picking it back up
by Andrea Elizabeth
Michael Gorman agrees with me a bit more in Chapter 2 on justification. I just wish he had done more of the following in the first chapter on Christ’s humility.
We should, however, be careful about creating what may be – and I stress may be – false antitheses, such as divine initiative or human response, soteriology or ecclesiology, forensic declaration or participation, covenant or apocalyptic, boundary markers or moral effort, faith or obedience, obedience to death or sacrificial death, expiation or propitiation, crucifixion or resurrection, etc. [bold mine]
I think Orthodox would agree with
This rethinking [about justification] of Luther and other Reformers has shifted the emphasis in Reformation soteriology from declaration and legal fiction to real participation and even divinization – a term found even in Luther.
Gorman is still fixated on humble crucifixion only though and says that justification is participation in Christ’s crucifixion. He doesn’t want us to get falsely antithetical about it, but he is forcing a dialectic between that part of Christ’s obedience (unto death) and the Orthodox teaching that we are saved by and participate in every part of His life. We have to be born again, not only die. We have to be baptized with Him, be transfigured, everything. But he’s on the right track. I bet he’s a Wesleyan Methodist.