¹ I am grateful to Father Emery de Gaál (The University of St. Mary of the Lake) and to Aristotle Papanikolaou (Fordham University) for reading an earlier draft of this article. Any errors, which may remain, are certainly my own.

² Gaudium et spes 22: “The truth is that only in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a figure of Him Who was to come, namely Christ the Lord. Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear.”

³ Gaudium et spes 24: “Indeed, the Lord Jesus, when He prayed to the Father, ‘that all may be one… as we are one’ (John 17:21–22) opened up vistas closed to human reason, for He implied a certain likeness between the union of the divine Persons, and the unity of God's sons in truth and charity. This likeness reveals that man, who is the only creature on earth which God willed for itself, cannot fully find himself except through a sincere gift of himself.”

⁴ For an introduction to the thought of Zizioulas, see Aristotle, Papanikolaou, Being with God: Trinity, Apophaticism, and Divine‐Human Communion (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006Google Scholar) and Knight, Douglas H. (ed.), The Theology of John Zizioulas: Personhood and the Church (Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2007Google Scholar). Knight's work contains an excellent biography of secondary sources on Zizioulas's ecclesiology, Trinitarian theology, and theological anthropology.

⁵ For an overview of Wojtlya's thought, see Williams, George, The Mind of John Paul II (New York: Seabury,1981Google Scholar); Schmitz, Kenneth, At The Center of the Human Drama: The Philosophical Anthropology of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II (Washington D.C.: CUA Press, 1993Google Scholar); Buttiglione, Rocco, Karol Wojtyla: The Thought of the Man Who Became Pope John Paul II (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1997Google Scholar); Kupczak, Jaroslaw O.P., Destined for Liberty: The Human Person in the Philosophy of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II (Washington D.C.: CUA Press, 2000)Google Scholar.

⁶ Michael Waldstein has consistently argued that St. John of the Cross has played an important role in influencing the thought of Wojtyla. See his article “John Paul II: A Thomist Rooted in St. John of the Cross,” Faith & Reason, Vol. 30, Nos. 3 & 4 (2005):195–218Google Scholar.; Introduction to IIPaul, Blessed Pope John, Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body, trans. Waldstein, Michael (Boston, MA: Pauline Books and Media, 2006), 24–34Google Scholar.; and his Forthcoming Logos of Nature and the Glory of Gift in John Paul II's Theology of the Body. Unpublished Manuscript (2011): 161–200. Also see Pope John Paul II's dissertation on faith in the thought of St. John of the Cross, which was written under the direction of Father Reginald Garrigou La‐Grange (1877‐1965): Faith According to Saint John of the Cross, trans. Jordan Aumann, O.P. (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1981).

⁷ Zizioulas’ understanding of personhood, which is major theme of this essay, is influenced by the thought of the theologian Christos Yannaras (1935‐) and the philosopher Martin Buber. Papanikolaou, Aristotle, “Personhood and its exponents in twentieth‐century Orthodox theology,” In Cunninghamand, M.B. Theokritoff, E. (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 258Google Scholar. The writings of Yannaras engage the thought of Heidegger, which in turn must have influenced Zizioulas in Heidegger.

⁸ See Melissaris, Atahasios G., “The Challenge of Patristic Ontology in the Theology of Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon,” In The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 44.1–4 (1999): 467–490Google Scholar.

⁹ Zizioulas, John, Communion and Otherness: Further Studies in Personhood and the Church, Edited by McPartlan, Paul (London: T& T Clark, 2006), 40Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Zizioulas, Being As Communion, 18.

¹¹ Ibid., 17. For a full argument for the Father as Cause, see his Communion and Otherness, 113–154., where he fully articulates his position in light of his reading of the Cappadocians. For a critique of the ambiguity and inconsistency in Zizioulas regarding the monarchia of God the Father, see Thomas Weinandy, OFM Cap. “Zizioulas: The Trinity and Ecumenism,” In New Blackfriars 83.979 (September 2002): 410–412. Also see Harrison, Nonna Verna, “Zizioulas on Communion and Otherness,” In St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 42.3–4 (1998): 278–284Google Scholar.

¹² Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 34. This division has also been adopted by academic dogmatic manuals among Eastern Orthodox theologians. See C. Androutsos, Dogmatics of the Orthodox Eastern Church (in Greek) (Athens, 1907) and P. Trembelas, Dogmatique de l’Église orthodoxe catholique, vols. I‐III, trans. Pierre Dumont OSB (Chevetogne, 1966–1968). Cf. Zizioulas, , The One and Many Studies on God, the Church, the World Today. Edited by Edwards, Father Gregory (Alhambra, CA: Sebastian Press, 2010), 4Google Scholar.

¹³ Papanikolaou, Aristotle, Being With God: Trinity, Apophaticism, and Divine‐Human Communion (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006), 84CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 125.

¹⁵ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 154.

¹⁶ Zizioulas, , Lectures in Christian Dogmatics, Edited by Knight, Douglas K. (London: T & T Clark, 2008), 61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁷ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 4–5.

¹⁸ Ibid., 9–10.

¹⁹ Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 49. This ontology of love is very similar to the personalistic norm articulated by Karol Wojtyla in his work Love and Responsibility, trans. Willets, H. (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993), 40–44Google Scholar.

²⁰ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 59.

²¹ Ibid., 9.

²² Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 17.

²³ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 213. For an explication of Zizioulas’ thought on ek‐stasis, see Papanikolaou, “Personhood and its Exponents in Twentieth‐century Orthodox Theology,” 240–241.

²⁴ Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 56.

²⁵ Ibid., 57–58.

²⁶ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 214.

²⁷ Russell, Edward, “Reconsidering Relational Anthropology: A Critical Assessment of John Zizioulas’ Theological Anthropology,” International Journal of Systematic Theology, 5.2 (July 2003): 174Google Scholar.

²⁸ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 1. For a contrary thesis that outlines an understanding of the person as an individual rational substance as consistent with the Patristic view and in contradistinction with the modern conception, see Emery, Gilles O.P., “The Dignity of Being a Substance: Person, Subsistence, and Nature,” In Nova et Vetera 9.4 (2011): 991–1001Google Scholar.

²⁹ Zizioulas, Being and Communion, 53.

³⁰ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 9–10.

³¹ Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 63.

³² Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 80.

³³ According to Papanikolaou, The concept of ‘“person” is the key to understanding [Zizioulas's] eucharistic ecclesiology which identifies the Church with the eucharistic assembly. Zizioulas [synthesizes] the eucharistic of Nicolas Afanasiev, which one can also detect in Georges Florovsky, with the theology of personhood initiated in Lossky.’ Papanikolaou, “Personhood and its Exponents in Twentieth‐century Orthodox Theology,” 241.

³⁴ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 29.

³⁵ Ibid., 32.

³⁶ Zizioulas, , “Human Capacity and Human Incapacity,” Scottish Journal of Theology 28 (1975): 433CrossRefGoogle Scholar quoted in McPartlan, Paul, The Eucharist Makes the Church: Henri de Lubac and John Zizioulas in Dialogue (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993) 140Google Scholar.

³⁷ Lubac, Henri de S.J., Catholicism (London: Burns & Oates, 1962), 187Google Scholar quoted in McPartlan, 140.

³⁸ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 7.

³⁹ Ibid.

⁴⁰ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 79.

⁴¹ Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 81.

⁴² Zizioulas, The Eucharistic Communion and the World, 36.

⁴³ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 90.

⁴⁴ Zizioulas, The One and the Many, 68. “The early work on the Eucharist and ecclesiology is, however, key for understanding Zizioulas's own approach to personhood. The experience of God in the Eucharist is both the ground and the realization of human personhood.” Papanikolaou, “Personhood and its exponents in twentieth‐century Orthodox theology,” 238.

⁴⁵ Zizioulas, Eucharistic Communion and the World, 104.

⁴⁶ Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 63–64.

⁴⁷ Ibid., 120.

⁴⁸ Nevertheless, Wojtyla's philosophical work was enriched by the phenomenological method. As he reflects upon the gift of his priestly ministry, Wojtyla (as Blessed Pope John Paul II) writes ‘My previous Aristotelian‐Thomistic formation was enriched by the phenomenological method, and this made it possible for me to undertake a number of creative studies. I am thinking above all of my book The Acting Person. In this way I took part in the contemporary movement of philosophical personalism, and my studies were able to bear fruit in my pastoral work’ (Gift and Mystery: On the Fiftieth Anniversary of My Priestly Ordination (New York: Doubleday Books, 1996), 93–94). At the same time, the phenomenology (as understood by Edmund Husserl and Max Scheler) has its limitations. According to Wojtyla, the ‘Christian thinker, especially the theologian, who makes use of phenomenological experience in his work, cannot be a Phenomenologist’ (Wojtyla, Scheler, 196), quoted in Waldstein, Michael Maria. Logos of Nature and the Glory of Gift in John Paul II's Theology of the Body (Unpublished Manuscript, 2011), 402Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ See Wojtyla, Karol, “Thomistic Personalism,” In Wojtyla, Karol, Person and Community: Selected Essays, trans. Sandok, Theresa, OSM. (New York: Peter Lang, 1993), 165–175Google Scholar. “Thomistic personalism stresses the metaphysical distinction between individuality and personality.” Maritain, Jacques, The Person and the Common Good The Person and the Common Good, trans. Fitzgerald, John J. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1996), 13Google Scholar: For an outline of the history of personalism and the main ideas that are characteristic of Thomistic Personalism, see Williams, Thomas D., Who is My Neighbor?: Personalism and the Foundations of Human Rights (Washington, D.C.: CUA Press, 2005Google Scholar), especially 105–145. Also see Clarke, Norris S.J. “The Integration of Personalism and Thomistic Metaphysics in Twenty‐First Century Thomism,” In Clarke, Norris S.J., The Creative Retrieval of Saint Thomas Aquinas: Essays in Thomistic Philosophy, New and Old (New York: Fordham University Press, 2009), 226–231Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ Wojtyla, “Thomistic Personalism,” 166.

⁵¹ Wojtyla, “Thomistic Personalism,” 167.

⁵² Ibid., 169.

⁵³ Wojtyla, , “The Person: Subject and Community,” found in Wojtyla, Karol, Person and Community: Selected Essays, Trans. Sandok, Theresa, OSM (New York: Peter Lang, 1993), 220 and 222Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ Wojtyla, “The Person: Subject and Community,” 223.

⁵⁵ “Participation and Alienation,” In Wojtyla, Karol, Person and Community: Selected Essays, Trans. Sandok, Theresa, OSM. (New York: Peter Lang, 1993),198Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ Wojtyla, “The Person: Subject and Community,” 228.

⁵⁷ Ibid., 227.

⁵⁸ Wojtyla, “Participation and Alienation,” found in Wojtyla, Karol, Person and Community: Selected Essays, trans. Sandok, Theresa, OSM. (New York: Peter Lang, 1993), 203Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Wojtyla, “The Person: Subject and Community,” 245–246.

⁶⁰ Ibid., 247–248.

⁶¹ The prescient Trinitarian theology of Gilles Emery, O.P. highlights the hermeneutical key to work through the superficial opposition of ‘essentialism’ and ‘personalism,’ the ‘law of redoublement.’ This ‘law of redoublement’ is derived from Saint Basil the Great who maintains that one must maintain the connection is proper to each person of Trinity and what is common to them. According to Emery to address the Trinitarian mystery, ‘it is necessary always to employ two words, two formulas, in a reflection in two modes that joins here the substantial (essential) aspect and the distinction of persons (relative properties).’ Emery, “Essential or Personalism in the Treatise on God in Saint Thomas Aquinas,” trans. Levering, Matthew, The Thomist 64 (2000): 534Google Scholar. This tension is neglected by Zizioulas, who argues repeatedly that ‘person’ precedes ‘substance.’

⁶² Augustine, Confessions 7, 10, 16; cf. Avery Cardinal Dulles, “A Eucharistic Church: the Vision of John Paul II,” found in his Church and Society: The Laurence J. McGinley Lectures 1988–2007 (New York: Fordham University Press, 2008), 444Google Scholar.

⁶³ No. 22. Quoted by Charles, Morerod O.P., “John Paul II's Ecclesiology and St. Thomas Aquinas,” In John Paul II & St. Thomas Aquinas, Dauphinais, Michael & Levering, Matthew (eds.) (Naples, FL: Sapientia Press, 2006), 62Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ Personalism includes a diverse group of thinkers including Max Schleher, Martin Buber, Charles Peguy, Jacques Maritain, Gabriel Marcel, Peter Wüst, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Romano Gauardini, Theodor Haecker, Armando Carlini, Michele Federico Sciacca, and Carlo Arata. See Schmitz, Kenneth, “The Solidarity of Personalism and the Metaphysics of Existential Act,” In Schmitz, Kenneth L., The Texture of Being: Essays in First Philosophy, O'Herron, Paul (ed.) (Washington, D.C.: CUA Press, 2007), 133–134 n. 4Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Zizioulas, The One and the Many, 20.

⁶⁶ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 89.

⁶⁷ Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 122.

⁶⁸ Blessed Pope John Paul II, Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body, 9:3.

⁶⁹ Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 79.

⁷⁰ Redemptor hominis, no. 10.

⁷¹ Ibid.

⁷² Zizioulas, Communion and Otherness, 243.

⁷³ Zizioulas, Being as Communion, 91.

⁷⁴ See Loudovikos, Nicholas,”Person instead of Grace and Dictated Otherness: John Zizioulas’ Final Theological Position,” The Heythrop Journal 52.4 (2011): 684–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷⁵ Wojtyla, , “Family as Communion of Persons,” found in Wojtyla, Karol, Person and Community: Selected Essays, trans. Sandok, Theresa, OSM. (New York: Peter Lang, 1993), 317Google Scholar.

⁷⁶ Ibid., 318.

⁷⁷ See Ayres, Lewis, Nicaea and its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth‐Century Trinitarian Theology (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also see Levering, Matthew, Scripture and Metaphysics: Aquinas and the Renewal of Trinitarian Theology (Blackwell Publishing, 2004), 197–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Levering analyzes the work of Zizioulas in comparison with the writings of Norris W. Clarke, S.J., and Reinhard Hütter. Levering's close reading of these contemporary thinkers is compared to the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas to make his final analysis clear.