Dear friends in Christ,
Anyone knows if Saint Gregory Palamas is considered saint in both catholic and orthodox church? If yes, why? Since he is posterior to the schism.
Thank you!

Paz e Bem!

As the saying goes, "Asked and answered!" St. Gregory Palamas' feast is celebrated by the Melkite-Greek Catholic Church and the Russian Catholic Church, at least. The texts for his 'office' appear in our official liturgical books published in and by Rome or approved there.

I don't understand why is he saint for the roman catholic church... It makes no sense to me.

Paz e bem!

Well, I don't believe he is on the calendar of the Roman Catholic Church, but St. Gregory Palamas is venerated in multiple Eastern Catholic Churches. I know that his feast is celebrated in my own Ruthenian Catholic Church. While St. Gregory Palamas did leave after the schism, he lived prior to the time when various Eastern Catholic Churches returned to communion with Rome. Those Eastern Churches (or at least some of them) that venerated him prior to returning to communion with Rome have continued to do so.

Hardly a week goes by but that one of the Roman pontifical universities grants a doctorate to a candidate whose thesis was on this or that aspect of SAINT Gregory Palamas' theology! By the way, I never stated or implied that his feast was extended to the Roman Church, only that several of the Eastern Catholic Sister Churches (and of course the Sister Orthodox Churches) hallow his luminous memory!
But, please, let's not turn this topic into another exhausting screed on whose saints are revered by whom. In my grouchy old age I tire easily from ecclesial myopia: YOURS! As I tell my seminarians when they ask when 'reunion' will take place, "Fifteen minutes after the Parousia"! In the meantime, as the Anglo-Indian poet Rudyard Kipling wrote, "East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet".

Slava Isusu Khrestu

Some of the older faithful in our church constantly asked our priest, " Are there any Roman Catholic in heaven?" His answer was a simple, "No!" to which the faithful all sat back and smiled that smile of self satisfaction. In the same breath, he said that there were no Orthodox either in heaven. To which there was dead silence!!!! Yet, in that same breath he stated emphatically,that there are only the true followers of The Lord!

Just smiling here
and still unworthy
Kolya

Heaven's just a way station, in any case.

Hope that west and east shall meet again.

Yes, in heaven, on the duskless day of the Lord's kingdom. Before that? Don't bet the farm!

So, you are saying God's will can be gainsaid?

We have a wonderful new-to-us Latin priest with us at my Russian Catholic Church, concelebrating, learning to celebrate the Divine Liturgy, after decades of interest in the EC/Orthodox. His homily today for Transfiguration spoke of essence and energies, tho he said nothing of St. Gregory Palamas. I had such a grin during the whole homily, which was quite wonderful, that he spoke to me after saying I was a homilist's dream-- someone who appeared to be listening and appreciating the homily. Both were true.

Patriarch +Josyp of blessed memory rallied for St. Gregory's return to liturgical worship in the late 1960s (cf. Pelikan), and it was included in the Anthologion printed in 1974 in Rome through the efforts of Patriarch +Josyp with approbation of the Holy See. It was also included in the Melkite Synodal books printed in Rome about the same time.

So at least for the Melkites and UGCC there are official liturgical commemorations for St. Gregory appointed for the second Sunday of the Great Fast that have been in place in official liturgical books printed by both churches since the 1970s.

The Byzantine Catholic Calendar celebrates St. Gregory on the Second Sunday of the Great Fast as well.

That would seem quite impossible, unless proven! Critics, especially roman catholics, for example Aidan Nichols, but accepted in eastern literature as well, say that Palamas was a phenomenon forgotten from 15 up to 18 century, and that including Athos and byzantium of the time, i.e The Balkans.
Its hard to believe as such how would his veneration had been alive among slav orthodox who joined Rome in 16 century!

According to F. Basilios Kaliakmanis book about theology during othoman occupation, greeks educated in the college of Saint Athanasius in Italy were obliged to condemn Palamas, they had to sign it, before entering the church service in greek islands.
Another interesting book that I have, but havent seen it yet, is that of the roman catholic author, Gerhard Podskalsky, 'greek theology during turkish occupation'.

In fact, Rome acknowledged Gregory Palamas as a saint in 1973 and he can easily be found online through the website "Catholic Saints Online." Pelikan made mention of this Roman recognition of Palamas, but I no longer remember where he did so.

Bl Pope John Paul II himself privately venerated St Gregory Palamas in his papal chapel (as he also did St Theophane the Recluse and St Seraphim of Sarov).

It is true that Roman Catholic theologians took issue with Palamas in the past (largely through general ignorance of his theology). Palamas was thought by them to be an Eastern "Quietist" and other such nonsense.

However, Roman Catholics can and do develop in their understanding of Eastern Christianity! As the Reverend Father DIAKon has said, our Patriarch Saint Joseph the Hieroconfessor (who was a Thomistic scholar in his own Rite and had an icon of Aquinas written for his cathedral in Rome, BTW) was an ardent partisan of the veneration of Saint Gregory Palamas and Rome responded favourably to his efforts by blessing the inclusion of Palamas in our calendar some decades ago.

To reiterate, Rome today acknowledges the sanctity of Palamas, we can look this up on a popular Catholic saints website that is online, and the old arguments against him of the past have dissipated based on better information and greater education of Roman Catholic theologians in this matter.

Of course, there was never any problem in this regard with the great experts of Eastern Christianity such as Fr. Taft et alia. Not to mention Fr Francis Dvornik's work exonerating, from a Roman Catholic perspective, Saint Photios the Great, Patriarch of Constantinople!

Alex

This, that Rome has recognised him and that pope Vojtila venerated him, is great! What could be more said about it?

What I wrote above is that since Palamas was a canonised saint in east before union of 1596, his veneration among uniates dates before union, that reasoning doesnt sound logical enough, because of the reasons I stated above.

Arbanon

Just a reminder that "uniate" is generally considered a pejorative term here and is not used. I think "Eastern Catholics" is a reasonable alternative.

I don't mind, provided that an Eastern Catholic is using it. I use it myself, because "uniatism" is a specific ideology and model of Church unity, defined in the Balamand Statement (as well as in a number of scholarly works), and with it goes a particular mindset. There are indeed Eastern Catholics who espouse uniatism, and therefore can be called, legitimately, "uniates".

However, there are many other members of the Eastern Catholic Churches who reject uniatism, and therefore are not uniates. The use of the term "uniate" to describe an entire Eastern Catholic Church or Churches, is therefore inaccurate.

Ironically, the bishops and presbyters who signed the Treaty of Brest would never have accepted uniatism as it developed, and cannot possibly be called uniates under the technical definition of the term.

I have no problem. As far as I personally am concerned, I may call them even orthodox in communion with Rome, or eastern catholics or orthodox catholic, apart of uniates.

What I still insist to is the answer to question from where and when does the palamite veneration originate with these byzantine christians in communion with Rome?

I guess, it should be somewhere after hesychastic movement among russians in 18 century or even much latter.

Palamite veneration is part of the patrimony that is the Byzantine Tradition. That it was ever suppressed was a latinizing act of self-mutilation on the part of Greek Catholic clerics under the influence of the ideology of uniatism. Its restoration is of a part with the rest of the Catholic Church's desire that the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome restore the fullness of their respective Traditions, in liturgy, theology, spirituality, theology, doctrine and discipline.

Is there something more concrete than part of patrimony or that it was ever surpressed?
To repeat myself, I think it's not enough to assume that since Palamas was a canonised saint prior to the union of 1596, his veneration has been part of this community since then.
First, Palamas was a canonised saint, few years after his passing away, in Constantinople only. And I dont think his canonisation in there had any immediate impact not even at the orthodox slavs in Balkans.
His veneration was established in a slow process, especially with the hesychastic revival in 18 century, from when it went to russians. Among orthodox communities in communion with Rome it most likely his veneration has entered by the influence of this revival.

Palamas was certainly venerated by the Melkites long before 1724. The best way to find who was venerating whom when is to look at the Typicons of the various Churches to see when the Second Sunday of Lent became the commemoration of St. Gregory Palamas.