Hagiorite Tome in English

[Gregory Erickson]

All,

I'm looking to purchase something that has the Hagiorite Tome in it. Does anyone know of such a book?

[Eugene]

May be in one of these books?:
http://www.fetchbook.info/search_Gregory_Palamas/searchBy_Author.html

Here is one in Russian (f someone could translate it for you):
http://www.hesychasm.ru/library/palamas/tomos.htm

[Eugene]

Gregory, this link on the Tome may be interesting for you:
http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b16.en.saint_gregory_palamas_as_a_hagiorite.00.htm
http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b16.en.saint_gregory_palamas_as_a_hagiorite.10.htm

[Gregory Erickson]

Evgeny,

Ah! Many thanks. http://www.monachos.net/mb/clipart/happy.gif

It is because of that book I'm interested in finding the Tome.

[Ken McRae]

Theological Tome's, in those days, were massive sized folio books, often containing the complete or collected works of an author in a single volume, where possible. In the case of prolific authors, though, their collected works usually were comprised of several tomes.

In this case, I'd imagine the "Hagiorite Tome" consisted mainly, if not entirely, of Gregory's major apologetic and polemical writings, some of which are currently available in English; such as these, for example:-

1 ) Defense of the Holy Hesychasts

2 ) The One Hundred and Fifty Chapters

3 ) Dialogue Between an Orthodox and a Barlaamite

"The Defense", also known as "The Triads", which was translated by John Meyendorff, is considered his "magnum opus", I believe. Two volumes of his Homilies are currently available in English, as well, with a third on its way.

[Ken McRae]

" ... I'd imagine the "Hagiorite Tome" consisted mainly, if not entirely, of Gregory's major apologetic and polemical writings ... " - Theo

Forgive me, but I now realize this remark is entirely erroneous, though it does seem St. Gregory is, in fact, the author of the Tome. I tried to edit/delete the above post, but it now seems that's impossible. I will try to be more careful in the future.

Humbly in the Lord,
Theo

[Ken McRae]

Divine Providence made the following publication aware to me only today. I trust it's what you're looking for:-

Living Witness of the Holy Mountain: Contemporary Voices from Mount Athos

" ... What follows are documents of great variety and interest ... the ''Tomos of Mt. Athos'' of 1341, which defended the orthodoxy of St. Gregory Palamas' teaching on the essence and energies of God and the validity of the experience of seeing, in this life, the uncreated light of the Godhead ... etc. "

PAPER - 311 pgs. - $26.95

Link (http://www.eighthdaybooks.com/cgi-bin/virtualcatalog/CatalogMgr.pl?cartID=b-8360&SearchField=partnumber&SearchFor=0178&template=Htx/item.htx)

The 1341 'Tomos of Mt. Athos', I believe, is 'the Hagiorite Tome' Metropolitan Hierotheos refers to.

In Christ,
Theophilus

(Message edited by theophilus on 16 January, 2005)

[Ken McRae]

" The Living Witness of the Holy Mountain - by Hieromonk Alexander Golitzin (http://www.eighthdaybooks.com/cgi-bin/virtualcatalog/CatalogMgr.pl?cartID=b-8360&SearchField=partnumber&SearchFor=0178&template=Htx/item.htx)

Well, I finally acquired this book, and it contains the complete text of the Hagiorite Tome, in English translation for the very first time ever. The entire document is only about eight pages long. I wonder if Hieromonk Alexander would mind if I typed it out and posted it here. I'll try to contact him by e-mail, and ask for his permission. In the meantime, I'll prepare the document.

Someone posted a link not long ago for a Hesychast website, that provides a small online library of hesychastic documents and writings. Perhaps the Tome is one document that should be added to that website library.

[Eugene]

Thanks a lot, Theophilus! I'm maintaining the English Hesychasm website (http://www.hesychasm.ru/en/index.htm ) and I'd be happy to post the Hagiorite Tome on it. We have it in Russian there in the library, but not yet in English.

[Ken McRae]

The Tomos of Mount Athos
In Defense of the Hesychasts


AGAINST THOSE WHO, BECAUSE OF THEIR OWN LACK OF EXPERIENCE AND OF FAITH IN THE SAINTS, DENY THE MYSTICAL ACTIVITIES OF THE SPIRIT WHICH, IN GREATER WAYS THAN SPEECH CAN EXPRESS, ARE AT WORK IN THOSE WHO LIVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPIRIT AND WHICH, THOUGH MANIFESTED IN DEEDS, HAVE NOT YET BEEN DEMONSTRATED BY WORDS.


"Teachings that today are daily discussed and common knowledge to all, that are proclaimed with complete freedom, were at one time the mysteries of the Mosaic Law and forseen in the Spirit only by the prophets. The good things promised to the saints in the world to come, however, are mysteries of the Gospel life and are given to and seen beforehand only by those whom the Spirit has made worthy of seeing - and even then only in moderation and, as it were, in partial earnest. Just as the Jew of ancient times would not have gladly listened to the prophets saying that God's Word and Spirit were co-eternal with Him and from before the ages, but would have thought that he was hearing opinions forbidden by piety and opposed to the confession of the devout, by which we mean: "Hear O Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord (Deut. 6:4);" just so might someone who had not listened reverently feel today regarding the mysteries of the Spirit which are known only to those who have purified themselves for the sake of virtue. But, just as the fulfillment of the prophecies proved that what were mysteries before were in full agreement with what later was made manifest - such that now we believe in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, divinity in three persons, a single simple nature, uncomposed, uncreated, invisible and incomprehensible - so, too, the mysteries of the age to come have been unveiled in our own time in accordance with the inexpressible manifestation of the one God in three perfect Persons, and these latter mysteries shall be shown forth as in harmony with everything that has already been revealed.

"We are therefore obliged to consider that, just as the Three-Personhood of the Godhead was later made manifest to the ends of the earth ( with the unity of the Godhead inviolate because of the Father's Monarchy ), but was clearly recognized by the prophets before the events of the Incarnation and was accepted without difficulty by those who believed in them, thus, in the same way, neither do we now avoid confessing the teachings of those things that are proclaimed boldly by the saints made worthy of mystical revelations in the Spirit. Some are initiated into these things by the experience itself. They are as many as have not only renounced the ownership of things for the sake of the Gospel life, and the good opinion of other men, and the doubtful pleasures of the flesh, but have as well confirmed their renunciation by submission to those who have arrived at maturity in Christ. For, having exclusively applied themselves in retreat and in heart-felt prayer to God, they have gone beyond themselves, have entered into God by means of that mystical union with Him that transcends even the intellect, and have been initiated into what is beyond intellection. Others, though, have learned of these things through their reverence for such men, their trust in them and devotion. This is the example that we too follow who listen to what the great Dionysius says in his second epistle, "To Gaius." We are persuaded that God transcends his own gift of deification, that He Who transcends divinity and deity and goodness is also beyond that grace which He bestows on those who are worthy. For God suffers no multiplication. No one says that there are two divinities. Yet, as the divine Maximus says concerning Melchizedek, the deifying gift of grace from God, Who is eternally, is itself revealed as uncreated and existing forever. The same saint often says elsewhere that it appears to the worthy (whenever they do indeed become worthy of it) as an ingenerate and personal light, but never as something created for the occasion. The same also calls this phenomenon the light of ineffable glory and the purity of the angels. The great Macarius calls it in addition the food of the bodiless powers and the glory of the divine nature, the beauty of the age to come, divine and heavenly fire, light ineffable and intelligible, the earnest of the Holy Spirit, the unction of joy which makes us holy.

"Therefore, whoever ranks those who call this deifying grace uncreated, unbegotten, and personal, with the Messalians, or else calls them di-theists, whoever this person may be, let him understand that he opposes the saints of God and that, unless he repent, he has cast himself out of the inheritance of the saved and fallen away from the One Who alone is by nature the God of the saints. But, whoever believes in and is persuaded by and agrees with the saints, and who does not make up excuses for his sins, this person will not reject what the saints have clearly said merely because he is ignorant of it. Let him rather, as not knowing the manner of the mystery, not think it unworthy of himself to ask and learn from those who do know. He will learn that there is nothing in these things that is inconsistent with God's word and deeds, but that they are most necessary, and that without them nothing whatever would exist, nor would there be any mystery at all adequate to God.

"Whoever asserts that the perfect union with God is accomplished without the deifying grace of the Spirit, but is only a relative thing and accomplished by imitation, in a way similar to people who are fond of each other and grow alike in their ways; and, moreover, who says that the deifying grace of God is a condition inherent in our rational nature which becomes active merely by virtue of this moral imitation, but that it is not a supernatural and inexpressible illumination and divine activity which is seen invisibly by those made worthy of it and comprehended incomprehensibly: this person should know that he has tumbled unaware into the error of the Messalians. For, if deification be a potential inherent in nature and so included within the definition of nature, then he who is deified must necessarily be himself God by nature. Such a person should not then attempt to smear those who stand fast with his own rebellion and try to blame the faith of the blameless. Instead, putting aside his own opinion, let him learn from those who are experienced or who have been taught by those with experience that the grace or divinity is not related to anything else whatever, nor does there exist any potential in nature capable of receiving it, since it would otherwise not be grace but merely the manifestation of an activity proper to our being. Deification would not be miraculous if it should occur as the result of some potential for its reception, for in that case it would clearly be a work of our nature instead of God's gift, and the person deified would then in fact be able to become God by nature and to acquire the title of "Lord"! For the natural potential of everything that exists is comprised of nothing other than the unswerving impetus of nature towards its proper activity. How in that case could deification be said to take the one deified outside of himself? If it were still to take place within the bounds of nature, then this [traditional] expression would be meaningless. The grace of deification is therefore beyond nature, beyond virtue and knowledge, and, according to St. Maximus, all these things fall infinitely short of it. While every virtue, including that imitation of God that is within our power, prepares a capacity in the recipient for divine union, it is still grace that accomplishes the unutterable union itself. It is by means of grace that all of God co-indwells with all of those who are worthy, and that the whole of the saints co-inheres wholly with the whole of God. Thus they receive into themselves God entire and, as a kind of reward for their struggles in asending to Him, they possess Him, Himself alone, Who has made them worthy of becoming His members, and He indwells them as a soul is entwined with its own body.

"Whoever affirms that they are Messalians who say that the intellect is located in the heart or the head, let this person know that he is inveighing against the saints. While the great Athanasius says that the reasoning faculty is in the head, Macarius, who cedes nothing to him in greatness, holds that the activity of the intellect is to be found in the heart. etc. etc. etc."

(N.B. This is nearly half of the document. Paragraph lengths are long in the English translation I have, which I believe accurately reflects the "original". Deeply sorry for the delay, but I've been, sadly, very distracted. Lord willing, I will try to get the other half posted a.s.a.p.!)

[Ken McRae]

Whoever affirms that they are Messalians who say that the intellect is located in the heart or the head, let this person know that he is inveighing against the saints. While the great Athanasius says that the reasoning faculty is in the head, Macarius, who cedes nothing to him in greatness, holds that the activity of the intellect is to be found in the heart. With these two practically all the saints concur. What the divine Gregory of Nyssa says, that the intellect is bodiless and neither within nor outside the body, does not contradict the others. For the former say that the intellect is within the body in as much as it is joined to it. Since they were speaking about different aspects of the matter, they differ with him scarcely at all. Nor, indeed, does he who says that God is not confined to place in that He is bodiless differ with him who also says the Word of God entered once into a spotless, virgin womb in order there to be united, beyond speech, with our substance on account of His ineffable love for mankind.

Whoever says that the light that flashed around the disciples on Tabor was a phantasm, a sort of symbol that came into being and then departed, that had no real existence, that did not transcend thought but was on the contrary an activity inferior to intellection, this person clearly contradicts the opinion of the saints. For the latter, in their hymns and writings, address it as unspeakable, uncreated, eternal, timeless, unapproachable, immense, infinite, boundless, transcending the vision of men and of angels, archetypal and unchanging beauty, the glory of God, of Christ, of the Spirit, ray of divinity, and other similar things. This is because they hold that the flesh of Christ was glorified at the instant of His conception, and that the glory of His divinity became in consequence the glory as well of His body. But, for those who were unable to endure that splendor on which the angels dare not gaze, this glory was not made manifest in His visible body. Thus, in His transfiguration, it was not that He took of something that He was not before, nor that He was changed into something else, but that He then appeared to His disciples as He truly was, opening their eyes and giving them to see who before were blind. Yet, both as He appeared before and as He was then seen by His disciples, He remained identically Himself. For He is truly Himself the beauty of the divine glory. He shone like the sun, the latter itself being a dim image of His radiance - but then there is nothing created which may be taken as an image of the uncreated without some loss.

Whoever says that the essence of God alone is uncreated but not His eternal energies (all of which He transcends as the one acting must always transcend his actions), let this man listen to Saint Maximos, who says:-

"All immortal things and immortality itself, all living things and life itself, all holy things and holiness itself, all virtuous things and virtue itself, all good things and goodness itself, all blessings and blessedness itself, all beings and being itself, all are manifestly works of God. Some things began to be in time, for there was when they were not. Others, however, did not begin to be in time, for there was no time when virtue, goodness, holiness, and immortality did not exist."

Goodness, and everything which is embraced by the principle of goodness, and simply:-

"All life, immortality, simplicity, unchangingness, and infinity, and as much as is contemplated essentially as around God, are the works of God that did not come to be in time, for non-being was never older than virtue, nor any of the other things we have listed, even if those things that participate in them do have a beginning in time. All virtue is without beginning because there is no time prior to it: God is eternally the unique author of its being.

"God is infinitely, infinitely above all beings, whether participating or participated."

Let him thus learn from this that everything that takes its origin from God is not necessarily subject to time. Some of His works are without beginning ... etc. etc.

[Ken McRae]

Let him thus learn from this that everything that takes its origin from God is not necessarily subject to time. Some of His works are without beginning, yet that Tri-Unity, which alone is by nature without beginning, suffers no loss in its supernatural simplicity. In the same way, taking again a dim image of that transcendent simplicity, our human intellect in no way becomes composite by reason of the intellections that are native to it.

Whoever does not accept that the spiritual states perceived in the body derive from the charisms of the Spirit present in the soul and growing into God, and who says that apatheia is the habitual mortification of the soul's passible faculty, but not the latter's habitual activity towards what is proper, its complete turning away from evil and toward the good, as having put off its evil habits and grown rich in those that are good, this person is of such an opinion that he in consequence denies our eternal abode with the body in the age of incorruption to come. For, if the body shall partake together with the soul in the ineffable good things - and doubtless even now so shares, insofar as its nature allows, in the grace of God that He gives mystically and inexpressibly to the purified intellect - and itself be completely won over to divine things in its own way, then the soul's passible faculty is transformed and sanctified, and not simply rendered dead by habit. By means of the same faculty, which is common to the soul and the body, grace sanctifies the body's ordering and activities. This is because, according to Saint Diodochus (of Photiki), in the case of those who have liberated themselves from the beauties of this world for the sake of their hope in the good things to come, the mind advances securely on account of its freedom from care. It senses in itself the divine, and inexpressible goodness, and, according to the degree of its progress, it shares its own goodness with the body. That grace which then comes to pass in both soul and body is such that it comprises an unfailing reminder of the life incorruptible.

The light of the intellect is one thing and sense perception in turn another. While the latter explores sensible things insofar as they are sensible, the light of the intellect is that knowledge that inheres in conceptions. Sight and intellect do not lay claim to the same light, but each operates in natural things in accordance with its own nature. But, whenever those who are made worthy are in possession of spiritual and supernatural grace and power, then they see what is beyond all perception and intellect. They see what, borrowing from Saint Gregory the Theologian, God only knows - He and those whom He has moved to such things.

These things we have been taught by Scripture; these we have received from our fathers; these we know by virtue of our own small experience; to these same things, as they have been set down by our brother, Kyr Gregory, most honorable among hieromonks, in exact obedience to the traditions of the saints and in defense of the holy hesychasts, we ourselves subscribe for the assurance of all who may read this:-

The protos of the venerable monasteries on the Holy Mountain, Isaac, hieromonk
The abbot of the venerable, imperial, and holy monastery of Lavra, Theodosius, hieromonk
The signature of the abbot of the monastery of the Georgians in his own language
The abbot of the venerable and imperial monastery of Vatopedi, Ioannikios, hieromonk
The signature of the abbot of the monastery of the Serbs, in his own language
The least of hieromonks, Philotheus, I agree and have signed
Least among hieromonks, and spiritual director of the venerable monastery of Esphigmenou, Amphilocius
Most wretched among hieromonks, Gerasimus. I have seen and read what was written for love of the truth and, accepting it, have signed.
I, wretched elder and least among monks, Moses, do agree and have signed.
Least among hieromonks and spiritual director of Vatopedi, Theodosius
Abbot of the holy monastery of Koutloumousiou, Theostiriktos, hieromonk
I, Gerontios Maroulis, a sinner and least among the elders of the venerable Lavra, do agree and have signed.
Kallistos Mouzalon, least among monks
I, Gregory Stravolagadites, least and wretched among monks, a hesychast, thinking the same and in agreement, have signed.
I, Isaias, elder of the scete of Magoula and least among hieromonks, do agree and have signed.
Mark the Sinaite, least among monks
Kallistos, of the scete of Magoula and least among hieromonks
The signature of the elder and hesychast from Syria, in his own language
Sophronius, least among monks
Ioasaph, least among monks
I, Iakovos, humble bishop of Ierissos and the Holy Mountain, having been nourished by the traditions of the Athonites and fathers, and witnessing to what the entire Holy Mountain has agreed to in this address and signed, and agreeing to it myself, do also sign and seal it. Further, in that we have subscribed to this with all the rest, if someone should not agree with the saints as we have done and as our fathers who preceded us have done, we will not accept him into communion with us.

( The Living Witness of the Holy Mountain, pp. 111-118 @ http://eighthdaybooks.com/cgi-bin/ccp51/cp-app.cgi?usr=51H7556470&rnd=2157807&rrc=N&affl=&cip=72.142.35.253&act=&aff=&pg=prod&ref=0178&cat=&catstr= )