130 GREGORIO IL SINAITArannomai il fruttoper la mancanza di pena, essendo interiormente insensibilialdolore. Testimone colui che dice: Anche se possediamo tutte Ie azioni piu grandi,senon abbiamo il cuore afflitto, esse sono bastarde e senza vigore. Allostessomodo, quando ci conduciamo senza fatica, tratti dall' accidia nelle distrazioni inu-tili,e siamo ottenebrati e crediamo di trovare in lora la quiete, cosa che non cor-risponde alla realta,mentre siamo avvinti in modo invisibile da legami indissolu;..bili, diventiamo immobili e inerti in ogni opera, colmi di rilassamento, in particolarmodose siamo dei principianti. Tutto eutile nella giusta misura ai perfetti. Cio eattestato dal grande Efrem che dice: Datti alle fatiche nella pena per sfuggire Ievane fatiche.19 Se Ie nostre reni, come dice il Profeta, non vengono indebolite congli sforzi del digiuno e non sentiamo i dolori, come una partoriente [cf. Is 21,3; 26,18], nel cuore, non concepiamo 10 Spirito di salvezza nella terra del cuore, secondoquanto hai udito. Ci vanteremo aHora soltanto di aver passato tanti anni in un yanGeremitaggio e nel rilassamento, ritenendo di essere diventati qualcuno nella hesy-chiao Nel giomo della nostra morte, tutti conosceremo senza alcun dubbio il frutto.15. Nessuno puo imparare da solo la scienza delle virtu, anche se alcuni hannoavuto come maestro I' esperienza. Fare di testa propria e non ascoltare i consigli diquelli che ci hanno preceduto conduce aHa presunzione, meglio la genera. Infatti, seil Figlio da se non puo fare nulla, rna fa quello che gli insegno il Padre[10 5,19]e 10 Spirito non parlera da se[1016,13], chi puo pensare di essere giunto ad untale vertice di virtu da non avere bisogno di qualcuno come guida? Anche se crededi possedere la virtu, costui emandato in rovina dalla follia. Per questa motivo sidevono imparare Ie fatiche della pratica da quelli che sanno eCOS! intraprenderle :digiuno e astinenza completi,veglia assidua, genuflessione faticosa, stare in piedicon pena nell' immobilita, preghiera continua, umilta sincera, contrizione e gemitoincessanti, silenzio saggio e come condito con sale [cf. Col 4, 6], sopportazione intutto. Non bisogna rimanere sempre nella quiete, ne restare sempre seduti sino allavecchiaia 0 al sopraggiungere di una malattia, perche, dice la Scrittura:Mangerete dei frutti delle tue virtu[cf. Ps127, 2], e: II Regno dei cieli edeiviolenti[Mt 11, 12]. Chi si sforza ogni giornodipraticare tali virtu nella pena,grazie a lora e con l' aiuto di Dio, conseguira il frutto.19 Derectavivendiratione 25: J.S. ASSEMANI, Sancti Patris NostriEphraem Syriopera omnia quaeexstant graece, syriace, latineII, Raffia1743, p. 60, n xxv(CPGs3941).GREGORY PALAMASROBERT E. SINKEWICZ, TorontoI. BIOGRAPHYBornca1296, Metrop. of Thessalonica1347-1357, died14 Nov. 1357,declared a saint in1368.1 The life and theological work of Gregory Palamascan be divided into four periods:his early life and formative period (1296-1335), the controversy with Barlaam the Calabrian (1335-1341), the contro-versywith-tGregoryAkindynos (t 1348)andthecivilwarperiod(1341-1347), and, finally, the triumph of Palamite theology (1347-1357).2Gregory Palamas was born ca1296 in C/ple to the family of the senatorKonstantios Palamas(t 1301).3Under the patronage of Andronikos IIPalaiologos(1282-1328)4Palamasreceivedaclassical educationandwasseeminglydestined fora career inthecivil service. Influenced perhapsbyAthonite monks visiting the capital,Gregory decided toenter monastic lifeand left for Mount Athos with two of his brothers ca 1314.By the time of hisdeparture forAthos, Gregory hadalreadyacquired asoundeducationinthebest of theByzantinetradition. Hehad, nodoubt,completedall or most ofthebasicprogrammeofstudy, theHe was certainly well-versed in the formsof Byzantine rhetoric,and he himself wrote in both the simpler' ecclesiastical' style and the Hoch-sprache of the literary elite. The exact extent of his training in philosophy isuncertain. After describinghisachievementsingrammarand rhetoric, hisbiographer, Philotheos Kokkinos (t ca 1377/8),5 mentions his familiarity withthe physics,the logic and other works of Aristotle.6Although there are fewquotationsfromAristotleinhiswritings, Gregoryhadsomeacquaintancewiththelogical worksof Aristotle, aswecanseeespeciallyinhisinitial1 PLP 21546.2 MEYENDORFF 1959 (Introduction), p. 25-64,65-94,95-128 &129-170, respectively.3 PLP 21549.4 PLP 21436.5 PLP 11917.6 EncomiumGregorii Palamae,edt D. TSAMES, (/hAODiou K/rroAclJJq roDKoxxtvouayt,oAoyt,xa epyrx I 4), Thessalonica1985, p. 437-438; PG151, 559D-560A; cf.GREGORY PALAMAS, Contra Gregoram1, 14:4, 242 (W 20).132 R. E. SINKEWICZGREGORY PALAMAS 133discussions with Barlaam the Calabrian (ca 1290-1348).7 In his treatment ofnatural scienceinthe OneHundredandFiftyChapters(W 19) Gregoryshowed some familiaritywith the ideasof Aristotle's Decaelo perhaps Deanima and Meteorologica, and he may have known the Ps.-Aristotelian Demundo.8Elsewhere, Gregory refers to Aristotle's Metaphysica once by name;he could recall a theorem of Euclid and he knew something of the Platonictheory of the world soul.9However, in all these texts one is left with the dis-tinct impression of an earlier schooling imperfectly remembered. We shouldalso bear inmind that Gregory was only about eighteen years old when heleft the capital for Athos.Of Gregory'sspiritual or theological formationin thisearly period, vir-tuallynothingisknown. Inspiteof theclaim intheEncomiumGregoriiPalamae writtenby Philotheos Kokkinos, Theoleptos of Philadelpheia(t 1322)10 could not have been the spiritual father of Gregory, since the chro-nology of their lives does not allow for this. 11On Mount Athos Gregory spent two years under the direction ofNikodemos,12 whose hermitage was near the monastery of Batopedi. Afterthe death of Nikodemos (ca1316), Gregory moved to the monastery of theGreat Laura, then around 1320 he took up the eremitic life in the hermitageof Glossia. Because of Turkish incursions on Mount Athos in 1322, Gregoryfled with eleven other monks to Thessalonica where shortly after he was or-dainedtothepriesthood. Around1326hethenmovedontoaneremiticretreat nearBerroia. GregoryreturnedtoAthosin1331andtookuptheeremitical lifeat St Sabas, a dependency of the Great Laura. It wasduringthis first period of his monastic career that Palamas wrote the Life of St PetertheAthonite(ca 1332)13andhisDiscourse on the Presentation oftheTheotokos (ca1333).14For a short while he served as higumen of the monas-tery of Esphigmenou (ca1333/4).The period of Gregory's controversies with Barlaam the Calabrian15 ex-tended from1335to1341. Theinitialcontroversy of 1335-1337 revolved7 See SINKEWICZ 1982.8 See esp. The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters 3-12. Also SINKEWICZ 1986 (ChristianTheology).9 One Hundred and Fifty Chapters 3-7, 13; Contra Gregoram 2, 70 4, 313).10PLP 7509; A. RIGO, Ancora sulle opere diTeolepto di Filadelfia, OCP 60 (1994),p. 245-246; SIDERAS, p. 252-254.11 See SINKEWICZ 1992, p. 11.12 PLP 20374.13W44.14 W 50, Hom. LIII.15PLP2284; TRE5(1980) 212-215; SINKEWICZ1981&1982; KAKRIDIS1986;KOLBABA1995 &1995 (Conversion); RIGO1997; FLOGAUS1998. For a new assessmentofthedatingofBarlaam'sworks andhisroleinthecontroversywithPalamas seeFYRIGOS1998.around several issues. In1334 there had been a renewal of discussions withLatin theologiansover thereunion of the churches.16 Barlaam had becomeinvolvedinthedebates. In1335GregorywrotehisTreatises against theLatins (W 1) defending the traditional Orthodox position on the procession ofthe Holy Spirit and warning, in a veiled way, against certain improprieties inBarlaam's treatment of the subject. As Gregory learned more of Barlaam'smethods of refutation, he became seriously alarmed about the latter's use ofAristotelian logic in theological discourse. This in tum led to a dispute overthe nature of human knowledge of God. The situation worsened further whenthe Calabrian raised the question of the illumination of the Hellenic sages.The second phase of controversy with Barlaam isthe hesychast contro-versy proper (1337-1341). By the beginning of 1337 Barlaam was already incontact with certain hesychast monks in Thessalonica, who introduced him tothe writings of several hesychast authors on the subject of prayer: principally,Nikephoros the Monk (t after 1282),17 On Watchfulness and the Guarding oftheHeart;the Methodos(TheThreeMethods of Prayer)ascribed to -7Sy-meontheNew Theologian(in fact, a late thirteenth-centurytext); andthewritings of -7Gregory the Sinaite (t ca 1346).18 On the basis of what he reador was told of these teachings, Barlaam accused the hesychast monks of theheresy of Messalianism and denounced them to the Standing Synod in C/plesometimebeforethe summer of 1337. The Synoddecidedthat his ac-cusations were unfounded. 19Bytheendof1337PalamashadcometoThessalonicatodefendthehesychast monks against Barlaam's accusations. Inthe springof 1338Gregory wrote his first Triad in Defence of the Holy Hesychasts (W 3). Thisfirst set of three treatiseswas written mostly on hearsayof Barlaam's posi-tions. Thefirst wasa treatiseagainst profanephilosophyanditsdangers;mostly traditional in character, it had little to do with Barlaam's actual posi-tions. The second treatise was a defence of the hesychast way of prayer, andthe third treatise demonstrated that the proper way to knowledge of God isthrough the divinecharism of spiritual perception (voepcX Late in1338 Barlaam wrote his first treatises against thehesychast prac-tices and teachings. Palamas replied in the first half of 1339 with his secondTriad. This second set follows the same schema as the first: refutation of pro-fanephilosophy,treatment of hesychast prayer,true knowledge of God. Inthewinterof 1339/40, theCalabrianrepliedwithanewor revisedset oftreatises titled Against the Messalians. In the early part of 1340, Gregory re-16 SINKEWICZ 1980.17 PLP 20325; A. RIGO, Niceforo l'Esicasta (XIII sec.): alcune considerazioni sullavita e sull' opera, in Amore del bello. Studi sulla filocalia. Atti del 'Simposio Intern. sullaFilocalia'(Pontificio Collegio Greco. Roma, nov. 1989), Magnano 1991, p. 81-119.18 PLP 4601; RIGO 1989, p. 43-103.19 Regestes, no. 2178.134R. E. SINKEWICZ GREGORY PALAMAS 135turned to Athos where he convinced the principal monastic authorities to addtheir signatures to the Hagioretic Tomos (W 4), which he had drawn up as asolemncondemnation of Barlaam's basic positions though Barlaam himselfwas not specifically named. At the same time Gregory wrote his third Triadas arefutationof Barlaam'sAgainst the Messalians. InthisthirdTriadGregoryexpoundedat lengththeorthodoxteachingondivinization, histheologyoftheLight of Tabor as anuncreatedenergyofGod, -and hisunderstanding of the distinction between the divine substance and the divineenergies. The controversy, however, was not settled until 10 June 1341 whenthe Patriarchal Synodwas convokedtoexamineBarlaam's accusationsagainst the hesychast monks regarding their method of prayer and the visionof the Taboric Light. In the end Barlaam was condemned for blasphemy andthe patriarch issued a document ordering the Calabrian's writings destroyed.TheSynodalsoforbade all further discussionofthesequestions, eitherwritten or oral.20The next phase of theological controversy lasted from 1341 to 1347. Nowthat Barlaam had left the scene, it was Gregory Akindynos21 who came to theforefront of the opponents of Palamas. Originally, Akindynos wason goodterms with both Palamasand Barlaam and acted asa mediator between thetwo. When Barlaam attacked themonks, Akindynos made a concerted efforttowarntheCalabrianabouttheinadvisabilityof suchacourseof action.Akindynos finally broke with Gregory over the question of the distinction ofthe divine substance and the uncreated energies. In particular, certain incau-tious and awkward theological statements in Gregory's third letter toAkindynos - such as his referring toGod's substance and energyasa su-perior and inferior divinity - raised the latter'ssuspicions. ThisgreatlytroubledAkindynos, evenafterBarlaam'scondemnation, andheeventually spoke openly against Gregory. Most importantly, he had the ear ofthePatriarchJohnKalekas(1334-1347)22andwasgraduallydrawinghimover to his side.To defend himself against the accusations of Akindynos, Palamas wrote aseries of sixtreatises(W 5-10) in1341and1342.IntheseworksGregory20Regestes, no. 2210(10June 1341): Synodal examinationoftheaccusationsofBarlaamagainstthehesychast monksregardingthevision of the divinelight andtheirmethod of prayer; no.2211(after 10 June - July1341): Letter ordering the submission ofBarlaam's writings to the ecclesiastical authorities for destruction; no. 2213(July1341):Redaction and synodal examination of the letter giving the account of the condemnation ofBarlaam, deemed guilty of having unjustly attacked the hesychast monks; no.2214 (Aug.1341): signingof the letterdrawnupinJuly. Forthetext of no. 2211and2213, seeHUNGER, Register, no. 130, 132.21PLP 495.For the details of Akindynos' life see CONSTANTINIDESHERO1983, p.IX-XXXIII; J. NADAL CANELLAS, Gregorius Acindynus. Refutationesduae operisGregorii Palamaecui titulusDialogusinterOrthodoxumet Barlaamitam(CCG31),Tumhout 1995, p. XIII-XXVIII, andGregorio Akfndinos.22 PLPGregorio Akfndinos, Texttriestoprovethat histheologyandlanguageof thedivinesubstanceandenergies was whollytraditional. Theyincludedetailedrefutations ofthestatements and opinionsof Akindynos, along with numerous citations frompatristic writers accompanied by theological commentary. With these writi-ngs, Palamas contravened the interdiction of all further treatment of the con-troversial theological issues that had been laid down in the Synodal Tomos of1341(W 51). Asa result, Palamas wasimprisoned fora time;firstintwosuccessive monasteries (the Akataleptos monastery being one of them), andthen in the prison of the imperial palace. About 4 November 1344, at a meet-ing of the Synod, Palamas was formally condemned and excommunicated.23Between1342and1343Akindynos, havingreceivedpatriarchal per-missiontodisputePalamitetheology, wrotetwo importantrefutationsofPalamas' Dialogue of an Orthodox and a Barlaamite (W 8) - one a lengthyand systematic treatment in four parts; and a short refutation in the form of acontinuous commentary(thelatter unfortunatelysurvives incomplete).24Palamas responded in a series of seven Antirrhetic Treatises (W 11), and hiscorrespondenceduringthisperiodisof critical importancetothecorrectinterpretation of his theology. In an effort to better inform his supporters andto persuade the undecided, Palamas tends to be more cautious in his letters,nuancing his explanations and his use of theological language. 25It is also important to remember that 1341-1347 was a period of civil war.After the death of Andronikos IlIon15 June1341,26 there were two claim-ants to imperial power; John Kantakouzenos (t 1383),27 the Great Domesticunder Andronikos; and the legitimate successor, John VPalaiologos(t 1391).28JohnV, however, wasaminorandthusunabletorule, sohismother, Anna of Savoy (t ca 1365),29 supported by the patriarch, laid claim tothe regency. The party of John Kantakouzenoswas for the most part support-ive of Palamas, while the empress and Patriarch John Kalekas favoured theside of Akindynos. Needless to say, this complicated matters considerably.23 Regestes, no. 2249.24 NADAL CANELLAS, Gregorius Acindynus. Refutationes, p. 3-410,413-430.25 See for ex. the discussion in the art. of SCHULTZE 1975, p. 114-117. Note for ex. thestatements inPalamas' Letter toDaniel of Ainos3-5 : 2, 377-378 (W 29): Theenergy andthe substance are identical in the divine andsupernatural simplicity; Substance and energy inGodaresomehow identical, but it happensthat theyarealsodistinctfromeachother, asthetreatisesof theFathersclearlyindicate ; Onemust,therefore, admit both the distinction and the identity and through both remain in the midstof orthodoxy.26 PLP 21437.27 PLP 10973.28 PLP 21485.29 PLP 21347; SandraORIGONE, Giovanna di Savoia, alias Anna Paleologina, Latina aBisanzio (c. 1306-c.1365), Milan 1999.136 R. E. SINKEWICZGREGORY PALAMAS 137By the spring of 1346,Kalekaswas in disfavour with the empress, whonow informed herself more fully on the theological positions of Palamas. InJan. 1347, with John Kantakouzenos at the walls of C/ple, the Empress Annadecidedtosummonasynodtodeposethepatriarch. On8Feb. 1347asynodal judgement was rendered, deposingand excommunicating both thePatriarchJohnKalekasandAkindynos. TheSynodal Tomosof 1341wassolemnly reaffirmed and Palamas exonerated.30Upon his appointment to the patriarchal throne on17 May1347, IsidoreBoucheiras (1347-1350)31proceeded to promote thirty-two new bishops,allsympathetic to the theologial positions of Palamas.In the late spring of thesame year Palamas was himself appointed Metrop. of Thessalonica, but wasunabletoenter thecityuntil 1350whenJohnKantakouzenos hadwoncontrol back fromthezealotswhohadheldthecitysince1342. Gregoryspent the intervening years mostly on Mount Athos. In1349/50 during thisrelatively tranquil hiatus between two periods of polemic, he wrote the OneHundred and Fifty Chapters on Topics of Natural and Theological Science,theMoral and Ascetic Life, intended asaPurge for. theBarlaamiteCor-ruption (W 19). This is one of the more important theological works of Pala-mas,comparable to theTriads. It has the distinction of being presented in arelatively systematic format and represents a more mature stage of Palamas'theological thought.Opposition to Palamite theology had by no means been put to an end bythesynod of1347. Throughout thespring of that year a groupof bishopscontinued to hold meetings against the Palamites, and against the election ofthe new Patriarch Isidore, even going so far as to publish a formal declarationof their opposition in July1347. The synod responded by deposing the dissi-dent bishops at the end of August.32 The intellectual leader of the oppositionwasthelearnedscholar NikephorosGregoras (t 1358/61)33andso, inthewinter of 1348, Palamas disputed publicly with Gregoras in C/ple. Two yearslater,in1350, Gregoras published hisFirst Antirrhetics againstPalamas.34These are theologically the most significant refutation of Palamite theologywithin the lifetime of Palamas.By 1351the convocation of a new council had become inevitable. On 27Maya synod wasconvened under the presidency of the Emperor JohnVIKantakouzenos (1347-1354). In May and June meetingswere held in whichboth parties were heard, and then in July a new assembly was convened and a30 Regestes, no. 2270; HUNGER, Register, no.147.31 PLP 3140.32 Regestes, no. 2281, 2289.33PLP 4443; BEYER 1971 & 1978; DEVRIES-VANDER VELDEN 1989, p. 117-147.34 BEYER 1976.solemndefinitionof dogmawaspromulgated.35Thesynodlaiddownsixprincipal doctrinal tenets: [1]there is in God a distinction between his sub-stance and his energy; [2]the energy is uncreated; [3]this distinction doesnot involvecomposition inGod,forit isnot a question of twosubstantialrealities, since both belong to one unique God;[4] the Fathers used the term, divinity' or ' God'for the energy; [5] the Fathers also spokeof thesubstancethatsurpassesor transcendstheenergy; [6] likewise, theFathers asserted very clearly the incommunicability of the divine substance,while at the same time they speak of the real participation in the divine life orenergy (PG 151, 732 C - 754 B).36Inthe last period of his life Palamasworked diligentlyaspastor of hisflock in Thessalonica, although for a while in 1354-1355 he was imprisonedbythe Turks. 37Atthe end of1354 JohnV Palaiologosentered C/pleandforcedJohnKantakouzenos toabdicate. Althoughcondemnedin 1351,Gregoras now again had access to the court and received permission to con-tinue his polemic against Palamas. In 1355 John V organized a public debatebetweenPalamas andGregoras for thebenefit ofthepapal legatePaul(t before 1371).38 There are two surviving and differingaccounts of the de-bate; a verbose polemic by Gregoras himself and a more sober,official ac-count by the Protostrator George Phakrases.39 Gregoras,not willing to cedethe issue, completed and published his Second Antirrhetics against Palamasin 1355/6.40 AyearlaterPalamas counteredwithhis ownAntirrhetics(W 20).The latter part of Gregory's carreer is most characterized by his preachingin Thessalonica,thoughnot all of his homiliescan be dated to thisperiod.Gregory died on 14 Nov. 1357.41 In late Feb. or early March of 1368, he wasproclaimed a saint and his feast was celebrated in the Great Church of C/pleby the Patriarch Philotheos Kokkinos(Regestes, no2540), who had earlierwritten his biography.35 Regestes, no. 2324. A set of six anathemes was also incorporated into the Synodikon,p.80-85.36 See MEYENDORFF 1959 (Introduction), p. 147.37 Ibid. (p.157-162); PHILIPPIDIS-BRAAT 1979; DE VRIES-VAN DER VELDEN 1989.38 PLP 22143.39 PLP 29575.40 PAPAROZZI 1970-1971.41 Thereisalong-standingdebateoverthedating of Palamas' deathto1357or to1359. There is now a growing consensus in favour of 1357 (see RIGO 1993, p. 159 n. 9).