Procession and deification

[Mina Mounir]

Peace,

I was reading the 3rd Triad of saint Gregory Palamas , he was explaining that the denial of " uncreated energies " and " Divinization" leads to the Filioque
but didn't discuss it in detail.
can anyone explain this relationship between the three terms : uncreated energies , Divinization and Filioque . ?
thanks!

[Mina Mounir]

sorry for adding more questions ;
I was reading
Vladimir Lossky on the procession of the Holy Spirit (http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/lossky_filioque.html)
I found him distinguishing between :

1- Hypostatic Procession ( from father alone)
2- Natural procession , which is Manifestation . ( through the son)
3- Sending


from the patristic famous classics - like the Mystagogy of st. Photius the Great - about the Procession , I didn't see the second point at lossky's classification . I always saw how the fathers distinguished between the procession as something internal in the immanent Trinity , while sending is not a type of procession , but an economic missionary. but in the same time , I couldn't find a detailed explanation of the " through the son " concept in the writings of those fathers since they were working on the debate of filioque by distinguishing between procession and sending.

Lossky says - as far as I understood - that the " natural procession" is the energies. could anyone correct me if I'm mistaken ? and what is the difference between the second and third then ?


thanks , again !

[Mina Mounir]

hi ...
I found fr. Romanides on the same topic saying :

Because the Frankish Filioque presupposes the identity of uncreated divine essence and energy, and because participation in the divine essence is impossible, the Latin tradition was led automatically into accepting communicated grace as created, leading to its objectification and magical priestly manipulation.
what is the relation between " Filioque " or Procession in general and the uncreated energies , and consequently, the Deification ?
thanks

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Mina Mounir wrote:


what is the relation between " Filioque " or Procession in general and the uncreated energies , and consequently, the Deification ?
thanks.

For this you might want to look into the Orthodox understanding of perichoresis. Perichoresis describes the type of relationship between the Persons of the Holy Trinity, between Christ's two natures, and also between the Uncreated (ie the Divine) and the created. The central point is that this relationship is of utter communion but without the distinctions of the participants being lost. Thus when man is deified in God his distinct manner of being is not lost but rather fulfilled. We could also say this of God since in communion with man He diminishes nothing at all of Who He is but rather leads all towards His providential purpose.

Now as far as procession goes this describes the Personal relation of the Father to the Holy Spirit. It also as with the relationships described above shows that within this Trinitarian relationship the Divine Persons do not lose their distinctions. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father but in so doing the Holy Spirit is not a 'piece' from the Father nor a simple manifestation of Him. Rather this procession is the manner in which the Father ineffably is related to the Holy Spirit as distinct Persons.

There also is a relationship of communion between God and His creation. However this is not of the same sort mentioned above between the Persons of the Holy Trinity. Between God and His creation the manner of His communion is governed by that between the Uncreated and the created.

Thus for us as created God is not participated in essentially as between the Divine Persons but rather by energy. This however does not mean that God is not really participated in by us. Rather it means that the manner of this participation is that between the created & Uncreated.

To return to the principle stated above concerning perichoresis: in union with God man does not become literally God, union does not override his being a distinct and human. In fact in some mysterious fashion union with God actually fulfills man's unique calling.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Robert Hegwood]

(momentary aside) With regard to the meaning/teaching of Perichoresis I looked it up on Wikipedia...about half of it is fine, but then it gets into the procession of the Holy Spirit and it gets wonky...and gives a very western theological "explaination". If anyone has Wiki expertise...a correction or counterpoint to that entry would be welcome.

Also, there is no entry at all on the subject in Orthowiki...seems like there should be.

[Anna Stickles]

the Latin tradition was led automatically into accepting communicated grace as created, leading to its objectification and magical priestly manipulation.

Just another aside, I believe one has to watch out for anti-western bias in both Lossky and Fr. Romanides.
Instead of merely presenting what the Orthodox view is, they attempt to debunk the Roman Catholic view ... except very often they misrepresent the view held by the Roman Catholic Church. This causes a lot anti-Orthodox sentiment. Nothing like being told your beliefs are wrong by someone who is misunderstanding what you believe.

[Vasiliki D.]

(momentary aside) With regard to the meaning/teaching of Perichoresis I looked it up on Wikipedia...about half of it is fine, but then it gets into the procession of the Holy Spirit and it gets wonky...and gives a very western theological "explaination". If anyone has Wiki expertise...a correction or counterpoint to that entry would be welcome.

Also, there is no entry at all on the subject in Orthowiki...seems like there should be.

Thats because they refuse to use Greek terminology and use an english equivalent word or most googled term ... do you know the English equivalent for the English word Perichorisis?

[Mina Mounir]

thanks , fr. Raphael.
I think I can understand the role of procession without using the " filioque" to preserve the distinction and uniqueness of each hypostasis.
I still can't understand what st. Palamas meant by saying " the Barlaam's denial of the essence-energy distinction leads to the Latin doctrine of Filioque " ?
thanks

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Mina Mounir wrote:


I still can't understand what st. Palamas meant by saying " the Barlaam's denial of the essence-energy distinction leads to the Latin doctrine of Filioque " ?

Did St Gregory write exactly this? Perhaps if you could give a source.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Mina Mounir]

not literally,
but I will look for an english copy of the second triad , and send exactly what he said
because my copy is in arabic

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

not literally,
but I will look for an english copy of the second triad , and send exactly what he said
because my copy is in arabic

Thanks. I was wondering because the filioque long preceded Barlaam's theological problems.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Mina Mounir]

Dear father,
if u have an english text , it is found in : Third Triad : title no.3 .

unfortunately I did not find a complete english text of the triads ... but I found that it is quoted in a book :
George I. Mantzaridis,The Deification of Man,st. Gregory Palamas and the Orthodox Tradition,St. Vladimir Seminary Press 1984.

page 37 :

But Palamas goes even further , linking the doctrine relating to procession of the Holy Spirit " also from the Son" to the denial of the uncreated nature of divine grace .
in answer to the question , " why did Barlaam struggle so hard to refute the uncreated nature of divine grace?" Palamas say, " he has given what strength he posseses to his fellow latins , so that cunningly and even forcibly he may seduce us to their teaching" for , he continues , if uncreated grace does not exist , then the Spirit conferred by the Son, which according to the testimony of the fathers is uncreated , is not the uncreated energy but the actual hypostasis of the spirit. " do you not see " he concludes,"his deep and dark purpose, and the deceitfulness and malice of his undertaking?" * [Defence of the Hesychasts 3, 1, 3, works 1, pp.617-18]

actually , I didn't understand the relation between filioque and denying deification but it seems that the uncreated energy - for palamas - is the connection , if there is an explanation for this , I'd be glad. thanks.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

I checked for this work of St Gregory Palamas yesterday but I do not have it in its complete form. Therefore I wasn't able to find what is quoted.

In any case why I asked the question was to confirm whether the quote came from Mantzaridis or St Gregory Palamas.

Both of course could be equally valid.

So far though without seeing the actual quote it could be that the point about Barlaam and the filioque has to do with tendencies in western theology to protect the essence of God through a hesitancy concerning the distinctions in God.

Thus for Barlaam there is a hesitancy about the essence/energy distinction.

In the filioque there is a tendency to see the Persons as deriving from the Divine essence rather than as from the Person of the Father.

In a sense both of these are trying to protect the priority of the Divinity as essence.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Mina Mounir]

I checked for this work of St Gregory Palamas yesterday but I do not have it in its complete form. Therefore I wasn't able to find what is quoted.

In any case why I asked the question was to confirm whether the quote came from Mantzaridis or St Gregory Palamas.

Both of course could be equally valid.

So far though without seeing the actual quote it could be that the point about Barlaam and the filioque has to do with tendencies in western theology to protect the essence of God through a hesitancy concerning the distinctions in God.

Thus for Barlaam there is a hesitancy about the essence/energy distinction.

In the filioque there is a tendency to see the Persons as deriving from the Divine essence rather than as from the Person of the Father.

In a sense both of these are trying to protect the priority of the Divinity as essence.

In Christ- Fr Raphael
according to my arabic copy of the 3rd triad , I think George Mantzaridis mentioned the whole part of palamas. yes , I believe that the problem is that it makes the monarchy is for the Divine essence not the person of the father , that's why st. Photius - as far as I understood from his mystagogy - connected it with sabelianism . what I understood is that the Fiolioque means that the holy spirit "essentially" proceeds from the father and the son , then there is no place for energetic procession and this doesn't make the Holy spirit moves from the father through the Son by eternal manifestation ( lossky calls it the natural procession of energies ( he quoted from the Tomus of Gregory II of Cyprus an expression " aidion ekfansin = eternal radiance") ). this means that we are not - in Christ - deified however St. Paul says :
Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour( titus 3 : 6)

I hope I'm not mistaken too much :) .