Problems of theodicy and apocatastasis and the theology of hypostatic freedom

The article analyzes the attempts of theodicy of various Christian thinkers within the framework of hypostatic-natural ontology. The appeal of Fr. Paul Florensky’s approach to the antinomianism of theodicy is evaluated as well as its relation to anthropodicy. The theory of apocatastasis, according to which the salvation of all takes place via centuries of development, is recognized as inconsistent, as postulating the totalitarianism of salvation and excluding personal freedom. The difference between the understanding of evil and suffering in dualistic religions and in Christianity, where they are not absolute and are tools of Divine pedagogy, is outlined. The theme of earthly suffering and human kenosis is linked to the non-compassionate kenotic self-giving of the Persons of the Trinity in the intra- trinitarian life. God’s allowance of evil and suffering is associated with the vocation of the fallen human race, created in the image of the Holy Trinity, to unity through the possession of the universal nature not for selves. The solution of the problems of theodicy, anthropodicy, and apocatastasis is possible only in the context of the hypostatic-natural balance, in which the concepts of hypostatic freedom and personal will occupy a central position.