Conclusion

Abstract

With these words, Maximus the Confessor (580–662) provides his own rendering of the “blessed inversion” formula. It is this theosis that many Western theologians consider to be a distinct quality of Eastern Christianity. Yet, throughout this study, I have argued that theosis is not merely a core element of Eastern Orthodoxy, but is also an underlying theme within another “Eastern” Christianity—Chinese Christianity. However, the history of Chinese Christian theology has been greatly influenced by the developments of a sociopolitical context and a continued return to the Chinese traditional philosophies and religions. Hence, one of the main goals of this study has been to see if theosis can form a useful basis of a Chinese contextual theology in the Second Chinese Enlightenment. But before we explore this discussion further, it would perhaps be useful to review some of the key points revealed by this study.

By hisgracious condescension God became man and is called man for the sake of man and by exchanging his condition for ours revealed the power that elevates man to God through his love for God and brings God down to man because of his love for man. By this blessed inversion, man is made God by divinization and God is made man by hominization.¹