The Eucharist in the works of St. Gregory Palamas

In his article on the topic of the Eucharist in the context of theological disputes of the 14th century, 2 prot. John Meyendorff pays attention, albeit briefly, to St. Gregory Palamas. In a polemic with Gregory Akindinus, who argued that “Eucharistic communion implies the communion of the Divine essence itself” 3, St. Gregory, on the contrary, insists that “Eucharistic communion is a communion not of the Divine essence, but of the human nature of Christ, His deified Body - the Body that has become the body of the Divine Word. For St. Gregory, to partake of the Body of Christ means to partake of His human nature, because the human nature of Christ became the human nature of God - the Word" 4 . Prot. John comments: “This teaching, associated with the Christology of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, clearly presupposes a distinction between essence and energies in God” 5 . A few lines later, Meyendorff repeats even more definitely: “Palama affirms only that the Eucharistic Bread and Wine become, thanks to the mysterious μεταβολή [translation], the deified Body of Jesus, the Body which is for us the source of divine life and uncreated illumination, while it itself is not the divine essence” 6 . Then Fr. John draws attention to the fact that this teaching in no way affects Palamas’s ideas about the Eucharist, for whom Holy Communion is “personal union with the Person of the Word and a real participation in His energy” 7 . The concept presented clearly and well agrees with Meyendorff's formulation of the theological question. But does it truly reflect the thought of the saint himself? Without going into an analysis of the issue of the theology of the Eucharist in the broad context of Palamite disputes, about which a special study was written not so long ago 8, this work aims to consider exclusively the works of St. Gregory Palamas in order to determine his understanding of the Eucharist. In the two most important texts of Palamas 9 cited by Meyendorff, which relate to the doctrine of uncreated divine energies, the doctrine of the Eucharist is not considered at all. The phrase from the 16th homily, quoted in the text of the article itself, examines the mystery of the Incarnation 10 without regard to the topic of the Eucharist. Finally, Meyendorff's notes cite three more texts that clearly speak of the Eucharist: two phrases from the 16th Homily 11, as well as a reference to the “Triads” (I 3.38) 12. To these texts we can add four more: from the First Triad 13, then from the Confession of Faith 14, from the 5th Homily 15 and from the Decalogue of the Legislation of Christ, or the New Testament 16. Thus, from the entire corpus of works of St. Gregory Palamas we can identify six texts that speak about the Eucharist. Three of them are contained in polemical works, the other three in pastoral writings dating back to the time of the episcopal service of the Thessalonian saint. Special mention should be made of the 16th homily as the most extensive. In anticipation of a study of the patristic origins of the saint's thoughts and formulations, we present only an analysis of his texts. The third part of Triad I is devoted to "light, divine enlightenment, sacred beatitude and perfection in Christ." In it, Palamas raises the key topic of controversy, the possibility of real knowledge and experience of meeting God in this world. The argumentation, rich and well-structured, is based on reflections of a philosophical nature, on the testimony of the holy fathers (in particular, Macarius of Egypt and Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite) and, of course, on reflections on biblical passages. In this context, he turns to the doctrine of the Eucharist as something given in advance and therefore accepted as one of the proofs in the reasoning of the saint. In the text of Triad I 3.25, the Eucharist, along with Baptism (the illumination of the Spirit - τὸν φωτισμὸν τοῦ Πνεύματος), is mentioned as an example of believers experiencing illumination from above (the Lord bestows His luminous Body as food - τὸ φωτιστι – κὸν αὐτοῦ σῶμα), the fulfillment of what was foreshadowed by manna, and as a guarantee (ἀρραβών) of future unity (κοινωνία) with Christ. These expressions reflect the traditional language of arcane teachings and are used as a basis for further argumentation. Then we talk about the nature of this insight and about the insight based on the hesychast experience. To confirm the fact that the experience of communion with God is inherent in all human nature and therefore its bodily component also participates in it, Palamas again turns to the Eucharist (Triads. I 3.38). But even in this case, the theology of the Eucharist is not the focus and is not relevant to the controversy. Mainly St. Gregory emphasizes the reality of the believer’s unity with Christ in the act of Eucharistic communion and the personal, individual, so to speak, aspect of this unity. The Divine Hypostasis of the Son united with human nature in the Incarnation, and through “the communion (μεταλήψεως) of His holy Body,” He “mixes Himself (συνανακιρνῶν) with each of the believers,” “becomes cocorporeal ( σύσσωμος) to us and makes us a church of the entire Divinity.” Thus, we are talking about the true essence of the Eucharist, which consists in the realization in the concrete life of each believer of salvation, realized in the life of Jesus of Nazareth (which is interpreted in the key of the incarnation, the assumption of human nature). In this case, the ancient language of the baptismal announcement is used (however, there is also an original element in the language when it comes to “human hypostases”). "Confession of Faith" written by St. Gregory approx. 1343 – 1344 as an appendix to a letter addressed to the monk Dionysius, and subsequently solemnly read at the 2nd meeting of the Council in 1351, this is a kind of summation of the teaching on the Eucharist. Here the Eucharist is presented as the first of the “church traditions”; with the help of an untranslatable play on words, Palamas emphasizes that in this sacrament (τελετ ή) all other sacraments (τελετα ί) are fulfilled (τελε ί ωσις). The Eucharist reveals three fundamental aspects: “the remembrance (ἀνάμνησις) of Him who exhausted Himself inexhaustibly” (a reference to the Incarnation and suffering on the cross); worship in which bread and wine, through the same Principle that gave life, become Body and Blood; finally, the gift of the Eucharist is “secret communion (μετουσ ί α) and communion ( κοινων ί α) with Jesus.” It also says here about the need to approach the Sacrament “reverently (εὐαγῶς).” The appeal to the Eucharist in the text, the purpose of which was to demonstrate the rootedness of the theology of St. Gregory Palamas in the tradition, since faith in the Eucharist is one of the foundations of the doctrinal church tradition. And although in some places in the “Confession of Faith” of St. Gregory uses expressions characteristic of “Palamite theology” (the essence of energy), they, however, remain completely outside the framework of the presentation concerning the Eucharist, where, on the contrary, the traditional for St. fathers language. The mentioned topics are raised in homilies that deal with eucharistic issues in a purely pastoral manner. The purpose of the 5th homily (“At the Meeting of our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ, it [talks] about chastity and the evil opposite to it”) is to present salvation as a fact that makes the believer a responsible partner and, as a consequence, requiring a chaste life in accordance with the principle of celibacy or “God-given marriage” 17 (it is this last issue that this homily, addressed to the entire people, is devoted to God's 18). Reflection is fundamentally soteriological; We find this approach even in St. Gregory the Theologian: “what is not received is not healed, but what is united with God is saved” 19. God's will (“that all men should be saved,” 1 Tim. 2:4) is manifested in the Incarnation, when the divine Hypostasis of the Son takes on human nature. But salvation is not only a general fact. It is necessary that our hypostases be involved in it: “not only to the nature itself, which He had from us by indissoluble union, but also to everyone who believes in Him, He granted perfect redemption” 20 . Now this personal involvement of each believer occurs through the Sacraments: “for this [that is, to bring everyone to salvation. – M.S.] He commanded divine Baptism, and laid down saving laws, and announced repentance to everyone, and handed over His Body and Blood; for it is not just the nature in general, but the hypostasis of every believer who receives Baptism, lives his life according to the divine commandments, and is a partaker of the idolizing Bread and Cup” 21 . The teaching presented is completely traditional; in similar expressions we find it, for example, in St. Maximus the Confessor 22. It will be fully reflected in the works of St. Nicholas Cabasilas, essentially contemporary with the pastoral work of Palamas. It should also be noted that there is a significant contrast with the fact that St. Gregory asserted in 1343–1344: “... all God deifies the worthy, uniting with them not hypostatically - which belongs solely to Christ Himself - not in essence <...> and not through all the divine grace and energy, but through a small part of the uncreated energies of the uncreated Divinity” 23. If, according to this passage from the “5th Antirritik against Akindinus,” the deification of man is accomplished through uncreated energies, then, according to the text of the 5th homily (and, as will be seen, to an even greater extent the text of the 56th), it is accomplished through the mysterious power of Baptism and the Eucharist. As follows from both texts, deification occurs through the union of each believer with God; Only the expression of this unity, the method of achieving it, differs. The theme of uncreated energies, central to the controversy, is almost forgotten in these later texts of a pastoral nature 24 . In any case, we never meet it in connection with the theme of the Eucharist; in this context, the main significance in the deification of man is already acquired by the very sacrament of the Eucharist, and, as we have already shown, such an understanding is fully consistent with the Eucharist in the works of St. Gregory Palamas and the traditional teaching of the Church, which the saint unconditionally accepts. In the 56th homily there are 25 saints. Gregory Palamas dwells on the topic of the Eucharist in more detail, 26 but the saint’s attention is again drawn not to the divine service (i.e., ritual) and not to Eucharistic realism, 27 which, however, is obvious due to traditional patristic formulations. Reflecting on the visible and invisible aspects of the Eucharist, St. Gregory calls for paying attention not only to visible reality (bread), but also to what remains invisible according to the very logic of the sacrament: “[Communion] is called “mysteries” (μυστήρια) for the reason that it is not only what we see, but also something spiritual and inexpressible” 28. To explain, Palamas uses the image of a veil: “This Bread is, as it were, a kind of curtain (καταπέτασμα) hidden within the Divinity.”29 This image refers us to the church curtain, which protected the place of God’s presence, making it difficult to see it directly. St. Gregory borrows this image from the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 10:20); in the image of the “veil” of the ap. Paul sees the humanity of Christ (“his flesh”) as the means by which believers can draw closer to God. In our text, this appeal to the human nature of Christ becomes a direct reference to the Eucharist. So, at St. Gregory, in accordance with church tradition, the connection between the Incarnation and the Eucharist is obvious; this connection is also implied in this homily, pronounced on the eve of Christmas with the intention of encouraging believers to prepare for “the feast of the Nativity according to the flesh of the Lord and God and our Savior Jesus Christ, when it is the custom of almost all Christians to partake (ἐν μεθέξει γίνεσθαι) of the Holy Body and His Blood and, by virtue of this, to unite ( ἑνοῦσθαι) with Him and in the divine image to become one spirit and one body with Him” 30. This meaning of “veil” in the context of the Eucharist calls on the believer not to stop at what he sees, but to look with spiritual eyes in order to be able to recognize the action of the Holy Spirit 31 . Only in this case will participation in the Sacrament be fruitful: “if you look only at what is clearly visible (τὸ φαιν ό μενον), then you have not gained any benefit; if you look at the spirit (πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα), that is, this present You see the bread in a spiritual way (πνευματικῶς), then, having received communion, you will be revived” 32. We see that the theme associated with the image of the veil also concerns the complicity of believers. It is in this perspective and in this case that St. Gregory Palamas speaks about the Eucharist. Thus, the need to prepare for the reception of the Body and Blood of the Lord through cleansing and repentance is emphasized 33 . But especially St. Gregory focuses on the result of communion with the Body and Blood of Christ, which is unity with Him. Real unity, both spiritual and physical, based on the spiritual and physical nature of the Eucharist: “So that not only in spirit, but also in body we might be one with Him—flesh of His Flesh and bone of His Bones. Through this Bread He gave us contact with Him." 34 And further: “we not only come into close contact, but also mix (ἀνακιρν ώ μεθα 35) with The Body of Christ through the communion of this divine Bread, and we not only become one body, but also one spirit” 36. This dynamics is expressed using an “ascending” (in terms of content) verb series in the text of the 3rd paragraph quoted above: enter into communion, become one essence with Christ, achieve divine perfection. The ultimate goal is “to get rich, or better yet, to get rich” 37 . Further St. Gregory develops 38. Thus, we are talking about transfiguration, which, through the Body and Blood of the Lord, makes us sons and anointed of God, and moreover, makes us Christ himself, embodied already now in our lives; at the end of time it will appear in the fullness of glory. Here participation in the sacrament of the Eucharist is given an eschatological dimension. It is this aspect of the question of deification, it seems to me, that is the core of Palamas’ argument, the core of his thought. At the conclusion of the homily, from this core he derives ethical norms: it is about living in accordance with the gift received, and if the Eucharist is a “divine gift” 39, then there is a need for a human effort to accept it. It is necessary to preserve the “sanctification received from the sacrament” 40 so that it does not turn out to be in vain. This refers to “deed, word and thought” 41 in accordance with the classical formula, implying life in its external and internal manifestations. It should become obvious that the life of a believer is now the very life of God, and therefore it is organized according to divine laws: “The Father Himself gave His Only Begotten Son for us; the Only Begotten Son of God Himself [gave] Himself; shall we not, in turn, give ourselves, not even for Him, but for ourselves?” 42. And lastly, St. Gregory clarifies that the content of this self-giving is “love for Him and for each other,” which is then transformed into obedience to God’s will, which involves getting rid of one’s own passions and desires, and, finally, into the ability to “die to sin and live for virtue.” St. Gregory shows that the Eucharist is an appeal to God and to us: “the very Body and Blood of Christ, which are presented, speak to God and the Father to a much greater extent than the blood of Abel (because it cried out to God against his brother, and this blood [cries] for us, whose brother Christ has deigned to become, propitiating Him to us and reconciling us with the highest Father), they also speak to us, clearly showing the path of love" 43 . It is in this context that Palamas speaks of the Paschal dimension of the Eucharist (which he calls here “the crucified Body of Christ, presented for us as food” 44), emphasizing the participation of the whole life of the believer in the risen Christ. In the “Decalogue of the Legislation of Christ, or the New Testament,” dating back to the time of the episcopal service in Thessalonica 45, St. Gregory presents, in his characteristic pastoral tones, the Decalogue of Moses in the light of Christian experience. In talking about the fourth commandment, relating to the observance of the Sabbath, 46 the saint presents Sunday as a day of rest, reflection and worship, established for the sake of the constant renewal of life. On this day, it is said, “you will enter the church of God and appear at the divine service (σύναξις), and you will partake (μεταλαμ – βάνω) of the Holy Body and Blood of Christ in immaculate faith and with pure consciousness, and you will have the beginning of a more worthy life, you will renew yourself and prepare to accept future eternal blessings” 47. This text primarily emphasizes the relationship of the Eucharist to the Day of the Lord and the Day of the Lord to the Eucharist. The call to Sunday Eucharistic celebration is based on church tradition dating back to apostolic times 48 . Palamas also emphasizes the general requirements for the Eucharist “immaculate faith and pure consciousness,” which is also a traditional point on which he, in particular, insists in the 56th homily. What is implied here is the Eucharistic reality, which is "the holy Body and Blood of Christ." Moreover, this text demonstrates the existential character of the Eucharistic communion, namely the renewal of the human personality to which it leads the believer and which it requires of him. Finally, the eschatological aspect of the Eucharist is also noted, preparing the believer to accept “future eternal blessings.” This text is a summary of the Church's teaching on the Eucharist, listing its main aspects. So, the presented review of the texts of St. Gregory allows us to formulate several final observations: 1. Despite the enormous volume of Palamas's legacy, attention to the theme of the Eucharist as a whole is secondary and very limited in scope. 2. Three of the six texts somewhat related to the topic are texts of a pastoral nature, relating to the period of the saint’s life, when the polemics had already subsided and he devoted himself primarily to episcopal service in Thessalonica. As for the texts from Triad I, the mention of the Eucharist has little relevance to the problem raised there. An excerpt from the “Confession of Faith” serves to emphasize that St. Gregory belongs to the traditional doctrine. 3. The Eucharistic theme in the texts of St. Gregory remains, in fact, alien to the central problematics of the Palamite polemic. It is relied upon in argumentation as a generally accepted doctrine. In this regard, minority does not mean that the topic seems unimportant. In fact, Palamas's controversial writings were a response to certain problems. Obviously, the Eucharist in this period was not included in the scope of these problems. 4. The Eucharistic theme that attracts Palamas' attention is deification, which is achieved through the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ. 5. It is given mainly existential meaning, as, indeed, was required by the literary genre of the texts. 6. The theme of deification occupies a central place in the controversy, but in our texts we do not find any reflection of themes characteristic and dear to Palamas. On the contrary, as we have already noted, a kind of substitution takes place here: in place of uncreated energies, Taborian light, in the texts under consideration, the theme of the divine-human, mysterious nature of the Eucharist is revealed. In this, Palamas’ thought about the Eucharist is very close to the thought of St. Nicholas Kavasila. 7. However, it seems to us, such a substitution does not allow us to assert that Palamas allowed for the possibility of two paths of deification: the monastic-ascetic one, in which the central place is occupied by uncreated energies, and the path of communion with the Sacraments, where the main role is played by the Eucharist 49 . On the contrary, it seems that for Palamas these two aspects do not intersect, but run parallel and relate to different situations. 8. The main focus is on the realization of the salvation granted by the Incarnation and Easter of Christ in the life of the believer. From here flow the foundations of moral behavior, both preceding the Eucharist (purification in order to be ready for communion) and subsequent (moral life prompted and required by the Eucharist). The eschatological perspective is emphasized here: the Eucharist anticipates and prepares for the life of the future age. The ecclesiastical perspective still remains unilluminated; The Eucharist is interpreted as a personal, almost individual fact. 9 . Comparison with other great authors of the 14th century. (St. Gregory of Sinaiti and St. Nicholas Cabasilas) 50 reveals another aspect: Palamas, unlike them, is not concerned with the Liturgy as such, he does not interpret it, but focuses on the sacrament of Communion and its theological significance. 10. Nevertheless, in a broader context, we find much in common between these three theologians, as well as the consistency of their thought with church tradition. The topics raised overlap with each other and often coincide. 11. This also seems to me to be proof that Palamas’s thought on the Eucharist expresses the general church teaching 51, without any author’s development of it. This publication is the first published authorized translation of a revised version of the Italian article: Scarpa M. La teologia eucaristica di Gregorio Palamas // Marcianum. Vol. 3 (1). 2007. P. 231–246. Translations of quotes have been verified from ancient Greek. original. – Ed. Meyendorff J". Le dogme eucharistique dans les controverses théologiques de XIVe siècle // ΓΠ. T. 42. 1959. Σ. 93–100 (Idem.” Byzantine Hesychasm: Historical, Theological and Social Problems: Collected Studies. L., 1974. Item XIII). Ibid. Σ. 98. Theological works. No. 42. 2009. pp. 137–145. Dunaev A.G.” The Theology of the Eucharist in the context of the Palamite controversies // Cristianesimo nella storia. Vol. 29(1). 2008. P. 33–52. [For the corrected and expanded Russian original of the article, see this issue of BT. – Ed.] See also: Bernatsky M. M.” [Questions of the theology of the Eucharist among Byzantine authors of the XIV-XV centuries] / Eucharist // PE. T. 17. 2008. pp. 634–638. Homilia 35 // PG. 151. Col. 448a (cited on p. 97); Triads. III 2. 7 (cited on p. 98). Homilia 16 // PG. 151. Col. 193b (cited on p. 96). Quotes in notes 10 on p. 96 and approx. 14 on p. 98. Wed. approx. 24. Link to approx. 14 on p. 98. Homilia 5. 23 // PG. 151. Col. 76a. Decalogue of the legislation of Christ, or the New Testament. 4 // ΓΠΣ . T. 5. Σ. 255. Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 5.23. This homily, like most others, was written, obviously, during the period of the episcopal ministry of St. Gregory in Thessalonica, see E. Introduzione // Gregorio Palamas.” Che cos'è l'Ortodossia. Capitoli, scritti ascetici, lettere, omelie. Milano, 2006. P. XLII-XLV; Meyendorff J". Introduction à l’étude de Gregoire Palamas. P., 1959. P. 393. Gregory the Theologian, St. Letter 101 to Clidonius // PG. 37. Col. 181c-184a. See: Meyendorff J. La teologia bizantina. Sviluppi storici e temi dottrinali. Casale Monferrato (AL), 1984, pp. 196–202. Gregory" "Palama" "St." Homilia 5.2 // PG. 151. Col. 64d. It’s him.” Homilia 5. 3 // PG. 151. Col. 64d-65a. Maxim the Confessor, St. Ambigva to John // PG. 91. Col. 1088c. Gregory Palamas, St. Antirritiki. 5. 26 // ΓΠΣ. T. 3. Σ. 371. Wed. also: Meyendorff". Introduction... P. 394. Γρηγορ ί ου ἀρχιεπισκ ό που Θεσσαλον ί κης , τοῦ Παλαμ ᾶ, ὁμιλ ί αι ΚΒ ʹ / ... Νῦν πρῶτον ἐκδιδ ό ντος Σοφοκλέους Κ . τοῦ ἐξ Οἰκον ό μων ... Ἀθ ή νησι, 1861. Σ. 200–212. For this homily, see also: van Rossum J.” L’Eucharistie chez saint Grégoire Palamas: l’homélie sur “Les saints et redoutables mystères du Christ” // Contacts. Vol. 54. 2003. P. 180–192. However, our conclusions are somewhat different from the conclusions of I. van Rossum: it seems to us incorrect to attempt to interpret the liturgical theology of Palamas, which is basically traditional, based on the theology of uncreated energies, expressed in the texts of the polemic with the “Barlaamites.” It is also not entirely clear why it is necessary at all costs to look for terminology and ideas in this homily that are not in it, which I. van Rossum himself admits: “cette homélie du grand docteur hésychaste ne parle pas de la spiritualité hésychaste ou de la prière de Jesus [this homily of the great teacher of hesychasm does not talk about hesychast spirituality or the Jesus Prayer]” (Ibid. P. 190), but then devotes his energies to the search for “aspects “palamites” [“Palamite” aspects]”, which “on y retrouve évidemment [are obviously present there]” (see: Ibid. P. 180). For example, the topic of real presence, which so occupied the minds of the West at that time. Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 56.5 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 205. Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 56. 3 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 202. In the West at that time the same aspect was emphasized by resorting to the word "veil", which, most likely, had already lost the reference to the church curtain and implied only concealment, pointing not to the Holy Spirit, but to the words of the Lord, affirming the new essence of bread and wine; Wed hymns dedicated to the feast of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Christ, attributed to Thomas Aquinas, for example in “Adoro te devote”: “Visus, tactus, gustus in te fallitur, sed audit solo tuto creditur. / Credo quidquid dixit Dei Filius; / nil hoc verbo veritatis verius. [...] Jesu quem velatum nunc auspicio, / oro fiat illud quod tam sitiö / ut, te revelata cernens facie, / visu sim beatus tuae gloriae [Sight, touch, taste lead astray in relation to You, / but only hearing [Your words] makes faith [in the Sacrament] reliable. / I believe whatever the Son of God says; / there is nothing truer than this word of truth. […] Jesus, whom I now see hidden, / I pray that what I so long for may come true: / so that, having seen You unveiled face to face, / I may become blessed from the contemplation of Your Glory. – Ed.”].” Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 56.5 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 205. In the theme of the veil, a method of interpretation appears, which becomes obvious a little further: polarization “prototype” (τύπος) - truth” (ἀλ ή θεια). We are talking about the classical method of exegesis as applied to the Old Testament, which is often used in interpretations of the Liturgy, see: Bornert R.” Les commentaires byzantins de la Divine Liturgie du VIIe au XVe siècle. P., 1966. P. 115; for the development of this terminology in the biblical and patristic spheres, see: Pizzolato L. F.” L’antitipö un concetto tra esegesi e mistagogia // Annali di Storia dell’esegesi. Vol. 17(1). 2000. P. 161 – 202. Truth, that is, the New Testament, illuminates and fulfills the prototypes, that is, the Old Testament, just as the prototypes contribute to the comprehension of the truth. In this homily we are talking about the prototype of the body, which justified Abraham (Gen. 14:18), and about the blood that kept the children of Israel alive in Egypt (Ex. 12:23), the consecration of the tabernacle (Ex. 40:10) and the feast of Atonement: the prototype allows you to enter unattainable regions, the Truth is in heaven (see: Gregory Palamas, St. "Homilia 56. 7 // Οἰκονόμος . Σ. 208; in this place Palamas’s argument is closely connected with the exegetical scheme of the Epistle to the Hebrews). See the entire first part of the homily: Gregory Palamas, St.” Homilia 56. 1–4 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 200–205. Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 56. 6 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 206. This verb has already been used by the saint in the text “Triad”, commented above. This special emphasis on “mixing” emphasizes, on the one hand, the inseparable unity with Christ, and on the other, the eternity of the human person himself, which is not rejected or replaced, but rather “mixed” and therefore cleansed of evil. Ibid. // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 207. Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 56. 4 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 204. Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 56. 8 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 209. Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 56. 9 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 210. Gregory Palamas, St. Homilia 56. 10 // Οἰκονόμος. Σ. 211. It is interesting to suggest that it is possible to clarify the time when the “Decalogue” was written, namely, after the Turkish imprisonment of Palamas, i.e. after 1355, see: ΓΠΣ. T. 5. Σ. 148. Obviously, Palamas follows the numbering of the commandments according to the Eastern tradition: the commandment, which in the West is considered the first, in the East is divided into two, and the last two are combined into one. Gregory Palamas, St. Decalogue. 4. The same call is expressed in the 51st homily (Οἰκονόμος . Σ . 112 – 113) and in homily 21. 16 (PG. 151. Col. 284d). Palamas speaks about the need for frequent, almost daily, communion of the Body and Blood of Christ in the 38th homily (PG. 151. Col. 481b). In modern thought, this double path is briefly presented, for example, by Met. Philaret (Vakh Romeeva) in: Ethics of ascetic and sacramental experience // Philosophical ethics and moral theology: X Christmas Educational Readings. M.: Synodal Theological Commission of the Russian Orthodox Church, Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2003. pp. 32–43. See in detail: Scarpa". La teologia eucaristica di Gregorio Palamas… As already suggested by M.-E. Congourdo, a deep study of this issue is necessary, which is not within the scope of this study: “Il s’agit de l’enseignement traditionnel de la mouvance hésychaste, tel qu’il était déjà réinterprété, en fonction du réalisme eucharistique d’un Jean Chrysostome par Syméon le Nouveau Théolologien [We are talking about that traditional teaching hesychast movement, which was already reinterpreted by Simeon the New Theologian in connection with the Eucharistic realism of John Chrysostom]" (Congourdeau M.-H." Nicolas Cabasilas et le Palamisme // Gregorio Palamas e oltre. Studi e documenti sulle controversie teologiche del XIV secolo bizantino / A cura di A. Rigo. Firenze, 2004. P. 200).