www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Gregory Palamas

In fact, Rome acknowledged Gregory Palamas as a saint in 1973 and he can easily be found online through the website "Catholic Saints Online." Pelikan made mention of this Roman recognition of Palamas, but I no longer remember where he did so.

Bl Pope John Paul II himself privately venerated St Gregory Palamas in his papal chapel (as he also did St Theophane the Recluse and St Seraphim of Sarov).

It is true that Roman Catholic theologians took issue with Palamas in the past (largely through general ignorance of his theology). Palamas was thought by them to be an Eastern "Quietist" and other such nonsense.

However, Roman Catholics can and do develop in their understanding of Eastern Christianity! As the Reverend Father DIAKon has said, our Patriarch Saint Joseph the Hieroconfessor (who was a Thomistic scholar in his own Rite and had an icon of Aquinas written for his cathedral in Rome, BTW) was an ardent partisan of the veneration of Saint Gregory Palamas and Rome responded favourably to his efforts by blessing the inclusion of Palamas in our calendar some decades ago.

To reiterate, Rome today acknowledges the sanctity of Palamas, we can look this up on a popular Catholic saints website that is online, and the old arguments against him of the past have dissipated based on better information and greater education of Roman Catholic theologians in this matter.

Of course, there was never any problem in this regard with the great experts of Eastern Christianity such as Fr. Taft et alia. Not to mention Fr Francis Dvornik's work exonerating, from a Roman Catholic perspective, Saint Photios the Great, Patriarch of Constantinople!

Alex

This, that Rome has recognised him and that pope Vojtila venerated him, is great! What could be more said about it?

What I wrote above is that since Palamas was a canonised saint in east before union of 1596, his veneration among uniates dates before union, that reasoning doesnt sound logical enough, because of the reasons I stated above.

Arbanon

Just a reminder that "uniate" is generally considered a pejorative term here and is not used. I think "Eastern Catholics" is a reasonable alternative.

I don't mind, provided that an Eastern Catholic is using it. I use it myself, because "uniatism" is a specific ideology and model of Church unity, defined in the Balamand Statement (as well as in a number of scholarly works), and with it goes a particular mindset. There are indeed Eastern Catholics who espouse uniatism, and therefore can be called, legitimately, "uniates".

However, there are many other members of the Eastern Catholic Churches who reject uniatism, and therefore are not uniates. The use of the term "uniate" to describe an entire Eastern Catholic Church or Churches, is therefore inaccurate.

Ironically, the bishops and presbyters who signed the Treaty of Brest would never have accepted uniatism as it developed, and cannot possibly be called uniates under the technical definition of the term.

I have no problem. As far as I personally am concerned, I may call them even orthodox in communion with Rome, or eastern catholics or orthodox catholic, apart of uniates.

What I still insist to is the answer to question from where and when does the palamite veneration originate with these byzantine christians in communion with Rome?

I guess, it should be somewhere after hesychastic movement among russians in 18 century or even much latter.

Palamite veneration is part of the patrimony that is the Byzantine Tradition. That it was ever suppressed was a latinizing act of self-mutilation on the part of Greek Catholic clerics under the influence of the ideology of uniatism. Its restoration is of a part with the rest of the Catholic Church's desire that the Eastern Churches in communion with Rome restore the fullness of their respective Traditions, in liturgy, theology, spirituality, theology, doctrine and discipline.

Is there something more concrete than part of patrimony or that it was ever surpressed?
To repeat myself, I think it's not enough to assume that since Palamas was a canonised saint prior to the union of 1596, his veneration has been part of this community since then.
First, Palamas was a canonised saint, few years after his passing away, in Constantinople only. And I dont think his canonisation in there had any immediate impact not even at the orthodox slavs in Balkans.
His veneration was established in a slow process, especially with the hesychastic revival in 18 century, from when it went to russians. Among orthodox communities in communion with Rome it most likely his veneration has entered by the influence of this revival.

Palamas was certainly venerated by the Melkites long before 1724. The best way to find who was venerating whom when is to look at the Typicons of the various Churches to see when the Second Sunday of Lent became the commemoration of St. Gregory Palamas.