Recent developments in the field of natural sciences shed a light on theological-medical approach to the human being. Modem medicine (neuro-molecular biology) from its own prospective can say a lot about ‘spiritual’ processes. Therefore, author of this study undertakes deliberation in possibility of verifying truthfulness of theological implications about man’s freedom through observations on premises of modem medicine. An unpleasant sense of enslavement and conditioning that chemical biological individuality of human “nature” gives to his personality in inheritance now is placed in the light of ascetical experience of the Church (mostly St. Maxim the Confessor and elder Porphyrius Kapsokalibite). In that field, it shows that out of all human characteristics, only freedom, as transcendent impetus and gift, does not submit to objective testing. Salvation (spirituality, integration) and truth-recognition in theology is an act that initiates God himself as subject, and this act is result of freedom and love. On the other side, spirituality gives birth to ethos as habit of conduct and also infiuences biological life. The eschaton, as a true state of existence, enlightens the question of man’s biochemical substratum in a decisive way, seeing it as “law of nature” that can’t be changed (human body as biochemical mechanism), but epigenetically changes “tropos of existence” in a thorough way. This multidiscipline approach in biochemistry of freedom has pedagogical, missiological, pastoral, bioethical and other implications. In the уеаг when Danvin’s double jubilee is globally marked, author of this study negatively answers the questions is there a biochemistry of freedom and do evolution laws exclude the transcendent cause, i. e. Personal God and His closest relationship with world and history.
Baptism and Eucharist are two Mysteries that the Church offered as an answer to the question of overcoming fallen biochemistry. The Baptism is man’s immersion with death in Christ, i. e. real dying of old man and his “methods of knowing” and natural passions, and resurrection of new man with Christ. On the other hand, the Eucharist does not only give foretaste but an advance(eamest, indemnity) of the eschatological health and healing. Theologically, it could be admitted that there is the biochemistry of natural will, but not the biochemistry of freedom, since the latter escapes biochemistry in a mystical way but not less experientially realistic, especially because of God’s salvific activity and His transcendent dwelling in man and among men. In that sense, there is no hopeless determinism which would reduce freedom to an instinctive level. Orthodox theology should develop ethos of freedom and love in such a way as to establish a bioethical culture which would be ruled by a conscience that there is no real freedom without transcendence nor complete healing outside of Christ.