Comparison of the doctrine of deification in the theology of F. Aquinas and G. Palamas

Many modern historians of theology often argue that the division of Western and Eastern Christianity is largely determined by the fundamental opposition of the teachings of such theologians as Thomas Aquinas and Gregory Palamas. These two authors are in some way symbols, leading figures for scholasticism and hesychast theology. These theological trends themselves became in the Middle Ages the most striking expression of the Western and Eastern Christian traditions, respectively. It was then that the crack between the Christian West and East widened. For Western Christians, hesychasm seemed like a strange quirk of Eastern monks, and in the minds of Eastern Christians, scholasticism embodied all the worst delusions. Although non-theological factors played a significant role in the division of the Churches, now they are no longer as important for theological dialogue as several centuries of harsh theological polemics and mutual accusations of heresy. The question of the polemic between hesychasm and scholasticism is one of those points that is difficult to avoid in the process of searching for a theological understanding of the West and the East. According to some researchers, the divergence between Western scholasticism and the Greek tradition largely depends on the distinction between nature and grace, which played an important role in the Latin tradition, despite the fact that the categories and terminology of this distinction are alien to Greek theology. Others believe that the dispute between Latin and Byzantine theology arose primarily due to the fact that the philosophy of Aristotle was more influential in the West, and Plato in the East. The debate about deification includes a whole range of theological issues. Modern Orthodox authors have generally taken a negative view of Thomistic beatific theology, criticizing mainly the concept of created grace and their supposed fact that in Latin Trinity theology the divine essence precedes the three Persons. Disputes often involve theological anthropology and the doctrine of sanctification. Orthodox authors often emphasize that if in the Thomistic concept of VIsio beatifica (beatific vision) we are talking about the blessed who have already passed into heavenly communion with God, then for Palamism it is fundamentally important that deification begins already in this life, and is achieved due to the fact that the flesh becomes spiritual. But anthropology and the doctrine of the Trinity do not exhaust the content of the controversy: ideas about the correct theological method also play a significant role in it. Even among authors who generally take a conciliatory position, the question of deification appears as a point of divergence between East and West. They proceed from the fact that it is correct to speak not about opposition, but about different paths of development of theology, which manifested themselves especially clearly in the 12th-14th centuries. The purpose of this work is to study how significant the differences between the concepts of deification are between Thomas Aquinas and Gregory Palamas, and whether these differences are an actual contradiction of positions, or just show a difference in emphasis. If it turns out that Aquinas and Palamas' statements on a particular issue appear to be contradictory, the intentions of the authors should be identified, determined by the theological context. We will also try to answer the question of whether it is possible to identify common positions in the methodology and doctrine of deification among these theologians.