Perspective" In Ward, Roger;
Gushee, David P (Eds), The Scholarly Vocation and the Baptist Academy: Essays on
the Future of Baptist Higher Education . Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press,
2008.

____ ___.'Learning from others: Baptists and receptive ecumenism', Louvain Studies 33.1-2
(2008), 54 -73

________. “Concept, Image and Story in Systematic Theology.” International Journal of
Systematic Theology, 11/ 1 January 2009, 3 -23.

________, "G. M. Hopkins" in Lemon, Rebecca; Mason, Emma; Roberts, Jonathan et al
(Eds), The Blackwell Companion to the Bible in English Literature . Chichester:
Wiley -Blackwell, 2009, 563 –576

________. "Something Will Come of Nothing: On A Theology of the Dark Side"
In Lalleman, Peter J (Ed), Challenging to Change: Dialogues with a Radical Baptist
Theologian: Essays Presented to Dr. Nigel G. Wright on His Sixtieth Birthday .
London: Spurgeon's College, 2009.

________. "The Body as Site of Continuity and Change" In Anderson, Pamela Sue(Ed), New
Topics in Feminist Philosophy of Religion: Contestations and Transcendence
Incarnate . New York: Springer, 2009, 261 –77.

246

________. "Daniel Turner and a Theology of the C hurch Universal" In Briggs, John H. Y
(Ed), Pulpit and People: Studies in Eighteenth Century Baptist Life and Thought.
Studies in Baptist History and Thought 28. Carlisle: Paternoster, 2009, 112 –27.

________. "Church and Sect: Cross -currents in Early Bapt ist Life" in Cross, A. R.; Woods, N.
J (Eds), Exploring Baptist Origins. Oxford: Regent's Park College, 2010.

________. "On Theology" in MacSwain, Robert; Ward, Michael (Eds). The Cambridge
Companion to C. S. Lewis. Cambridge Companions to Religion . Cambridge University
Press, 2010.

________. "Ambiguities of the Future: Theolog ical Hints,” In ‘The Novels of Patrick
White" . Pacifica 23: 2010,.281 –98;

________. "Dual Citizenship in Athens and Jerusalem: The Place of the Christian Scholar in
the Life of the Church" In Cross, Anthony R.; Gouldbourne, Ruth M. B (Eds),
Questions o f Identity: Essays in Honour of Brian Haymes. Centre for Baptist History
and Heritage Studies 6. Oxford: Regent's Park College, 2011.

________. Contributors , Eclessiology (2011), Vol. 7 Issue 2, p. 137 -139.

________. "Christian Doctrine and Free Church Ecclesiology: Recent Developments among
Baptists in the Southern United States". Ecclesiology 7 (2) (2011), 195 –219

________ . Editorial/Ecclesiology (2012), Vol. 8, Issue 2, p. 153 -161.

________. “The Root o f Religious Freedom: Interpreting Some Muslim and Christian
Sacred Texts” Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, vol 1, No. 1 (2012), 169 -184.
________. Seeing the World and Knowing God: Hebrew Wisdom and Christian Doctrine in a
Late-Modern Context . Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2013.
Forsyth, P.T. The Work of Christ: lectures to young ministers : London: Independent Press
Limited, 1938.

Frame, John M. No Other God: A Response to Open -Theism . New Jersey: P&R Publishing
Company, 2001.

France , R. T. The Gospel According to Matthew . Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1985.

Franke, John R. „God is Love: The Social Trinity and the Mission of God.” Iin Trinitarian
Theology for the Church: Scripture, Community, Worship , Daniel J. Treier and
David Lauber (eds). Leicester: Intervarsity Press, 2009, 105 -119.

Freeman, Curtis W., James Wm. McClendon, Jr, Rosalee de Silva. Baptist Roots: A
Reader in the Theology of a Christian People. Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1999.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Gospel of Matthew: An Exposition . Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux
Brothers, 1961.

247

Galeriu, Constantin. Jertfă și răscumpărare . Bucuresti: Ed. Harisma, 1991.

Geldenhuys, Norval. The Gospel of Luke . Grand Rapids, MI: Wm, B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1977.

Gorman, Michael J. Cruciformity: Paul’s Narrative Spirituality of the Cross . Grand
Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001.

Govier, Trudy. Forgiveness and Revenge . London: Routledge, 2002.

Grass, Tim. „Orthodoxy and the Doctrine of the Church.” In Ian Randall (ed.), Baptists and
the Orthodox Church: On the Way to understanding . Prague: International Baptist
Seminary, 2005, 5 -14.

Green, Joel B. 1 Peter . Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2007.

Greeven, “  ” In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ,
vol. 2, edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, translated by Geoffrey W.
Bromiley.Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Company, 1964, 775 -784..

Gregory of Nyssa. „ The Great Catechism,” 37, in Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers . 5.
Gregory of Nyssa, Dogmatic Treatises, Philip Schaff (Ed). Peabody,
Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007, 471-509.

________. „ Catechetical Oration. ” In Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers . 5. Gregory of
Nyssa, Dogmatic Treatises, Philip Schaff (Ed). Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson
Publishers, 2007, 513 -524.

Gundry, Robert H. Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross . Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 19 93.

Gunton, Colin E. „The Church on Earth: The Roots of Community.” In On Being the
Church: Essays on the Christian Community, Colin E. Gunton & Daniel W. Hardy
(Eds), Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1989, 48 -80.

________. The One, the Three and the Many: God, Creation and the Culture of Modernity .
Cambridge: University Press, 1993.

Gushee, David P. Only Human: Christian Reflections on the Journey Towards Wholeness .
San Francisco, CA: Jossey -Bass, A Wiley Imprint, 2005.

Hammond , T.C. In Understanding be Man: A Handbook of Christian Doctrine . Leicester:
Inter -Varsity Press, 1968.

Hauerwas, Stanley. Matthew . Ada, MI: Brazos Press, 2006.

Hays, Richard B. First Corinthians . Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1997.

248
Hendric ksen, William. Ephesians: New Testament Commentary . London: The Banner of
Truth Trust, 1967.

Herrick, Vanessa, and Ivan Mann. Jesus Wept: Reflections on Vulnerability in Leadership .
London: Darton, Longman, and Todd Ltd, 1998.

Hess, K. “Serve, Deacon , Worship.” In Dictionary of New Testament Theology , vol. 3,
edited by Colin Brown. Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1971, 544 -553.

Hildebrand, Dietrich Von. Transformation in Christ: On the Christian Attitude . San
Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2001.

Hodge, Charles. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians . London: The Banner of
Truth Trust, 1964.

________. 1 Corinthians . Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1995.

Holmes, Stephen R. The Holy Trinity: Understanding God’s Life . London: Paternoster Press,
2012.

Ică, Jr. Ioan I. “Împărtășirea continuă pro și contra – o dispută perenă și lecțiile ei.” In
Împărtășirea continuă cu Sfintele Taine . Sibiu: Deisis, 2006, 5 -88.

Ierunca, Virgil. “Teologia Dogmatică Ortodoxă’ a Părintelui Dumitru Stăniloae.” In
Persoană și Comuniune: Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profesor Academician
Dumitru Stăniloae la înplinirea vârstei de 90 de ani . Sibiu: Editura Arhiepiscopiei
ortodoxe, 1993, 103 -107.

Jenson, Robert W. Systematic Theology: The Works of God , vol 2. Oxford : Oxford
Univeristy Press, 1999.

Jervis, L. Ann. „Becoming like God through Christ: Discipleship in Romans.” In Patterns
of Discipleship in the New Testament , Richard N. Longenecker (Ed). Grand Rapids,
MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996, 143-162

Joantă, Serafim. „Din istoria isihasmului până în secolul al XV -lea,” in Persoană și
Comuniune: Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profesor Academician Dumitru Stăniloae la
înplinirea vârstei de 90 de ani . Sibiu: Editura Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe, 199 3.

Jobes, Karen H. 1 Peter . Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005.

Jones, Christopher „Loosing and Binding: The Liturgical Mediation of Forgiveness.” In
Forgiveness and Truth: Explorations in Contemporary Theology , Alister McFayden,
Marcel Sarot, and A nthony Thiselton (Eds). Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2001. 31-52

Jones, D. M. Lloyd. Life in the Spirit, In Marriage, Home & Work: An Exposition of
Ephesians 5: 18 to 6: 9 . Carlisle: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1973.

Jones, Tony. The Sacred Way: Spiritual Pra ctices for Every Day Life . Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 2004.

249

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. “Israel as the People of God.” In The People of God: Essays on the
Believers’ Church , edited by Paul Basden and David S. Dockery. Nashville, TN:
Broadman Press, 1991 , 99-108]

________. Christology: A Global Introduction. Ada, MI: Baker Academic, 2003.

Karmiris, John N. The Status and Ministry of the Laity in the Orthodox Church . Brookline,
MA: Holy Cross, 1994.

Karmiris, John. N. „Concerning the Sacraments.” In Eastern Orthodox Theology: A
Contemporary Reader , Daniel B. Clendenin (Ed) (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic, 2003, 21 -32.

Kasemann, Ernst. Essays on New Testament Themes. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1982.

Kasper, Walter. Theology & Church . London: SCM Press, 1989.

Keown, Gerald L., Pamela J. Scalise and Thomas G. Smothers. . Jeremiah 26 -52. In Word
Biblical Commentary, edited by David A. Hubbard and Glenn W Barker. Dallas,
TX: Word Books, 1995.

Kim, Seyoon. Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s
Gospel. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002.

Klappert, B. “Lord’s Supper.” In Dictionary of New Testament Theology , vol. 2, edited by
Colin Brown. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1971, 520 -538.

Knowles, Michael P. „Christ in You the Hope of Glory: Discipleship in Collosians.” In
Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament , Richard N. Longenecker (ed).
Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996, 180 -202.

Koester, Craig R. Hebrew: A New Translation and Commentary. New York: Doubleday,
2001.

Kreider, Eleanor. Given for You: A Fresh Look at Communion . Leicester: Inter -Varsity Press,
1998.

Kreitzer, Larry. The Gospel According with John . Oxford: R egent’s Park College, 1990.

Kummel, W.G. The Theology of the New Testament: According to its Major Witnesses Jesus
– Paul – John. London: SCM Press Ltd, 1974.

LaCugna, Catherine Mowry. God For Us: The Trinity and Christian Life. San Francisco,
CA:

Ladd, George Eldon. The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Rralism .
Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974.

250
Lamb, Jonathan. Integrity: Leading with God Watching . Nottingham: Inter -Varsity Press,
2006.

Lampe, G .W.H. “The Eucharist in the Thought of the Early Church.” In Eucharisic
Theology Then and Now. ” London: SPSK, 1968, 34 -58.

Leonard, Bill J. Baptist Ways: A History . USA: Judson Press, 2003. .

Lewis, Scott M. The Gospel According to John and the Johannine Letters . Collegeville,
MI: Liturgical Press, 2005.

Lighfoot, J. B. St Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon . London: MacMillan
and Co, 1875.

Lincoln, Andrew T. „Ephesians.” In Word Biblica l Commentary , Ed. By David Hubbard,
Glenn W. Barker. Dallas, TX: Word Books, Publisher, 1990, 1 – 468.

Lindvall, Michael L. The Christian Life: A Geography of God. Louisville, KY: Geneva Press,
2001.

Lloyd -Jones, D. M. Darkness and Light: An Exposition of Ephesians 4: 17 -5: 17 .
Edinburgh: The Baner of Truth Trust, 1982.

Lossky, Vladimir. The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church . Cambridge: James
Clarke & CO.LTD, 1973.

Lossky, Vladimir. The Vision of God . New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1983.

Louth, Andrew. “Review Essay: The Orthodox Dogmatic Theology of Dumitru Stăniloae.”
Modern Theology, 13.2, 1997, 253 -267.

Mariș, Marius Daniel. Biblical Theology of Creation as Basis for the Christian Dialogue
between Evangelicals and the Ortho dox Church in Post -Communist Romania.
Unpublished PhD. Dissertation . Bucharest: Bucharest University, 2006.

________ . 1 Peter . Leicester: Intervarsity Press, 1991.

________ . „A New Understanding of the Present and the Future: Paul and Eschatology.”
In The Road from Damascus: The Impact of Paul’s Conversion on His Life,
Thought, and Ministry , Richard N. Longenecker (Ed) (Grand Rapids, MI: igan: W.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997, 43 -61.

Martin, Ralph. P. Colossians: The Church’s Lord and the Christian Liberty. Exeter, UK:
Paternoster Press, 1972.

Matei, Eugen. The Practice of Community in Social Trinitarianism: A Theological Evaluation
with Reference to Dumitru Stăniloae and Jurgen Moltmann. Unpublished PhD
dissertation . Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological Seminary, 2004.

251
Mănăstireanu, Dănuț. “Dumitru Staniloae’s Theology of Ministr y.” In Dumitru Staniloae,
Tradition and Modernity in Theology . Edited by Lucian Turcescu. Iasi: The Center
for Romanian Studies, 2002, 126 – 144.

___________. A Perichoretical Model of the Church: The Trinitarian Ecclesiology of
Dumitru Stăniloae. Unpublished PhD dissertation. London: Brunel University, 2005.

___________. Locul Scripturii în tradiția ortodoxă . Cluj-Napoca: Ed. Alma Mater, 2006.

___________. A Perichoretical Model of the Church: The Trinitarian Ecclesiology of
Dumitru Stăniloae. Saarbrucken, Lambert Academic Publishing, 2012.

McClendon, James Wm ., Jr. Systematic Theology: Ethics vol 1. Nashville, TN: Abingdon
Press, 198 6.

________ . Systematic Theology: Doctrine , vol 2. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1994.

________ . “The Believers Church in Theological Perspective.” In Stanley Hauerwas et al
(Eds.), The Wisdom of the Cross: Essays in Honor of John Howard Yoder . Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999 , 309-326.

McFague, Sallie. Models of God: Theology for an Ecological, Nuclear Era . Philadelphia,
PA: Fortress Press, 1987.

Meeks , Wayne A. The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul . New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1983.

________. The Origins of Christian Morality: The First Two Centuries . New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press, 1993.

Meye, R.P. „Spirituality.” In Dictionary of Paul and his Letters , G. F. Hawthorne, R. P.
Martin, D.G. Reid (Eds). Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1993, pp.???.

Meyendorff, John. St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality . New York: St,
Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1974.

________. A Study of Gregory Palamas. New York: St. Vladimir’s Semin ary Press, 1998.

Mikoski, Gordon S. „Baptism, Trinity, and Ecclesial Pedagogy in the Thought of Gregory
of Nyssa.” Southwestern Journal of Theology, 59 (2) (2006), 175 –182.

Miller, Charles. The Gift of the World: An Introduction to the Theology of Dumit ru
Stăniloae Edinburgh: T& T Clark, 2000.

Milne, Bruce. The Message of John: Here is Your King . Leicester: Inter -Varsity Press, 1993.

Moltmann, Jürgen. The Crucified God: The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and
Criticism of Christian Theology . Lon don: SCM Press, 1974.

252
________. The Trinity and the Kingdom of God: The Doctrine of God . London: SCM Press,
1981.

________. God in Creation: An Ecological Doctrine of Creation. London: SCM Press, 1985.

________. The Church in the Power of the Spirit: A Contribution to Messianic
Ecclesiology. London: SCM Press, 1992

________. The Source of Life: The Holy Spirit and the Theology of Life . Minneapolis, MN:
Fortress Press, 1997

________. The Spirit of Life: A Universal Affirmation . Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press,
2001.

_______ . „God in the World – The World in God: Perichoresis in Trinity and
Eschatology.” In The Gospel of John and Christian Theology , Richard Bauckham
and Carl Mosser (Eds). Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 2008, 369 -381.

Moo, Douglas. Romans 1 -8, The Wyccliffe Exegetical Commentary, Keneth Barker (Ed).
Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1991.

Morden, Peter „The Spirituality of C.H. Spurgeon: II Maintaining Communion: The
Lord’s Supper.” Baptistic Theologies 4: 1 ( Spring 2012), 27 -50.

Muller -Fahrenholz, Geiko. The Art of Forgiveness Theological Reflections on Healing and
Reconciliation. Geneva: WWC Publications, 1996.

Murphy, Fra ncesca Ann. God is Not a Story: Realism Revisited . Oxford: University Press,
2007.

Negruț, Paul. The Development of the Concept of Authority within the Romanian
Orthodox Church during the twentieth Century . Unpublished PhD dissertation.
London: Brune l University, 1995.

Newbigin, Leslie. The Household of God: Lectures on the Nature of the Church . London:
SCM Press Ltd, 1964.

________. The Gospel in a Pluralistic Society. London: SPCK, 1992.

Noble, Ivana. “ Conversion and Postmodernism.” In Dagmar Heller,. Bekehrung und Identität:
Ökumene als Spannung zwischen Fremdem und Vertrautem. Frankfurt am Main:
Verlag Otto Lembeck, 2003, 45-68.

________. “Doctrine of Creation within the Theological Project of Dumitru Stăniloae.”
Communio Viatorum 2 (2007 ), 185 -209.

________. “Memory and Remembering in the Post -Communist Context. “ Political
Theology 4 (2008), 455 -475.

253
________. Tracking God: An Ecumenical Fundamental Theology . Wipf & Stock, Eugene,
Oregon, 2010.

Noble, Ivana. Theological Interpretation of Culture in Post -Communist Context: Central
and East European Search for Roots. Ashgate: Farhnam, 2010.

Noble, Ivana. “How to Avoid Grand Narratives in Christology: A Challenge of Postmodern
Hermeneutics,” in Milltown Stud ies 65 (2010), 42 -58.

Nouwen, Henri J. M. Reaching Out: The Three Movements of the Spiritual Life . New York:
Doubleday & Company, Inc, 1966. .

O’Brien, Peter T. The Letter to the Hebrews . Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 2010.

Okholm, Dennis L. “Prayer.” In Baker Theological Dictionary of the Bible , edited by
Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996, 621 -626.

Oprean, Daniel G. When Salt Looses its Saltiness: Causes of Spiritual Abuse within the
Church , Unpublis hed paper, Osijek, 2003.

________. Comuniune și participare: Reflecții teologice cu privire la dimensiunea
spirituală a existenței . Timișoara: Excelsior Art, 2011.

________ . ”Reconciliation in Church and Society: Church’s Ministry as God’s
Reconcilia tion Agency.” In Reconciliation: The Way of Healing and Growth , Janez
Juhant, Bojan Zalec (Eds). Wien: Lit Verlag GmbH & Co, 2012, 179 -187.

Osterhaven, M.E. “Views of Lord’s Supper.” In Evangelical Dictionary of Theology ,
edited by Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1984, 654 -656.

Păcurariu, Mircea. „Pr. Prof. Acad. Dumitru Stăniloae. Câteva coordonate biografice,” in
Persoană și Comuniune: Prinos de cinstire Părintelui Profesor Academician Dumitru
Stăniloae la înplinirea vârstei de 90 de ani . Sibiu: Editura Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe,
1993..

Pannenberg, Wolfhart. Christian Spirituality . Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press, 1983

Parushev, Parush R. “Doing Theology in a Baptist Way.” In Teun van der Leer, ed., Doing
Theology in a Baptist Way: the Plenary Papers Collection of the Symposium.
Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit, 2009 (in English and Dutch), 1 -33. Re -published as
“Doing Theology in a Baptist Way (Theologie op een baptistenmanier),” in Teun
van de r Leer, red., Zo zijn onze manieren! In Gesprek over gemeentetheologie,
Baptistica Reeks (Series), vol.1 (September 2009, in Dutch), 7 -22 and footnotes 66 –
75.

Patsch, H. “  ”
In Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Horst
Balz and Gerhard Schneider, vol. 2. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing House, 1991, 87 -88.

254
Paul, I. „Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosantum Concilium).” In The Documents
of Vatican II , Walter. M. Abbott, S.J (Ed). Baltimore, MD: America Press, 1966,
137-178.

Pelikan , Jaroslav. The Christian Doctrine: A History of the Development of Doctrine: The
Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100 -600). Chicago, IL: The University of
Chicago Press, 1971.

________. The Vindication of Tradition . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984.

________. Tradiția creștină: O istorie a dezvoltării doctrinei, 1: Nașterea tradiției
universale (100 -600) Iași: Polirom, 2004.

________. Tradiția Creștină, O istorie a dezvoltării doctrinei, 2: Spiri tul creștinătății
răsăritene (600 -1700 ). Iași: Polirom, 2005.

Peterson, David. Possesed by God: A New Testament Theology of Sanctification and
Holiness Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995.

Pickard, William. M. Rather Die Th an Live – Jonah . New York: Education and Cultivation
Division Board of Global Ministry, 1974.

Pinnock, Clark. „Systematic Theology.” In The Openness of God: A Biblical Challenge to
the Traditional Understanding of God , Clarck Pinnock, Richard Rice, John
Sanders, William Hasker, David Basinger (eds). Carliste, PA: Paternoster
Press, 1994, 101 -125.

Piper, John. Desiring God: Meditations of a Christian Hedonist . Oregon: Multnomah
Books, 1986.

Plămădeală, Fr. Antonie. “Generația Stăniloae.” In Persoană și Comuniune: Prinos de
cinstire Părintelui Profesor Academician Dumitru Stăniloae la împlinirea vârstei
de 90 de ani. Sibiu: Editura Arhiepiscopiei ortodoxe, 1993, xi -xx.

Popescu, Alexandru. Petre Țuțea: Between Sacrifice and Suicide . England: Ashgate
Publishing Limited, 2004.

Popovici, Alexa. Istoria Baptiștilor din România, 1856 -1989 . Oradea: Ed. Faclia, 2006.

Pratt, Richard L., Jr. „Baptism as a Sacrament of the Covenant.” In Understanding Four
Views on Baptism, John H. Armstrong (ed). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007,
59-72.

Prestige, G.L. God in Patristic Thought . London: SPCK, 1952.

Prior , David. The Message of 1 Corinthians: Life in the Local Church . Leicester,
InterVarsity Press, 1985.

Rad, Gerhard von. Old Testament Theology: The Theology of Israel’s Historical Traditions ,
vol 1. London: SCM Press Ltd, 1975.

255

Rahner, Karl. Theological Investigations, 4 . London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1966.

________. Foundations of Christian Faith: A n Introduction to the Idea of Christianity . New
York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1978.

________. The Trinity . New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1997

Ratzinger, Joseph, Cardinal. Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today . San
Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1996.

Ridderbos, Herman. Paul: An Outline of His Theology . Grand Rapids, MI: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing House, 1975.

Ridell, Michael. Threshold of the Future: Reforming the Church in the Post –
ChristianWest – London : SPCK, 1998.

Rogobete, Silviu Eugen. Subject and Supreme Personal Reality in the Theological Thought
of Fr. Dumitru Stăniloae. An Ontology of Love. Unpublished PhD dissertation .
London: Brunel University, 1997.

________. O ontologie a iubirii: Subiec t și Realitate Personală supremă în gândirea z
părintelui Dumitru Stăniloae . Iasi: Polirom, 2001.

Schattenmann, J. “  ”In Dictionary of New Testament Theology , vol.1. Edited by
Collin Brown. Exeter, The Paternoster Press, 1975.

Schillebeeckx, Edward. Church: The Human Story of God . London: SCM Press, 1990.

Schleiermache r, Friedrich. Christian Faith . Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1968.

Schmemann , Alexander. For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy. Crestwood,
NY: St Vladimir ’s Seminary Press, 1973.

________. The Eucharist: Sacrament of the Kingdom. New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary
Press, 1988.

________. Din Apă și din Duh: Studiu Liturgic al Botezului . București: Symbol, 1992.

Schreiner, Thomas R. Romans . Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998.

Schweitzer, Albert. The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle . New York, Seabury Press, 1931.

Sf. Ioan Gura de Aur: Cateheze baptismale . Sibiu: Editura Oastea Domnului, 2003.

Sheriffs, Deryck. The Friendship of the Lord . Carlisle, Cumbri a: Paternoster Press, 1996.

Sider, Ronald J. Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger: A Biblical Study . Illinois: Inter –
Varsity Press, 1977.

256
Sobrino, Jon, S.J. Christology at the Crossroads: A Latin American Approach . London: SCM
Press Ltd, 1978.

Soelle , Dorothee. Christ the Representative: An Essay in Theology after the “Death of
God.” London: SCM Press, 1967.

________. Suffering . Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1975.

Spurgeon, Charles Haddon. “The Double Forget -Me-Not.” In Metropolitan Tabernacle
Pulpit , LIV, nr. 3.999, 5 July 1874. London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1908.

Stamoolis, James J. Eastern Orthodox Mission Theology Today. New York: Orbis Books,
1986.

Stăniloae, Dumitru. “Curente noi în teologia protestantă germană.” In Revista Teologică ,
an, XIX, 1929, nr. 7 -8, 234 -238

________. “Pentru Pacea confesională.” Telegraful Român , LXXIX, 1931, nr. 33 -34, 1 -2.

________.. Catolicismul după războ i. Sibiu: Editura Arhidiecezană, 1933.

________. “Metafizica lui Lucian Blaga” RevistaTeologică , XXIV, 1934, nr. 11 -12, 393 –
401.

________. “Reîntoarcerea filosofiei.” Telegraful Român , LXXXV, 1937, nr. 43, 1.

________. “Filosofia existențială și credința în Iisus Hristos.” Gândirea , XVIII, nr. 10, 1939,
565-572.

________. “Or ganizarea sinodală a Bisericii Ortodoxe în paralel cu cezaro -papismul
catholic.” StudiiTeologice , II, 1950, nr.9 -10, 541 -555.

________. “Dumnezeiasca Euharistie în cele trei confesiuni.” Ortodoxia , v, 1953, nr. 1. 46-
115.

________. “Ființa Tainelor în cele trei confesiuni.” Ortodoxia , VIII, 1956, nr. 1, 3 -28.

________. “Starea primordială a omului în cele trei confesiuni.” Ortodoxia , VIII, 1956,
nr. 3, 323 -357.

________. “Posibilitatea reconcilierii dogmatice între Biserica Ortodoxă și Vechile
Biserici Orientale.” Ortodoxia , VVII, 1965, nr. 1, 5 -27

________. “Tendința Vaticanului după comuniunea euharistică cu ortodocșii.” Ortodoxia ,
XXXIV, 1972, nr. 3, 492 -494.

________. “Drumul cu Hristos prin tainele si sarbatorile ortodoxe,” ( The Way with Chr ist
through the sacraments and Orthodox celebrations). Ortodoxia , nr 2, aprilie – iunie
1976, 402 -416.

257
________. “Romanian Orthodox Anglican Talks: A Dogmatic Assesement.” In Romanian
Orthodox church and the church of England. Bucharest: Biblical and Ort hodox
Missionary Institute, 1976, 129 -148

________. “Desăvârșirea noastră în Hristos după învățătura bisericii Ortodoxe.” In Studii
și Articole: Mitropolia Olteniei, Revista Oficială a Arhiepiscopiei Craiovei și
Episcopiei Rîmnicului și Argeșului , partea 1. Craiova: 1980, 76 -111.

________. „Desăvârșirea noastră în Hristos după învățătura bisericii Ortodoxe.” In Studii
și Articole: Mitropolia Olteniei, Revista Oficială a Arhiepiscopiei Craiovei și
Episcopiei Rîmnicului și Argeșului , 2. Craiova: 1980, 403 -426.

________. Priere de Jesus et experience du Saint -Esprit . Paris: Desclee dr Brouwer, 1981.

________. Theology and the Church . Yonkers, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1981.

________. “The Faces of Our Fellow Human Being.” International Review of Mission , 1982,
29-35.

________. “Doctrina luterană despre justificare și Cuvânt și câteva reflexii ortodoxe.”
Ortodoxia , XXXV; 1983, nr. 4, 495-509.

________. “Image, Likeness, and deification in the human person.” Communio , 13/1986,
64-83.

________. Chipul evanghelic al lui Iisus Hristos . Sibiu: Editura Centrului metropoilitan,
1991.

________. Spiritualitatea Ortodoxă: Ascetica și Mistica . București: EIBMBOR, 1992.

________, Reflexii despre spiritualitatea poporului român . Craiova: Scrisul Românesc, 1992.

________. Ascetica și Mistica , 1: Ascetica. Alba Iulia: Deisis, 1993.

________. Viața și învățătura sfântului Grigorie Palama . București: Scripta, 1993

________. Filocalia sfintelor nevoinți ale desăvârșirii , 1. Bucure ști: Harisma, 1993.

________. Iisus Hristos sau Restaurarean Omului . Craiova: Omniscop, 1993.

________. Sfânta Treime sau La Început a fost Iubirea. București: Ed IBMBOR, 1993.

________. The Experience of God. Brookline: MA, Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1994.

________. Teologie Dogmatică Ortodoxă, 1. Bucuresti: EIBMBOR, 1996.

________. Teologie Dogmatică Ortodoxă , 2. Bucuresti: EIBMBOR, 1997.

________. Teologie Dogmatică Ortodoxă , 3. Bucuresti: EIBMBOR, 1997.

258

________. The Experience of God: Orthodox Dogmatic Theology 1: Revelation and
Knowledge of the Triune God. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1998.

________. The Victory of the Cross . Oxford: SLG Press, 2001.

________. Rugăciunea lui Iisus și experiența Duhului Sfânt . Sibiu: Deisis, 2003.

________. The Experience of God , Orthodox Dogmatic Theology 2: The World: Creation
and Deification. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2005.

________. The Experience of God, Orthodox Dogmatic Theol ogy 5: The Sanctifying
Mysteries. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2012.

________. The Holy Trinity : In the Beginning There was Love . Brookline, MA: Holy Cross
Orthodox Press, 2012.

Steinhart, Nicolae. Prin alții spre sine . Bucuresti: Ed. Emin escu, 1988.

Stott, John R. W. God’s New Society: The Message of Ephesians . Leicester: Inter -Varsity
Press, 1979.

________. The Message of Acts: To the Ends of the Earth . Leicester: Inter Varsity Press,
1990.

Sunday School Chronicle , 17 February 1882, ‘Spurgeon’s Scrapbooks, Numbered
Volumes’, Vol. 6, 8.

Tenney, Merril C. “John.” In The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, New Testament , edited
by Kenneth L. N. Barker & John R. Kohlenberger III. Grand Rapids, MA:
Zondervan Corporation, 1994, 1 -203.

The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary , revision editor Allen C. Myers. Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,1987.

Thiselton, Anthony C. First Corinthians: A Shorter Exegetical and Pastoral Commentary .
Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006.

Thomas, Robert L. Understanding Spiritual Gifts . Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications,
1999.

Thomson, J.G.S.S. and W.A. Elwell. “Spiritual Gifts.” In Evangelical Dictionary of
Theology edited by Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books House,
1984, 1135.

Thurian, Max. „The Eucharistic Memorial, Sacrifice of Praise, and Supplication.” In
Ecumenical Perspectives on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry , Max Thurian (Ed).
Geneva: World C ouncil of Churches, 1983, 90 -103.

259
Tillard, J.M.R. „The Eucharist, Gift of God.” In Ecumenical Perspectives on Baptism,
Eucharist and Ministry , Max Thurian (Ed). Geneva: World Council of Churches,
1983, 104 -118.

Tillich, Paul. Love, Power, and Justice . London: Oxford University Press, 1954.

Titus, Eric J. „ The Perfections of God in the Theology of Karl Barth: A Consideration of
the Formal Structure.” Kairos : Evangelical Journal of Theology / Vol. IV. No. 2
(2010), 203 -222.

Toon, Peter. “Lord’ s Supper.” In Baker Theological Dictionary of the Bible , edited by
Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996.

Torrance, Alan J. Persons in Communion: Trinitarian Description and Human
Participation . Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996.

________. „T he Trinity.” In The Cambridge Companion to Karl Barth , John Webster (ed).
Cambridge University Press, 2000, 72 -91.

Torrance, T.F. „Spiritus Creator.” Verbum Caro 23 (1969), No, 89 , 63-85.

Tracy, David. The Analogical Imagination: Chrisitan Theology and the Culture of
Pluralism . London: SCM Press Ltd, 1981.

Turcescu, Lucian. “Eucharistic Ecclesiology or Open Sobornicity?” In Dumitru Stăniloae ,
Tradition and Modernity in Theology . Edited by Lucian Tur cescu. Iasi: The Center
for Romanian Studies, 2002, 83 -103.

Turner, Daniel. A Compendium of Social Religion . London: John Ward, 1758.

________. Charity the Bond of Perfection. A Sermon, The Substance of which was
Preached at Oxford, November 16, 1780, On Occasion of the Re -establishment of a
Christian Church of Protestant Dissenters in that City . Oxford: 1780.

Turner, Denys. The Darkness of God: Negativity in Christian Mysticism. UK: Cambridge
University Press, 1995.

Turner, Max . Power from on High : The Spirit in Israel’s Restoration and Witness in Luke
–Acts. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996.

Vanhoozer, Kevin J. Is There A Meaning in This Text? Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1998.

Vassady, Bela. “Gleanings.” In How Karl Barth Changed My Mind, edited by Donald K.
McKim. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1986, 27 -36.

Volf, Miroslav. Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness,
and Reconciliation . Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 19 96

260
________. After our Likeness: The Church as the Image of the Trinity . Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1998.

________. „Being as God is: Trinity and Generosity.” In God’s Life in Trinity , Miroslav
Volf and Michael Welker (Eds). Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2006, 3–12.

________. Captive to the Word of God: Engaging the Scriptures for Contemporary
Theological Reflection . Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 2010.

Wallace, R. S. “Lord’s Supper.” In Evangelical Dictionary of The ology , edited by Walter
A. Elwell. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books House, 1984, 652.

Ware, Bruce. A. God’s Lesser Glory: The Diminished God of Open Theism . Illinois: Cross
Way Books, 2000.

Ware, Kallistos. „Communion and Intercomunion.” In Primary Readi ngs on the Eucharist ,
Thomas J. Fusch (Ed) (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2004, 185 -208.

Ware, Timothy. The Orthodox Church . London: Penguin Books, 1993.

Weinandy, Thomas G. In the Likeness of Sinful Flesh: An Essay on the Humanity of
Christ . Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993.

________. The Father’s Spirit of Sonship: Reconceiving the Trinity. Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1995.

________. Does God Suffer? Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000.

Weiser, A. “ 
” In Exegetical Dictionary of the New
Testament, edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider, vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990, 302.

Wenham, David. “How Jesus Understood the Last Supper: A Parable in Action.”
Churchman, vol. 105 Number 3, 19 91, 246 -260.

________. Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity? Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995.

Wijngaards, John. The Spirit in John . Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1988.

Wilcock, Michael. The Message of Luk e: The Saviour of the World . Leicester: InterVarsity
Press, 1979.

Willmer, Haddon. „Jesus Christ the Forgiven, Christology, Atonement and Forgiveness.”
In Forgiveness and Truth: Explorations in Contemporary Theology , Alister
McFayden, Marcel Sarot, an d Anthony Thiselton (Eds).Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2001,
15-30.

261
Wink, Walter. Naming the Powers: The Language of Power in the New Testament .
Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1984.

Witherington III, Ben . Paul’s Narrative Thought World: The Tapestry of Tra gedy and
Triumph . Westminster: John Knox Press, 1994.

_____________. „Contemporary Perspectives on Paul.” In The Cambridge Companion to
St. Paul, edited by James D.G. Dunn. Cambridge: University Press, 2003, 256 -269.
.

Witherington III, Ben and Ice, Laura M. The Shadow of the Almighy: Father, Son, and Spirit
in Biblical Perspective . Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
2002.

Wright, N.T. The New Testament and the People of God . London, SPSK, 1992 .

________. The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and Law in Pauline Theology. Minneapolis,
MN: Fortress Press, 1992.

________. The New Testament and the People of God . London: SPCK, 1992.

________. Jesus and the Victory of God . London: SPSK, 1996.

________. „Paul’s Gospel and Caesar’s Empire.” In Paul and Politics: Ekklesia, Israel,
Imperium, Interpretation. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000.

________. John for Everyone , 2: Chapters 11 -21. London: Society for Promoting Christian
Knowledge, 2002.

________. Surprised by Hope . London: SPSK, 2007.

Wright, Nigel G. New Baptists, New Agenda . London: Paternoster Press, 2002.

________. Free Church, Free State: The Positive Baptist Vision . Carliste: Paternoster Press,
2005.

________. “ Spirituality as Discipleship: the Anabaptist Heritage.” In Under the Rule of
Christ: Dimensions of Baptist Spirituality , edited by Paul S. Fiddes. Oxford and
Macon, GA: Regent’s Park College with Smyth & Helwys Publishing Inc, 2008,
79-101.

Wyatt, John . Matters of Life and Death: Today’s Healthcare Dilemmas in the Light of
Christian faith. Leicester: Inter -Varsity Press, 1998.

Yannaras, Christos Elements of Faith: An Introduction to Orthodox Theology . Edinburgh:
T&T Clark, 1991.

Ziesler, John. Paul’s Letter to Romans. London: SCM Press, 1989.

________. Pauline Christianity. Oxford: University Press, 1990.

262

Zizioulas, John. Being as Communion: Studies in Personhood and the Church . New York:
St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1993

Zizioulas, Ioannis. Creația ca Euharistie. București: Editura Bizantină, 1999.