Sainthood of Gregory Palamas

[Badaliyyah]

Originally Posted by East and West

And the heads are plunged into the sand.

I am not sure who you think has their heads plunged in the sand? We are aware of our history and who we are. As has been mentioned several times over, we renounced nothing to enter into communion with Rome.

It seems to me the issue here is that you have made the judgement that there is an inherent and irreconcilable tension between Palamas and the Latin tradition. That being the case, as I said earlier in this thread, your gripe is not with us but with Rome for somehow overlooking this awful situation you perceive. But we are who we are. We didn't change.

Of course you are not helped by the fact that neither the Melkites (et al.) nor the Latins seem to be aware of this theological abyss that you perceive to be holding us in separation from one another.

salaam.

[Cristian C]

I would like to propose my own contribution as a Romanian Greek—Catholic, living in a predominantly Eastern Orthodox country.
I admire Palamas as a religious writer and homilist. I want to state that the Romanian Greek Catholic Church does not venerate Palamas (or Photios) as a Saint. Moreover, my Church has a history of admiration for the Western spiritual treasure and especially for the Thomism. We recite the Creed with the Filioque.
As a Greek—Catholic, a Romanian one,I am Thomist, Filioquist. (If the first one is an option, the second one is not, never will.)
The arguments blaming the rejection of the Church on ignorance and misrepresentations are puerile. This way, the only criterion for sanctity is the good—will, very subjectively defined.
On the other hand, the fact that Rome allowed for the veneration of the aforementioned Byzantine theologians would deserve a qualify answer from the Congregation. The implicit approval of the Pope is a fact. It is a fact that the Pope presumably knowingly gave his approval, consented. One can not toy with that. One may be puzzled, etc.,yet the fact is a fact.
The very positive fact is that I see on this forum some qualified and respectable Eastern Catholics who venerate Palamas,and this is a fact,and it is a proof that his veneration does not require, does not go hand in hand with bashing the Latin Catholics. The love or esteem of a sincere and honest man always means something.
It is also a fact that Sheptytsky worked in this direction, activated towards this. He should not be dismissed.
It is a bit odd nonetheless to see people who have become Eastern Catholics or Eastern Orthodox two years ago and feel entitled to speak about ‘our tradition’, ‘our heritage’, in a wholly inappropriate and legalistic way.
To put forth blandly things like ‘then he misunderstood, and should not be immediately condemned’ is quite puzzling,since the person discussed is interesting exactly as a theologian; I also notice the polarized thought: venerating/ condemning, the recourse to extremes . I am pretty convinced that Calvin misunderstood too; and so did many others.
“I am not aware that he was in obstinate defiance of the Pope. He did not live in the immediate years of the reunion councils (Lyons or Florence), so whatever "disobedience" he had with the Papacy or Rome must have been learned/acquired and not personal”—I guess that the elders here propose even new categories of flaccid thought: e.g., the learned vs. the personal (a Pavlovian reminiscence, to be sure …).
“to be positively regarded as a heretic, we need to have proof that he denied that the Son had ABSOLUTELY NO role in the Procession”—this is patently fake, as the Catholic dogma is not that the Son has “some role”, or “even a tiny role”. In order to contradict it, you need not to state that the Son has no role; it suffices to hold that the Son has not the role specified by the Church. Where did you find these weird rules for determining heresy?
The union of the Eastern Churches with Rome was not made on terms of equality, but on terms of submission and of return. Even the open—hearted Card. Kasper knows that—it was an ecumenism of return, not on terms of equality. So the Eastern Churches received or added something that lacked before, and renounced what was contrary to their return.
“Augustine was a pagan for a while and openly rejected the Church.”—yes,and?Was he canonized as a pagan?Did he not need to abjure, reject, renounce paganism?
“it would seem later generations of Easterns (of which Gregory Palamas was one) would conceivably have grown up not knowing what the Latin Church actually taught, and rather have been taught polemic arguments against the Latin Church”—yes,and?The fact remains that he is venerated by the schismatics as a hero of the fight against Catholics.
“The mitigation of invincible ignorance is a very high possibility in my view.”—this says it all, this solves is all—the universal solvent. So much for the invincibly ignorant Arius, Eutychius, Calvin, etc., etc..
“Wasn't he a monk of Mount Athos, one of the most rigidly anti-Catholic bastions of Eastern Orthodoxy?”—well,how do YOU prove this?
“In a past quote from Father Ambrose, a synodal statement was given to the effect that those who did not grow up in the Orthodox Faith may still be saved if they knew nothing of it. Though the EO generally don't accept the principle of invincible ignorance, that synodal statement was nothing more than a repetition of the Catholic principle.”—another sophism. But since when did you find out the heroes of the anti—catholic fight knew nothing of Catholicism? If so,it’s humanly very wrong to criticize what you utterly ignore.
“I would not judge any of my Eastern or Latin brethren for venerating locally whomsoever they choose”—this is the splendid political correctness—or, to put it frankly,’the splendor of the political correctness’—no need for coherence, etc..
“do you suppose our Eastern brethren are venerating him BECAUSE he opposed the Catholic Church? It seems like that is what you are saying since you keep judging him based on that.”—well,it’s quite appalling when a self—styled Eastern Catholic ignores even this fact! Palamas is one of the three greatest heroes of the anti—Catholic fight.

[Cristian C]

Someone wrote here that Origen is nonetheless a Church Father; but this is grievously mistaken. He was not; he was a Church writer, a Church author.
Someone wrote:” Gregory Palamas was never in communion with the Catholic Church and he opposed Catholic doctrine.”,and the answer he got was :” I've asked you to produce the Magesterial documents, or anathematization [I did correct the spelling!] to support that St. Gregory was declared by the Church to be a heretic or explicitly opposed to the Catholic Church.”On this basis, K. Barth is a candidate for veneration as well. So is Dalai Lama.
“what canonization actually says about the saint - that he or she is in heaven”—no,not at all.It means that him or she is an exemplary Christian. You are confusing saved with canonized. This is a very rough idea. Canonization is not a salvation certificate; it’s much more.
About the Church’s decision to allow the veneration of Palamas:
It seems that the Popes’ approval amounts to a decision.

[Catherine Grant]

Please note the stickies at the top of the Eastern Catholicism forum:
Temp Ban: Recognition of Another Church's Saints

Originally Posted by Catherine Grant

Temporary Ban: Effective immediately and expiring January 7, 2009.

A spitting match of whose saints are more holy or righteous has sadly become a recurring topic on the Eastern Catholicism forum. The contemptible theme of "our saints are better" seems to draw out the worst in some of our posters. In order to assist them in not being in an occasion of sin, to promote fruitful dialogue, and to allow the board to return to its stated purpose, discussion about the Roman Catholic Church's recognition of St. Photius, St. Gregory Palamas, or the recognition of sainthood for any other saints on the Eastern or Oriental Catholic or Orthodox calendars is now under a temporary ban. The recognition of western saints by Eastern churches is likewise banned.

This ban is effective for both the Eastern Catholicism and Non-Catholic Religions forums at CAF. If you see a new post which violates this temporary ban, please refrain from responding to it and report it to the moderators using the red triangle in the top right of the post.
For the time being, this ban will be applied narrowly. If it becomes problematic, it will be applied broadly. Questions about these topics should be addressed to the CAF apologists or to one's priest or spiritual director. Questions about the policy may be addressed to me via PM. I expect all posters to review the purpose of the Eastern Catholicism forum and to post within the forum's guidelines.