12. EMPIRICAL THEOLOGY
[ BACK ] 12. EMPIRICAL THEOLOGY |
12. EMPIRICAL THEOLOGY
[ BACK ] 12. EMPIRICAL THEOLOGY |
The theology of St. Gregory Palamas is theology of the Orthodox Church. He was not himself introducing a new system of teaching and knowledge of God, but he lived and then expressed what he met in the Church and on the Holy Mountain, having been trained in the life in Christ.
It is well known that orthodox theology is empirical. This means that the holy Fathers theologised not in conjecture and philosophy, but through experience, through the Revelation. God revealed His truth to the Prophets, Apostles and saints, and through this revelation they guided the Lord's people. St. Gregory the Theologian says that the saints speak of God like fishermen and not in an Aristotelian way. That is to say, they speak of God in the manner of the Apostles, not in the manner of Aristotle through imagination and conjecture.
This is just what we also find in the theology of St. Gregory Palamas. The source of his theology was God's Revelation, and therefore his whole theology is experiential. Two striking passages of his on this subject are characteristic.
In the first he indicates that all the heresies come out of philosophy and are based on philosophical principles. "And if you were to examine the problem, you would see that all or most of the harmful heresies originate in this source". Actually there are enormous differences between philosophy and theology. St. Gregory several times calls even Barlaam a theologian because he is concerned with God, but in the end he says that "theology" is one thing and the vision of God is another.
The second passage is about the terms which are used by both the philosophers and the holy Fathers of the Church. The Fathers use some philosophical terms, but with a different meaning and another content. This has to be said, because unfortunately some people, seeing the same terminology, confuse matters, with the result that they identify theology with philosophy. St. Gregory observes: "Even if any of the fathers says the same things as the outwardly wise, this is true only of the words, but the meanings are far apart; for according to Paul the latter have the nous of Christ, but the former, if nothing worse, are speaking from a human mind". The meaning of this passage is that there is a difference between the Fathers and the philosophers, even in the use of the terms. It is also said here that the philosophers are speaking either from their human mind or else by the energy of the demons. This is the sense of "if nothing worse, they are speaking from a human mind".
|
[ BACK ] 1. The presuppositions of the theology of St. Gregory |
What we have said by way of introduction will, I think, help us to proceed to developing the topic of the presuppositions of St. Gregory's theology. It is true that other chapters of this book which speak of the saint's ascetic way of life point to the presuppositions of his theology. But here I would like to go on to analyse another aspect, for us to see the difference between Barlaam's "theology" and the theology of St. Gregory.
This aspect of the subject is necessary because today a number of theories have been brought forward about the theology of St. Gregory Palamas which distort both his teaching and the theology of the Orthodox Church, and they are creating dreadful confusion, with unexpected consequences. Finally, of course, these views also end in defamation of the saint himself.
These contemporary views are analysed and opposed by Father John Romanides in an excellent study of his, which is an introduction, on the one hand, to an understanding of St. Gregory's teaching, and on the other hand, to placing his theology, which, as we have said, is a theology of the Orthodox Church, in its proper framework. I would like to underline only two such views, suggesting to the reader that he study this admirable introduction thoroughly and carefully.
According to the first view there are two patristic traditions in the history of the Orthodox Church. One is called a hellenising patristic tradition and the other a biblical and patristic tradition. Thus Barlaam is regarded as an adherent of the first tradition, while St. Gregory is a champion of the second. The hesychastic struggles resulted in the biblical hesychastic tradition prevailing at the expense of the hellenising patristic tradition.
This view is unacceptable to the orthodox side, because there is no such distinction in patristic theology. The holy Fathers were hesychasts, they lived God experientially, they purified their hearts of passions, experienced illumination of the nous and then arrived at the vision of God, Pentecost, which is the greatest moment of Revelation. Thus the saints received the Revelation and transmitted it to the people in the terms of their time, giving a different content to these terms.
As an example I will mention that the term 'ecstasy' has one meaning in the stoic and platonic philosophy and another in the Orthodox Tradition. In the former it meant the mortification of the passible part of the soul, while in the latter it meant and still means the transformation of the passible part of the soul. So the heretics through the ages who used hellenic philosophy did not belong to any patristic tradition, but they introduced heresies which have been condemned by the Church. Anyone who reads the "Synodical of Orthodoxy" will find out that the heretics based themselves on hellenic philosophy and therefore both they and the philosophical ideas on which they based themselves are condemned.
Therefore Barlaam belonged, not to any hellenising tradition, since there is no such thing, but to the Franco-Latin theological tradition. "Our accepted church Tradition is absolutely right that Barlaam belonged to the Franco-Latin theological Tradition. Not one of Barlaam's condemned heresies is contained in the teaching of any of the so-called Hellenising Fathers of the Church. On the contrary, all of Barlaam's heresies are found at the centre of the Franco-Latin theological Tradition".
According to the second contemporary theory about Barlaam's theology, this Calabrian philosopher does not express western scholastic theology, that is to say he is not a scholastic theologian, but an advocate of nominalism. This view has been expressed because Barlaam found fault with the doyen of Franco-Latin theologians, Thomas Aquinas. But this theory too fails to put things right and creates confusion for the correct understanding of Barlaam's presuppositions, and therefore of the presuppositions for understanding the teaching of St. Gregory Palamas.
All who maintain that Barlaam was a nominalist theologian and opponent of scholastic theology are in reality unaware that in Franco-Latin theology there are three positions about the essence and energy of God. One extreme position was expressed by the nominalists through the well known nominalist philosopher William Occam, who removed every distinction between essence and energy in God, saying that such a distinction is only in name. The second extreme view was expressed by the Scotists through Scotus, who believed that there is a specific distinction between essence and energy, and the third was expressed by Thomas Aquinas, that there is a dynamic distinction.
The point is that all three of these theories belong to the scholastic theology of the West. It may be a fine distinction, but they do not cease to constitute different positions within the same scholastic theology of the West, which has been influenced by both Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy.
More generally, we should say that nominalism, which was influenced by Aristotle, believed that general and abstract ideas are simple names, words, and not particular entities, as realism believed. The nominalists considered ideas only as mere names or concepts devised in the mind. Nicephoros Gregoras said that the qualities "are names rather, and nothing else", while Palamas replied: "Yes indeed they are, philosopher". Of course this must be seen from point of view that according to Plato all things that exist in the world are "images of transcendent archetypes", and these archetypes are the ideas, which are self-existent and on the basis of which the world was created. Aristotle believed in the ideas. For him, however, the ideas were not self-existent, but forms. The scholastic theology of the West accepted Plato's theory about archetypal ideas in the mind of God, while the nominalists discarded the Platonic theory of the archetypal forms.
In studying Barlaam's views, as St. Gregory Palamas refutes them, we understand very well that he had Platonic ideas about the body and soul of man, about the Revelation of God, essence and energy, and so forth. In other chapters we saw Barlaam's Platonic views about the body as the prison of the soul, and about the nature of the salvation of man. Therefore we cannot regard Barlaam at the same time as both a Platonic philosopher and a nominalist. Moreover "Barlaam even as a factor in the Renaissance could not possibly be an unalloyed Aristotelian, because Aristotle, by one of the peculiarities of history, was scorned in Renaissance times".
Thus Barlaam was a scholastic theologian of the West, who, without knowing the nature of orthodox theology and orthodox practice, attempted to transfer the presuppositions of the theology of the West to the Greek way.
Unfortunately, according to contemporary theologians who formulate such views about Barlaam's "theology", "paradoxically Barlaam's supposed hesychasts appear simultaneously as humanists and Platonists and nominalists, as if such a thing were possible!". William Occam, who enlivened the dispute with the pragmatists was a contemporary of Barlaam, "but it is difficult for us to clarify yet how far the two movements were connected".
Carefully following the whole discussion between Barlaam and St. Gregory Palamas, one understands that the former was a scholastic-conjecturer philosopher of the West, and not a theologian of the Orthodox Church, while St. Gregory Palamas was a theologian who had all the essential presuppositions of the holy Fathers, which are hesychasm.
After the necessary spiritual struggle St. Gregory attained the vision of God; he saw God in the light. This can be seen clearly in his writings. Detailed analyses of these subjects, which are quite subtle, cannot be made by anyone who does not have the experience. He was kindred in spirit to the holy Fathers, and that is why he interpreted them authentically, developing their teaching still further, being in the same frames of reference and the same spiritual atmosphere.
St. Philotheos Kokkinos tells us that our saint attained illumination of his nous, acquired unceasing prayer of the heart and then reached vision of the uncreated Light. The miracles which he performed still in his lifetime are proof of this. He had communion with the All-holy Mother of God, saw her herself in all her glory, saw divine visions in the uncreated Light, but also even saw the glory of God. St. Philotheos says that during a service in the Church of the Great Lavra "withdrawing his nous from hymn-singing, he usually turned it towards himself and through himself to God; and at once a divine light shone round him from above, and with the eyes of both his body and his soul illuminated by those rays, he saw clearly as if present, what was to happen many years later".
Therefore the theology of St. Gregory Palamas is a theology of the Church, the Prophets, the Apostles and the saints, it is an empirical theology, a theology of the Light and the Revelation. In this frame of reference we can say that it was a Hagiorite theology. We should look at his theological positions and the way in which he expressed them from this point of view, that is to say, that he was a hesychast Hagiorite monk. So he opposes to Barlaam's conjectural and scholastic theology the empirical theology of the Orthodox Church and the Holy Mountain.
With these things before our eyes we can also look at two characteristic points which we find in his works.
The first is that he speaks of demonstrative and not dialectical syllogisms. In a letter of his to Barlaam the saint analyses thoroughly the fact that we have demonstrative syllogisms about God, since we have revelations and manifestations. God Himself reveals Himself to man and offers him His true knowledge. The dialectic syllogisms contain ignorance of what is sought, probability and conclusion on the basis of thoughts, conjectures and logical propositions.
The second refers to his characterisations of the heretics, who were anti-hesychasts and were fighting against the revelation of the saints. At one point he writes: "Tremble, then, you unbelievers who lead others to unbelief, you blind ones eager to lead the blind...". Many times he calls Barlaam a philosopher and speaks scornfully.
He uses the same tactic for the philosopher Gregoras, with whom he had a debate in the last phase of the hesychastic disputes. In one place he writes: "We have had quite enough of the false doctrines of Gregoras, and those of Barlaam and Akindynos; and having been a victim of those bad ways, we know and deplore the suffering caused by what has been written and spoken by him". And in another place he writes: "Thus also from this beginning, for those who give even a little attention to this writing of Gregoras, it is laughable and reprehensible as being utterly false".
In another place he characterises Nicephoros Gregoras as a self-made theologian and a false teacher, among many other things: "Now, not heeding the Apostle who says `nobody takes honour to himself', he has been ordained by his own pen and is a self-made teacher. I think that in this teaching of his, and especially his falsehoods, and his quibblings without cause, not only against me but also against the saints, and his completely inconsistent and unsuitable loquaciousness and his swarm and cloud of blasphemies against God and his shamelessness and extraordinary arrogance and, in a word, all his mixed rubbish against us and against godliness, or rather against his own head and soul, he is now going too far".
The way in which St. Gregory theologises, preaches and confutes the heretics is due to the certainty which he has about the theology that he is expressing -because he knows that his theology is Revelation- but also to the certainty about the error and impertinence of the anti-hesychasts and the fact that if they triumph, they will harm the members of the Church of Christ. And this certainty is a fruit and result of his Hagiorite experience and life.
Beyond the experience which St. Gregory had, at the same time he also possessed exceptional mental and other gifts which helped him to express this revealing experience which he gained and lived on the Holy Mountain. All the saints are spiritual fathers in that they have received the Revelation, and with it they guide their spiritual children, who are reborn into the life in Christ. But those Fathers who, through experience but also through the exceptional qualities which they had, confronted heresy and kept the orthodox teaching unharmed and unsullied, are called Fathers and Ecumenical Teachers in a special sense and meaning. St. Gregory Palamas was also one such saint.
Studying the patristic texts, we can verify clearly that there are two centres of knowing in man. One is the nous, which is activated in the heart, and the other is that of the mind and reasoning which is connected with the brain. Orthodox spirituality is supported by the noetic power of the heart, while the thinking power is supported by the brain.
"Thus we have the following four categories of people:
1. Those with low mental achievements, who rise to the highest level of noetic perfection.
2. Those with the highest mental achievements, who fall into a low, or even the lowest, level of noetic imperfection.
3. Those who reach both perfect mental achievements and noetic perfection.
4. Those who have poor mental qualities and achievements, and hardness of heart as well".
This grouping is a key to understanding the patristic tradition. Actually all the saints are on a high level of noetic energy, but not all have high mental achievements, that is to say they do not have the mental gifts and education to express the experience which they attain through their nous. But others have a high level of mental energy as well and can formulate what God grants to them.
St. Gregory Palamas is surely one of the greatest Fathers of the Church, because he reached a high degree of noetic perfection but also had great mental gifts, whereas Barlaam and Gregoras had indisputable mental accomplishments, but they were on a low level or the lowest plane of noetic imperfection. Indeed it at this point that we find the difference between the Hagiorite hesychast St. Gregory Palamas and the anti-hesychast and scholastic philosophers.
|
[ BACK ] 2. Elements from the theology of St. Gregory Palamas |
I regard it a great blessing from God that I have been granted since my student years to study and give my attention to the writings of St. Gregory Palamas. Indeed at one period of my student life I also assisted with the critical edition of the saint's works. The theology of the Hagiorite saint filled me with great enthusiasm and helped me to acquire the orthodox background for understanding the patristic texts. I believe that the saint's analyses are analyses of the presuppositions of orthodox theology.
Therefore I have been busy for more than twenty-five years with the writings of St. Gregory, and the study of related works which analyse this great personality. As a fruit of these studies I have published various articles appearing from time to time in different periodicals, and republished them in my books. These articles analyse a variety of theological topics with which St. Gregory Palamas was concerned. Of course they cannot be quoted in this book as well, because they have already been published. However it would be good to have something of the sort in order to give the fullest possible picture of the saint's teaching. And this is necessary because, as we have already explained, St. Gregory speaks, writes theologises, discusses, as a Hagiorite. Therefore it is connected with the subject of this book.
So in order to avoid too much material, but also to give a bit of the saint's teaching, in what follows I prefer to present a small summary of the articles and to send the reader to look up my books and study them more fully.
|
[ BACK ] a) The two wisdoms |
In his work "on the holy hesychasts" he makes the distinction between the two kinds of knowledge and the two wisdoms. First he uses passages from the lives of saints to show that there is godly wisdom and there is worldly or demonic wisdom. He uses the Apostle Paul's words: "However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, which none of the rulers of this age knew" (1 Cor. 2, 4-8).
Human wisdom can even end in demonic wisdom. He quotes the words of James the brother of God: "This wisdom does not descend from above, but is earthly, sensual, demonic" (Jas. 3, 15). Thus human wisdom is often contrary to divine wisdom. And we can verify this in the way of thinking of the heretics, who, by using conjecture, rejected the revelation of God.
Analysing this topic, he says that there is an enormous difference between the philosophers and the Prophets, Apostles and Fathers. He says this because Barlaam maintained that the experience which the Apostles had was inferior to the revelation which the philosophers had. And this was because the saints saw God through outward symbols and their bodily senses, while the philosophers had contact with God through logic, which is a nobler element in man. He said that there is as much difference between the philosophers' vision of God and that of the Prophets as there is between reason and the external senses. However, St. Gregory demonstrated that the "theology" of the philosophers does not compare with the wisdom of the saints who saw God. If the philosophers had been superior to the Prophets and Apostles and had therefore known God, Christ would not need to have become man.
In support of this view he used Basil the Great's writing in which he said that he had changed his mind about his schooling in worldly education, he had turned to the search for the real wise men and teachers of truth, who are the ascetics, in order to attain knowledge of God. Likewise he refers to St. Gregory of Nyssa's words about philosophy being sterile and fruitless, not leading to knowledge of God, while the wisdom of the Spirit is very fertile, has many children, and leads many people from darkness to the wonderful light of God.
The saint is a practical philosopher. He himself seeks and does the will of God, he has efficacious words and eloquent actions. Fear is the beginning of the wisdom of God, and fear gives birth to prayer and the keeping of God's commandments. Through God's commandments man experiences reconciliation with Him, and then his fear turns to love and prayer, which offer knowledge of the mysteries of God. This is the learning of the Orthodox Church.
|
[ BACK ] b) Truth and Church |
The truth is identified with the Church, because those who withdraw from the Church and do not receive the Revelation do not have the truth. And those who break off their link with the truth also fall away from the Church.
The truth is given by revelation, to the Prophets, Apostles and Fathers. Thus there is identity of experiences in both the Old and the New Testaments. And of course the Revelation is not comparable to the philosophy and conjecture of the philosophers. We must accept this truth of the Church. Right belief is that one does not doubt the teaching of the Godbearing Fathers.
By their conjectures the heretics alter the words of revelation and as a result they poison the Christians. Anyone who apostatises and breaks off his link with Christ is really faithless and godless. Furthermore, atheism is ignorance of God, and non-communion with Him. The heretics are atheists because they do not believe in God as He has been revealed to the Prophets, Apostles and Fathers, and so they believe in a non-existent God. Thus all the struggles of St. Gregory are justified.
|
[ BACK ] c) The cure of the soul |
In reality hesychasm is the method which the Orthodox Tradition has for curing man, and so its aim is the cure of the soul. All the works of St. Gregory Palamas refer to this crucial point. Man must be cured, and of course this is the basic work of the Church. By his struggles St. Gregory wished to preserve this orthodox method of healing, and in his homilies he recommended the true way of curing man.
The divine Gregory was a catholic theologian, that is to say an orthodox theologian who did not overemphasise some truths at the expense of other truths of the faith. He expressed the entire truth of the Church.
This catholicity appears in the stand which he took towards heretical tendencies prevailing in his time, which were distorting the spiritual life.
The first tendency was expressed by the Messalians, early heretics who had come back to life in the time of St. Gregory. According to them, the Sacraments of the Church, holy Baptism and the Eucharist, do not have such great importance for the salvation of man. They maintained that what unites man with God is chiefly what is called noetic prayer. This purifies the person, and it is through this, and not the sacramental life, that he attains his deification. In addition the Messalians taught that divine Grace and Satan are to be found in the heart at the same time. In other words, the Messalians overemphasised the hesychastic life at the expense of the sacramental life of the Church.
The second tendency was given expression chiefly by western Christianity, which basically started from the theories of St. Augustine as the Latins understood and shaped them, with conjectural theology. And in the time of St. Gregory Palamas it was expressed by the philosopher conjecturer Barlaam, with whom the great Hagiorite saint entered into dialogue. He placed great emphasis on the sacramental life of the Church at the expense of the hesychastic life. He had contempt for so-called hesychasm and what was said about noetic prayer. Therefore the greatest thing of all was our partaking of the holy Sacraments of the Church. He too spoke of prayer, but very abstractly and conjecturally. Furthermore, he emphasised that the Grace of God is created and that the vision of God is vision of created light. In general, he held in contempt and spoke sceptically about the whole hesychastic tradition of the Church, which is the basis of all the doctrines and is the common life of all the Fathers.
St. Gregory Palamas fought against these two tendencies in parallel. He, like the Church, considered that any exaggeration of one tendency and overlooking of another constitutes a deviation from the orthodox life and therefore moves away from salvation. He emphasised that for man's cure and therefore for our salvation we need the combination of these two things, that is to say the combination of sacramental and hesychastic life. A sacramental life which saves without its essential presupposition, the so-called hesychastic life, is unthinkable. And a hesychastic life without the sacramental life of the Church is unthinkable.
Therefore, according to the Hagiorite saint, the cure of the soul is attained through the sacramental and hesychastic life. Without this combination it is not possible for orthodox life and orthodox theology to exist. But we must look more analytically at this teaching of the saint, because it will also show us the method by which we can be cured.
In speaking of the sacramental life he analyses the two great sacraments of the Church, Baptism and Holy Communion, and their meaning for our personal life. Through Baptism Christ becomes a Father of men and through Holy Communion He becomes a mother. Thus through these two Sacraments Christ nourishes us like infants, in the way that a mother nourishes her children with her two breasts.
Through Baptism we are born into a new life. This means, first of all, that we transcend the biological life and are brought into the Church, the Body of Christ. But Baptism is closely connected with man's repentance. Thus repentance is essential, before and after holy Baptism. If after Baptism we do not live in accordance with Christ's commandments, we are like the baby who at birth has received the possibility of becoming heir to his father's fortune, but who does not inherit it when he deserts his parents.
Holy Baptism leads to Holy Communion. Holy Communion gives us life. By His incarnation Christ became our brother, by revealing the sacraments He became our friend and through Communion of His Body and Blood He becomes our bridegroom. By partaking of things consecrated a person has contact with Christ. By Holy Communion we are made immortal, we become purple, or rather royal, blood and body, and attain adoption by Grace. In order to be worthy of approaching Holy Communion, preparation is also necessary. This consists of repentance, purification of the soul and body, and faith that what looks like bread on the Holy Table is the Body of Christ. But also after Holy Communion we need asceticism in order to preserve the divine Grace which we received with the Body and Blood of Christ.
St. Gregory is not satisfied just to point out the value of the sacraments, nor does he only urge us to partake of the Body and Blood of Christ. He goes on to the ascetic life as well, because the sacraments are very closely connected with asceticism.
In speaking of asceticism he underlines many points. But we shall look at the hesychastic life. As we know, the ascetic life is purity of heart from evil thoughts, for one cannot drive thoughts away by reasoning. St. Gregory presents the Holy Mother of God as the type of hesychia and the hesychast. When she was in the holy of holies she found the suitable way of attaining communion with God and deification. Man is made up of nous and sensation. Between the two are imagination, opinion, and mind. The latter three are very closely connected with sensation, and of course no one can reach God through the senses. This is achieved through the nous. Therefore the Virgin Mary deadened sensation, reason, opinion and imagination, activated her nous, and thus achieved her desire, she saw God and became Favoured.
Of course throughout this book we have also analysed other methods of asceticism by which a man cures the passible part of his soul and keeps the commandments of God, and all these can be applied by Christians who live in the world.
Man is cured by the sacramental and ascetic life. The writings of St. Gregory Palamas - the theological ones as well as his sermons - refer to man's cure. Orthodox theology either is a fruit of the cure or leads to the cure. The orthodox theologian is a physician who cures his spiritual children, and that is why theology is closely connected and identified with spiritual fatherhood.
|
[ BACK ] d) The interpretation of the Scriptures |
When St. Gregory attained the experience of God, he became a bearer of the tradition and therefore understood the teachings of the earlier saints. Only those who are spiritual kindred of the Fathers can understand their teaching. The wise of this world, without the experience, cannot interpret the words of the saints.
The words of the saints are like a honeycomb containing hidden honey or milk, according to what spiritual age it is for. People with worldly wisdom live in the outer wrapping of the words and fail to understand them, and naturally they fail to nourish the people.
Not all people can understand the Scriptures equally. Just as the sun sends its rays on all people alike but only those who have their eyes open see it, and just as only those who have good eyesight enjoy the dawn, so it is in spiritual matters as well, the saint emphasises. God sends His Grace to all people, but it is those who have receptivity who enjoy it. They are the saints, who have purified the eyesight of their minds and have acquired the nous of Christ.
The heretics use the words of the Spirit essentially against the Spirit, and this is harmful to their followers. When a mother's food is hard, to make it more digestable she chews it in her mouth before offering it to her babies. This work is done by the holy Fathers. But the mouths of the heretics are full of poison and so when the poison is chewed up with the words of life they too become deadly to those who listen to them imprudently. Therefore he advises the Christians to avoid as worse than a snake those who look at the patristic teaching from the outside, for the snake causes an untimely death to the body, while the words of the heretics cause the eternal death of the soul.
Therefore interpreting the Scriptures is a matter of revelation. Just as the Apostles received the truth and wrote it down, so also the interpreters must have experience of this revealing life. To interpret the Scriptures apart from the Church is impossible, incomprehensible and harmful.
After presenting these basic preconditions for interpretation, St. Gregory gives examples of orthodox interpretation in all his works. Of course the saint did not write any special treatise to analyse the subject, but we find these elements here and there in all the sermons which he gave to his flock in Thessaloniki.
The way in which he analyses various hagiographic texts, parables, and the words of Christ and the holy Apostles is particularly impressive. He moves with extraordinary ease. He glides into the deepest meaning of the Scriptures and words, and he is especially creative in many ways, for example when he mentions that the Mother of God was the first to see the risen Christ.
The analyses of various topics such as Christ's Transfiguration, His Resurrection and His Ascension, the mystery of the Cross, the divine rest, the food of Christ after the Resurrection, the Theotokos as a model of the hesychast, the Theotokos and the Risen Christ, the resurrection of the Theotokos, the parable of the man who owed ten thousand talents, the blessedness of poverty, the Publican as a model of a hesychast, the prodigal nous, -all these show that he interprets the Bible as a great Father of the Church.
|
[ BACK ] e) The knowledge of God |
Barlaam maintained that knowledge of God is not a matter of the vision of God, which takes place through transformation of the senses, but a fruit of man's understanding, a working out of reason. Therefore he said that the Prophets' vision of God is inferior to our own understanding. If this had prevailed, it would certainly have distorted the Church's truth concerning the knowledge of God.
In various writings St. Gregory Palamas analysed the orthodox conception of the knowledge of God, and of course suggested the way for man to attain it.
His writings repeatedly emphasised the truth that the vision of God is not from outside, but from inside and is essentially identical with the deification of man. This means that through deification man attains the vision of the Light of divinity, which is uncreated.
The vision of the uncreated Light is called a deifying gift, which God gives to man according to His will. This deification is man's union and communion with God, it is a participation and a deifying communion. Thus the term 'deification' is interchangeable with the terms 'communion', 'participation' and 'union'.
Vision, deification and union with God are the things which offer man true knowledge of God. In this condition man attains real knowledge of God. This knowledge is higher than knowledge through the senses and, to be more precise, it is in accordance with the senses and above the senses.
The bodily eyes are altered and they see the uncreated Light, which is the brilliance of the divine nature, the glory of divinity, the beauty of the kingdom of heaven. This Light is invisible to sensation, unless the latter is altered by the Holy Spirit.
Moreover the vision of the uncreated Light and the knowledge which comes from this is not only above nature and above human knowledge, but also above virtue. Virtue and remembrance of God prepare us for divine union, but it is Grace that solemnises this ineffable union.
It is clear from all of St. Gregory's teaching that the vision of God, deification, union and knowledge of God are closely interconnected. A person sees God through deification, which is a union and offers true knowledge of God. These cannot be understood independently. To break this oneness is to take the person away from knowledge of God. Of course knowledge of God is higher than created human knowledge. Thus the basis of orthodox epistemology is illumination and the revelation of God in the purified heart of man.
In conclusion we may say that the theology of St. Gregory Palamas, like the theology of the Church which it expresses, is an empirical theology. It is not a fruit of thoughts and conjectures, reflection and sensation, but of God's Revelation in the heart of man. That is why it is true. Thus we value the Holy Mountain, because it preserves the method by which we attain knowledge of God and pure theology. To be sure, we also value the great worth of St. Gregory Palamas, who preserved for us all these true presuppositions of orthodox theology.
|
|
