Orthodox–Reformed Dialogue and the Ecumenical Recovery of Theosis

Agreement about theosis in Orthodox–Reformed dialogues played a small but strategic role in the ecumenical recovery of the patristic doctrine of deification and its emergence as a locus of Reformed theology. Ecumenical dialogue helped dispel the idea that theosis is a distinctively Orthodox doctrine incompatible with the Western tradition. This idea was first propounded in the 19th century by Albrecht Ritschl, Ferdinand Kattenbusch, Adolf von Harnack, and others associated with the Ritschlian school. It was later appropriated by émigré Orthodox scholars. Orthodox–Reformed dialogue helped correct this and other misconceptions about theosis. This began informally in correspondence between Thomas F. Torrance and Georges Florovsky and continued in formal dialogue meetings. Orthodox–Reformed dialogue also highlighted patristic ways of thinking about salvation that were not then prominent in Reformed theology. However, as the Reformed participants consulted the works of John Calvin, they realized that he shared those patristic ways of thinking. Today, Reformed theologians are eager contributors to the ecumenical recovery of theosis. They increasingly discuss theosis as a doctrine native to the Reformed tradition.     

An Evolutionary Outlook on Motivation: Implications for the Clinical Dialogue

A taxonomy of basic motivational systems (reptilian, mammalian, and neo-mammalian), that emerged in phases during the course of millions of years, is proposed. These different phases did not replace each other, but became reorganized in the brain at different hierarchical levels. It is argued that (a) humans are an ultracooperative species and (b) high degrees of cooperation put strong selective pressures toward the development of sophisticated forms of intersubjective communication. These two developments had cascading effects on human evolution, creating both the conditions upon which humans were able to understand intentions, gestures, emotions, and, ultimately, the minds of others, and the emergence of language and symbolic forms of cultural evolution. Possible evolutionary steps that led to this ultracooperative survival strategy and some of their genetic mechanism, with special emphasis on a multilevel model of selection, are described, and the implications for psychotherapy and psychoanalysis are explored.     

The Need for Synergy in Academic Policies: An Introduction to the Dialogue on Pre‐registration

There has been much debate on the need for preregistering experimental studies. Opinions differ with some people believing that “pre‐registration should be required—for us to believe the results of papers,” and others believing that “pre‐registration makes no difference to science and just adds work.” This research dialogue brings differing viewpoints together, in an open academic dialogue. Two target articles and two commentaries discuss what pre‐registration does for replicability of studies, and what cost it adds on authors and reviewers. Additionally, in my introduction to the research dialogue, I deliberate on the need for synergy between our journals, review teams, authors, and institutions, in order for any new policies on pre‐registration to be successfully adopted.     

Dialogue Groups in the 21st Century: An Extension of Practice

Experts in group dynamics are needed to work with societal-level identity groups to facilitate productive dialogue in lieu of destructive action or stalemate. Group therapists can promote dialogue about feelings and thoughts regarding societal-level identity issues that contribute to stuck destructive intra and intergroup relationships. After an introduction to the politics of identity and the importance of societal-level groups, the theory and practice of dialogue groups will be introduced and our own dialogue group described.     

The (Holy and Great) Council of the Orthodox Churches: An Ecumenical Perspective

From 19 to 26 June 2016, the first Pan‐Orthodox Council for more than a thousand years took place in Crete, although the Orthodox churches of Russia, Georgia, Bulgaria, and Antioch, for various reasons, did not participate. This article offers an assessment, from an ecumenical perspective, of the preparation and results of the council, and especially the document agreed in Crete concerning the “Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World.”