Dear brethren,

I have found myself facing a peculiar situation that I was hoping some of you here could help me resolve.

The priest at the Melkite Byzantine Catholic parish that I attend was formerly Eastern Orthodox. On the second Sunday of Great Lent, they celebrate St. Gregory Palamas (I think...)

Since the self-governing Patriarchate accepts St. Gregory as a saint of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, I do not see how he cannot be a saint in the Roman Patriarchate.

However, alot of St. Gregory's ideas are disturbing to me and I am beginning to question his Orthodoxy.

He seems to make too much of a distinction between the energies of God (what God does) and the ousia of God Himself. So much so that He even appears to reject the Orthodox Catholic teaching of the Beatific Vision. Some of the great Unionists of the Orthodox Church (who later left schism and entered into the Orthodox Catholic Church forming the venerable Byzantine Catholic Churches) wrote extensively against St. Gregory as did (if I am not mistaken) the Dominicans.

I wonder whether there is some basis in Fr. Adrian Fortescue's conclusions that the "Palamism" is NOT Orthodox teaching, and he contends that it even borders on polytheism.

However, I submit myself to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church's judgement, as she has the succession and the ROCK of Orthodoxy, the See of St. Peter, from whence sacerdotal unity takes its source.

Could someone please help me to find what the Catholic Church has definitively taught in this matter? What have the Holy Ecumenical Synods ruled in this? What have the Popes taught consistenly?

This appeared on another forum:



It appears to be something that is "standard" Eastern Orthodox teaching.

Is this compatible/acceptable with Holy Orthodoxy professed by Christ's Catholic Church?


This bothers me GREATLY because, when compared to the Catechism, this perhaps appears to be an instance of heretical teaching within the Greco-Slavic East.

I shudder to think so as it was handed down to me that EO were in schism.....NOT heretics.

Here is the Catechism part that I cite that seems to contradict the above teaching:


Here is the Catechism part that I cite that seems to contradict the above teaching:



Also:



Further:

The essence / energy distinction is completely orthodox, and in fact if one fails to make this distinction the doctrine of theosis as it was taught by the Eastern Fathers becomes nonsensical.

You might want to get a copy of Fr. Maloney's book "A Theology of Uncreated Energies", because it will help you to understand better what the essence / energy distinction is about and why it is a necessary part of the Byzantine theological tradition.

Another helpful book, which tries to explain the doctrine of grace from an ecumenical perspective, is called "The Theology of Grace and the Oecumenical Movement", and it is helpful precisely because it explains the doctrine of grace as it developed in the West during the Scholastic period, and how the theory of "created" grace came to dominate Western thinking; while having no impact on the patristically based theology of the Eastern Church. It is a good book and should help you to understand better the different approaches of East and West, both as it concerns grace and -- to a lesser degree -- Triadology.

The quotations from the Western Church's Catechism are not theologically problematic, because the East holds that the vision of the uncreated light (i.e., the divine energy) is a direct vision of the tri-hypostatic God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), and so the vision of God "face to face" (πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον) is not a vision of the divine essence (ούσια); instead, it is a vision of the three divine persons (πρόσωπα) through their manifesting energies (ἐνεργέίαί). In other words, to see the Taboric Light is to see God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) directly, and yet God remains essentially beyond our grasp.

Dear Knight Wolf

Since you have posted this also on 2 different Internet Sites (and the thread on one of them was locked by the Mod) I have a few questions for you

1) Are you trying to get an answer which suits you ?

2) do you realize that cross posting in this way usually brings a degree of retribution down on the poster concerned ?