ChatGPT Prompt
Write a skit where Athanasius chairs a whimsical thesis committee with other relevant doctors
of the church to summarize, review, reflect and critique diaphoris.
Scene: A timeless, book-lined chamber somewhere between Heaven and the Cloud of Witnesses. A chalkboard bears the title: “Diaphoris: The Ecstatic Agony of Divine Glory.” Four ancient figures in scholarly robes sit behind a floating mahogany table. A modern presenter (the author) stands at a lectern, nervously clutching a cup of coffee.
Characters
- St. Athanasius of Alexandria (Chair): Incarnational theologian, sharp and fearless.
- St. Gregory of Nazianzus (“Gregory the Theologian”): Poetic, mystical, wryly intense.
- St. John of Damascus (Damascene): Systematic, philosophical, always concerned with precision.
- St. Augustine of Hippo: Visiting examiner, metaphysical depth with a psychological bent.
Opening
Athanasius (chairing):
We are gathered to examine the thesis titled “Diaphoris: The Ecstatic Agony of Divine Glory.” Candidate, you may proceed.
Presenter:
Honored Fathers, I propose diaphoris as a neologism to describe the dynamic process by which divine love bears and transforms difference—through suffering and ecstasy—toward union, particularly in light of John 17 and the Cross. I see it as a complement to perichoresis, emphasizing not static mutual indwelling but agonic communion across difference.
Initial Responses
Gregory:
Hmm. Ecstatic agony, you say. That’s almost erotic. I rather like it. Reminds me of what I called “divine eros” in my Fifth Theological Oration. Though you walk a dangerous path—difference must be borne without division. The Trinity is not tension, but harmony.
John Damascene:
And yet, Gregory, he is not speaking of difference in essence, but rather in participation. The Logos assumed suffering without confusion; thus diaphoris may describe the path by which the created traverses the uncreated boundary through grace.
Augustine:
Indeed. But I am curious: do you mean this diaphoris as ontological—some new category—or is it a metaphor for sanctification?
Presenter:
Great question, Blessed Augustine. I mean it to be phenomenological: not a new essence, but a process of participation, especially in the cruciform path of love. A bridge between kenosis and perichoresis.
Theological Debate
Athanasius:
So you propose that the Word did not merely condescend, but invites us to embrace this agonic movement—to be glorified through suffering. That is not new. I wrote, “He became what we are, so that we might become what He is.” (On the Incarnation, §54). What is new here?
Presenter:
Your words remain gold, Father. I simply mean to name and frame what happens when love must move through rather than just into—to see theosis not only as ascent but as bearing difference together in glory.
Gregory:
This is good. The Spirit moves over the face of the deep. You are describing that movement—not as static ontology but poetic procession. Yes?
Presenter:
Yes. And I hope it also helps make sense of human suffering—how communion is possible even when we cannot resolve difference. The Cross is not merely substitution, but divine solidarity.
John Damascene:
But be careful. We speak of the unconfused union of Christ’s two natures. If your diaphoris implies conflict within the divine essence, you risk Nestorianism—or worse.
Augustine:
Yet Christ’s cry, “Why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46) suggests that even within the unity, difference is mysteriously borne. In my Confessions, I wrestled with this—how the soul stretches, breaks even, to be made whole in God.
Final Reflections
Athanasius:
I see no heresy—only a desire to name what the faithful often feel but struggle to articulate. Proceed, but clarify: diaphoris is not a new nature, but the agonized dance of grace working through created limitation.
Gregory:
And poetic! Your neologism is strange, but strangely apt. Let your metaphors breathe, but keep them tethered.
John:
Define your terms. Don’t let novelty unmoor you from Nicaea.
Augustine:
And remember: every new term must serve love. If diaphoris helps souls endure suffering in hope of glory, then let it be.
Conclusion
Athanasius:
Then we, the assembled committee, find your thesis… conditionally approved—pending minor revisions to terminology and metaphysical clarity.
Gregory:
And perhaps a few verses of poetry next time.
Presenter:
Thank you, Fathers. Truly. Per crucem ad lucem.
All:
Amen.
Let me know if you’d like an appendix featuring Maximus the Confessor, Symeon the New Theologian, or Teilhard de Chardin.
Radically Happy 
Leave a comment