Gregory Palamas defined “the Triumph of Orthodoxy”
in his generation
Dr. Herbert Thomas Schwartz did so in ours
Last Sunday was for Orthodox the first Sunday of Great Lent, known as the Sunday of Orthodoxy; next Sunday will be the Sunday of St Gregory Palamas. The two Sundays are – in the wisdom of the Church’s tradition – intimately connected, in that “Orthodoxy” is, in a pre-eminent manner, exemplified in the life and teaching of St Gregory Palamas.
I have the temerity to attempt a study of this because the exact same teaching-cum-life-experience is exemplified in the life and teaching of Dr. Herbert Thomas Schwartz, and this in a quintessentially contemporary manner, as if St. Gregory Palamas were re-born in our times - I having been privileged to be a disciple of Dr. Schwartz for16 years, until his blessed repose in 1980. I would thus be seriously remiss were I not to put my experience at the service of the Church when it is so sorely neededcccs.
Only after much searching did I find a reasonably accurate and experientially realistic description of Palamas which might serve as an introduction, for the purpose of this memo. So I beg my readers to forget 99% - or, better, ALL of what they may have been heretofore exposed to in this regard.
My source is: Met Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, “St. Gregory Palamas as a Hagiorite”, see: http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b16.en.saint_gregory
_palamas_as_a_hagiorite.11.htm Met Hierotheos’ claim that “we shall be able to establish the great importance of St. Gregory Palamas for Orthodoxy, that is for the triumph of the true faith, in monasticism and on the Holy Mountain” is fully justified by the text.
“We can see quite clearly the great significance of Palamas’ teaching for Orthodoxy on the important question of epistemology. When we say epistemology we mean the knowledge of God and, to be precise, we mean the way which we pursue in order to attain knowledge of God.”
In our own times as in the time of St Gregory, nothing is more shrouded in confusion than the epistemological foundation of our knowledge of all reality as such, and a fortiori of the basis of all reality: God.
Max Scheler, via Edmund Husserl, attracted the attention of Edith Stein, as also of Pope John Paul II, who, in 1954, as Karol Wojtyla, defended his thesis on "An Evaluation of the Possibility of Constructing a Christian Ethics on the Basis of the System of Max Scheler", to earn a second doctorate from Lublin Catholic University, in addition to his doctorate in theology from the Dominican Angelicum, in Rome, in 1948, his earlier thesis being on the object of faith in the works of St. John of the Cross (Doctrina de fide apud Sanctum Ioannem a Cruce). The future Pope’s frustration at the failure of St. John of the Cross to even consider the defined dogmata of the Catholic Church as included under this rubric is evident, and he added to the body of his thesis an extensive appendix of quotations on the subject from St. Thomas Aquinas, every single one stating exactly the same thing: that such dogmatic formulations cannot be the object of faith, which is God Himself, the simplicity of whose infinite intelligibility cannot be expressed by the human mind, which is thus constrained to use the complex formulations commensurate with the complex ratiocination proper to the human reasoning process in formulating such dogmata. Needless to say, Husserl, Scheler, et al were of no benefit whatsoever.
Too bad no one thought to check out St. Gregory Palamas, who understood what was at issue from his own personal experience.
As Met Hierotheos writes: “St. Gregory Palamas developed the fundamental teaching of the Church concerning the great mystery of the indivisible distinction between the essence and energy of God. We must underline that this is not the teaching of St. Gregory Palamas alone, but of the Orthodox Church, and therefore this theology cannot be called Palamism. Many fathers have referred to the distinction between essence and energy. We find it in the Bible, in the first Apostolic Fathers, in the Cappadocian Fathers, and especially in Basil the Great and that great dogmatic theologian of the Church, St. John of Damascus. [I must note that my own personal researches over the years definitively bear out the Metropolitan’s statement.] St. Gregory Palamas, with his outstanding theological ability, developed further this already existing teaching and put forward its practical consequences and dimensions.
“It is very characteristic that this distinction began to be noted in discussions about the Holy Spirit. The Calabrian philosopher Barlaam maintained that we could not know just what the Holy Spirit is, especially His procession and His being sent by the Son. In the face of the danger of agnosticism St. Gregory Palamas taught that the actual procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father is a different thing from His being sent by the Son. [St. Thomas Aquinas addressed this difference, positing a distinction between the Trinitarian processions “ad intra” versus “ad extra” – although his reasoning, while not substantively erroneous, is pretty clumsy. Perhaps, in the wake of that experience at the end of his life which led St. Thomas to state that, in comparison to this revelation, all he had written was as straw, he might have bettered himself - but in God’s providence this did not happen.] Thus while we do not know the essence of the Holy Spirit, we do know His energy.
“All spiritual life is a result and fruit of the energy of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, Gregory Palamas taught, we cannot participate in God's essence, but we can know and participate in His energies. As the great dogmatic theologian St. John of Damascus teaches, we can see His three unions: union in essence, of the Persons of the Holy Trinity; union in substance, in the Person of Christ between the divine and human natures; and union in energy, between God and man.
“In this way St. Gregory preserves the true teaching of the Church.”
Met Hierotheos of Nafpaktos goes on to say further that “the teaching of St. Gregory Palamas, Archbishop of Thessaloniki, has great significance for monasticism as well.”
The spiritual discipline known to him as monasticism was pre-eminently the spiritual discipline inculcated in us, as disciples of Dr. Herbert Schwartz. The Metropolitan doesn’t mention some intervening history which however affects the epistemological scene as we knew it at the mid-point of the 20th century, when we, Herbert Schwartz’ disciples, came together in the community which formed around him. This was, in fact, the way monasticism grew from its very beginning.
A watershed figure of the period between St. Gregory Palamas the Hagiorite and ourselves was Rene Descartes, born almost exactly 300 years after St. Gregory Palamas. Descartes is principally famous – or, rather, infamous, for his dictum: Cogito ergo sum, I think therefore I am. If the axiomatic basis of human logic becomes our thinking ---- uh, I mean, God is relegated to distinctly “after the fact” status, wouldn’t you say? This is exactly the logic which directed, or, rather, misdirected Barlaam’s theological effort in its entirety. I’m not sure anyone in our community had more than cursory knowledge of St. Gregory Palamas and the clarification and systematization of the Church’s tradition which he effected in his brilliant and profoundly mystical response to Barlaam’s utterly topsy turvy, radically hindside-before approach to reality. Nevertheless, this was exactly what Dr. Herbert Schwartz effected within our profoundly hagioritic community in mid 20th century.
Returning to Met Hierotheos of Nafpaktos: “In St Gregory Palamas’ time, the philosophers, led by Barlaam, doubted the value of traditional monasticism and the monks' way of life, especially that of the so-called hesychasts. (Hesychia means stillness. Hesychasm is the practice of stillness in the presence of God. Those who practise hesychasm are called hesychasts.)
“This was due to a difference of theological assumptions. Barlaam maintained that the noblest part of man, through the help of which he can acquire knowledge of God, is reason, and that reason is the only instrument by which one can attain knowledge of God.” Exactly the “cogito ergo sum” line of reasoning!!! Said Pascal, Descartes’ younger contemporary: “I cannot forgive Descartes. In all his philosophy he would have been quite willing to dispense with God. But he had to make Him give a fillip to set the world in motion; beyond this, he has no further need of God.” And again: “The heart has reasons that reason cannot know.”
“So Barlaam came to the conclusion that the ancient Greek philosophers, who used a great deal of reasoning, attained a greater knowledge of God than the Prophets, who were looking at external things, revelations and visions. Barlaam laid great stress on the value of the philosophers as against the Prophets, the value of human thought as against the vision of the uncreated Light which the three Apostles had on Mt. Tabor.”
Please see the ikon of the Transfiguration on Mt. Tabor on the home page of my website: http://www.mamaleh-larisa.com
As Met Hierotheos sagely observes: “This naturally had implications for orthodox and traditional monasticism. If Barlaam's teaching was right and succeeded in prevailing in the Church, priority would be given to reason and philosophy, traditional monasticism would be disregarded and we would arrive at agnosticism.
“But St. Gregory showed in his teaching that the Prophets and Apostles were higher than the philosophers, that the instrument for acquiring knowledge of God is not reason, but the heart in its full biblical meaning: that God is not discovered through human reasoning, but reveals Himself in a man's heart and that the real way of knowing God is the hesychastic way, which is described in the Holy Scripture and experienced by all the saints. So he made it very clear that the monks' way of life, that is to say, the method of prayer which they were following, leads to true knowledge of God.”
And this was precisely the way of life which we followed in our community, with Dr. Herbert Schwartz as our Spiritual Father – our Staretz, as is the Russian expression which Herbert used, in referring to his role in our lives.
Met Hierotheos continues: “It is characteristic that one of St. Gregory's first writings, which is also his main work and bears the title "On the holy hesychasts" - refers to the three basic topics which were being pondered at that time. One is the great subject of education, which confronts the question of whether the philosophers are higher than the Prophets and whether philosophy is the real road to the knowledge of God. The second is the theme of noetic prayer and deals with everything connected with that, while the third is the subject of the uncreated Light. The crucial theological view is expounded that the Light which the saints see is uncreated. That is to say, it is not a matter of creation, but of the uncreated energy of God. The basis of this writing is traditional orthodox monasticism.”
Just as we learned this teaching and discipline by our constant everyday experience of it, so also, as Met Hierotheos emphasizes, “St. Gregory … himself was a Hagiorite. He lived on the Holy Mountain, experienced its life and then expressed it. Through his writings he showed that the Holy Mountain is a place of life and, above all, a way of life. The Holy Mountain expresses the Orthodox Tradition, it is an expression of the life which exists in the Orthodox Church…. St. Gregory went to the Holy Mountain as a student and lay brother, not as a teacher. He went in order to study his Orthodox tradition…. He put himself under obedience to confessors and deified monks. He gained many experiences of the spiritual life… He kept silence for many years. And when he was required to speak, he spoke and expressed his experience. Therefore his teaching is an expression of the life of the Holy Mountain, but in a wider sense it is an expression of the life of the Church, because the Holy Mountain is not absolute or autonomous. The Holy Mountain expresses the life of the Orthodox Church. Thus we can see its great importance.
“We said at the beginning that the time of St. Gregory Palamas is parallel to our own time. This is very important and we want to emphasize it particularly.
“In the first place we see that men's search for God is increasing day by day. Many people are seeking to find and possess real knowledge of God. Some, since they are not following the true way to knowing God, become discouraged and come to deny God. Others, instead of finding the true God, find various idols of God, which they worship.”
Although matters do seem to be taking a positive turn – uh, somewhat……. Surely some in my chat group could give a nudge in the right direction
The report from the Chicago Council on Global Affairs says major challenge for U.S. is to understand powerful role of religion in other societies
By Jill Dougherty, CNN
February 25, 2010 2:34 a.m. EST
Religion is a growing factor in world affairs, but the U.S. government tends to view it through the lens of counterterrorism. That's the conclusion of a two-year study by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.
The success of American diplomacy in the next decade "will be measured by its ability to connect with the hundreds of millions of people throughout the world whose identity is defined by religion," the report says.
The task force of 32 experts, including former government officials, religious leaders, heads of international organizations and scholars concludes, "The challenge before us is to marginalize religious extremists, not religion,"
Religious communities, they point out, are central players in major developments around the world: the war in Afghanistan, the promotion of human rights, environmental policy and the pursuit of peace.
"Religion has played a negative role in U.S. foreign policy in the past, especially in relations with the Muslim world," notes Thomas Wright, executive director of studies for the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.
The strategy of engaging religious communities is not trying to circumvent the First Amendment, observed Wright. "The separation of church and state is vital and must be preserved in foreign as well as domestic policy."
But citing President Obama's Cairo speech to the Muslim world in June 2009, Wright said "the United States has greatly improved its capacity to understand religious dynamics in world affairs."
The report notes the speech "set the stage for a new departure in U.S. foreign policy toward Muslim communities" but "the scope must be much broader."
"Engaging Islam is only one very crucial component of a larger challenge ... engaging the multitude of religious communities across the world as an integral part of our foreign policy."
Without "more serious and thoughtful engagement" with religion, the report says, "U.S. foreign policy will miss important opportunities."
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
In my book, at least, living our lives to the height to which God has created and pre-destined us is a really “important opportunity” – I don’t know how you feel about it.
