Page 145 - Uros Todorovic Byzantine Painting Contemporary Eyes

Chapter II
We observe here that Aristotle’s dialectical syllogism is insufficient when implement- ed (on its own) as a methodology in a discussion of the dogmatic teachings of the Ortho- dox Church, as from the foundation of the Church and throughout its history, these dogmatic teachings have always been antinomic.50 Varlaam was unable to comprehend the essential nature of the Orthodox dogmatic teaching, and consequently, upon losing the debate against the hesychasts (10th of June 1341), Varlaam entirely changed his polit- ical and religious orientation, and having returned to Italy he became a bishop of the Roman Catholic Church.
Varlaam’s subsequent departure from Byzantium did not constitute the end of the Hesychast Debate. The main anti-hesychast figure after Varlaam, was his student Greg- ory Akindynos51 (who lost the debate in August 1341), and then, between 1351 and 1352, Nikiphoros Gregoras.52 We shall not elaborate on all the particularities of the events after Varlaam’s departure – as our aim here is mainly to explain the essential outcome of the Hesychast Debate and to make reference to its subsequent influence in the cultural do- mains of life in the last decades of the Byzantine Empire.
In 1351, the last significant council regarding the question of the legitimacy of Hesy- chasm was held,53 where the representative of the opponents of Hesychasm was Niki- foros Grigoras. The following questions were all categorically resolved in favor of Greg- ory Palamas and the hesychasts:
Between the divine essence (οὐσία) and the divine energies (ἐνέργειες) there is not only a unity, but also a distinction.
Both God’s energy and His essence are uncreated.
The distinction between the uncreated divine energies and the divine essence does not incur the acceptance of synthesis (plurality) in divinity.
The term deity (θεότης) is used in the writings of the Church fathers not only for God’s essence but also for His energies.
According to the Church fathers, the essence is, in a certain sense, higher than its energy, and that, in the same way the cause is higher than the consequence.
50 More specifically, the Orthodox teaching is founded upon principles which negate one another, and, as Ostrogor- sky observes, this teaching contemplates as theologically singular that which is logically plural, and vice versa, it con- templates as theologically plural that which is logically singular. Ibid., 220.
51 Also spelled Gregorius Acindynus.
52 Георгије Острогорски, О Веровањима и Схватањима Византинаца. Наслов Оригинала: Studien zur Geschi- chte des byzantinischen Bilderstreites. Превела Др Љиљана Црепајац (Београд: Просвета, 1970), 217.
53 Ibid.
143