06 Interpreting God's Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas

研究論文（Research Paper）

鄭維亮以帕拉瑪斯天主本質與能量的分別來解釋天主在神恩復興運動中的自我分享

非屬於本刊當期企劃之主題，但對宗教研究領域有創新、評論上有建設性、資料蒐集及分析有貢獻之完整學術規範論文，其字數限制與審定方式皆同專題論文。

《新世紀宗教研究》第十三卷第二期（2014年12月），頁179-232 DOI 10.3966/168437382014121302006

以帕拉瑪斯天主本質與能量的分別來解釋天主在神恩復興運動中的自我分享

鄭維亮加拿大基督聖體恩寵研究所研究員 24205新北市新莊區中正路510號輔仁大學格物學宛 202室 [email protected]

摘要為了證明天主在天主教神恩復興運動中真實分享自己本體的確實，作者以東正教St. Gregory Palamas（聖額我略．帕拉瑪斯，約西元1296-1359年）天主本質與能量的分別來證實之。本文分為五節。第一節簡介今天在天主自我分享上的幾個神學論題。第二節歸納Palamas（帕拉瑪斯）天主本質與能量的分別。第三節精簡指出神化奧蹟（theosis）及天主自己神化人的能量。第四節以天主自己神化人的能量去解釋天主在神恩復興運動中真實分享自己本體的議題。第五節是本合一對話的結語。

關鍵詞：東正教、聖額我略．帕拉瑪斯天主本質與能量的分別、天主教神恩復興運動、天主真實分享自己的本體、天主神化人的能量、合一對話

投稿日期：102.12.17；接受刊登日期：103.08.05；最後修訂日期：103.08.29 責任校對：林鈞桓、何維綺 180 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies

Cheng, Wai-leung Grace Institute of the Holy Eucharist [email protected]

Abstract To explore, demonstrate or prove the possibility of God’s sharing His real Being or Self with us charismatically,1 this paper employs the distinction of St. Gregory Palamas (c. 1296-1359) between God’s Divine Essence and Divine Energies. Divided into five sections, section A introduces concisely what is at stake with the theological issues today as regards God’s Self-sharing. Section B briefly sums up Palamas’ distinction between God’s Divine Essence and Divine Energies. Section C succinctly deals with theosis or deification and Divine Energies as God’s deifying Energies. Then, section D interprets God’s Charismatic Self-sharing in terms of God’s deifying Energies. Finally, section E consists of the concluding remarks as regards this ecumenical dialogue.

Keywords: Eastern Orthodoxy, St. Gregory Palamas’ distinction between God’s Divine Essence and Divine Energies, Catholic Charismatic Renewal, God’s real Self-sharing, God’s deifying Energies, ecumenical dialogue

1 It may be true that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal movement has been in general decline in the West for more than two decades, but it is not so in many parts of Africa, Latin America, and some parts of Asia such as mainland China and South Korea. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 181

A. INTRODUCTION

Is God’s very Divine Being per se shareable or participable by us human beings on earth?2 Present-day Christianity is facing at least five issues inextricably related to this question, i.e., theism, deism, atheism, pantheism, and the Charismatic Renewal. First of all, theism “is the belief in a transcendent, personal God who creates, conserves and intervenes (e.g. through miracles) in our world. Unlike pantheism, theism does not push the divine immanence to the point of identifying God with the world. Unlike deism, theism holds that God is not a mere remote creator but through providence, revelation and a variety of salvific acts is ceaselessly engaged on our behalf. A Cambridge Platonist Ralph Cudworth (1617-1688) probably coined the term. Despite their major differences, Christianity, Islam and Judaism may be bracketed together as theistic religions.”3 As explained later, there is a major difference between Eastern Orthodox Christianity and Western Christianity as regards this question on the possible human participation in God’s very Being. While the Christian West in general states that we can only partake in God’s Being or essence in unmediated union only in Heaven, the Christian East teaches that we can even do so here and now. Second, atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens believe that there is simply no God－or that there is almost certainly no God－in whose Being we can partake. In fact, we should not even believe in any religion about the real existence of any Deity, since such a religion is by nature poisonous or delusive.4

2 Pope Benedict XVI recently stated that many people today lack an experience of God, assessed on Sept. 27, 2011, http://www.zenit.org/article-33522?1=english (ZE11092410–2011-09-23) 3 Gerald O’Collins, S.J. & Edward G Farrugia, S.J. (1991). A Concise Dictionary of Theology. New York/Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press, p.238. 4 Cf. Christopher Hitchens (2007). God is not Great: How religion poisons everything. Toronto, Ontario: Mc Clelland & Stewart, pp.1ff; Richard Dawkins (2006). The God Delusion. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin, pp.113-159. 182 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

At the same time, secular pantheism in its many faces tells us that everything is God or that we can partake in God’s very Being so completely that we are God or a real part of God. For example, the poem “Charge of the Goddess” by Doreen Valiente, a modern witch, which can be easily read pantheistically: “For I am the soul of nature, who gives life to the universe. From Me all things proceed, and unto Me all things must return.”5 Margot Adler, a priestess of Wicca, wrote in Drawing Down the Moon: “Divinity is immanent in all Nature. It is as much within you as without.”6 In How to know God: The soul’s journey into the mystery of mysteries, Deepak Chopra lists seven stages in knowing God. In the highest stage of the soul’s journey, one sees no difference between himself and God.7 Seemingly, secular pantheism teaches that everyone is a part of God and that God is completely shareable to each one on earth. Moreover, Christian transcendent deism inspired by the philosophy of Aristotle informs us that God’s Being is imparticipable. In other words, deism is a summary term “for the beliefs of many British, European and American writers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, who in various ways stressed the role of reason in religion and rejected revelation, miracles and any providential involvement in nature and human history.”8 Commenting on the traditional deistic and theistic theology in the West, George A. Maloney, S.J. (1924-2005), a prominent Western scholar in Eastern Christianity, cogently stated about Western Christians in general: “On all levels of Christian life the faithful are searching for a more immediate experience of God. Descartes’ ‘clear and distinct ideas’

5 Cf. Paul Harrison (1999). The Elements of Pantheism: understanding the divinity in nature and the universe. Boston, MA: Element Books, p.11. 6 Ibid.. 7 Deepak Chopra (2000). How to Know God: The soul’s journey into the mystery of mysteries. New York: Random House, p.490. 8 Gerald O’Collins, S.J. & Edward G Farrugia, S.J. (1991). A Concise Dictionary of Theoloy, p.53. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 183

have given the West a rationalistic science of theology.”9 Hence, “Western theology by and large has become reduced to a static form of objectifying God’s transcendence by separating Him in His primary causality in all things from the created world in its createdness.”10 In other words, there is God, but He is so transcendent that we cannot really participate in His transcendent Being as such. As a result, countless Christians in the West have been desperately looking “for an immediate encounter with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.”11 Subsequently, as an overall universal reaction to traditional transcendent nominalistic deism and theism, a deep hunger for a personal experience of God has emerged. Thus, we witness inter alia the rise of the world-wide Pentecostal-Charismatic Renewal movement since the beginning of the last century. Historically, this prominent Pentecostal-Charismatic Renewal which swept through North America and beyond was started by Protestants at the turn of the twentieth century.12 On the Catholic side, it was via the initiation of two professors in 1966 at Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, that the Catholic Charismatic Renewal gushed forth and began to spread.13 Through the personal experience and witness of countless Protestant Pentecostals and Catholic Charismatics, it is now clear that human beings can partake in God’s very Being in terms of His numerous charismatic gifts or charismata. Apparently, the variegated spectrum of charismata in the Catholic Charismatic renewal consists at least of the following six areas: (1) God the Uncreated Grace; (2) Sanctifying

9 Rev. George A. Maloney, S.J. (1978). A Theology of Uncreated Energies. The 1978 Pere Marquette Theology Lecture. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Marquette University Press, pp.7-8. 10 Ibid., p.8. 11 Ibid.. 12 Cf. Randall J. Stephens, “Assessing the Roots of Pentecostalism: A historiographic essay,” accessed on July 25, 2011, http://are.as.wvu.edu/pentroot.htm 13 Rev. Edward D. O’Connor, C.S.C. (1972). The Pentecostal Movement in the Catholic Church. Notre Dame, Indiana: Ave Maria Press, pp.13-14; Ralph Martin (1971). Unless the Lord Build the House: The Church and the New Pentecost. Notre Dame, Indiana: Ave Maria Press, p.62. 184 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

gifts or charismata of the Holy Spirit; (3) The nine-fold fruit of the Holy Spirit; (4) Charismatic gift-ministries of the Holy Spirit; (5) The Church as the Mystical Body of Christ; and (6) Baptism in the Holy Spirit.14 However, many Christians, including the Charismatics, are still not sure to what extent they could participate in God’s Being per se. Many tend to ask the following questions directly and indirectly: Is it possible for human beings to experience an infinite God? How could the infinite God be confined to an experience? How could Charismatics be aware of an “object” so vast and transcendent? How should our encounter with an infinite God be properly understood. How could this infinite God make Himself shareable?15 Focusing shapely on the core of these challenging questions, it is the intention of the present paper, therefore, to address specifically “the extent in which Charismatic Christians can partake in God’s very Being per se in terms of Palamas’ distinction of God’s Essence and Energies.” To effectively engage in this issue of God on sharing Himself or His Being with us charismatically, the present article, in view of St. Gregory Palamas’ distinction between God’s Divine Essence and His Divine Energies, seeks to explain this charismatic Self-sharing of God in terms of God’s Divine Energies as His deifying Energies. One may say the present paper is a continuation of an article published by the author earlier entitled “The Distinction between God’s Essence and Energy: Gregory Palamas’ idea of Ultimate Reality and Meaning.”16 Although that paper succinctly presents Palamas’ distinction between God’s Divine Essence and Divine Energy, many vital aspects related to

14 Cf. the author’s paper entitled “Exploring the Charismatic Spectrum of Charismata－From the Catholic viewpoint,” New Century Religious Studies, vol.10, no.3 (March 2012), pp.41-81. 15 Cf. David Middlemiss (1996). Interpreting Charismatic Experience. London: SCM Press, p.69. 16 John Cheng (1998). The Distinction between God’s Essence and Energy: Gregory Palamas’ idea of Ultimate Reality and Meaning. Ultimate Reality and Meaning, vol.21, no.1, pp.56-75. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 185

this distinction have been missing, such as explaining charismatically the Self-sharing God in terms of God’s Divine Energies. Thus, this paper is now taking up such a significant challenge in an attempt to address the very extent Charismatics can partake in God’s Divine Being. It is hoped that such an exploration or demonstration would also shed some light on other modern-day issues like atheism, secular pantheism, as well as transcendent theism and deism aforementioned.

B. PALAMAS’ ESSENCE-ENERGIES DISTINCTION17

(A) Introducing St. Gregory Palamas as a Defender of Orthodox Hesychasm

St. Gregory Palamas was born c. 1296, the first-born of a noble family in Constantinople, and he died as the Archbishop of Thessalonica in 1359. Palamas was recognized as a saintly monk and a mystical theologian by four local non-ecumenical Councils held at Constantinople during his lifetime and shortly after his death respectively in 1341, 1347, 1351, and 1368.18 He became a major teacher of Byzantine Christianity. In our own day Palamas’ status in Eastern Christianity has been rediscovered by Orthodox theologians such as Georges Florovsky (1893-1979) and John Meyendorff (1926- 1992), and he has rightly been restored to a central position.19 Apparently, as Palamas was canonized by the synod of Constantinople in 1268, St. Gregory Palamas (1296-1359) in the Christian East may be compared with St. Thomas

17 This section on Palamas’ distinction of God’s Essence and Energies is substantially taken from the author’s article: John Cheng (1998). The Distinction between God’s Essence and Energy: Gregory Palamas’ idea of Ultimate Reality and Meaning, Ultimate Reality and Meaning, vol.21, no.1, pp.60-63. 18 Kallistos Ware (1975). God hidden and revealed: The apophatic way and the essence-energies distinction. Eastern Churches Review, Vol.7, p.129. 19 Cf. Ibid.; Karl Rahner (Ed.) (1975). Encyclopedia of Theology: The concise Sacramentum Mundi. New York: Seabury, p.391. 186 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

Aquinas (c. 1225-1274) in the Christian West.20 To this day his relics have been venerated at the cathedral of Thessalonica. In the following hymn, the Orthodox Church chants to St. Gregory Palamas in the liturgy of the second Sunday of Lent, in veneration of the saint who, several decades before the fall of Byzantium, integrated hesychasm—Eastern Christianity’s ancient mystical tradition of contemplative monasticism—into a doctrinal synthesis:

O light of Orthodox, teacher of the Church, its confirmation!

O ideal of monks and invincible champion of theologians!

O wonder-working Gregory, glory of Thessalonika and preacher of grace!

Always intercede before the Lord that our souls may be saved!21

Traditionally, Palamas’ hesychastic mysticism cannot be claimed to be the only Orthodox mysticism which has taken many forms throughout history and does so even today. However, he “can be called a master of orthodox mysticism inasmuch as his work transcends the limits of one school of spirituality and renews in its deepest essence the life of the Christian Mystery.”22 Hesychasm (Greek: hesychasmos, from hesychia, “stillness, rest, quiet, silence”) is an eremitic mystical tradition of prayer or prayerful mysticism of sacred quietude in the Eastern Orthodox Church.23 Initiated by Christ, the avowed goal of the hesychasts

20 Catherine M. LaCugna (1991). God for Us: The Trinity and Christian life. New York, N.Y.: Harper Collins, p.181. 21 John Meyendorff (1974). St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, p.7. 22 Ibid. 23 Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesychasm Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 187

is the mystical unitive deification or theosis, through their union with Him.24 Oftentimes, after a long repetition of the Jesus Prayer (i.e., “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me a sinner!”) in holy quietude, the pious believer is given an affirming sign of this prayer of the heart through a living vision of God’s Uncreated Light. According to Palamas, this Light experienced in holy hesychasm is identical with the “Taboric Light” seen by Christ’s disciples at His Transfiguration on Mount Tabor.25 Such a real personal encounter of God’s Uncreated Light, Energy, Power or Grace26 is regarded by traditional Orthodox mystical hesychasm as authentic. Consequently, in terms of the distinction between God’s Essence and Energies, Palamas defended this Orthodox mystical experience to be the result of our unmediated union or communion with God Himself who has made it truly possible for us to partake in such an experience, both on earth and in Heaven.27 Palamas stated this doctrine as follows: “He who participates in the divine energy… becomes himself, in a sense, light; he is united with the light and with the light he sees in full consciousness all that remains hidden for those who have not this grace; for the pure of heart sees God [the light].”28 Acting as the authentic spokesman or theologian for hesychasm, St. Gregory was simply safeguarding a traditional Eastern spirituality of mystical prayer which has existed since the 4th century.29 Through the distinction between God’s Essence and Energies, Palamas desired to solidify an objective theological foundation to justify this practice which was a prayer possible not only for monks, but also for

24 Cf. John Meyendorff (Ed.) (1983). Gregory Palamas. The Triads. Selective translation of Meyendorff’s critical edition of the Triads by Nicholas Gendle. New York: Paulist Press, p.8. 25 M. T. Hansbury (1979). Hesychasm. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Religion, Vol.F-N, p.1660. 26 Kallistos Ware (1975). God hidden and revealed: The apophatic way and the essence-energies distinction, pp.130-131. 27 John Meyendorff (Ed.) (1983). Gregory Palamas. The Triads, p.37. 28 Vladimir Lossky (1974). In the Image and Likeness of Christ. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, p.61; Basil Krivocheine (1938-1939). The Ascetical and Theological Teaching of Gregory Palamas. Eastern Churches Quarterly, Vol.III, p.198. 29 Ibid., pp.207-208. 188 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

all Christians.30 In truth, the core of Palamism is merely a theological expression of that fundamental truth concerning the real intimate, unmediated mystical union between God and us established by the mystery of Christ’s Incarnation.

(B) Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies

As alluded to above, the best known part of the Palamite doctrine consists of the distinction between God’s Essence and Energies.31 This is Palamas’ unique conception of expressing the idea that the transcendent God remains eternally hidden in His Divine Essence, but at the same time this God seeks to communicate, unite, and share Himself with us personally through His Divine Energies. Indeed, the very focus of hesychasm is a sacred prayerful experience of God’s personal union with us through His Divine Energies, as He seeks to reach out to us in this prayerful quietude. Accordingly, Palamas’ defence of the Orthodox traditional practice of hesychasm was done in terms of the necessary distinction between God’s Essence and Energies. Simultaneously, Palamas’ articulation of the distinction between God’s Essence and Energies was put together amid his incumbent defense of Orthodox hesychism.32 Historically, out of the four non-ecumenical Councils held separately in 1341, 1347, 1351,33 and 1368, the 1351 Constantinople Council was the most important doctrinally of all the Councils related to Palamas and his teaching. It summed up succinctly the Palamite distinction in eight main points:

(1) There is in God a distinction (diakrisis) between the essence and the energies or energy.

30 John Meyendorff (Ed.) (1983). Gregory Palamas. The Triads, p.8. 31 John Meyendorff (1974). A Study of Gregory Palamas. London: The Faith Press, p.202. 32 Cf. John Meyendorff (1974). St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality, pp.95-129. 33 For the acts of the Councils of 1341, 1347 and 1351, see I. N. Karmiris (1960). Ta dogmatika kai symvolika mnimeia tis Orthodoxou Katholikis Ekklisias, vol.1, pp.354-410. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 189

(2) The energy of God is not created but uncreated (akistos).

(3) This distinction between the uncreated essence and the uncreated energies does not in any way impair the divine simplicity; there is no “compositeness” (synthesis) in God.

(4) The term “deity” (theotis) may be applied not only to the essence of God but to the energies.

(5) The essence enjoys a certain priority or superiority in relation to the energies, in the sense that the energies proceed from the essence.

(6) Man can participate in God’s energies but not in his essence.

(7) The divine energies may be experienced by men in the form of light—a light which though beheld through men’s bodily eyes, is in itself non-material, “intelligible” (noeron) and uncreated. This is the uncreated light that was manifested to the apostles at the Transfiguration on Mount Tabor, that is seen during prayer by the saints in our own time, and that will shine upon and from the righteous at their resurrection on the Last Day. It thus possesses an eschatological character: it is “the light of the Age to Come.”

(8) No energy is to be associated with one divine person to the 190 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

exclusion of the other two, but the energies are shared in common by all three persons of the Trinity.34

The 1351 Council also formally endorsed Palamas’ Confession of Faith submitted by him. What is particularly epoch-making in this Confession is Palamas’ linking as synonymous God’s energeia with God’s grace and power through which God enters into intimate union with us. His Confession shows that his teaching on God’s Divine Energies is substantially a theology of grace. St. Gregory Palamas states tersely:

[God] is not revealed is his essence (ousia), for no one has ever seen or described God’s nature (physis); but he is revealed in the grace (charis), power (dynamis) and energy (energeia) which is common to the Father, Son and Spirit. Distinctive to each of the three is the person (hypostasis) of each, and whatever belongs to the person. Shared in common by all three are not only the transcendent essence— what is altogether nameless, unmanifested and imparticipable, since it is beyond all names, manifestations and participation—but also the divine grace, power, energy, radiance, kingdom and incorruption whereby God enters through grace into communion and union with the holy angels and the saints.35

Thus, Palamas has made it clear that we can participate in God’s divine nature and become one with Him via what His nature revealed to us as grace,

34 The first seven points were listed in Synodical Tome of 1351, nos.18, 46, which can be found in Karmiris (1960). Ta dogmatika kai symvolika mnimeia tis Orthodoxou Katholikis Ekklisias, vol.i, pp.385, 400. The English translation was done by Kallistos Ware, as found in his article entitled “God hidden and revealed: The apophatic way and the essence-energies distinction,” p.130. Moreover, the eighth point was listed by Kallistos Ware in the same article on the same page. 35 Karmiris (1960). Ta dogmatika kai symvolika mnimeia tis Orthodoxou Katholikis Ekklisias, vol.i, pp.130-131. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 191

power, or Divine Energy, both on earth and in Heaven, though in different degrees. At the same time, Palamas’ God is an all-present transcendent- immanent God who is absolutely transcendent in His Essence and yet at the same time immensely immanent to us everywhere through His Energy or Energies. Hence, God can be called a divine transcendent-immanent Being or the Divine Essence-Energies Being present everywhere. This transcendent-immanent concept of God helps us to comprehend better how God in His omnipresent Essence-Energies can be hidden and revealed to us simultaneously in what Western Christianity tradition calls the supernatural and natural realms. Further, this Palamism provides Western Christians with an authentic daily Christian immanentism, since the distinction between God’s Essence and Energies really expands the horizon of the Platonic transcendental tendency embraced by Western deism and theism. As we know, such a two-storey supernatural- natural departmentalism of Platonism and Neo-Platonism consciously and subconsciously identifies the supernatural God primarily with the eternal transcendent realm, therefore depriving their followers a real unmediated participation in the supernatural God in the present natural earthly realm. Moreover, it is vital to note that Palamas’ personal existentialism applies the concept of divine simplicity not to God’s Essence but to God’s Tripersonal Being, who is revealed to us in His free acts, operations or Energies, while He remains forever transcendent to us in His Essence.36 Since this simple or non-composite Tripersonal Being is fully present both in His Essence and Energies, He is imparticipable in His Essence and participable in His Energies insofar as humans are concerned. Coming from the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit, each Divine Energy of God is Tripersonal through which

36 Cf. John Meyendorff (Ed.) (1983). Gregory Palamas, The Triads, pp.13-14. 192 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

all of God unites Tripersonally with us.37 It is clear that in God’s reaching out to us personally, His participable Energy or Energies flowing eternally from His imparticipable Essence are used by Him to communicate to us personally His very Being. In this way, we can have a real personal unmediated union with God, without going through His forever unapproachable Essence.38

As a whole, one may say that up to this very day, Western Christian theology and spirituality have been vastly influenced by traditional scholastism. By definition, scholasticism is “an academic and monastic tradition that used Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy to understand, interpret systematically and speculate about the truths of faith. Building on St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430), Boethius (ca. 480-524) and others, scholasticism really began with St. Anselm of Canterbury (ca. 1033-1109) and his program of ‘fides quaerens intellectum’ (La. ‘faith seeking understanding’). After Peter Abelard (1079-1142) and Peter Lombard (ca. 1100-60) it found its greatest exponents in St. Thomas Aquinas (ca. 1255-74), St. Bonaventure (ca. 1217-74) and Duns Scotus (ca. 1265-1308). With William of Occam (ca. 1285-1347) scholasticism declined into empty nominalism.”39 Thus, as mentioned, traditional Western Christianity to an outstanding extent has taken on the Platonic-Aristotelian dualism of separating the totality of reality into the supernatural and natural departments in developing theology and

37 Cf. Michael Fahey & John Meyendorff (1977). Trinitarian Theology East and West: St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Gregory Palamas. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Press, pp.38-39. 38 Cf. M. Edmund Hussey (1974). The Persons-Energy Structure in the Theology of St. Gregory Palamas. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, Vol.18, pp.26-27. 39 Gerald O’Collins, S.J. & Edward G Farrugia, S.J. (1991). A Concise Dictionary of Theology, p.215. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 193

spirituality. The “blind spot” of this approach consists precisely in consciously, subconsciously, or unconsciously placing God the Infinite Absolute Being in the out-of-this-world supernatural transcendent realm, while imprisoning man and all creation in the temporal natural immanent realm. In other words, “God is the independent universal cause or source; the universe, his extrinsic effect or outcome. The universe is outside the divine actuality, not a qualification or constituent of it.”40 It is true that Aquinas also writes about God’s omnipresent immanence that “God is in all things, and innermostly.”41 However, it seems that Western Christians deeply entrenched in supernatural-natural two-storey block mentality would soon find such a description considerably symbolic, purely theoretical, or substantially nominalistic. As a consequence, the departmentalized transcendent God presented by traditional scholasticism, which has profoundly shaped traditional deism, theism, and even nominalism, is hardly related to day-to-day human life.42 George Maloney comments: “The West has suffered from the thought categories taken from Neo-Platonism by Augustine and inserted into Western theology and spirituality. But when Western schoolmen no longer were mystics like the earlier theologians who could discourse on contemplation and never separate it completely from God as Life, theology fell into a rationalization of man’s anthropomorphic view of God.” 43 Without surprise, Western traditional scholastic theology and spirituality is noticeably characteristic of its cataphatic, unmystical way of seeking an intellectual knowledge of God. According to Pope John Paul II, the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas

40 Charles Hartshorne & William Reese (1953). Philosophers Speak of God. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, p.500. 41 St. Thomas Aquinas (1947). Summa Theologica, corpus I, Q.8, Art.1 (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). New York & Boston, etc.: Benziger Brothers, p.34. 42 George A. Maloney, S.J. (1978). A Theology of Uncreated Energies. The 1978 Pere Marquette Theology Lecture, p.103. 43 Ibid., p.113. 194 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

is fundamentally a philosophy of Actus Essendi, whose transcendental value helps to pave directly to the rise to the intellectual knowledge and understanding of God as the Ipse Actus Essendi Subsistens, i.e., Subsistent Act of Being Itself.44 Accordingly, actus in Latin means “(1) action, activity, act, a synonym of ‘actio and operatio,’ the opposite of ‘habitus and potentia’; (2) reality, real being, the opposite of ‘potentia and potestas’; (3) deed, activity, Acts of the Apostles.”45 Indeed, St. Thomas regards Actus Essendi as “the actuality of all acts, the perfection of perfections”46 and “a proper effect of God.”47 In other words, depicted properly in terms of divine effect, God to Aquinas is the living Divine Being who is the Perfect Actualization of Perfect Actualizations, having infinitely fulfilled all His potentials or potentialities. Therefore, this conception of the infinitely good or self-giving God is utterly amazing, since this is a God-for-us who has not only infinitely actualized or fulfilled His Being eternally within Himself, but is reaching out everywhere to give or share with his creature His very Being overflowing with infinite goodness and eternal fulfillment.48 Yet, due to its traditional departmental way of thinking, Western Christianity tells us that we human beings can only partake in God’s very Uncreated Being as He is when we are in Heaven. It is not possible at all for us to participate in God’s Being as He is on earth. Aquinas states: “God cannot be seen in His essence by a mere human being, except he be separated from this mortal life.”49 Traditionally, this teaching of St. Thomas has been reaffirmed, among

44 Cf. Retrieved on July 2, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_Essendi. 45 Roy J. Deferrari (1968). A Latin-English Dictionary of St. Thomas Aquinas. Boston, MA: Daughters of St. Paul, p.25. 46 Cf. St. Thomas Aquinas (1947). Summa Theologica, corpus I, Q.4, Arts.1 & 3 (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.); Quaestiones Disputatae De Potentia, q.7, a.2, & 9; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_Essendi 47 Cf. St. Thomas Aquinas (1947). Summa Theologica, corpus I, Q.45, Art.5 (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.); Summa Contra Gentiles, book III, chapter 66, no.4; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_Essendi 48 Cf. John Cheng Wai-leung (2010). A Comparative Study between St. Thomas Aquinas's Concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens and the Concept of Qi in the Guanzi's Four Daoist Chapters. Toronto: Grace Institute Press, pp.78-85. 49 St. Thomas Aquinas (1947). Summa Theologica, Pt.1, Q.12, Art.11 (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 195

others, by The Constitution Benedictus Deus (1336), The Council of Florence (1438-1445) and The Vatican Council I (1869-1870).50 Obviously, this scholastic way of presenting God is different from Palamism. To St. Gregory, God is eternally at rest in His Divine Essence, yet He exists always in an outgoing motion of love to share Himself with us creatures in His Divine Energies.51 As a footnote, it is important to note the sharp difference between the term “God’s essence” which is used by Western Christianity to refer to God’s very participable Being, and the same term “God’s essence” used in Palamas’ distinction which is not partakable by creation, now and forever. Further, Christians in the West have to wait until they are in Heaven, in order to personally see or partake in the wonderful essence or Being of Actus Essendi as He is. At the same time, this scholastic conception of God has not spelled out clearly how far we can actually partake in God’s very essence or nature in Heaven. As we know, St. Gregory reminds us that if a human being could for an instance be allowed to partake in God’s Essence (as understood by Eastern Orthodoxy) or the Hypostases of the Holy Trinity, he or she would become another Divine Person, along with the Three Divine Persons.52 All in all, in viewing God principally as an essence,53 people with this conception of God in the West tend to focus mainly on His eternal supernatural transcendence. This can lead to an intellectual “pitfall” lurking in our traditional scholastic theism. It tends, among others, to distract Christians unintentionally from a deeper awareness of God’s personal, omnipresent immanence and,

50 Cf. Jesuit Fathers of St. Mary's College (1973). The Church Teaches: Documents of the Church inEnglish translation. Rockford, Illinois: Tan Books and Publishers, pp.349-353. 51 Cf. George A. Maloney, S.J. (1978). A Theology of Uncreated Energies. p.44. 52 Cf. Vladimir Lossky (1976). The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, pp.69-70. 53 Cf. George A. Maloney, S.J. (1978). A Theology of Uncreated Energies, pp.5-15; Charles Hartshorne & William Reese (1953). Philosophers Speak of God, pp.76-163. 196 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

in particular, the possibility of a real, personal unmediated union with Him everywhere on earth. Following Palamas’ distinction, we may view God as the Divine Essence-Energies Being radiating unceasingly His very Essence-Energies Being in all directions, embracing, and permeating all creation. Nonetheless, we can only partake in His participable Energies, but not in His imparticipable Essence, both now and in Heaven. Indeed, it is through His Energies that God is reaching out and seeking a personal union with everyone everywhere. This awareness enables us to add God’s immanent, participable dimension to the scholastic concept of God which views God largely as a transcendent divine essence, participable only in the afterlife. The Palamite concept that God’s Divine Energies are within everything and outside everything54 helps us to grasp God’s real personal immanence to us everywhere. Palamas adds concisely: “God is entirely present in each of the divine energies, we name Him from each of them, although it is clear that He transcends all of them.”55 Without denying God’s absolute transcendent existence in His Essence, Palamas wrote: “Indeed, it is only through his energies that one knows that God exists; hence, he who rejects the divine energies… must necessarily be ignorant of the [all-pervasive immanent] existence of God.”56 In fact, God’s Divine Energies are God Himself coming down personally to meet and embrace us everywhere. They are God’s real personal immanence in the present universe, through which God makes our personal union with Him possible. In the final analysis, created to “become partakers of the divine nature” (2Pet 1:4), we Western Christians should graciously and gratefully welcome Palamism as an unprecedented eye-opener. First, Palamas’ distinction reminds us that whether we are in Heaven or on earth, the simple non-composite God

54 Cf. Vladimir Lossky (1976). The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, p.89. 55 Cf. John Meyendorff (Ed.) (1983). Gregory Palamas, The Triads, pp.95-96. 56 John Meyendorff (1974). A Study of Gregory Palamas, p.211. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 197

which traditional scholasticism espouses is in fact both personally imparticipable and participable by us. Second, this God is constantly seeking a personal union with each of us everywhere through His omnipresent Divine Energies which can be regarded as God-for-us in His participable nature, life or constitution. Third, humans no longer have to wait till they arrive in Heaven to be able to partake in God’s very Being in unmediated union in this realized eschatology presented by Palamas.

C. THEOSIS AND GOD’S DEIFYING ENERGIES

The doctrine of God’s Divine Energy or Energies is not only the dogmatic basis as regards the real character of all mystical experiences as explained to some significant extent above.57 At the same time, one may say that this teaching of Palamas is also the doctrinal foundation of theosis or deification. Equating God’s Divine Energy with God’s grace, St. Maximus the Confessor (c. 580-662) germanely sums up what theosis and God’s deifying grace really mean as follows: “God has created us in order that we may become partakers of the divine nature, in order that we may enter into eternity, and that we may appear like unto Him, being deified by that grace out of which all things that exist have come, and which brings into existence everything before that had no existence.”58 Apparently, the creation or better depicted by Eastern Orthodoxy as theosis of the whole humankind began when the Triadic God said in Genesis: “Let us create man in our image, after our likeness.” (Gen 1:26) According to Timothy or Kallistos Ware: “The image denotes the powers with which every man is endowed

57 Cf. Retrieived on July 7, 2014, http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/lossy_essences.html; and George A. Maloney, S.J. (1978). A Theology of Uncreated Energies. 58 Epist. 43, “Ad Joannem cubicularium,” P.G., XCI, 640 BC. This translation is taken from Lossky (1976). The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, p.90. 198 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

by God from the first moment of his existence; the likeness is not an endowment which man possesses from the start, but a goal at which he must aim, something which he can only acquire by degrees.”59 As Jesus Christ is “the visible image of the invisible God, the first born of all creation” (Col 1:15), one may say at the moment of creation, each human person is given by God His sufficient deifying powers or Divine Energies to become like Christ Jesus. How much we would eventually resemble “this perfect image of God” as a certain God-pleasing “likeness of God” in Jesus Christ by the end of our life on earth depends on how much we would co-operate with God’s deifying grace or Energies during our whole earthly life. In fact, to be created in God’s image means much more. Ware adds: “It means we are God’s offspring (Acts 17:28), His kin; it means that between us and Him there is a point of contact, an essential similarity. The gulf between creature and Creator is not impassable, for because we are in God's image we can know God and have communion with Him.”60 Hence, to acquire the divine likeness of God means we are being put into the process of theosis or deification by God “to be deified, to become a ‘second god,’ a ‘god by grace’.”61 Psalm 82:6 reads: “I said, ‘you are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you.’” (Ps 82:6) According to St. Gregory of Thessalonica, that man has a body makes him higher than angels. Created with a body and a soul means that man’s nature is more complete than the angels and endowed with richer potentialities of Christ as “a microcosm, a bridge and point of meeting for the whole of God’s creation.”62 No wonder

59 Timothy Ware (1981). The Orthodox Church. New York, NY: Penguin Books, p.224. It is notable that Timothy Ware adopted the name “Kallistos Ware” in 1966 upon being ordained a monk. 60 Ibid.. 61 Ibid.. 62 Ibid., p.225. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 199

quite a few Orthodox Fathers such as St. Irenaeus (c. 140-202), St. Athanasius (c. 295-373), St. Gregory of Naziansus (c. 330-390), and St. Gregory of Nyssa (331-392) all proclaim with one resounding accord the ultimate goal of theosis: “God made Himself man, that man might become God.”63 In retrospect, with respect to this possibility of deification of a human person, one should give utter praise and thanksgiving to the Incarnation and the hypostatic union of the two natures of Jesus Christ under the hypostasis of the Son of God as dogmatically pronounced by the Fourth Ecumenical Council, i.e., the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.). Incredible as it is, the authentic theosis of a human being is one of the principal consequences of the hypostatic union of Christ’s divine and human natures solemnly declared at this vital Christological Council:

So, following the saintly fathers, we all with one voice teach the confession of the one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ; the same perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the same truly God and truly man, of a rational soul and a body; consubstantial with the Father as regards his divinity, and the same consubstantial with us as regards his humanity; like us in all respects except for sin; begotten before the ages from the Father as regards his divinity, and in the last days the same for us and for our salvation from Mary, the virgin God-bearer, as regards his humanity; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, acknowledged in two natures which undergo no confusion, no change, no division, no separation; at no point was the difference between the two natures taken away through the union, but rather the property of both natures is preserved and comes together

63 Vladimir Lossky (1974). In the Image and Likeness of God. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir Seminary Press, p.97. 200 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

into a single person and a single subsistent being.64

As aforementioned, on the one hand, Christ, being consubstantial with God the Father, is fully God Himself, i.e., consubstantially fully filled with the divine nature as God the Father. On the other hand, being consubstantial with each human being except sin, the same Christ is fully man Himself, i.e., consubstantially fully filled with humanity as a normal human being. Therefore, any ordinary human being through his or her personal union, relationship or connection with the God-Man may be able to share God’s divine nature, just as 2Pet 1:4 reveals to us as “partakers of divine nature.” Yet it is important to note that in this deification we have become, thus, not partakers of God’s Divine Essence, but only God’s Divine deifying Energies, both on earth and in Heaven, becoming more and more like Christ Himself who is the perfect image of God (2Cor 4:4). It may be important to note further that two Greek words resemble each other with the connotation of “nature,” i.e., the dynamic φúσιζ and the static ουσíα. The famous 2Pet 1:4 is using only the word φúσιζ for divine nature. The doctrine of theosis obtained from this divine revelation makes it possible to understand how the Holy Trinity can remain incommunicable in Its Divine Essence (ουσíα) and at the same time come to dwell within us in terms of φúσιζ, according to the promise of Christ (Jn 14:23; 2Pet 1:3-4). In other words, the whole of Christ, just as the whole of God the Father, is infinitely filled with God’s forever inseparable “incommunicable Essence” and “communicable Energies.” Yet, we can be in union with Christ through His humanity. Simultaneously, through such a union with the God-Man, who is the one and only one Mediator between God and man, we can partake in God’s divine φúσιζ, nature or Energy. The Divine Energies

64 Norman P. Tanner, S.J. (1990). Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Volume I (Nicaea I – Lateran V). London & Washington, D.C.: Sheed & Ward and Georgetown University Press, p.86. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 201

which flow eternally from God’s Divine Essence, being communicated to us in Christ and by the Holy Spirit, deify us and make us participate in the life of the Holy Trinity.65 Incontestably, the union with God to which we are called is not hypostatic, as in the case of the human nature of Christ. Neither is this human union of ours with God substantial, as in that of the Three Divine Persons. Nonetheless, our union with God consists in our union with God’s Divine Energies. In this way, our union by this grace or deifying Energy will make it possible for us to participate in the divine φúσιζ, increasingly so, without our human nature becoming thereby the incommunicable divine nature or Divine Essence of God. As such, we continue to stay on as creatures while becoming God by His deifying Energies in accordance with His likeness, as Christ remained God in becoming one of us by His Incarnation according to our human likeness.66 At this critical point, one may ask: As we are filled with God’s shareable deifying Energies, to what extent could we become God or like God while fully remaining creatures, in view of the Charismatic Renewal movement? Differently expressed: How far could we enter into the mystery of becoming Jesus or like Jesus Himself charismatically as He was on earth? Hopefully, to a significant degree, the answer as regards His Charismatic Self-sharing may be given in the section below in terms of God’s deifying Energies.

D. GOD’S DEIFYING ENERGIES IN HIS CHARISMATIC SELF-SHARING

This section begins with the identification of God’s deifying Energies as

65 Cf. Vladimir’s Lossky (1974). In the Image and Likeness of God, p.57. 66 Cf. Retrieved on July 2, 2014, http://www.myriobiblos.gr/texts/english/lossky_essences.html 202 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

God’s charismata. Then, it attempts to describe theosis as the process in which God intends to share His charismata with us in six areas given by His Holy Spirit in and through Christ Jesus the Charismatic par excellence.

(A) Identifying God’s Energies as God’s Charismata

Georges Barrois, a present-day Orthodox theologian, states: “Palamas aims at much more than an indirect knowledge of God. His goal is experience, vision, contact with the Triune. This quest leads in a straight line to the distinction in God of essence and energy.”67 Christos Yannaras, another renowned Eastern theologian, adds: “The acceptance of this distinction between essence and energies means an understanding of life, and of knowledge as participation in the truth and not as an understanding of meanings that result from intellectual abstraction.”68 Manifestly, this is one of the important reasons why the recent Pentecostal-Charismatic Renewal has been able to sweep through the world, since countless traditional Christians brought up directly and indirectly by unmystical scholasticism no longer want to live in theological abstraction and spiritual nominalistic emptiness. Created to partake mystically in the Divine Energies of the Holy Trinity flowing from the Father through the Son and the Holy Spirit, they are consciously, subconsciously, unconsciously desperate for a positive lived unmediated experience or union with a living God, living far beyond traditional deism, theism, and nominalism which deny them of any personal participation in the divine life of their beloved God, including His theosis of man.69 Therefore, in the present endeavour to describe the Charismatics experience in terms of God’s deifying Energies, it is critical to link the charismata, graces

67 Georges Barrois (1975). Palamas Revisited. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 19, p.223. 68 Christos Yannaras (1975). The Distinction between Essence and Energies and its Importance for Theology. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 19, p.241. 69 Cf. Ibid., p.242. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 203

or gifts profusely experienced in the Charismatic Renewal with Palamas’ Essence-Energies distinction. As mentioned, the 1351 Council has doctrinally accepted Palamas’ Confession of Faith. What is particularly significant in this Confession is Palamas’ linking as synonymous God’s energeia with God’s grace (charis) and power. Palamas states: “[God] is not revealed in his essence (‘ousia’), for no one has ever seen or described God’s [incommunicable] nature (‘physis’), but he is revealed in the grace (‘charis’), power (‘dynamis’) and energy (‘energeia’) which is common to Father, Son and Spirit.”70 Upon further reflection, Metropolitan Kallistos Ware notably points out to us: “The identification of ‘energeia’ with ‘charis’ is of particular importance, and shows that the Orthodox teaching on the divine energies embodies a theology of grace.”71 In equating grace (charis) with the Uncreated Energy of God, St. Gregory Palamas and the 14th-century Councils seem to exclude the concept of “created grace” that is found in Western scholastic theology.72 As we know, “created grace” oftentimes connotes the notion of human response to God’s self-communication or “uncreated grace.”73 As it is, “created grace” cannot be equated with God’s very nature or deifying Energy. When we receive “created grace,” we receive only a transformation of human nature, not the Self-sharing of God’s very divine nature in our unmediated union with Him. Although no human being other than Christ Himself has ever partaken in God’s unshareable nature, Being or Essence, we can－as we human beings are all invited in this process of God’s sharing of Himself－participate in His shareable nature or Being in the process of theosis expressed in terms of His deifying Energies.

70 Kallistos Ware (1975). God hidden and revealed: The apophatic way and the essence-energies distinction. Eastern Churches Review, Vol.7, p.130. 71 Ibid., p.131. 72 Ibid.. 73 Gerald O’Collins, S.J. & Edward G Farrugia, S.J. (1991). A Concise Dictionary of Theology, p.86. 204 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

It is, therefore, exciting to know about Palamas’s identification of energeia with charis in our effort to describe the process of God’s Self-sharing. In fact, even before Palamas, there had been other evidences showing such a trend. For instance, during the time of Emperor Michael VIII Palaeologus (1261-1282), the priest-monk Hierotheus called the God's Divine Energies as “essential charismata of the Holy Spirit,” “energies and divine charismata of the Holy Spirit,” and “essential grace.”74 These expressions show us that on the one hand the Divine Energies of God belong to the divine and uncreated order, and that on the other hand due to Christ’s Incarnation they are especially linked with the Holy Spirit as the Giver of God’s Energies who gives these charismata to us in Christ Jesus.75 In particular, such a link between God’s Energies and charismata would help us understand better the Charismatic Renewal as a renewal in which the Charismatics could experience a certain unmediated union with God, as well as God’s operations in this world in terms of the charismata or deifying Energies. According to the observation of Ware, “to express this double truth that God is both hidden and revealed, both transcendent and immanent, Orthodox theology makes a distinction between the divine essence (‘ousia’) and the divine energies or operations (‘energeiai’).”76 In fact, the term energeia, applied to God, is found in several times in the Epistles of St. Paul, i.e., Eph 1:19; 3:7; Phi 3:21; Col 1:29; 2:12.77 Respectively, the English translations of these Biblical quotes are taken from Revised Standard Version Interlinear Greek-English New Testament:78

Eph 1:19: “and what is the immesurable greatness of his power in

74 Hieromonk Gabriel Patacsi (1977). Palamism before Palamas. Eastern Churches Review, 9, pp.68-69. 75 Ibid.. 76 Kallistos Ware (1975). God hidden and revealed: The apophatic way and the essence-energies distinction. Eastern Churches Review, Vol.7, p.128. 77 Cf. Ibid.. 78 Alfred Marshall (1979). Revised Standard Version Interlinear Greek-English New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 205

us who believe, according to the working (energeia) of his great might.” Here the word energeia or operation is translated as “working.”

Eph 3:7: “Of this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God’s grace which was given me by the working (energeia) of his power.” Here again, the word energeia or operation is translated as “working.”

Phi 3:21: “who will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power (energeia) which enables him even to subject all things to himself.” Here, the word energeia or operation is translated as “power.”

Col 1:29: “For this I toil, striving with all the energy (energeia) which he mightily inspires me.” Here, the word energeia or operation is translated as “energy.”

Col 2:12: “and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working (energeias) of God, who raised him from the dead.” Here the word plural form of energeia, i.e., energeias or operations is translated as “working.”

Thus, we have observed that the term energeia in Greek has always been translated differently in English in the Western world, contributing to further misconception of the term energeia. As the New Age movement has oftentimes used the term “energy” in its heretical teaching, some fundamental Christians may even identify Palamism with the New Age movement. Patently, what they do not know is that the Holy Scriptures, let alone Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic 206 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

Christians, have been employing this term for God’s Divine Energy, Energies and charismata, etc., in God’s divine active operations in the world. In any case, on more than one occasion Palamas asserts: “Thus the perfect contemplation of God and divine things is not simply an abstraction; but beyond this abstraction, there is participation in divine things, a gift and a possession rather than just a process of negation.”79 One may, hence, safely conclude that the Charismatic Renewal is a movement of the Father flowing through the Holy Spirit in the Son and His Mystical Body the Church. This divine activity is to help traditional Christians, lapsed Christians, and the lost in this world－who have been hungry for a real taste of God’s personal presence in their life and His personal operations in this world－to live no longer in pessimistic deistic, theistic, nominalistic abstraction and negation, but to participate positively and enthusiastically in God’s real deifying Self-sharing for themselves and for others, by means of God’s divinizing charismata or Energies.80

(B) Theosis and the Charismatic Process of God’s Self-Sharing

Succinctly, created as the image and likeness of God Himself (Gen 1:26), theosis or deification may be defined as the process of divinization in which a person realizes the likeness of such an image of God within himself and subsequently reaching out to others in accordance with this divine image, becoming thus more and more like Jesus Christ the God-Man who is the perfect “image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation.” (Col 1:15) Defined in terms of the Charismatic experiences, insofar as a person is concerned, deification may be depicted as the process of becoming progressively like Jesus Christ charismatically, i.e., being filled ever more by the Holy Spirit with His full

79 John Meyendorff (Ed.) (1983). Gregory Palamas. The Triads, p.36. Found in Gerry Russo (1988). Rahner and Palamas: A unity of grace. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 32. 80 Cf. Gerry Russo (1988). Rahner and Palamas: A unity of grace. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 32, p.161. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 207

spectrum of charismata or charismatic graces according to the will of the Father, so that he or she is divinized and becomes a second Jesus on earth. In other words, like Jesus Himself, he or she is increasingly Christified in nature and ability by God the Uncreated Charisma (the Uncreated Grace) and His charismata or deifying Energies to the fullest extent possible, in full accord with the designated blueprint of the Creator. To that extent, theosis may be linked with and defined in terms of such a process of charismatization. St. Paul says: “Grace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, just as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world. He destined us in love to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace that he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.” (Eph 1:2-6) Again, he reiterates: “I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that has been given you in Christ Jesus, for in every way you have been enriched in him.” (1Cor 1:4) Indeed, this bestowing of God’s grace or deifying Energy to us is even true eschatologically, as the last verse of the Holy Bible reminds us: “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen.” (Rev 22:21) All in all, this gratuitous grace (generic) or graces (as a spectrum) of the Self-giving God is “marked with the seal of the promised Holy Spirit” (Eph 1:13a) given to us as “the pledge of our inheritance toward redemption as God’s own people, to the praise of his glory.” (Eph 1:13b-14) Evidently, as the agent of the Father deifying us through Christ Jesus, the Holy Spirit is outpouring God’s whole spectrum of shareable charismata or deifying Energies to us for our redemption (a term often used in the West) or theosis (a term often used in Eastern Orthodoxy). Below is an attempt to describe concisely the spectrum of charismata given in the Charismatic Renewal in terms of God’s participable deifying Energies. This spectrum of charismata consists of at least six areas: (1) God the Uncreated 208 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

Grace; (2) Sanctifying charismata of the Holy Spirit; (3) Nine-fold fruit of the Holy Spirit; (4) Charismatic gift-ministries; (5) The Church as the Mystical Body of Christ; and (6) Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Since this list of charismatic graces has been described before in an essay by the author,81 the purpose here is simply to re-interpret this charismatic spectrum in terms of God’s deifying Energies in the process of theosis through which the Holy Trinity desires to transform or divinize each Charismatic Christian into a second Christ as much as possible to Its wonderful praise and glory.

Be definition, Western Christianity in general understands Uncreated Grace as “God Himself, given to a creature beyond any of its demands. Examples are primarily the Blessed Trinity indwelling in the just as distinct from created gifts; and also the Son of God given in the Incarnation, the Holy Spirit sent to men by the Father and the Son, the love of God for men that is God Himself beyond the demands of nature, and predestinations, or God’s decree to glorify those who shall be saved. This concept of grace is commonly admitted by theologians; for every supernatural gift is rightly called grace, and preeminently among these is God Himself.”82 “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be my witness in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth.” (Acts 1:8) Laudably, the Charismatic Renewal consistently interprets God Himself as the greatest power or Giver of powers. As it is, the greatest success of the Charismatic movement consists in its charismatic propensity in assisting countless people, young and old, to experience or

81 Cheng Wai Leung (2012). Exploring the Charismatic Spectrum of Charismata－From the Catholic viewpoint. New Century Religious Studies, vol.10, no.3, pp.47-75. 82 F. L. Sheerin (1967). Grace, Uncreated. New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol.6, p.683. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 209

re-experience intimately God the Uncreated Grace or Uncreated Charisma. To those Christians, lapsed Christians, and non-Christians brought up with an anti-supernatural background deeply immersed in the rationalistic and naturalistic frame of thinking, their doubt of God’s existence has, thus, efficaciously vanished in their charismatic approach to this God who is immensely eager to share with all humanity His very Being. At a closer observation, Palamas’ Essence-Energies distinction neither impairs nor obstructs the Charismatic’s approach to God as the Uncreated Grace. Rather, this distinction becomes an exciting window to see further, i.e., the Charismatic union with God is more than a realism of intention. In fact, such a union with God is unmediated, since it is the Divine Energies of God in which a Charismatic is partaking. Further, this Energies are deifying, making him or her a real deified son and daughter of God, i.e., a second God or Christ by grace. Differently expressed, the Palamite doctrine on our genuine participation in God’s deifying Energies in effect lifts a Western Charismatic brought up more or less with the scholastic deism, theism, or nominalism to a higher level of understanding and union with God. He or she does not have to wait until the eschaton for a real unmediated participation in God. As mentioned, the scholastic God defined in terms of essence without Energies does not really allow theosis to take place in real unmediated union with God on earth. Moreover, Palamas’ distinction can become an awesome great blessing even to secular non-Christians or lasped Christians, teaching them that each human being is created and ceaselessly invited everywhere to share in God’s deifying Energies to the fullest possible extent according to their created capacity. Apparently, Palamas’ concept of our God’s energetic unmediated union with God is quite critical today to countless people in the current postmodern relativistic multicultural age. So many people in the present post-modernity have moved out of the debris of the modern anti-mystical rationalism, scientism, materialism, 210 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

individualism, atheism, and may easily fall into all kinds of New Age pantheism or secular polytheism instinctually and hungrily seeking for an intimate mystical union with God.

(D) Sanctifying Charismata of the Holy Spirit

In the Charismatic renewal, the seven sanctifying charismata of the Holy Spirit are understood as understanding, knowledge, wisdom, counsel, piety, fortitude and fear of the Lord (cf. Is 11:2-3). It is true that these gifts may be approached as created graces, in the sense that they are sanctified or transformed effects which have appeared in human nature as a result of God’s presence, helping human beings to further sanctify themselves and others in the process of salvation or sanctification. However, just as faith is the supernatural knowledge born of religious love,83 these sanctifying charismata of the Holy Spirit may also be viewed as the sanctifying effects in Charismatics as a result of their participation in the all-holy God who actively approaches them and shares with them His all-holy Divine Energies. At the same time, these Divine Energies in which God wholly reveals Himself are efficaciously deifying, divinizing a Charismatic in effect into a second God by such grace of holiness, infusing him with the holy likeness of Jesus Christ who is filled with these sanctifying charismata of the Spirit of Holiness as described in the Sacred Scriptures. Here, it is pivotal to note that holiness is the absolute preeminent characteristic of God’s Divine Essence and Energies, since God “who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct; since it is written, ‘You shall be holy, for I am holy.’” (1Pet 15-16) In fact, this New Testament teaching is only reaffirming what God Himself has revealed in the Old Testament, stating: “For I am the Lord your God; consecrate yourself

83 Bernard Lonergan (1972). Method in Theology. New York, NY: Herder and Herder, p.115. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 211

therefore, and be holy, for I am holy. For I am the Lord who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God; you shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.” (Lev 11:44-45) As mentioned, although no human is allowed to partake in God’s Essence of holiness, each person is cordially invited by the Creator to participate in His sanctifying Energies of holiness.

(E) Nine-fold Fruit of the Holy Spirit

The holiness of God in human life is not abstract, empty, signless. There are actual discernable signs or fruits emerging in us as a result of our actual participation in God’s deifying Energies of holiness. In fact, one may connect these signs of God’s holiness in the life of a person or a community with the nine-fold fruit of the Holy Spirit which is “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control” taught by St. Paul (Gal 5:22-23). Figuratively speaking, as the Bible reveals to us, God may be viewed as Love, for “God is love.” (1Jn 4:8) At the same time, God is Joy or Happiness, as St. Thomas Aquinas says: “God is happiness by His Essence.”84 Further, God is Peace, since He is the “Prince of Peace.” (Is 9:10) Indeed, God is also Kindness, as He proves so in that while we were sinners Christ His Son died for us (Rom 5:8). God is Goodness too, as “God is the supreme good.”85 Simultaneously, God is Faithfulness, for God’s consubstantial Son is called “Faith and True.” (Rev 19:11) Besides, God is Gentleness, for Christ being the “King of king and Lord of lords” (Rev 19:16) never imposes His words on anyone with His unsurpassed might. Finally, God may be called the infinite Source of self-control. For instance, at the very moment of Christ’s crucifixion, He did not appeal to His Father to send Him any legion of mighty Holy Angels

84 St. Thomas Aquinas (1947). Summa Theologica, Volume One, Pt.I-II, q.3, a.1 (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.), p.596. 85 Ibid., Pt. I-II, q.6, a.2. 212 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

to save Him (cf. Mt 26:53-54). Hence, God may be identified as the Infinite Source of the nine fruits of the Holy Spirit who reaches out in the Charismatic Renewal and beyond to share Himself generously with us through His fruit-bearing deifying Energies. Ostensibly, these fruitful marks of holiness are exactly what countless people need today, especially when these fruits need to appear unconditionally in life, i.e., independent of any dire, unfortunate, disastrous situation which we happen to be in. For example, the IV Catholic-Orthodox Forum entitled “Religion and Cultural Diversity: Challenges for the Christian Churches in Europe” held in Minsk, Belarus, from June 2 to 6, 2014, restates that in the present economic and cultural crisis of Europe, “many are suffering and are in search of a word that give sense to their life. Indeed where Christian faith and morality have been dismissed, a feeling of emptiness leads many to despair and nihilism.” 86 This is perhaps where Palamas’ distinction can come in, reminding people brought up with no possibility to be really united with God that it is now possible to genuinely partake in the omnipresent fruit-bearing deifying Divine Energies of God which are all-loving, all-joyful, all-peaceful, all-patient, all-good, etc., although we may never be able to participate in His all-loving, all-joyful, all-peaceful, all-patient, all-good Divine Essence of God Himself.

(F) Charismatic Gift-ministries

As we know, the charismatic gift-ministries consist in (1) the gifts (charismata or charisms) of tongues, interpretation of tongues, and prophecy as the power to say; (2) the charismata of wisdom, knowledge, and discernment as the power to know; (3) as well as the charisms of faith, healing, and miracles as

86 Retrieved on July 3, 2014, Http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/final-message-of-iv-catholic-orthodox-european-forum Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 213

the power to do.87 These gifts are listed in 1Cor 12:4-11, as we read:

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. To each is given the manifestations of the Spirit for common good. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are activated by one and the same Spirit, who allots to each one individually just as the Spirit chooses.

In the final analysis, these charismatic gifts or gift-ministries are nothing but a participation in God’s own divine powers or deifying Energies, i.e., in God’s own “operation” translated for example as “working,” “power,” and “energy” as seen in Eph 1:19, Eph 3:7, Phi 3:21, Col 1:29, and Col 2:12 above. In fact, the person gifted with these gift-ministries simply seeks to co-operate with the Spirit of the Father and the Son, freely allowing this divine “operation” to say, to know, to do through him or her as a faithful servant of the Most High. In fact, when Jesus said: “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father.” (Jn 14:12) Communicably, these charismata are necessarily coming from God who attempts to share Himself with us, using us as a second Jesus as much as feasible. Thanks to Palamas’ distinction, we can safely participate only

87 Cf. Rev. Vincent M. Walsh (1976). A Key to Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church, A priority edition. St. Meinrad, Indiana: Abbey Press, pp.67-68. 214 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

in His Divine Energies, but not in His Divine Essence. Otherwise, Charismatics might be accused or misunderstood of trying to become another God by nature polytheistically. Doubting non-Charismatics, therefore, can rest assured that those Charismatic sisters and brothers practicing these gift-ministries in the Renewal are doing so only on behalf of God. These Charismatics are not actual Gods or gods by God’s Essence. Rather, they are only Godly servants or channels of God, partaking in His shareable Energies or powers charismatically.

(G) The Church as the Mystical Body of Christ

According to St. Irenaeus, it is in the Church being the Mystical Body of Christ that we have access to the fount of the Holy Spirit.88 Hence, it is necessary to be united to the Body of Christ in order to receive the grace or deifying Energies given by the Holy Spirit.89 As the true Mystical Body of Christ who “is all, and in all” (Col 3:11), Christ due to His Incarnation is fully present in His Church along with His Holy Spirit, infusing and adorning this beloved Bride of His with God’s “unsearchable riches” (Eph 3:8). Manifestly, the Church is thus “the fullness of him who fills all in all” (Eph 1:23) both in terms of His Essence and Energies. However, through the concomitant help of His Holy Spirit, it is only in His deifying Energies which we can partake as sons and daughters of God. Thus, one may say that it is in this Mystical Body of Christ which the radiant deifying Energies of God demonstrate their greatest intensity and blessing for Christ’s followers, indeed even for all humanity and creation. St. Basil (c. 330-379) writes:

Shining upon those who are cleansed of every stain, he [the Holy

88 “Adv. Haeres., V, 24, ” P.G., VII, 966, quoted by Vladimir Lossky (1976). The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, p.177. 89 Vladimir Lossky (1976). The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, p.177. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 215

Spirit] makes them spiritual by communion with himself. As bright, transparent bodies, when a sunbeam falls on them, become brilliant too and shine with a fresh brightness of their own, so souls in whom the Spirit dwells, through his illumination, become spiritual and send their grace to others.90

Moreover, one may observe that there are at least five categories of union explainable in terms of Palamas’ Essence-Energies distinction. First, there is the union of Divine Essence between the Three Divine Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, in which each Divine Person is consubstantial with the other Two Divine Persons. Second, there is the hypostatic union between the two natures, i.e., divine and human, of the incarnate Christ the God-Man. Third, there is the union according to God’s deifying Energies between God and a Christian,91 e.g., when a Charismatic partaking in God’s shareable Energies is being sanctified, bearing fruits of the Spirit, or being used by God in a gift-ministry. Fourth, through God’s deifying Energies, there is the Eucharistic union between a Christian and the Real Body of Christ, e.g., when a Christian receives devotedly Christ’s Eucharistic Body, participating profusely in Christ’s deifying Energies. Fifth, again through partaking in God’s deifying Energies, there is the mystical union between Christians and the Mystical Body of Christ. All in all, it is to the credit of the Holy Spirit working through the Mystical Body of Christ that countless people in the Charismatic Renewal are brought by God’s deifying Energies without precedent to a personal, intimate, loving union with God, with Christ’s Real Body, as well as with the Church of Christ Himself. Further, from these Divine Energies of God acting as the living Source, as St.

90 Basil, De Spir. s., I, 22 and 23, P.G. 32, 109 AC, quoted by Casimir Kucharek (1976). The Sacramental Mysteries: A Bysantine approach. Allendale, N.J., & Combermere, Ontario: Alleluia Press, p.370. 91 The first three categories of union are found in Kallistos Ware (1975). God hidden and revealed: The apophatic way and the essence-energies distinction. Eastern Churches Review, Vol.7, p.132. 216 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

Basil indicates, “comes foreknowledge of the future, understanding of mysteries, perception of what is hidden, the distribution of good gifts, a heavenly citizenship, a place in the chorus of angels, joy without end, abiding in God, the being made like unto God, and, highest of all, the being made God!”92

(H) Baptism in the Holy Spirit “There is only one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all” (Eph 4:4-6). As it is, the regular Sacrament of Baptism is needed only once in a lifetime. However, “Baptism in the Holy Spirit,” being a term used frequently in the Charismatic Renewal, simply means further dipping in the Holy Spirit, further fanning the flame which has been given by the Spirit of God in the regular Sacrament of Baptism, helping baptized Christians to live the Christian life to the fullest.93 Consequently, such a dipping in or connecting with the Giver of God’s deifying Energies is a life-time process, until the individual is plentifully filled with all the graces which God has planned to share with him or her in the mystery known as God’s theosis of man indicated by St. Basil above. As Palamas’ distinction shows us, except for His imparticipable Uncreated Essence, God intends to share with us as much as possible all His deifying Energies or charismata, including Himself as the Uncreated Grace. The transparent goal of Baptism in the Holy Spirit is to help a Christian to be profoundly connected and filled with the Holy Spirit as the Uncreated Source of all graces “from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit.” (2Cor 3:18) In this way, this adopted son or daughter of God may be given

92 Basil, De Spir. s., I, 22 and 23, P.G. 32, 109 AC, quoted by Casimir Kucharek (1976). The Sacramental Mysteries: A Bysantine approach, p.370. 93 Cf. Killian McDonnell & George T. Montague (Eds.) (1991). Fannng the Flame: What does Baptism in the Holy Spirit have to do with Christian Initiation. Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, pp.9-10. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 217

a fuller spectrum of charismata, in the process of becoming even a second God or Christ by grace. This is why a Charismatic may receive Baptism in the Holy Spirit many times in life. All in all, Baptism in the Holy Spirit belongs to the Christian inheritance of all those sacramentally initiated into the Church.94 With respect to the importance of the Holy Spirit in our life, Metropolitan Ignatios of Latakia (1936-2012) reiterates succinctly:

Without the Holy Spirit, God is far away. Christ stays in the past. The Gospel is a dead letter. The church is simply an organization. Mission is a matter of propaganda. The liturgy is no more than an evocation. Christian living is a slave morality. But in the Holy Spirit, the cosmos is resurrected and groans with the birth-pangs of the kingdom. The risen Christ is there. The Gospel is the power of life. The church shows forth life of the Trinity. Authority is a liberating service. Mission is a Pentecost. The liturgy is both memorial and anticipation. Human action is deified.95

To a considerable extent, Metropolitan Ignatios elaborates resounding well and compactly the indispensable presence and workings of the Holy Spirit which the Charismatic Renewal would bring forth into our personal life, as well as in the life of the Church and of the world at large, including even the authentic possibility of theosis profoundly treasured by Eastern Orthodoxy. That is perhaps why St. Paul announces: “Since the Spirit is our life, let us be led by the Spirit.” (Gal 5:25)

94 Killian McDonnell & George T. Montague (1991). Christian Initiation and Baptism in the Holy Spirit: Evidence from the first eight centuries. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, p.382. 95 Metropolitan Ignatios of Latakia (1968). Main Theme Address. The Uppsala Report 1968. Geneva: WCC, p.298. 218 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

E. CONCLUDING REMARKS

Overall speaking, one may say that Palamas’ Essence-Energies distinction with respect to the very “essence, whatness, ‘quidditas,’ being, substance, or is-ness”96 of God Himself, as He is per se, consists of the Orthodox Church’s paramount sacred tradition in explicating how it is really possible for us humans both now and in eternity to authentically “become partakers of divine nature.” (2Pet 1:4) Without Palamas’ ingenious distinction of God’s partakable Divine Energies from God’s impartakable Divine Essence, we might tend to assume that God is absolute imparticipable “Essence” in Palamas’ sense, both presently and forever. At the same time, we might conceive that God is absolute, transcendent “essence” in Aquinas’ sense, i.e., God’s very “essence” is participable only in Heaven. Influenced inextricably by Plato’s two-storey departmentality, traditional Western scholastic theism, deism, and nominalism, etc., have pointedly denied the possibility of any authentic unmediated personal union with God on earth. Moreover, we might be tempted to believe that God is the all-participable Being or Energy which anti-Christian New Agers and other secular sects are teaching today, resulting in sheer pantheism or polytheism. We would, then, mistakenly think that we can fully become God by nature or Essence, since we can become totally and categorically one with the Most High without any barrier, reservation, limitation, difficulty, or distinction as finite human beings. In fact, the author, at the starting point of writing this paper, sought simply to demonstrate if it is possible to do an ecumenical dialogue by interpreting

96 It may be interesting to note that “essence” today generally means: “1. the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, which determines its character; a property or group of properties of something without which it would not exist or be what it is; 2. an extract or concentrate obtained from a plant or other matter and used for flavouring or scent.” Catherine Soanes & Angus Stevenson (Eds.) (2006). Oxford Dictionary of English, second edition, revised. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, p.592. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 219

God’s Charismatic Self-sharing in terms of St. Gregory Palamas’ distinction between God’s Essence and Energies. What he did not foresee is that this inter-denominational discussion between the current world-wide Roman Catholic Charismatic Renewal97 and the Palamite doctrine of God embraced traditionally by Eastern Christian Orthodoxy would bring forth some wonderful, even surprising fruits, pointed out as follows: First, this article seems to have proven, at least to some notable extent, that varying vital themes of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal movement can be soundly explained by means of Palamas’ Essence-Energies distinction. As mentioned, these critical areas to a committed Charismatic Christian are: (1) God as the Uncreated Grace; (2) the sanctifying charismata of the Holy Spirit; (3) the nine-fold fruit of the Holy Spirit; (4) the Charismatic gift-ministries given by the Holy Spirit; (5) the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ; and (6) the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Second, this paper has shown that God’s grace understood in the Christian West can be ecumenically interpreted and approached as God’s Divine Energy or Energies according to the understanding of Palamas and Eastern Orthodoxy. At the same time, Christians in the West can delve into God’s grace as His deifying Energy. In addition, the awesome mystery of theosis or deification so much championed and embraced by the Orthodox Church could be consistently introduced to the Charismatic Renewal, especially to its followers eagerly seeking for spiritual growth without precedent. Third, through such an interpretation, another astounding windfall has emerged, i.e., the Charismatic Renewal could be lifted to a higher spiritual level. This is obviously due to the possibility that a normal practicing Charismatic

97 Cf. Retrieved on June 15, 2014, http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-to-inaugurate-charismatic-convocation-in- rome-s-olympic-stadium. Presented personally by Pope Francis himself, this convocation was held on June 1-2, 2014 and drew some 50,000 people from over 50 countries. 220 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

created in God’s image and after His likeness as His beloved son or daughter by adoption, can now see himself or herself becoming deified or divinized as a second God or Christ by grace, being infused with the real likeness of God or Christ, able to actually enter into unmediated union with God or Christ Himself even here, however imperfect still being a sinner living on this chaotic planet. Fourth, in view of the recent miserable demise and collapse as regards, for example, the ardent practice of traditional Western Christian religion in Europe, one should find the connection between genuine Christian mysticism and the future of Western Christianity exceedingly vital, exciting, and challenging. Karl Rahner (1904-1984) states: “The Christian of the future will be a mystic or he will not exist at all.”98 Timothy Ware also says: “Theology, when it is not mystical, degenerates into an arid scholasticism, ‘academic’ in the bad sense of the word.”99 Thus, the author is deeply convinced that if more people brought up in Western scholastic tradition were to take on Palamism and theosis seriously as taught faithfully by the Eastern Christian mystical tradition, there would certainly be a great future of Western Christianity resiliently re-arising and re-flourishing in Europe and other parts of the world. Fifth, one should be reminded of the complementarity between the more or less cataphatic faith-seeking-understanding intellectual scholasticism of the Christian West and the apophatic faith-seeking-mysticism spiritual theology of the Christian East. While the former seeks to put our faith firmly grounded in this practical cataphatic world, the latter seeks to help us to experience a necessary foretaste of the apophatic Heaven through its reasonable mystical theology. Sixth, whereas this paper may have focused on the extraordinary mystical contributions of the school of Palamism, Karl Rahner and Herbert Vorgrimler

98 Karl Rahner (1981). The Spirituality of the Church in the Future. Theological Investigations XX. (Edward Quinn, Trans.). New York: Crossroad, p.149. 99 Timothy Ware (1981). The Orthodox Church, p.215. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 221

remind us that “to wish to belong to no school would be the part of a proud and stupid man who imagines that here and now he can possess eternal truth outside historical time. To cling to a system as if it fully expressed the faith of the Church would be to deny the historicity of truth.”100 To say the least, the cataphatic scholastic school in its rational approach to theological and spiritual truth is not heterodox or unorthodox as such, for it has educated well the people traditionally trained in the scholastic mentality on the one hand; on the other, it intelligently prevents Christians from being unreasonably carried away by all forms of aberrational and heretical spiritual emotionalism, irrationalism, and cultism101 which have so often taken place in the history of the Church. Seventh, in the area of ecumenical dialogue, this article seems to be able to bring the two sacred traditions of the Universal Church of Christ a bit closer together. “Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity! ” (Ps 133:1) Resoundingly, Christ Himself prays in accordance: “Father, may they may all be one, even as thou art in me and I in thee.” (Jn 17:21) It appears that it is the personal hope of Our Lord Jesus that these two mainstreams of Christianity should be brought together in God-pleasing sisterly harmony and unity. At the same time, they should develop further genuine Christian fellowship, dialogue, and co-operation on many fronts for countless people today and tomorrow. On the important issue whether or not these two Christian traditions belong actually to all Christians as one common treasure, St. Pope John Paul II (1920-1978-2005) proclaims wisely: “The Church must breathe with her two lungs.”102 Eighth, the author has unexpectedly discovered or re-discovered the unspeakable importance of the theology and spirituality of theosis central to

100 Karl Rahner & Herbert Vorgrimler (1965). Schools of theology. Theological Dictionary. New York: Herder and Herder, p.428. 101 Cf. Retrieved on July 11, 2014, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cultism 102 Pope John Paul II (1995). Ut unum sint, That all may be one. The Pope Speaks, 40, p.319. 222 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

the mystical Orthodox Church, i.e., the divine mystery that “God became man that we might be made god.”103 In other words, each human being is created by God “to become by grace what God is by nature.”104 This mystery of deification impregnated in human nature at the moment of creation may explain, on the one hand, the necessary emergence of the Pentecostal-Charismatic Renewal movement going on around the world today. On the other, this inborn God-given vocation to become God by grace may intelligibly tell us why that when an individual is misguided, he or she would be irresistibly led into all kinds of heresy, disaster, and chaos in great confusion and disorder, such as the tendency to becoming another superman like Friedrich Nietszche (1844-1900), another self-appointed god like Adolf Hitler (1889-1945), or another modern self-worshipping pantheistic deity like Doreen Valiente and Margot Adler aforementioned. Ninth, this paper has encountered, by chance, the critical issue that some faithful monotheistic Charismatic Christians may still doubt about the Orthodox concept of deification as intrinsically pantheistic or aberrationally polytheistic.105 Patently, these concerned Charismatics are implying that by intentionally believing and practicing theosis, Christians would be made “easily” into Gods or gods. Here, they may be comfortably reassured by the pertinent words of Timothy Ware on theosis:

First, we shall only be fully deified at the Last Day; but for each of us the process of divinization must begin here and now in this present life.

Secondly, deification always presupposes a continued act of

103 Timothy Ware (1981). The Orthodox Church, p.29. 104 Ibid.. 105 Cf. Retrieved on July 11, 2014, http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0018a.html Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 223

repentance. Orthodox mystical theology is a theology of glory and of transfiguration, but it is also a theology of penitence.

In the third place, if a man asks “How can I become god?” the answer is very simple: go to church, receive the sacraments regularly, pray to God “in spirit and in truth,” read the Gospels, follow the commandments.

Fourthly, deification is no a solitary but “social” process. Deification means following the commandments of love of God and love of neighbour. The two forms of love are inseparable.

When we think of deification, we must think of the Hesychasts praying in silence and of Saint Seraphim with his face transfigured; but we must think also of Saint Basil caring for the sick in the hospital at Caesarea, and of Saint John the Almsgiver helping the poor at Alexandria.

Finally, deification presupposes life in the Church, life in the sacraments. Church and sacraments are the means appointed by God whereby man may acquire the sanctifying Spirit and be transformed into the divine likeness.106

Tenth, it appears that several crucial theological and spiritual topics raised above could be coherently linked up together by “the possibility of human union with God” which functions as a general motif or thread leading all in one concurrent concert. What follows succinctly point by point is “a few possible

106 Timothy Ware (1981). The Orthodox Church, pp.240-242. 224 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

kinds of human union with God” circumstantially discovered and summarily put together at the end of this paper: 1. Human union with God is impossible This is in fact what religious atheism, atheistic scientism, modern atheistic materialism, and postmodern atheistic digital superficialism in general are teaching us, since these atheistic theories substantially deny the actual, real existence of God. 2. Human unmediated union with God by all individuals is possible and total This seems to be the teaching of un-Christian, non-Christian, and secular pantheists or polytheists who make no difference between God’s Essence and His Energies as clearly taught by Palamas. 3. Human unmediated union with God who is transcendent essence is possible only in Heaven This seems to be the teaching of scholastic theism, deism, and nominalism which have placed God in the absolute, eternal, transcendent dimension, incommunicable to people still living their daily life on earth. 4. Human union with God on earth is possible by a spiritual intention of realism Being influenced still by traditional scholasticism, this external spiritual human union with God which is mediated by a human intention seems to be what Christianity in the West in many forms are still teaching. 5. Human union with God is possible truly through the Sacraments of the Church This seems to be what the traditional Christian Church in the West is teaching in general sacramentally; simultaneously, it does not touch upon the possibility of unmediated human union with God on earth. 6. Human unmediated union with God is authentically possible both on earth and in Heaven Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 225

Palamism which has become a foundational doctrine of all Orthodox Christian mysticism teaches us that unmediated union with God is genuinely possible through our participation in God’s deifying Energies both on earth now and in the future Heaven. 7. Human union with God practiced by a devoted Charismatic is a real unmediated union with God Due to the Orthodox doctrine of theosis, this is what this paper has discovered, namely, that the kind of human union with God sought after by a typical Spirit-filled prayerful Charismatic is a real unmediated union with God, however imperfect it is still. Eleventh, since “God is Light in Him there is no darkness at all,” (1Jn 1:5) we may, in terms of Palamas’ Essence-Energies distinction, safely acknowledge that God is imparticipable-participable Light. Just as we cannot partake in God’s Essence, we cannot participate in His imparticipable Light. At the same time, just as we can partake in unmediated union in and with God’s Energies, we can participate in unmediated union in and with His participable Light. For a person to be deified, therefore, simply means for him to be “light” without any darkness at all. As Christ is the Light of the world (Jn 8:12), we are all called to follow this Light to be “the light of the world.” (Mt 5:14) In this way, we would let our light or the Divine Energy of God in us so shine before others, that they may see the light or the good works propelled by this light and glory Our Father who is in Heaven (Mt. 5:16). Twelfth, as Lonergan says: “the better a man one is, the more refined one’s sensibility, the more delicate one’s feelings,”107 we may say in similar way that the better a theologian is, the more refined his sensibility of the divine, the more delicate his description as regards uncreated mysteries. We should, hence, accept

107 Bernard Lonergan (1972). Method in Theology, p.245. 226 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

St. Gregory of Palamas as a theologian in Eastern Orthodoxy par excellence who is incredibly sensible of the simultaneously imparticipable and participable God. Concurrently, in terms of the Essence-Energies distinction he can describe Him with such delicate theological terms without compare. Thirteenth, by means of the Essence-Energies distinction of St. Gregory Palamas, the Doctor of Uncreated Energies,108 we may indeed even approach St. Thomas Aquinas the philosopher of Actus Essendi109 and integrate his philosophy of Actus Essendi with Palamas’ distinction as follows succinctly: God the Alpha and Omega of all creatures has not only infinitely and eternally fulfilled ad intra (towards inside) in His omnipresent Esse or Existence in which the existence (esse) of each human existent participates. This Actus Essendi is now also reaching out ad extra (towards outside) everywhere to share Himself with each and every beloved human person created by Him as the all loving Essence-Energies Being. Although we cannot partake in His Essence, we are all invited most lovingly by Him to participate in His deifying Energies both now and in Heaven. In other words, God the Perfect Actualization of all Perfect Actualizations is inviting each human being without exception to participate by means of His Divine Energies in unmediated union with Him, so that we may become God by grace and filled with His perfections of perfections increasingly, even forever and ever. Fourteenth, seemingly, just as there is no greater heresy than that when a person says he can become God by Essence, be it monotheistically, polytheistically, or pantheistically, there is no greater blessing to a person created by God than that he or she can become God by His Divine Energies. Indeed,

108 Edmund M. Hussey (1974). The Persons-Energy Structure in the Theology of St. Gregory Palamas. St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly, Vol.18, p.22. 109 Pope John Paull II stressed that “the philosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas is the philosophy of actus essendi.” Retrieved on July 2, 2014, Http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_Essendi Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 227

we may rest assured of such a non-heretical possibility, since a person can only become God by grace in Heaven. At the same time, the life on earth presupposes that he or she has to pray constantly in penitence as a sinner, which Kallistos Ware sagely reminds us above.110 Thus, we can securely use the capitalized “God” rather than the small-letter “god” in saying that God becomes man so that man may become God by grace. Fifteenth, ultimately speaking, one may say a Charismatic is called to become deified as a second Jesus Christ by grace, i.e., in personal holiness, charismatic abilities or operations for others, and in particular in unmediated union with God Himself, participating more and more in His deifying Energies. In the final analysis, although more and more Roman Catholic theologians and students in theology today are open to the teaching of Palamas,111 it may still take quite a long time for Western Christianity to completely embrace and integrate Palamism into their theology and spirituality. Concurrently, one may furthermore delve into other world religions and sects, etc., as regards the possibility of human union with God. However, such an interesting topic is presently beyond the scope of this article. In any case, anything which is worth doing is worth doing even imperfectly. Hence, imperfect as it is still, if the present short discourse in some way could become an inspiration and eye-opener to some readers in their ecumenical understanding and dialogue between the Charismatic Renewal and Palamism on one hand, and Western scholasticism and Orthodox mysticism on the other, it would achieve its unique purpose to the glory of the Father blessing us through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

110 Cf. Timothy Ware (1981). The Orthodox Church, p.240. 111 Cf. Retrieved on July 3, 2014, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essence%E2%80%93Energies_distinction 228 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aquinas, St. Thomas (1947). Summa Theologica, Volume One (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). New York & Boston, etc.: Benziger Brothers. Aquinas, St. Thomas (1952). Quaestiones Disputatae De Potentia (the English Dominican Fathers Westminster, Trans.). Maryland: The Newman Press. Aquinas, St. Thomas (1955-1957). Summa Contra Gentiles (Joseph Kenny, O.P., Ed.). New York: Hanover House. Balás, David L., & Cist, S. O. (1966). Man’s Participation in God’s Perfections according to Saint Gregory of Nyssa. Romae:《I.B.C.》Libreria Herder. Barrois, Georges (1975). Palamas Revisited. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 19, pp.211-231. Benedict XVI, Pope, “Holy Father says Many Lack an Experience of God,” Retrieved on Sept. 27, 2011, http://www.zenit.org/article-33522?1=english Cheng, John Wai-leung (1998). The Distinction between God’s Essence and Energy: Gregory Palamas’ idea of Ultimate Reality and Meaning. Ultimate Reality and Meaning, vol.21, no.1, pp.56-75. Cheng, John Wai-leung (2010). A Comparative Study between St. Thomas Aquinas's Concept of Ipsum Esse Subsistens and the Concept of Qi in the Guanzi's Four Daoist Chapters.Toronto, Ontario: Grace Institute Press. Cheng, John Wai-leung (2012). Exploring the Charismatic Spectrum of Charismata－From the Catholic viewpoint. New Century Religious Studies, Vol.10, No.3, pp.41-81. Chopra, Deepak (2000). How to Know God: The soul’s journey into the mystery of mysteries. New York: Random House. Coffey, David (1988). The Palamite Doctrine of God: A new perspective. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 32, pp.329-358. Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Boston & New York: Houghton Mifflin. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 229

Deferrari, Roy J. (1968). A Latin-English Dictionary of St. Thomas Aquinas. Boston, MA: Daughters of St. Paul. Fahey, Michael, & Meyendorff, John (1977). Trinitarian Theology East and West: St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Gregory Palamas. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Press. Falcon, Andrea, “Aristotle on Causality,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, pp.1-25, retrieved on Dec. 26, 2011, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-causality Hansbury, M. T. (1979). Hesychasm. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Religion, Vol. F-N, p.1660. Harrison, Paul (1999). The Elements of Pantheism: Understanding the divinity in nature and the universe. Boston, MA: Element Books. Hartshorne, Charles, & Reese, William Reese (1953). Philosophers Speak of God. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press. Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is not Great: How religion poisons everything. Toronto, Ontario: McClelland & Stewart. Hussey, M. Edmund (1974). The Persons-energy Structure in the Theology of St. Gregory Palamas. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, Vol.18, pp.22-43. Ignatios of Latakia, Metropolitan (1968). Main Theme Address. The Uppsala Report 1968. Geneva: WCC. Jesuit Fathers of St. Mary’s College (1973). The Church Teaches: Documents of the Church in English translation. Rockford, Illinois: Tan Books and Publishers. John Paul II, Pope (1995). Ut unum sint, That all may be one. The Pope Speaks, 40, pp.295-343. Karmiris, I. N. (1960). Ta dogmatika kai symvolika mnimeia tis Orthodoxou Katholikis Ekklisias, vol.1, 2nd ed.. Athens. Krivocheine, Basil (1938-1939). The Ascetical and Theological Teaching of Gregory Palamas. Eastern Churches Quarterly, Vol.III, pp.26-32, 71-84, 138-156, 193-214. Kucharek, Casimir (1976). The Sacramental Mysteries: A Bysantine approach. 230 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

Allendale, N.J., & Combermere, Ontario: Alleluia Press. LaCugna, Catherine M. (1991). God for us: The Trinity and Christian life. New York, N.Y.: Harper Collins. Lonergan, Bernard (1972). Method in Theology. New York, NY: Herder and Herder. Lossky, Vladimir (1974). In the Image and Likeness of Christ. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Lossky, Vladmir (1976). The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church. Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Maloney, Rev. S.J. George A. (1978). A Theology of Uncreated Energies. The 1978 Pere Marquette Theology Lecture. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Marquette University Press. Marshall, Alfred (1979). Revised Standard Version Interlinear Greek-English New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House. Martin, Ralph (1971). Unless the Lord Build the House: The Church and the New Pentecost. Notre Dame, Indiana: Ave Maria Press. McDonnell, Killian, & Montague, George T. (1991). Christian Initiation and Baptism in the Holy Spirit: Evidence from the first eight centuries. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press. McDonnell, Killian, & Montague, George T. (Eds.) (1991). Fannng the Flame: What does Baptism in the Holy Spirit have to do with Christian Initiation. Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press. Meyendorff, John (1974). A Study of Gregory Palamas. London: The Faith Press. Meyendorff, John (1974). St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Meyendorff, John (Ed.) (1983). Gregory Palamas. The Triads. Selective translation of Meyendorff’s critical edition of the Triads by Nicholas Gendle. New York: Paulist Press. Middlemiss, David (1996). Interpreting Charismatic Experience. London: SCM Press. Interpreting God’s Charismatic Self-Sharing in Terms of Palamas’ Distinction between God’s Essence and Energies 231

O’Collins, S.J. Gerald, & Farrugia, S.J. Edward G (1991). A Concise Dictionary of Theology. New York/Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press. O’Connor, Edward D., C.S.C. (1972). The Pentecostal Movement in the Catholic Church. Notre Dame, Indiana: Ave Maria Press. Owens, Joseph (2003). Aristotle. New Catholic Encyclopedia, Second Edition. Washington: Thomas Gale in association The Catholic University of America, pp.679-685. Patacsi, Hieromonk Gabriel (1977). Palamism before Palamas. Eastern Churches Review, 9, pp.64-71. Rahner, Karl, & Vorgrimler, Herbert (1965). Schools of theology. Theological Dictionary. New York: Herder and Herder, pp.427-428. Rahner, Karl (Ed.) (1967). The Teaching of the Catholic Church. New York: The Mercier Press. (Originally prepared by S.J. Josef Neuner & S.J. Heinrich Roos) Rahner, Karl (Ed.) (1975). Encyclopedia of Theology: The concise Sacramentum Mundi. New York: Seabury. Rahner, Karl (1981). The Spirituality of the Church in the Future. Theological Investigations XX (Edward Quinn, Trans.). New York: Crossroad, pp.143-153. Russo, Gerry (1988). Rahner and Palamas: A unity of grace. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 32, pp.157-180. Sheerin, F. L. (1967). Grace, Uncreated. New Catholic Encyclopedia, First Edition, Vol.6. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America, p.683. Smith, V. E. (2003). Matter and Form. New Catholic Encyclopedia, Second Edition, Vol.9. New York & London: Thomson Gale in association with The Catholic University of America, pp.346-353. Soanes, Catherine, & Stevenson, Angus (Eds.) (2006). Oxford Dictionary of English, second edition, revised. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Stephens, Randall J., “Assessing the Roots of Pentecostalism: A historiographic essay,” accessed on July 25, 2011, http://are.as.wvu.edu/pentroot.htm 232 新世紀宗教研究第十三卷第二期

Tanner, S.J. Norman P. Tanner (Ed.) (1990). Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Volume II (Trent-Vatican II). London & Washington, D.C.: Sheed & Ward and Georgetown University Press. Walsh, Rev. Vincent M. (1976). A Key to Charismatic Renewal in the Catholic Church, A priority edition. St. Meinrad, Indiana: Abbey Press. Ware, Kallistos (1975). God hidden and revealed: The apophatic way and the essence-energies distinction. Eastern Churches Review, Vol.7, pp.125-136. Ware, Timothy (1981). The Orthodox Church. New York, NY: Penguin Books. Wedin, Michael V. (1999). Aristotle. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Second Edition (Robert Audi, Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.44-51. Yannaras, Christos (1975). The Distinction between Essence and Energies and its Importance for Theology. St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 19, pp.232-245.