Ivana Noble

Does a direct experience of God and the associated grace-filled transformation make people infallible, or can even saints still be wrong when they interpret who can be saved and who cannot, what forms of life people should choose, which political systems, figures and positions they should support? This article examines what St Gregory Palamas says on the nature of the saints’ experience and knowledge, how stability and progress are interrelated in his notion of deification, and what the consequences are of his differentiation between knowledge coming from above and natural knowledge.

Among the reasons for the appreciation of St Gregory Palamas in twentieth and twen­ty-first century theology is undoubtedly his emphasis on the real presence of God in creation, and, in particular, in the human experience of being reached, purified, and transformed by God, who through his grace joins to himself whom he wishes. It could be argued that his essence-energy distinction, or his accounts of the psychoso­matic techniques of prayer, all serve this one goal: to defend the reality of divine-hu­man communion. Preserving divine simplicity, on the one hand, and the possibility of human deification, on the other, Palamas argued that the eschatological divine fullness of life can irrupt into this life, as in the case of Christ’s Incarnation. Through Christ, it can transform people who are found worthy to see this fullness in terms of the uncreated deifying light In this article, I will examine the epistemological conse­quences of the direct experiences of and participation in God. My basic question will be: according to Palamas, does the experience of the deifying light make holy men and women infallible in their theological statements, in their discernment of what are, and what are not, good morals or even good political decisions?

To answer this question, the different layers that we need to be aware of in Palamas’ experiential theology will first be considered. Then, the conditions under which