The Holy Spirit in Vladimir Lossky

Growing up in California, the church which influenced me seemed to be the most knowledgeable, the most complete, the most thorough examiner of Scripture and theology. As I grew up I started hearing rumors of other churches, in other parts of the planet, where missionaries were sent to evangelize these spiritually impoverished people. Going off to college I found myself taking courses in church history, and historical theology, and discovering that indeed great Christians lived prior to this century and in fact those of the earliest generations had a great deal still to teach believers in this day and age. I was also, for the first time, exposed to those mysterious folk who are part of the Eastern Orthodox tradition, and I even attended a Good Friday liturgy one year in a local congregation. The beauty and depth of their service struck me, as did the great reverence with which they celebrated this important day of remembrance. This experience, as well as my continued studies in Early Church history led me to re-examine preconceived notions, and biases instilled in me since my youth. I learned to greatly value this Orthodox tradition, and appreciate all that it offered.

Even still, I did not know the differences in theology which accompanied the split of the church into East and West. Terms such as deification always struck me, but I did not know the background behind such striking terminology. In my time at seminary, however, my studies continued to highlight various beliefs or thoughts which the Orthodox church held to, but were not represented in the Western tradition. Seeking to finally resolve some of my basic questions, and discover what this tradition had to say concerning the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, I picked up a book by Vladimir Lossky called The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. It is the goal of this brief paper to review this book, and the methods and insights of this great Russian thinker of the early 20^th century, focusing especially on his Pneumatological views, and how these views contribute to a wider understanding. For in this book I found something which I felt was lacking in so many other theology texts which arise from a western perspective. I found an appreciation for and a developed doctrine of the third person of the Trinity, a discovery which will certainly shape and influence the rest of my theological thinking for a very long time.

For Vladimir Lossky, theology is by its very nature mystical. He contends that theology is rooted in religious experience, and religious experience leads into theology. There is no separation in the Eastern tradition, according to Lossky, between dogmatics and religious practice, as he states, “Christianity is not a philosophical school for speculating about abstract concepts, but is essentially a communion with the living God.” [1] With this idea comes the style of his writing which is extremely complex, extremely orderly in its argument and contention, yet actually elegant in how the Christian life is portrayed in its heavenly and mystical sense. The dependence on Early Fathers is not simply a source for authority, but there is definitely a continuance of the same devotional quality couched in elaborate philosophical expressions that the Fathers perfected.

The starting point for understanding Lossky and Eastern Theology is the primacy of apophatic theology. [2] Essentially, this means that the most perfect way of discussing God is by stating not what God is, but rather discussing what God is not. For God in his essence is unknowable, we have no possible way of understanding that which is beyond us, and have no analogy for that which has no equal. This reality leads to the complete inability for a believer to ascend towards God by way of intellectual pursuit. The goal of the Christian, then, is not so much to have a philosophical understanding of the divine, but rather to reach the point of union with God, to be deified. In fact, in order for this to occur the Christian must learn how to become completely detached from human understanding, as this way of knowing distorts and misleads understanding about God. True theology in the Eastern conception is relational not philosophical, concerned with communing with God, and abandoning conceptions which limit the limitlessness of the Divine. This is not to say, however, that nothing can be said about God. For although God in his essence is indeed beyond comprehension, he has been revealed to us in various ways. While we cannot know the God who is, we can know the God who does. [3]

One of the most delightful aspects of Lossky’s theology, and Eastern thought in general, is the very high regard the Trinity is held, not only in dogmatic assertions as in oftentimes true in the West, but in the actual working out of their theology. The understanding of the Trinity is the most sublime of all doctrines, and essential to understand how God works in the world. For although God is one, God is three, and this antinomy is the highest level of understanding and communion with God. For even as he is three in persons, so he is three in activity, with each person of the Trinity expressing an individual part of the continued creation and sustenance of the world, but each part intertwined and interacting with the others. These individual activities and roles are called economies. Each person has a specific role in God’s work in this world, though these are certainly not in isolation, but at each point and activity each of the three are intimately involved.

While Western thought tends towards being so highly Christological that the Holy Spirit is oftentimes added more as an appendix of thought than a crucial part, Eastern thinking discusses the Spirit in terms as being an equal in both role and personhood with Christ. In many cases while Western theologians would dogmatically assert Trinitarian reality, their teachings reflect a binarian understanding of the world, with the Father and Son playing pivotal roles in the salvation and restoration of humanity, and the Spirit being left as a dogmatic assertion. The Holy Spirit in the Eastern conception, however, is truly equal, and truly consubstantial with the Father and the Son. Rather than being subordinate to the Son, the Holy Spirit is seen as the other “hand” of the Father, equal but different. [4] The conception of Eastern theology, and interplay of the Trinity is expressed in the statement that “all energy originates in the Father, being communicated by the Son in the Holy Spirit.” [5]

The understanding of the economy of the Son, that is his temporal activities, in this world is essential for understanding Lossky’s conception of the Holy Spirit, for “the work of Christ calls out to the work of the Holy Spirit.” [6] The Son is the source of our salvation, the one who in descending to take on human flesh. For although humanity was intended to rise to deification, the triple barrier of sin, death, and nature prevents any possible achievement of this end. [7] In Christ’s taking on of humanity, however, these three bonds were broken, as he conquered sin and death, and brought a new nature to humanity, one which is no longer destined towards destruction, but now has the ability to be raised to the divine. A great barrier was broken, and this breaking we call salvation. For although God in his essence is unknowable, Christ is the image of the Father, and thus reveals God in his fullness, that we may participate in the divine nature. The Father is too great to know, but Christ shows him to us and allows us to begin to seek after him.

Christ is also the head of the Church, the people of this newfound nature, who calls, unites, and directs the activity of his people. In him many people become one, those of diverse backgrounds and ethnicities find unity and wholeness with Christ and with each other. [8] The church is based in the fact that we are no longer our own, seeking after our own desires and goals, but are in fact in all things seeking after the things of Christ and the welfare of others. The Church becomes united in those who have given up their own selfish pursuits to find wholeness in the person and salvation of Christ, and in the community which he inaugurated. It is the restoration of fallen humanity which is now unified towards seeking a common end, made possible by the incarnation.

If Christ is the image of the Father, the Holy Spirit is the image of Christ. For although equal in every way, the mission of the Holy Spirit is to show to believers throughout time the character of the incarnated one, and thus allow us to see through him the Father. “The Son makes known the Father, and the Holy Spirit bears witness to the Son.” [9] The economy of the Holy Spirit, then, is not simply a nuance of the economy of the Son, but rather an essential activity which is a continuation of the work of the Son in this world. [10] If the work of Christ inaugurated salvation, the Holy Spirit is carrying this work to completion, with Lossky stating that “in a certain sense, the work of Christ was a preparation for the work of the Holy Spirit.” [11] The goal of humanity is deification, and Christ allowed us to start on this path, but the Holy Spirit is the one who is continuing to lead us to continual higher levels of being. So while the “work of the Son is consummated, the work of the Holy Spirit is waiting for accomplishment.” [12] Because although we are now able to start down the road of deification through the restorative act of the incarnation and resurrection, we by no means have finished that journey.

As the image of Christ to those who believe in him, the Holy Spirit continually enlightens and informs the believer concerning the source of our salvation, and leads us into greater understanding of the one who saves. Yet we do not have a similar image of the Holy Spirit that would enlighten us concerning the work of this third member of the Trinity. The Son points us to the Father, and the Spirit points us towards the Son, each giving us insight into the nature of that which is pointed to. But the Spirit remains mysterious to us, as we do not have another image from within the Trinity from which to learn leading Lossky to say that “the doctrine of the Holy Spirit has the character of a secret, a partially revealed tradition.” [13] The person of the Holy Spirit diverts attention towards the Son revealing the truths of Christ and the Father to us, communicating to humanity the “fire of deity” and “uncreated grace.” [14] The Holy Spirit opens up the divine life within us, and allows us to participate in the fullness of divinity.

This fullness is not one of individualistic pursuit, nor of isolated undertaking, but is rooted in the life of the community of the Church which the son has united into one undivided whole. The Son has gathered together people to become one under his headship, united in their pursuits and fellowship together. Lossky uses Ephesians 1:22-23, however, to show that there are two different aspects of the church which correspond to the two persons of the Son and the Holy Spirit. “The Church is body in so far as Christ is her head; she is fullness in so far as the Holy Spirit quickens her and fills her with divinity, for the Godhead dwells within her bodily as it dwelt in the deified humanity of Christ.” [15] Christ is the head, but the Spirit is the life of the Church, filling, guiding, indwelling those who have been united by Christ and have accepted the salvation which allows us as a community to seek after union with God.

However, the work of the Spirit, according to Lossky, is substantively different in another way. For while the work and goal of the son is to bring unity and wholeness, gathering together those who have been scattered, in the church of which he is the head, the work of the Holy Spirit is to take that which has been made whole and bring diversity to those individual parts. Christ transforms human nature, allowing humanity to find wholeness and restoration, and restores community to humanity. The Holy Spirit is more “personal” dealing with each person in the church, allowing the individuality and personality of each believer to find his or her own fullness, “marking each member of the Church with a seal of personal and unique relationship to the Trinity, becoming present in each person.” [16]

Although we are bound together in a community, our own distinct personalities are not swallowed up into the whole, but rather our impoverished selves are made whole in themselves through the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which enables us to then be bound to other “whole” persons within the unity of the Church. For even as the Trinity is of one essence made up of three persons, so too is the church one unity made up of many persons, under the headship of Christ, but diverse through the work of the Spirit. The Spirit opens up the divine life in each person, conferring grace and manifesting the divine within us so that we co-operate with the divine will. As we grow in this, this will becomes our own, which is deification, the unification of our soul with God. The fullness of the deity becomes revealed in each believer through the work of the Holy Spirit, in unity and diversity within the Church, so that we can say that the Son reveals the Father, the Holy Spirit reveals the Son, and now the Church manifests the image of the Holy Spirit. For although there is no image of the Spirit within the Godhead, this image has been conferred upon those who believe in the Triune God, and are unified under the headship of Christ, and filled with the Holy Spirit, so that as the Church we reflect God to the world.

In Western thought Christology is oftentimes seen as the apex of theological study, but in the East, as seen in Lossky, pneumatology is equal if not greater in importance for they believe that “the fullness of Godhead, the ultimate fulfillment toward which all created persons tend, is revealed in the Holy Spirit.” [17] The Holy Spirit is the source for any understanding, and any participation with or contemplation of the Divine being. However, this expression of the importance of the Spirit does in no way diminish the roles of the Father or Son, but instead is delightful in its celebration and articulation of the Triune God.

The Spirit is shown to be a full participating member of the Godhead, rather than a fully affirmed in creeds, but diminished person in theology as often seen in the west. The Holy Spirit is the life of the Church, being the only avenue that a believer can see or know Christ, and through Christ the Father. Thus, for Lossky, the doctrine of the Holy Spirit is essential for understanding the doctrine of the church, or the doctrine of Christ, and thus crucial for understanding theology as a whole . All that we can know about God, in all of his Triune glory, and his work is due to the work and economy of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Church.

Throughout The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church Lossky is dependent upon the thought of the great Early Fathers of the Church. His theology is rooted in the foundational studies of the Trinity, and continues in many ways the same arguments and definitions which have been essential for the Church for 1500 years. Although insightful on his own, he is very cautious about maintaining the continuity of theology which the church has passed down through the ages. He is also very conscious and knowledgeable about the other various strands of theology which have developed over the course of Christian history, especially noting where Western and Eastern thought in general show variance in expression, emphasis, or even belief. However, his book though intended as an introduction to Western readers, is not necessarily concerned with a continual comparing and contrasting the two tradition, rather it is focused on conveying Eastern thought in general, highlighting however the distinctions at crucial times.

With this is by no means any sort of attack on Western thought or theological development. Instead, this book is an attempt to highlight the theology of the Eastern church so as to help the west grow in its appreciation for the thought of the East, and in doing so energize a dialogue between these divergent traditions. So, while Lossky is certainly a powerful advocate for Eastern thought, in its ancient and modern forms, he also conveys these differences in an attitude which encourages engagement, which pushes towards a stronger ecumenical understanding of theology, and which in many ways is healthily challenging for those of us who have grown up in a isolated Western context. For in the West we have spent a great deal of time studying the doctrine of Christ, focusing on his work and economy, but have in many ways neglected the study of the third person of the Trinity. Thus we have had movements bursting out of the confines of the church, oftentimes rejecting formal scholarship, because of this gap of engagement with the entire Trinity. Yet we find in Lossky that formal study can embrace the Holy Spirit, and that a full theology of the church and humanity demands that we face the reality of the work of the Spirit in this world.

Lossky offers to us in the West an understanding of the work and role of the Holy Spirit which has no real parallel in our own thinking. While the Pentecostal movement has reinvigorated the study of pneumatology, it is only recently that this has influenced strong academic pursuit, and thus has been very limited in its study and depth. Lossky points to the fullness of the work of the Spirit, which goes far beyond the charismata, and points us to the divinity in its fullness within ourselves. The understanding that as diverse persons unified in the church we become the image of the Holy Spirit is a great reminder indeed for our local communities. It is vital that we regain this understanding of the Triune God, and that as churches we seek after continued maturity and continued growth in how the Spirit is revealed in each of us and in our Church. Lossky’s contribution to the study of pneumatology is no less than a total call of the great importance and vitality that a study of pneumatology holds in the Christian community and a reminder that we in the west have in many ways become impoverished through a misconception of roles, and a diminishment of the Holy Spirit in our theology.

Yet, with this great contribution one must be aware of the weaknesses and problems which seem to arise in this study. While in the West we have in many cases been impoverished in the formal study of the Spirit, we have been very active in the actual outworking of the Holy Spirit in our churches. In the East it seems that the very loftiness and ornateness of their theology becomes a barrier for common understanding. While Lossky is elegant in his expression of the Triune God, this supposed introduction to Eastern Christian thought is almost too ethereal. The heavenly focus of this theology seems very removed from the earthiness of the incarnation. There is an almost Docetic quality to the writing. [18] The thoughts which are expressed are beautiful and true, but the complexity of the argumentation while encouraging equal participation limits those who feel they can participate in the fullness this theology offers. There is a philosophical boundary created which strikes against the message of the philosophy itself.

With this, Lossky seems so focused on the contemplative that much of the physical outworking of the Spirit in this world through the Church is lost. Though we in the West have lost much of the contemplative, we have restored the sense that the Spirit works in us to help the physical needs of others, and is calling us to reach out in missionary work to those who have not heard the message of Christ. While Lossky would certainly not deny these aspects, his theology reveals a contemplative consideration of the Spirit which these physical outworkings become very secondary. The weakness of Lossky’s thought is in its downplaying of “earthy” qualities of the Triune God, which was revealed in the incarnation so distinctly. The best theology would be one that could unite the theology of the Eastern Church’s understanding of the Transfiguration and the resurrection with the Western emphasis on the physical life and crucifixion. In this dual emphasis we could find something wonderful indeed.

This dual emphasis is indeed something to be sought after. For in the East and in the West, the Triune God has been active, revealing himself to those who believe, and showering upon his church gifts and insights for 2000 years. Yet, because of political distinctions, and theological disagreements, we have sacrificed the fullness of the work of the Holy Spirit in all of our lives. The Church is made up of persons diversified through the Spirit, united in Christ, who through our unity as individuals reflect the image of the divine. But in our division this image becomes distorted and incomplete. So as a church we must be active in restoring this community to its fullness, celebrating the great diversity which the work of the Spirit establishes, under the unifying headship of Christ, from whom we all derive the ability to commune with God and live a life filled with the Spirit. Lossky offers to the Western reader a bridge of thought, helping to establish connections, challenging misconceptions, and showing another strand of the development of the Christian church. He offers a full view of the Holy Spirit which I have felt so lacking in other 20^th century theological texts, and points towards further interaction and dialogue between the East and West. For the Holy Spirit is the life of the Church, and continues to lead and guide the church, from every region, into the fullness of life, and as the Church we reflect the image of the Spirit to the world. Lossky is invaluable in expressing this fact, truly a great contributor to Pneumatological study in general and definitely in my own quest to discover the wider work of the Holy Spirit in my life and in the life of my church.

[1] Vladimir Lossky, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1998), 42.

[2] See chapter one, “The Divine Darkness”.

[3] See Lossky, 86.

[4] See Lossky, 100.

[5] Lossky, 82. See also Lossky, 83 for other expressions of this same crucial thought.

[6] Lossky, 134.

[7] Lossky, 135.

[8] See Lossky, 182.

[9] Lossky, 85.

[10] Although outside the scope of this paper, this difference in western and eastern thought can be clearly seen in an evaluation of the filioque debate which tore the church apart in the 11^th century and remains unresolved to this day.

[11] Lossky, 159.

[12] Lossky, 155.

[13] Lossky, 161. See also Lossky, 84ff.

[14] Lossky, 162.

[15] Lossky, 157.

[16] Lossky, 168.

[17] Lossky, 238ff.

[18] See esp. Lossky, 242ff.