| (Paradosis, 26). Freiburg/Schweiz 1980. 133 Триады. I. 1. § 18//382.1–19; св. Григорий ссылается на следующее место св. Василия: «Даже если мы не видим содержащуюся в этом истину, ничто не мешает нам достичь обетованного нам блаженства». (См. Толкование на псалмы. XIV//PG XXIX. 256 C). 134 Намек на учение о душе мира, развитое Платоном в Тимее и кажущееся св. Григорию Паламе особенно опасным; он посвятил его опровержению многие из своих Глав физических… (3–8//Saint Gregory Palamas, The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters. 84–90 [ср.: R. E. Sinkewicz. Introduction//Ibid. 6, о большой распространенности неоплатонизма именно в палеологовское время]). 135 По мнению приверженцев переселения душ. 136 Трудно понять, почему возможность каких бы то ни было чудес нельзя считать абсолютным доказательством неабсолютности законов Аристотеля; на библейские же чудеса в патристике особенно принято ссылаться потому, что они наиболее известны и бесспорны. Также и ветхозаветная космология (хотя и весьма по–разному понимавшаяся святыми отцами — в силу как раз тех причин, о которых говорится в этом параграфе; см. например, о различном толковании Шестоднева у св. Василия Великого и св. Григория Нисского, хотя второй был учеником первого: E. Corsini. Nouvelles perspectives sur le probleme des sources de l’Hexaemeron de St Gregoire de Nysse//Studia Patristica. (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, 63). Berlin 1957. 194–103), при любом ее толковании, учитывающем, что это богодухновенное учение, во всяком случае, покажет правомерность неаристотелевского подхода к пониманию тварного бытия. 137 Чтобы показать, что Бог совершенно недоказуем, Варлаам писал в одном из своих антилатинских трактатов, которые здесь подвергаются критике учителем безмолвия: «Определения, гипотезы и аксиомы составляют начала доказательства и предшествуют своим следствиям, но нельзя говорить, что то, что относится к Богу, следует за этими общими понятиями, гипотезами и определениями… Следовательно, Божественное не доказывается». Paris. gr. 1278. F. 77 v. [См. об этом выше — прим. ii к этой главе и ч. I, гл. III.] |
| 171 Главы физические… 78//Saint Gregory Palamas, The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters. 172.1–4 [см. выше, ч. II, гл. I, прим. 18]; о святоотеческом происхождении этого смысла слова «природа» см.: Г. Флоровский. Тварь и тварность//Православная мысль. Paris 1927. I. 176–212. 172 Против Акиндина. V. 23//GPS III. 353: Воскресение Господне хотя и духовно… но ни воскресение не нетварно, ни само воскресшее. Ибо это воскресение тварного трупа, или, что то же самое, воссоздание и переделывание. 173 Возможность сближения богословия св. Григория с западными представлениями о тварной благодати — одна из главных тем книги Lison. L’Esprit repandu…, особ. выводы на с. 131–132. Вслед за своим учителем о. Андре де Аллё, о. Жак Лисон идет несколько далее и заключает: «В его (св. Григория Паламы) представлении возможность тварной благодати допускается, скорее, в области духовных дарований, как, в особенности, обновления сердца и духа. Однако, эти дары оказываются не созданными ex nihilo [т. е. «из ничего», как если бы они представляли собой какой–то совершенно особый род тварей — что подразумевается в латинском учении о тварной благодати. — В. Л.], но восстановлением твари; тварная благодать становится возможной только благодаря присутствию действующей энергии Духа, благодати нетварной, которая и остается, таким образом, первенствующей» (с. 132). Этот вывод представляется вполне убедительным. 174 Триады. II. 3. § 48//581.7–8; учитель безмолвия пользуется в отношении ума платоновским образом всадника, который ведет жизнь, не зависимую от жизни своего коня, и высшую, чем она (Беседа 53//175). 175 По поводу нетварного света св. Григорий выражается так: светом же сим по разуму прилучающихся соразмеряет явление. Против Акиндина. II. 16//GPS III. 140.9–10. 176 Через каждую из энергий всецелый присутствует и действует Дух Святый. Беседа 24//313 B. 177 Поскольку мимо этого — важнейшего — аспекта богословия отцов IV–V вв. авторы учебников патрологии обычно проходят в молчании, желательно пояснить примером, о чем идет речь. Доказательство божественности Св. Духа у св. Василия Великого: «И если усовершившихся в добродетели называем богами, и усовершение достигается чрез Духа; то как же Творящий других богами Сам лишается Божества?» (Против Евномия. III//Творения иже во святых отца нашего Василия Великого/Новый исправленный пер. Московской Духовной Академии. СПб. 1911. I. 527); «Необходимо же Тому, Кто в богах виною, что они боги, быть Божеским Духом и Духом от Бога. Ибо как в веществах горючих причине, от которой они горючи, необходимо быть горючею, и как во святых причине, от которой они святы, необходимо быть святою; так и в богах вине, от которой они боги, необходимо быть Богом» (Против Евномия. V//Там же. 575). |
| Третье следует сказать, во Христе оная форма – если предположить, что она [действительно] есть, – не сообщает названия, ибо она находится в становлении и даже присутствует по акциденции. И если б [Христу] она сообщала название, то [только] в смысле утраты, как бледное (ни на что не указывает положительным образом). И если предположить, что форма действительно есть, то она не может считаться воспринятой, потому что бытие Христа, принадлежащее Ему как Лицу, оставалось всегда, а состояние наступило впоследствии. Список сокращений Bihlmeyer – Seuse И. Deutsche Schriften/Hrsg. von K. Bihlmeyer. Stuttgart, 1907. Buxtorf – Rabbi M. Majemonidis Liber Doctor perplexorum: Ad dubia & obscuriora Scripturae loca rectius intelligenda. In linguam Latinam perspicue & fideliter conversus a J. Buxtorfio. Basileae, 1629. CSEL – Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum. Pragae; Vindobonae; Lipsiae, 1866 – . DW – Meister Eckhart. Die deutschen Werke: In 5 Bd./Hrsg. von J. Quint u.a. Stuttgart, 1936–2003. Heil, Ritter – Corpus Dionysiacum II. Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita. De coelesti hierarchia. De ecclesiastica hierarchia. De mystica theologia. Epistulae/Hrsg. von G. Heil, A.M. Ritter. B.; N.Y., 1991. Kotter – Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos/Hrsg. von P.B. Kotter, O.S.B. В.; N. Y., 1973. LW – Meister Eckhart. Die lateinischen Werke: In 5 Bd./Hrsg. von J. Koch u.a. Stuttgart, 1936–2007. Meyendorff – Gregoire Palamas.Defense des saints hesychastes: En 2 vol./Ed. J. Meyendorff. Louvain, 1959. Pf. – Deutsche Mystiker des 14. Jahrhunderts/Hrsg. von Fr. Pfeiffer. Leipzig, 1857. Bd. 2: Meister Eckhart. PG – Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Graeca/Ed. J.P. Migne. P., 1857–1866. Vol. 1–161. PL – Patrologiae cursus completus. Series Latina/Ed. J.P. Migne. P., 1844–1864. Vol. 1–221. Sinkewicz – Saint Gregory Palamas. The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters/Ed. R.E. Sinkewicz, C.S.B. Toronto, 1988. Sturlese, Blumrich – Seuse H. Das Buch der Wahrheit/Hrsg. von L. Sturlese und R. Blumrich. Hamburg, 1993. |
| Симеона Солунского, чья триадология и в других отношениях стоит вне развития богословско–полемической мысли позднее исихастских споров) и, наконец, формальный запрет именования Духа «любовью» у св. Геннадия Схолария (Об исхождении Святого Духа. I. 2. 7), сделанный при разборе и опровержении упомянутого трактата блаж. Августина (подробно: Lour’e. L’attitude de S. Marc d’Йphuse… 331). Итак, данное высказывание св. Григория должно объясняться использованием терминологии, довольно характерной для первой половины XIV в., происхождение которой, впрочем, пока неясно. 301 Главы физические…. 36//Saint Gregory Palamas, The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters. 120, 122 [см. выше, ч. II, гл. I, прим. 18. Ввиду значительной важности цитаты продолжим цитирование: «Когда же Слово Его (Родителя) посредством плоти беседовало (вступило в общение) с нами, и мы научились отличному от Отца имени существования (uJpavrxew») Духа. И это произошло не только от Отца, но и от Него (Слова) Самого. Ведь Он сказал: Дух Истины, Иже от Отца исходит (Ин. 15, 26). Ведь Святой Дух — Отца и Сына предвечная радость — общая для Них по обладанию — потому Он и посылается достойным от Обоих, — но существующая по существованию uJpavrcwn) только от Отца. Потому от Него только исходит по существованию»]. 302 О параллелях как таковых см. прим. xi. Здесь же останавливаемся только на содержательной стороне процитированного высказывания. Отметим прежде всего, что продолжение этой цитаты, которое мы приводим в сноске 24, содержит ясное указание на дарование «достойным» именно ипостаси Духа как «любви» (в греч. использован тот синоним этого слова, который имеет точный эквивалент лишь по–славянски). Здесь — наконец–то! — мы встречаем у св. Григория вполне традиционный язык византийского богословия. Если не видеть здесь ничего, кроме способа выражения, и в то же время, оставаться при одностороннем понимании «паламитского» учения о несообщаемости ипостасей, то придется сделать вывод о том, что нетварная ипостась Духа дарует нетварные же энергии, но не дарует самое себя (похоже на латинское учение, с той разницей, что там нетварная ипостась дарует тварные благодатные дары; см. |
| Early in the 1950s Orthodox scholars began to make a concerted effort to edit the unpublished writings of Gregory Palamas. John Meyendorff and Panagiotes Chrestou were two of the prime movers in this enormous undertaking. 6 As these new texts were published, the Capita 150 understandably faded into the background of scholarly attention. But even during the time that this work had received some serious study, the focus was almost exclusively on the sections that were more concerned with the detailed issues of the Palamite controversy; the earlier chapters were largely ignored. Only two scholars, Kiprian Kern and George Mantzarides, treated the introductory section of the Capita 150 with any seriousness. 7 However, they turned to these chapters as a source for the theological anthropology of Palamas, but failed to see their essential connection with the rest of the work. Two other factors have militated against a better understanding of the significance of the Capita 150. Firstly, the editors of the Philokalia had removed from the text all the references to Barlaam and Akindynos. But even more seriously, they had relied on a very inferior manuscript. The omissions and erroneous readings frequently leave the meaning obscure and at times indecipherable. 8 Secondly, the Capita 150 cannot be properly understood without an appreciation of the literary character of the work. Only when it is seen in relation to the earlier writings of Palamas can its structure be readily discerned and its significance evaluated. This book is an attempt to remedy the situation and restore The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters to its rightful place in Palamite theology. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to the Most Revd Bishop Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia and the Revd Joseph Gill, S.J. who inspired and guided me in my first studies of Gregory Palamas. The microfilms that made this edition possible were purchased with the help of a minor grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Abbreviations |
| The next significant addition to the Reply comes in c. 119.14–18 where the quotation of a text from Cyril is extended a few lines further. Later, in c. 120.20–27 Palamas made another digression from the Reply to add Sabellianism to the list of heresies to which the Akindynists have succumbed. There are several instances where small sections of the Reply are not reproduced in the Capita 150. None of them are very significant. A citation from Cyril " s Thesaurus is omitted (Reply 4.15–20) and also a specific reference to the historical circumstances of the pamphlet (Reply 6.1–5). The remaining omissions are brief interjections or introductory comments. The only other alteration to the text of the Reply was some minor rearrangement of portions of Reply 1 and 3. The Contra Acindynum (122–131) Although chapters 122–131 constitute a distinct division within the work, this section is not as cohesively organized as others. Its distinctiveness is based on the derivation of most of the material (though not verbatim) from the sixth book of the Contra Acindynum. Four chapters depart from this organizational schema. Chapter 123 has no apparent relation to the rest of the section. Akindynos and his cohorts had been appealing to apophatic theology to support their contention that God cannot possess both an uncreated substance and an uncreated energy. Palamas replied with an explanation of the proper meaning and use of apophatic theology and its relation to cataphatic. Chapters 124–126 form a subsection in which Palamas established the equation of the Akindynists with the Eunomians. Both heretical groups refused to recognize in God anything but the divine substance. Thus anything distinct from the divine substance could not be uncreated. Then for the Eunomians the Son had to be a creature and for the Akindynists the energy had to be created. 117 Palamas started from the orthodox position established against the Eunomians whereby each of the hypostases is divine and uncreated but distinct from each other and from the substance, while at the same time there is no compromise to the divine simplicity. In this, Palamas saw a clear patristic precedent for the doctrine of the uncreated divine energy. The fourth century Fathers used the argument that a relational name (e.g., son or father) cannot denote a substance and must refer to another reality with which it is not identical. In this way they were able to establish that the hypostases of the Godhead are distinct from one another and from the substance. And so, not everything in God is identical with the substance, as the Eunomians claimed. 118 Palamas took up the same argument and applied it to the energy, for this is God " s relatio ad extra in the divine economy of creation and salvation. As a relation it cannot denote God " s substance but must be distinct from it (c. 125). |
| That from creatures we acquire an understanding not of the divine substance but of the divine energies; and Akindynos, in denying this and in thinking creatures arc coeternal with God, is under the same charge as the Hellenes and Eunomius. 15 In one sense the first 63 chapters of the Capita 150 have much the same intention as the opening section of the first Triad, namely to demonstrate the superiority of spiritual gnosis and to point out the error arising from an exclusive reliance on natural science for attaining certain knowledge either about God or even about creation. However, in the Capita 150 the treatment of certain areas of Hellenic learning is much more specific and detailed. The fourteenth century witnessed a revival of several areas of study among which were Platonism, astronomy and natural philosophy. Palamas may well have been concerned with the dangers and temptations which this revival posed for the Christian and so wrote a kind of mini-treatise Περ Κσμου (c. 1–14). According to the long established definition of the word, «Cosmos means a system composed of heaven and earth and the natures contained in them.» 16 The schema has, of course, its parallel in the Judaeo-Christian worldview described in the Hexaemeron where God is said to have created heaven and earth and all that is in them. About 1315 Nikephoros Choumnos had written his Refutation of Plotinus On the Soul. 17 Unfortunately, the reasons and circumstances of its composition are not known. Sometime before 1335 Nikephoros Gregoras wrote a commentary on the De insomniis of Synesius of Cyrene, a late fourth to early fifth century pagan convert to Christianity. 18 The commentary demonstrates Gregoras’ familiarity with some of the mure arcane interests of the Neoplatonists, and in particular, the Chaldean Oracles. Gregoras derived much of his material from Michael Psellos, the great Neoplatonist antiquarian of the eleventh century. 19 In fact, the writings of Psellos must have enjoyed considerable popularity in the time of Gregoras, since over one hundred manuscripts of his works date from the late thirteenth and the fourteenth centuries. 20 Even Proclus himself was read with some frequency in this period. 21 |
| The episode of Constantine Anglikos as such had no results. The Calixtine party grew weaker rather than stronger and the further development of the Hussite movement took other directions. Yet it is interesting to note that again in 1491 delegates of the Czech Brethren were sent to the East in search of a living faith and a pure tradition. Unfortunately, very little is known of the results of this mission, though it seems probable that one of the delegates at least reached Moscow. Even more remarkable is the fact that in 1599, at the meeting with the Orthodox at Wilna with a view to the reopening of negotiations, Simon Turnovsky, one of the prominent Brethren leaders in Lithuania, referred in his proposals to the negotiations undertaken by Constantine Anglikos nearly one hundred and fifty years before. 109 III. East and West Relationships From the Reformations Until the 19th Century The Reformation was a crisis of the Western Church and did not directly affect the Church in the East. But before long the Reformation spread to some countries with a large Orthodox population, and the Orthodox were thereby compelled to face the implications of the new religious situation in the West. Poland was specially important in this respect. The Orthodox, and especially the Greeks, were vitally interested in the political changes brought about by the religious strife in the West. They still cherished the hope of liberation, and still hoped that some help might come from the Western powers. But now the situation was markedly changed. The West itself was divided. The main political consequence of the Reformation was that Europe was split into two hostile camps; religious divisions gradually hardened into the two great political alliances which were to struggle for victory in the Thirty Years War (1618 – 1648). The Greeks had now to decide with which of the two power blocs it was wisest to associate their hope of freedom. These Western powers themselves were interested in the moral support of the Orthodox, at that time under Turkish domination. We can trace through the centuries the close interest taken by foreign embassies at Constantinople in all discussions between the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the various European Churches. All ecumenical conversations unfortunately came to be complicated by diplomatic intrigues and political calculations. The inescapable fact was that at that period no political alliance with any European power – whether Roman Catholic or Protestant – was possible without some regulation of relationships in the religious as well as in the political field. Thus many of these ecumenical conversations were initiated, not so much because of any immediate theological concern, as from heavy diplomatic pressure arising from the general international situation. |
| Even in such a technical discussion as this, Palamas maintained his ultimate perspective, namely, the preservation of the reality of God " s self-revelation and the divine economy of creation and salvation. When the Akindynists disallowed any distinction between God " s transcendent substance and his activities ad extra, they sealed the divine being within itself and rendered the gap between the reality of man and the transcendent reality of God forever unbreachable. The Light of Tabor (146–150) In the final chapters of his work Palamas summarized the position he had taken against Akindynos and his supporters on the subject of the nature of the Taboric Light seen by the chosen apostles at the time of Christ " s Transfiguration. 127 Palamas began by setting out his favoured scriptural and patristic witnesses to the Taboric Light. These all point to the divine and uncreated character of that Light and its intimate association with the Godhead (c. 146). The Akindynists opposed Palamas on this point, claiming that the Light was merely a created phantom and that Palamas and his followers were ditheists because of their insistence on the uncreated nature of both the divine substance and the divine energies (c. 147). Chapters 148–150 are devoted to a brief summary of the more salient absurdities that result from the Akindynist doctrines. B. The Date of the Capita 150 In his well-known article in the Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, M. Jugie made the tentative suggestion that Gregory Palamas wrote the Capita 150 towards the end of his life. 128 Jugie no doubt made the reasonable assumption that a work bringing together the principal teachings of an author would naturally fall in the later part of his career. J. Meyendorff examined the problem of date in much greater detail and concluded that the work was written between 1344 and 1347. 129 The reference to the Contra Acindynum in c. 70 provides a terminus ante quem of 1344 (i.e., when the ca was completed). The only anti-Palamites mentioned are Barlaam, Akindynos and their followers. If the Capita 150 had been written after 1351, there would certainly have been some reference to Nikephoros Gregoras, In c. 148 there is reference to only one Synod. If the work had been written after 1347, there would have been reference to the second Synod, held in February 1347. Finally, the exhortation in c. 150 is a call to flee the κοινωνα of the heretics. This expression would be more appropriate prior to 1347; afterwards, Palamas would have called for union with the Church. |
| 1. The Early Chapters of the Capita 150 A. Introduction Gregory Palamas gave to the Capita 150 the full title: «One Hundred and Fifty Chapters on Topics of Natural and Theological Science, the Moral and the Ascetic Life, Intended as a Purge for the Barlaamite Corruption.» The title purports to provide two pieces of information regarding the content of the work. First, the work is divided topically according to the subjects of natural science, theology, the moral and the ascetic life. Second, it is, at least in part, a polemical work written against the Barlaamite heresy. In several manuscripts there is a note attached to chapter 34 telling the reader that the section on natural science has come to an end and that the following section will treat matters relating to theology. 9 However, there are no further such notes to signal the subsequent divisions treating the moral and ascetic life, nor does any note indicate a special group of chapters dedicated to a refutation of Barlaam " s heresy. The modern reader who comes to this work hoping to learn more about the nature of Barlaam " s heretical views and their refutation by Palamas will be disappointed. Barlaam’s name does not appear until more than one third of the way through the work. Both there and thereafter it appears only in conjunction with the name of Akindynos. 10 In fact, chapters 64–150 are directed almost exclusively against the " Barlaamite» teachings of Gregory Akindynos and his followers. The Capita 150 can be divided into two major sections: chapters 1–63, a general section which treats the divine economy of creation and salvation, and chapters 64–150 which constitute the anti-Akindynist section. The following schema presents an overview of the first section and its major divisions. The Divine Economy of Creation and Salvation I. The Non-Eternity of the Cosmos (1–2) That the world had a beginning. That the world will have an end: not a total annihilation but a transformation. II. The Celestial Sphere (3–7) |
|
|
