Tuesday, August 29, 2023

Gregory Palamas (1296 – 1359) on How God can be "Seen" and "Unseen"

The following comes from:

 

Tikhon Pino, Essence and Energies: Being and Naming God in St Gregory Palamas (Routledge Research in Byzantine Studies; London: Routledge, 2023), 116-17

 

Seen and Unseen

 

Directly connected to the theme of ‘knowing’ God is the language of ‘seeing’ or beholding God. This theme, too, lies at the center of an important antinomy in Christian tradition that Palamas maps on to the distinction between essence and energies. It includes the affirmations in scripture that God is both seen and not seen and that in different ways. “To see God,” Palamas points out, “is both forbidden and promised.” [93] The angels, we are told in the Gospel of Matthew “behold the face of God” (Mt 18:10), while Moses is told that the face of God will not be shown to you. Instead, Moses was allowed to see “the things behind” God (Ex 33:23). Indeed, Moses is told, You will not be able to see my face, for man may not see (μὴ ἴδῃ) my face and live (Ex 33:20), whereas St Paul states that now we see through a glass, darkly, but then face to face (1 Cor 13:12). In the Beatitudes, too, it is said that the pure in heart shall see God (τὸν θεὸν ὄψονται) (Mt 5:8), although in the Gospel of John it is said that no one has ever seen God (ἑώρακεν πώποτε) (Jn 1:18). [94] St Paul also insists that no one is able to see God (ἰδεῖν δύναται) (1 Tim 6:16), although Solomon declares that the Creator is seen (θεωρεῖται) proportionally from the magnitude and beauty of creatures (Ws 13:5). In Genesis, Jacob likewise proclaims that he has seen God (εἶδον γὰρ θεὸν) face to face (Gen 32:31). [95] Especially in the context of the hesychast controversy, the explanation that God could, in fact, be seen is of central importance for Palamas.

 

Although some of these biblical texts in question seem to be in tension with one another, if not outright opposition, still, according to Palamas, “these things do not contradict one another.” [96] Rather, the nuances introduced by the seemingly inconsistent language point to the distinction between God’s incomprehensible essence, on the one hand, and the energies or attributes that are manifested in and through the created order, on the other. The fact that God is not and cannot be seen refers to God’s unapproachability at the level of essence (κατ’ οὐσίαν), [97] since God is “invisible in his ousia.” [98] Yet it is also the case that God is seen. He is the object of mystical visions, for example, and is beheld in his illuminations (ἐλλάμψεις) [99] so that he becomes visible “according to energy and grace to those who have become Godlike.” [100] Thus, it is necessary to conceive of God beyond the category of his invisible essence. Without this distinction, it would certainly be a mere contradiction to say that the same thing is both invisible and visible in itself. [101] Yet Palamas affirms that God is both seen in his energies and not seen in his essence so that the antinomy of scripture might be maintained and the simultaneous revelation of transcendence of God might be upheld.

 

Notes for the Above:

 

93 Akind. 5.3.7 (PS 3:292.15–16).

 

94 Theo. 27 (PS 2:254.17–27).

 

95 Akind. 5.3.7 (PS 3:292.15–16).

 

96 Akind. 5.3.7 (PS 3:292.26–29).

 

97 Athan. 8 (PS 2:419.14–18); Akind. 5.5.15 (PS 3:297.27–29).

 

98 Theo. 27 (PS 2:255.12); cf. Tr. 3.2.4 (ed. Meyendorff, 669.12–16).

 

99 Tr. 3.2.4 (ed. Meyendorff, 669.12–16). This is not to say that the divine energy is not also ‘invisible’ in the sense of being immaterial and beyond sensation; cf. Introduction, p. 8, n. 20, and Chapter 1, p. 56.

 

100 Theo. 27 (PS 2:255.2–3).

 

101 Asan. 4 (PS 2:366.10–12): ἀόρατον καθ’ ἐαυτὴν καὶ ὁρατὸν καθ’ ἐαυτήν