Replies

All of you may find this brief paper of interest on +Gregory Palamas.

http://www.monachos.net/patristics/palamas_theology.shtml

Jo, none of us Orthodox can stress enough how truly fundamental the works of +Gregory have become over the past 600+ years to our understanding of God and yet he is actually only expounding in detail on the works of the Cappadocians who preceed him by 1000 years. In many senses, if one wants to understand Orthodoxy, and on a broader level, what The Church in the East has always believed, reading +Palamas is absolutely necessary. For this reason, some would argue, in this time when the Church of Rome seems to be seeking reunion with Orthodoxy and it appears to most of us that our differences are quite small, an understanding of Palamite theology, rejected by the West and unknown to the Protestants, is foundational to an appreciation of how the West got where it is, how the East has remained, theologically, essentially unchanged and how very different we really are.

...an understanding of Palamite theology, rejected by the West and unknown to the Protestants, is foundational to an appreciation of how the West got where it is, how the East has remained, theologically, essentially unchanged and how very different we really are.

Hmmmm....I'm not familiar with the details of Gregory Palamas beliefs and I certainly may be misreading this article; but based upon what your reference pointed to, I think Greg was on to something. Just a few excerpts from this article caught my attention.

Natural knowledge, believed Gregory, is one aspect of man’s relationship to his Creator; and yet it is quite a different thing to know about God, than it is to actually know Him.

There is a knowledge about God and His doctrines. (…) The use and activity of the natural powers of the soul and of the body do shape the rational image of man, but that is not the same as the perfect beauty of the noble state which comes from above; that is by no means the supernatural union with the more than resplendent light, which is the sole source of sure theology.

Thus Gregory viewed natural knowledge, in all its philosophical forms, as a tool leading to something greater, yet every bit as real as that very knowledge: the divine grace which brings about union, the true source of contemplative knowing.

This transfiguration of the body so that it might ‘experience divine things’ was not understood by Gregory in a merely metaphorical sense; it was not simply a symbol for increased knowledge of God that led to improved understanding, but a real and true change in the human person, such that the manner of his knowing the Divine Creator might indeed be transformed.

Gregory, too, found place for the apophatic approach, but for a different—and important—reason: he did not see it so much as the limitations of man’s knowledge that kept him from knowing God by personal experience, but the fact that God, by nature,is unknowable.

I like Greg's emphasis on knowledge. This is an area I often focus on since our knowledge and understanding comes from God. Man cannot know God unless God gives man that ability. As this article points out, God is unknowable and His divine grace must bring about the union. Once this union is brought about, one can only want more. Man will never run away.

This sound very Calvinistic in my mind.

Jo, none of us Orthodox can stress enough how truly fundamental the works of +Gregory have become over the past 600+ years to our understanding of God and yet he is actually only expounding in detail on the works of the Cappadocians who preceed him by 1000 years.

I imagine that is true [understanding Palamas] to the same degrees that it is crucial to understanding St. Thomas Aquinas for Latin Catholicism. My question is whether Palamas IS expounding the Cappodocians or not. I have not found any reference to "uncreated energies" in the three saints' writings. Nor have I received an answer on whether the Incarnation is an "energy" or God Himself in His Essence. I have decided to read Pelikan's Development of Doctrine on Eastern Christianity to give me a better understanding of how it developed and differs from the West. Until then, forgive me if I take a break from this discussion.

Regards