Did Palamas believe Mary to be Mediatrix of All Grace?

[PeterTheAleut]

Your way of speaking of the Mostholy Theotokos is improper - please stop it !

So, no one can have a sincere theological discussion with you because your way is right and to speak one's disagreement with it is blasphemy?

Yes she is a Mediatrix of All gifts ( I have to confess I do not like such terms) but it is true the fathers often speak in such language - humble yourself and stay close to them and not your opinion.

Sometimes reading your posts, I get the impression that your knowledge of the Fathers has actually made you somewhat proud.  How else do you presume to teach us so?

Case in point:

May God forgive to call her in this way!

Is this not a judgment of those who speak opinions different from yours?

Your opinion sounds really protestant and not orthodox ! I think a devout orthodox would never speak in such "tone" about our Allglorious Lady Theotokos !

As also is this?  You just defined what "devout" means to you and essentially stated that those who don't venerate Mary as you do are not devout.

 

[ozgeorge]

No please forgive but they use often such language ! If u want I will post some but I have to look.

I await your evidence.

The fathers can not even find words for Her praise - it is hard to believe that u do not know.

Ummm.... that's not the point. The All Holy Theotokos is, as I myself said in this thread, "more honourable than the Cherubim and beyond compare more glorious than the Seraphim". I have no problem with the fact that she is the Greatest of all Creatures, and I venerate her as such. What I have a problem with is proclaiming a dogma that she is "Mediatrix of All Graces". It ain't gonna happen in the Orthodox Church. Never has, never will, and I'd be surprised if it happens in the Roman Catholic Church. The Vincentian Canon should preclude even that possibility.
In the meantime I look forward to the multitude of your quotes from the Orthodox Fathers that prove your case that the All-holy Theotokos is "Mediatrix of All Grace."

 

[Christodoulos]

So, no one can have a sincere theological discussion with you because your way is right and to speak one's disagreement with it is blasphemy?
Sometimes reading your posts, I get the impression that your knowledge of the Fathers has actually made you somewhat proud.  How else do you presume to teach us so?

Case in point:Is this not a judgment of those who speak opinions different from yours?
As also is this?  You just defined what "devout" means to you and essentially stated that those who don't venerate Mary as you do are not devout.

God bless!

Thank u for your "nice post", it is always a pleasure to read them - you always look how u can disagree with my posts and say anything contrary - I think u like that ?

There is not problem in a different opinion but we should write in a proprer manner when speaking about the Theotokos ! I think ( I hope) u will agree and I can not help but his post sound a bit improper for me.

When it sounds proud for u what I wrote-I am sorry about but the "topic" of the Veneration of the Mostholy Theotokos Mary is one of my "favorite" topics of our Holy Faith and I studied the church fathers for years and I often could read some similar expressions !

But I know u will again find any reason not to agree and try to blame my words ! I think you still "angry" about our discussion of the Tradition in the orthodox church and so want in this topic to go on with that behavier. I think u accuse me of your own behavier - when I do not agree with u than I am proud and teachc others.........I hope u can stop this ??

In CHRIST

 

[Christodoulos]

God bless!

We have spoken already of two great Pillars of Orthodoxy-using similar expression:

St. Gregory Palamas ( he often wrote about her as the Mediatress of all that is good)
St. Theophan the branded

Then I posted some short quotes of St. John of Damascus !

the benefactress of all creation as a repayment of our debt.

Hail, inexhaustible ocean of grace

She is the channel of all our blessings.

For our sake she became Mediatrix of all blessings, in her God became man and man became God.

If we firmly abstain, then from past vices annd love the virtues with all our hearrt, taking them as our companions in life, the Virgin will frequently visit us bringing all manners of Graces.

O daughter of Joachim and anna, O mostholy Lady receive the word of a sinful servant, who nerverless burns wiwth love and places in you his only hope of joy, in you he finds the guardian of life, not only a Mediatrix in your Son's presence but a sure pledge of SALVATION.

She is all beautiful, all near to God. For she,surpasses the cherubim, exalted beyind the seraphim, is placed near God.

St. Andrew of crete:

O how marvelous it is ! She acts as mediatrix between the loftiness of God and the lowliness of the flesh.

O mistress of all man oh thou provider of life, life of the living, O holy One, holier without compare than all the Saints,supremly holy treasury of all that makes us holy....All creation is full of thy Glory,all things are made holy through thee,...all universe owns u as its common Altar of cleansing sacrifice...aside from God you are the highest being...

St. Cyrill -every good gift comes from God through the Theotokos:

Through you the Trinity is glorified, the precious cross is celebrated and adored thoughout the world, heaven exults, the angles and archangles rjoice, the demos are put to flight because of you the devil the tempter falls from heaven, the fallen creation is brought back to paradise.....

Through you holy baptism and the oil of gladness are administered !!!!!!!! to the believers, through you the churches are established throughout the world, the people are led to conversion through you. What more shall I say ??????? Through you the Trintiy reigns......!!!!

Through you, every faithful soul achieves the Salvation.

St. John of Thessalonica:

The mistress of the whole universe, through her all creation has received Salvation.
She is the Benefactress of the whole world....She is only second to the Trinity, we shall show worthy of all HER gifts......

She has free access to God and bestows on us the spiritual gifts, she gives grace to our words, she teaches wisdom, She is the Mother of wisdom....she bestowed upon the world the price of peace....While she lived on earth, she watched over us all, and was a kind of universal providence for her subjects. Now she has been taken up into heaven, she is the unassailable fortificatiion for the whole human race, and the intercessor for all.....

St. Modestus_

By the grace that came forth from her, every spiritual and intellectual nature shares eternal life.....Since u abide in his presence with full freedom of acces....paradise is given to the Saints through your Mediation....so that through you he might open up for us a means of acces to him......and we have gained the gifts of the Spirit and eternal blessings through you.........

St. Germanos:

O Mother of God because of you...it is that the human person is now made a full citizien of heaven through your immacualte flesh.....
No one is saved except through you, O All-Holy One, No one is delivered from evil except throgh you O All chaste One, No one obtains the grace of mercy except throgh you O All-honorable One.....She is the Mediatrix of all sinners...

St. John of Kronstadt:
She is the highest of all creation, She is the Mediatrix for the whole human race......she prepares eternal glory for us......Our Lady the Mostholy Mother of God is the most beautiful adorned Temple of the Trinity, She is after God the treasury of ALL BLESSING, of purity holiness, of all true wisdom, the source of spiritual power and constancy.

St. Theophan already written)
The Mother of God is the Dispenser and Distributer of all the wondros uncreated gifts of the Divine Spirit....she distibutes it and shares with others thus manifesting it..... All things were created for her and are goverened through her. No one attains the goal of life in Christ without her cooperation.....no one can participate in the divine gifts save through the Theotokos......

I think in these few ( I could go on and on) quotes we can clearly see that every blessing and grace comes from God through her. So it is not contrary to orthodox understanding to call her Mediatrix of all graces, or co-redeemer........ but you are right we do not need any new Dogma !


At Vespers on the forefeast of the Nativity of the Theotokos:

The spiritual beams of universal joy have dawned for the world, at your nativity, O All-pure One, foreshadowing for all the sun of glory, Christ God. For you have been declared the Mediatrix of the true gladness and grace.

St. Gregory the wonderworker:

For from Mary, the divine fountain of the ineffable Godhead, gushes forth grace and free gift of the Holy Spirit... because with her are quickened and live, all the treasures of Grace....

IN CHRIST

 

[ozgeorge]

Christodoulos,
When it comes to citations, translation and context is everything. One of the tricks the promoters of the doctrine of "Mediatrix of All Graces" (and other heterodox teachings) use is to take quotes from the Fathers out of context and mistranslate them. For example, let's look at just one of your quotes:

For from Mary, the divine fountain of the ineffable Godhead, gushes forth grace and free gift of the Holy Spirit... because with her are quickened and live, all the treasures of Grace....

This comes from "The Homily of St. Gregory the Wonder-worker, concerning the Holy Mother of God, ever-virgin." Here it is in context:
"Wherefore even with one voice let us sing the praises of God the Word, that according to the worthiness of each is cause and promoter of salvation, unto young men and old, and unto children and women. For from Mary, the divine fountain of the ineffable Godhead, gushes forth grace and free gift of the Holy Spirit. From a single Holy Virgin the Pearl of much price proceeded, in order to make alive once more the first-created man that was dead through sin."
Do you see what this Father of the Church is actually saying? He is talking about the Godhead, the Word, the "Pearl of Great Price" coming from the Theotokos. The "grace and free gift of the Holy Spirit" came through the Theotokos at the Incarnation. That is what St. Gregory is talking about.

 

[Christodoulos]

Christodoulos,
When it comes to citations, translation and context is everything. One of the tricks the promoters of the doctrine of "Mediatrix of All Graces" (and other heterodox teachings) use is to take quotes from the Fathers out of context and mistranslate them. For example, let's look at just one of your quotes: This comes from "The Homily of St. Gregory the Wonder-worker, concerning the Holy Mother of God, ever-virgin." Here it is in context:
"Wherefore even with one voice let us sing the praises of God the Word, that according to the worthiness of each is cause and promoter of salvation, unto young men and old, and unto children and women. For from Mary, the divine fountain of the ineffable Godhead, gushes forth grace and free gift of the Holy Spirit. From a single Holy Virgin the Pearl of much price proceeded, in order to make alive once more the first-created man that was dead through sin."
Do you see what this Father of the Church is actually saying? He is talking about the Godhead, the Word, the "Pearl of Great Price" coming from the Theotokos. The "grace and free gift of the Holy Spirit" came through the Theotokos at the Incarnation. That is what St. Gregory is talking about.

God bless!

It is not nice to accuse me of making tricks to promote an heterodox teaching ! I only looked for some quotes to show that it is ( also like B. Kallistos and other orthodox) not contrary to orthodoxy.
You I only posted a few quotes because the patristic corpus is soooo immense full of similar expressions that I wouls have not the time to present.

Through the Theotokos we were saved so through her we are united with God and so it is through her that we receive the grace of God. This is absolut patristic and many patristic scholars will tell u the same !

You only have to study some prayers and the hymnology of the orthodox church and u will see the same,

In CHRIST

 

[ozgeorge]

It is not nice to accuse me of making tricks to promote an heterodox teaching

I didn't.
You entirely miss the point of my post. You quoted St. Gregory the Wonder-worker out of context, and I gave you the correct context to show how easily one can be mislead into thinking the Fathers say one thing when they mean something entirely different.

I only posted a few quotes because the patristic corpus is soooo immense full of similar expressions that I wouls have not the time to present.

But what is the point if, like the quote from St. Gregory, they are only partial quotes taken out of context to mean something other than what the Father intended to say? This is not how the Orthodox study Patristics. We do not decide on a dogma and then look for parts of quotes from the Fathers that might fit it. If we are going to study the Fathers, then we read them in context and understand what they are trying to say- not what we would like them to say.

 

[Christodoulos]

I didn't.
You entirely miss the point of my post. You quoted St. Gregory the Wonder-worker out of context, and I gave you the correct context to show how easily one can be mislead into thinking the Fathers say one thing when they mean something entirely different.
But what is the point if, like the quote from St. Gregory, they are only partial quotes taken out of context to mean something other than what the Father intended to say? This is not how the Orthodox study Patristics. We do not decide on a dogma and then look for parts of quotes from the Fathers that might fit it. If we are going to study the Fathers, then we read them in context and understand what they are trying to say- not what we would like them to say.

God bless!

I did not post out of context, the argument with the quote of St. Gregory is in vain because he wrote FROM MARY - of course it is the grace of God but it is through the Theotokos we received it.

Like I have written the Fathers often use similar language - I am not alone with this understanding, read and study them and u will see, like I have said the patrisitc corpus is too immense that I can post all the passages, so forgive my incomplet post but for more I do not have the time.


IN CHRIST

 

[PeterTheAleut]

Thank u for your "nice post", it is always a pleasure to read them - you always look how u can disagree with my posts and say anything contrary - I think u like that ?

Why not?  I see that one of my tasks here is to challenge the wisdom of those who would presume to be teachers.

There is not problem in a different opinion but we should write in a proprer manner when speaking about the Theotokos ! I think ( I hope) u will agree and I can not help but his post sound a bit improper for me.

I agree that we should not speak disrespectfully of the Most Holy Theotokos, but I don't see ozgeorge having done so.  He questioned your understanding of Mary's role in our salvation, seeing it as borderline Mariolatry, which is totally right for him to do.  You, however, saw this as blasphemy against the Mother of God.

When it sounds proud for u what I wrote-I am sorry about but the "topic" of the Veneration of the Mostholy Theotokos Mary is one of my "favorite" topics of our Holy Faith and I studied the church fathers for years and I often could read some similar expressions !

But I know u will again find any reason not to agree and try to blame my words ! I think you still "angry" about our discussion of the Tradition in the orthodox church and so want in this topic to go on with that behavier.

Angry?  Hardly.  Wanting to continue my "bad" behavior from another thread a couple of months ago?  You give me too much credit.

I think u accuse me of your own behavier - when I do not agree with u than I am proud and teachc others.........I hope u can stop this ??

Again, I don't presume to teach; I just try to derail the reasoning of those who DO presume, in their own sense of self-importance, to teach.


Just a closing thought:  If what you teach is true, why do you feel it so necessary to defend your authority to teach it?

 

[PeterTheAleut]

like I have said the patrisitc corpus is too immense that I can post all the passages, so forgive my incomplet post but for more I do not have the time.

Yes, the patristic corpus is so immense you cannot possibly have read it all.

 

[Irish Hermit]

I think that the Melkites, at Vatican II, proposed a healthy counterweight to the Roman Catholic desire to overdogmatize the glories of the Mother of God.

Here is an extract from their reaction to formulate a new title for her as "Mother of the Church."

"Patriarch Maximos and the Melkite Greek Fathers refused to intervene. They were astonished to their very depths at the importance that was attached to recognizing or refusing this new title “Mother of the Church” to the Theotokos. Accustomed to the poetic language of their liturgy, in which the Virgin is saluted with a thousand titles, they had no trouble in accepting this new title, if it is interpreted in a large, liturgical, and poetic sense, or in refusing it, if it is interpreted in a sense that is too realistic and too literal."



The proposed Catholic title: Mother of the Church

The response of the Catholic Melkites at Vatican II to this new title for the Mother of God is very similar to the Orthodox response.

We have no problem with heaping an infinite number of praises upon the Mother of God.


The Melkite response is well worth the read. Here is an extract:

Mary and the Church

The preparatory doctrinal commission had begun by preparing an independent schema entitled: “On the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Mother of Men.” On June 5, 1962, the patriarch wrote to praise two intentions expressed in the text, namely: no new title for the Virgin, no new Marian dogma. But already he had been struck by the absence in the text of patristic citations, above all Eastern ones, in a domain which the Eastern Fathers have explored superabundantly. Only popes are cited.


1) We agree entirely with the care demonstrated by the theological commission in not granting to the holy Mother of God any new titles that have not been accepted by the Tradition of the Church.


2) We equally agree with the care to avoid defining new Marian dogmas, in spite of the pressure, as blind as it is well intentioned, of certain groups of devotees of the Virgin. In this matter, as in so many others, we must never lose sight of our separated brethren, above all those of the East, and avoid that which, in our efforts to honor the Virgin, deepens the chasm that separates us from them. The Virgin surely is not pleased by a homage that unnecessarily contributes to the widening of the divisions among her children.


3) We would point out, with respect to the drafting of the notes, that one should not be content with citing popes, especially in a matter on which the Fathers of the Church have spoken so much and so well. We must avoid giving the impression that in the eyes of the theologians of the council only popes form the magisterium of the Church. With a unionist goal, it would even be good to cite in particular the Fathers of the Eastern Church.



It will have been noticed that during the passionate debates that characterized the Council’s discussion of this schema “On the Virgin Mary,” Patriarch Maximos and the Melkite Greek Fathers refused to intervene. They were astonished to their very depths at the importance that was attached to recognizing or refusing this new title “Mother of the Church” to the Theotokos. Accustomed to the poetic language of their liturgy, in which the Virgin is saluted with a thousand titles, they had no trouble in accepting this new title, if it is interpreted in a large, liturgical, and poetic sense, or in refusing it, if it is interpreted in a sense that is too realistic and too literal.

Nevertheless, Patriarch Maximos, urged to speak, began to prepare the intervention that we publish below. Finally, he decided not to deliver it. This was in the 1963 session.


Before entering into a study of this schema “Concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary,” it is proper to ask ourselves this question: Is it necessary that this Second Vatican Council, already swamped with questions, devote a special dogmatic constitution to the most holy Mother of God?


For my part [the Melkite Patriarch], I do not think so. ...


Please go to (.pfd)
http://melkite.org/xCouncil/Council%20Chapter%204.doc

 

[Irish Hermit]

Here is a tradition in Orthodoxy. That when the church of the
Dormition was built, a request was made by the builder some ruler or
other, for a relic, meaning body part, of the Theotokos. There was
none, because she had been resurrected and taken to heaven by Jesus.

Until that time, some 500 years after the event, the Assumption of the
Virgin was rumored and some local feast existed, but the matter
wasn't universal.

Dear MCE,

Here's an interesting historical account of the Assumption - The Dormition..... You might say this is a case of knowing how to keep a secret. The history of the end of Mary's life was genuinely new to most of the Church when it was made public in the fifth century. The facts of the matter were kept private among the clergy of the Jerusalem Church, and only became public during the Council of Chalcedon. This was a case where there was a Tradition - a passing-along of knowledge - that was intentionally kept private. I personally suspect the remarkable near-silence of Scripture about the Mother of God was deliberate on the part of the Apostles; St John (her guardian) and the rest of the Evangelists kept her privacy.

The more picturesque details of the "transitus Mariae" literature had yet to be developed, but in the mid-400's some basic information was revealed by the Jerusalem clergy. I'm attaching a quote from the "Euthymiac History" quoted by St John of Damascus, for details.

__________________________________

In his second homily on the Dormition of the Mother of God, Saint John of Damascus refers to events recounted in the 40th chapter of the Life of St Euthymios:

It was said above that Saint Pulcheria erected many churches for Christ in Constantinople. One of these is the church in Blachernae, built at the beginning of the reign of the divinely-appointed Emperor Marcian . When the two of them built a worthy house there for the all-glorious and all-holy Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, and adorned it with every sort of decoration, they hoped to find her holy body, which had been the dwelling-place of God. And summoning Juvenal, the Archbishop of Jerusalem, and those bishops from Palestine who were staying in the capital because of the synod then being held in Chalcedon , they said to them: We have heard that the first and most outstanding church of the all-holy Mother of God, the ever-virgin Mary, is in Jerusalem, in the place called Gethsemane, where her life-giving body was put in a coffin. We now wish to bring this relic here, to protect this royal city."

continued...

 

[Irish Hermit]

...continued

Juvenal answered on behalf of them all:

"There is nothing in the holy, inspired Scripture about the death of Mary, the holy Mother of God; but we know from ancient and wholly reliable tradition that at the time she so gloriously fell asleep, all the holy Apostles who were traveling the world for the salvation of the peoples were lifted up in a single instant of time and were gathered at Jerusalem. And as they stood by her, they saw a vision of angels, and heard the divine chanting of the higher powers. So it was that she gave her soul in an ineffable way into God's hands, surrounded by the glory of God and all heaven.

"Her body, which had been God's dwelling place, was brought for burial amidst the singing of the angels and the Apostles, and laid to rest in a coffin in Gethsemane; and the angelic dancing and singing continued without pause in that place for three days. But after three days the song of the angels ceased; the Apostles were there, and since one of them - Thomas - had not been present and came at he end of three days, and wished to reverence that body which had housed God, they opened the coffin. And they could not find her body, which had been the object of such praise; all that they found were her burial wrappings. And being overcome by the ineffable fragrance that came out of the wrappings, they closed the coffin again. Amazed by this miraculous discovery, they could only draw a single conclusion: The one who had deigned to become flesh in her own person and to take his humanity from her, the one who willed to be born in human flesh as God the Word, the Lord of glory, and who had preserved her virginity intact even after childbirth, now chose, after her departure from this world, to honour her pure and immaculate body with the gift of incorruptibility, and with a change of state even before the common, universal resurrection."

When the imperial couple heard this, they asked Archbishop Juvenal to send them the holy coffin, properly sealed, with the funeral garments in it of the glorious, all-holy Mary, Mother of God. And when he had sent it, they placed it in the church of the holy Theotokos that had been built at Blachernae.

 

[Christodoulos]

Why not?  I see that one of my tasks here is to challenge the wisdom of those who would presume to be teachers.
I agree that we should not speak disrespectfully of the Most Holy Theotokos, but I don't see ozgeorge having done so.  He questioned your understanding of Mary's role in our salvation, seeing it as borderline Mariolatry, which is totally right for him to do.  You, however, saw this as blasphemy against the Mother of God.
Angry?  Hardly.  Wanting to continue my "bad" behavior from another thread a couple of months ago?  You give me too much credit.
Again, I don't presume to teach; I just try to derail the reasoning of those who DO presume, in their own sense of self-importance, to teach.


Just a closing thought:  If what you teach is true, why do you feel it so necessary to defend your authority to teach it?

God bless !

So I presume to be teacher !! first accuse
You do not see a disrespectful langage ---- for me it is, so why do you tell us what is and what is not, does it depend on your taste if something is improper or not - who are u ? For me it is improper to call her Superhero ...and not because he did not agree with me ! second accuse. For him it is right to doubt my "Matriology" but when I doubt your relativism about tradition - that's not allowed - are u infallable ?

Of course you do not teach ---NO. And you are absolut not intolerant. Everone who shares your opinion is right but when it is doubted than u begin to accuse and become angry or really angry !

In CHRIST

 

[Apotheoun]

That the uncreated energies flow through the Holy Theotokos is a pious opinion, and not a dogma; and moreover, since there is no such thing as "development of dogma" in Eastern Christianity, it follows that it is not possible that at some point a "new" dogma will be proclaimed.  There are no "new" dogmas; instead, the Church believes what she has always believed.

 

[samkim]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

 

[NicholasMyra]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

Pseudo-Dionysius fail.

 

[Seth84]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

Pseudo-Dionysius fail.

What is a fail?  That he seems to be relying on St. Dionysios or that his explanation is inferior to that of our father St. Dionysios?

 

[NicholasMyra]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

Pseudo-Dionysius fail.

What is a fail?  That he seems to be relying on St. Dionysios or that his explanation is inferior to that of our father St. Dionysios?

The latter; a misinterpretation, the classic "grace funnel" misinterpretation.

http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/hopko/bishops_part_12_dionysius_the_areopagite

 

[Seth84]

Thanks for the clarification.  I'll take a listen to that podcast.  I must admit that I have never heard an explanation like Fr. George's before.  Apparently it is common enough though, enough to make Fr. Thomas record a podcast.  Thanks again. 

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

Pseudo-Dionysius fail.

What is a fail?  That he seems to be relying on St. Dionysios or that his explanation is inferior to that of our father St. Dionysios?

The latter; a misinterpretation, the classic "grace funnel" misinterpretation.

http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/hopko/bishops_part_12_dionysius_the_areopagite

 

[samkim]

Another catechumen who thinks he knows better than a holy father and confessor for the faith who suffered under militant atheists (Fr. George), and a holy monastic (Fr. Damascene), and a saint of the Church (St. Dionysios)...

 

[Seth84]

Another catechumen who thinks he knows better than a holy father and confessor for the faith who suffered under militant atheists (Fr. George), and a holy monastic (Fr. Damascene), and a saint of the Church (St. Dionysios)...

I'm not sure that is fair in this case.  Such a literal interpretation of the writings of our father St. Dionysios as expressed in that quote (I recognize that it could be out of context) are completely foreign to me.  I haven't seen it in the Fathers.  I'll admit though that I haven't read all the Father, or even most of them.  I listened to the podcast linked to by NicholasMyra. BTW, skip the first 15 minutes and the last 4 if you are going to listen to it, they don't address the topic at hand.  I was extremely reticent, especially since I hold the writings of our father St. Dionysios close to my heart and because I have taken issue with some of the opinions of Fr. Thomas Hopko in the past. However I was surprised by Fr. Thomas, in a good way.  I found his explanation to be in line with those of the Fathers that I have read and in complete agreement with things I have read by Fr. John Romanides.  Actually, I was extremely impressed by his reference to St. Symeon the New Theologian at the end of the podcast.  St. Symeon speaks clearly regarding the teaching of the Fathers on this issue and corrects the misunderstanding of the writings of our father St. Dionysios. 

I have no doubt that Fr. George Calciu was a holy man and endured much for the Faith, but that doesn't automatically make him a theologian.  I have heard much of his writings in a certain monastery and found some of it (not most or all!) to be quite disagreeable, but then again, it could be my own passions preventing me from seeing clearly.       

That said, I believe the Mother of God is a mediator of grace.    ;D

 

[NicholasMyra]

That said, I believe the Mother of God is a mediator of grace.    ;D

As do I.

 

[samkim]

Forgive me. My response was too condemning.

 

[GreekOrthodoxDude]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

The Orthodox faith is the faith of my fathers, as far back as my ancestry can be traced. I will go even further than the impertinent catechumen and say that this cradle-born has trouble believing that what is quoted above was ever received from the Apostles.

 

[LBK]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

The Orthodox faith is the faith of my fathers, as far back as my ancestry can be traced. I will go even further than the impertinent catechumen and say that this cradle-born has trouble believing that what is quoted above was ever received from the Apostles.

I'm with GreekOrthodoxDude on this. I'd like to see a proper translation, or rendition, of what Fr George actually said/wrote, and how this squares with Fr Damascene's statement. Might have to talk with my Romanian friends ...

 

[samkim]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

The Orthodox faith is the faith of my fathers, as far back as my ancestry can be traced. I will go even further than the impertinent catechumen and say that this cradle-born has trouble believing that what is quoted above was ever received from the Apostles.

It's ultimately based on the angelology of St. Dionysios in the Divine Hierarchy. Now our tradition understands him to truly be St. Dionysios, and not "pseudo." If we're right, then this mariology might be apostolic.

St. Gregory Palamas (perhaps the Orthodox father par excellence) says this in the original homily mentioned in this thread: ‎"She alone has received the all-pervading fullness of Him that filleth all things, and through her all may now contain it, for she dispenses it according to the power of each, in proportion and to the degree of the purity of each. Hence she is the treasury and overseer of the riches of the Godhead. For it is an everlasting ordinance in the heavens that the inferior partake of what lies beyond being, by the mediation of the superior, and the Virgin Mother is incomparably superior to all. It is through her that as many as partake of God do partake, and as many as know God understand her to be the enclosure of the Uncontainable One, and as many as hymn God praise her together with Him. She is the cause of what came before her, the champion of what came after her and the agent of things eternal. She is the substance of the prophets, the principle of the apostles, the firm foundation of the martyrs and the premise of the teachers of the Church . She is the glory of those upon earth, the joy of celestial beings, the adornment of all creation. She is the beginning and the source and root of unutterable good things; she is the summit and consummation of everything holy." St. Gregory Palamas http://www.monachos.net/content/patristics/patristictexts/161-palamas-homily-dormition

Now, I suppose he could have been using hyperbolic speech. If not though, he is clearly teaching that anyone who partakes of grace, does so necessarily through the mediation of the Holy Mother of God.

 

[NicholasMyra]

It's ultimately based on the angelology of St. Dionysios in the Divine Hierarchy. Now our tradition understands him to truly be St. Dionysios, and not "pseudo."

A Dionysios, yes. Dionysios the Areopagite? No.

 

[samkim]

It's ultimately based on the angelology of St. Dionysios in the Divine Hierarchy. Now our tradition understands him to truly be St. Dionysios, and not "pseudo."

A Dionysios, yes. Dionysios the Areopagite? No.

According to Orthodox traditionalists, yes. According to the tradition in general as manifested in the hagiographic and liturgical books of the Church which name him as the author of the Dionysian corpus, yes. According modern scholarship, no.

The Prologue of Ochrid, the OCA and the Greek hagiographies call the Holy Hieromartyr Dionysios the Areopagite the author. Lex orandi, Lex credendi. So it doesn't seem like you're correct. (My own personal hunch is that it wasn't him, but I lay these doubts aside and accept the Church's judgment.)

 

[PeterTheAleut]

It's ultimately based on the angelology of St. Dionysios in the Divine Hierarchy. Now our tradition understands him to truly be St. Dionysios, and not "pseudo."

A Dionysios, yes. Dionysios the Areopagite? No.

According to Orthodox traditionalists, yes. According to the tradition in general as manifested in the hagiographic and liturgical books of the Church which name him as the author of the Dionysian corpus, yes. According modern scholarship, no.

The Prologue of Ochrid, the OCA and the Greek hagiographies call the Holy Hieromartyr Dionysios the Areopagite the author. Lex orandi, Lex credendi.

And these same hagiographies have some of our saints not nursing from their mothers' breasts on Wednesdays and Fridays, but are we really to believe that? Hagiographies are generally known for emphasizing some level of hyperbole over factual accuracy--in fact, I don't even think our hagiographers even cared all that much for factual accuracy--so I wouldn't give them a whole lot of credence as actual historical documents.

 

[Ortho_cat]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

The Orthodox faith is the faith of my fathers, as far back as my ancestry can be traced. I will go even further than the impertinent catechumen and say that this cradle-born has trouble believing that what is quoted above was ever received from the Apostles.

lol...seriously, whatever happened to the mediator between God and man?

 

[samkim]

It's ultimately based on the angelology of St. Dionysios in the Divine Hierarchy. Now our tradition understands him to truly be St. Dionysios, and not "pseudo."

A Dionysios, yes. Dionysios the Areopagite? No.

According to Orthodox traditionalists, yes. According to the tradition in general as manifested in the hagiographic and liturgical books of the Church which name him as the author of the Dionysian corpus, yes. According modern scholarship, no.

The Prologue of Ochrid, the OCA and the Greek hagiographies call the Holy Hieromartyr Dionysios the Areopagite the author. Lex orandi, Lex credendi.

And these same hagiographies have some of our saints not nursing from their mothers' breasts on Wednesdays and Fridays, but are we really to believe that? Hagiographies are generally known for emphasizing some level of hyperbole over factual accuracy--in fact, I don't even think our hagiographers even cared all that much for factual accuracy--so I wouldn't give them a whole lot of credence as actual historical documents.

Maybe, but it's not for me to judge. The proposition I was defending was merely that the tradition of the Church ascribes to the Areopagite the authorship of the Dionysian corpus.

 

[samkim]

"Between God and the spiritual creation there is the Mother of God. She takes of the Energy and distributes the Energy to the Chief Commander of the Seraphim. This is passed to the first member of the Cherubim, and so on. The Light goes from step to step through the Heavenly Hierarchies and reaches afterwards the visible universe." Fr. George Calciu, quoted by Hieromonk Damascene in Christ the Eternal Tao

The Orthodox faith is the faith of my fathers, as far back as my ancestry can be traced. I will go even further than the impertinent catechumen and say that this cradle-born has trouble believing that what is quoted above was ever received from the Apostles.

lol...seriously, whatever happened to the mediator between God and man?

There is only one mediator, in the sense that only one has united human nature to divine nature, "mediating" between the two. But there are many lesser mediators. Mediation and intercession mean the same thing. The greatest of these "lesser" mediators is the Theotokos. Please see the Palamas homily. The Orthodox Church is indeed the faith of our FATHERS.

 

[Volnutt]

Assuming samkim's interpretation of them is correct, a proposition:

St. Gregory Palamas, not being infallible, was wrong. St. Dyonisios, not being infallible, was also wrong.

I thought Orthodoxy was into consensus patrum

 

[samkim]

Assuming samkim's interpretation of them is correct, a proposition:

St. Gregory Palamas, not being infallible, was wrong. St. Dyonisios, not being infallible, was also wrong.

I thought Orthodoxy was into consensus patrum

In gneral, yes. But certain fathers carry more weightthan others. Also, there is a general idea that individual fathers for the most part don't contradict each other.

 

[Iconodule]

If we can say Mary "saves" us, while Christ is still the Savior, we can also say she mediates, even as Christ is the mediator.

 

[Volnutt]

If we can say Mary "saves" us, while Christ is still the Savior, we can also say she mediates, even as Christ is the mediator.

Quite so, but Miravelle and company take things a bit too far, don't you agree?

 

[Iconodule]

I thought we were talking about St. Gregory Palamas? I've never read Miravelle, sorry.

 

[PeterTheAleut]

It's ultimately based on the angelology of St. Dionysios in the Divine Hierarchy. Now our tradition understands him to truly be St. Dionysios, and not "pseudo."

A Dionysios, yes. Dionysios the Areopagite? No.

According to Orthodox traditionalists, yes. According to the tradition in general as manifested in the hagiographic and liturgical books of the Church which name him as the author of the Dionysian corpus, yes. According modern scholarship, no.

The Prologue of Ochrid, the OCA and the Greek hagiographies call the Holy Hieromartyr Dionysios the Areopagite the author. Lex orandi, Lex credendi.

And these same hagiographies have some of our saints not nursing from their mothers' breasts on Wednesdays and Fridays, but are we really to believe that? Hagiographies are generally known for emphasizing some level of hyperbole over factual accuracy--in fact, I don't even think our hagiographers even cared all that much for factual accuracy--so I wouldn't give them a whole lot of credence as actual historical documents.

Maybe, but it's not for me to judge. The proposition I was defending was merely that the tradition of the Church ascribes to the Areopagite the authorship of the Dionysian corpus.

Really? You have evidence from sources other than the often hyperbolic hagiographies you've already named?

 

[PeterTheAleut]

Assuming samkim's interpretation of them is correct, a proposition:

St. Gregory Palamas, not being infallible, was wrong. St. Dyonisios, not being infallible, was also wrong.

I thought Orthodoxy was into consensus patrum

In gneral, yes. But certain fathers carry more weightthan others. Also, there is a general idea that individual fathers for the most part don't contradict each other.

But are the Fathers infallible--that is to say, incapable of ever teaching error?