@article{
author = "Кнежевић, Микоња and Стојановић, Јелица",
year = "2019",
abstract = "Теолошки спор око исихазма тијесно је био повезан са политичким дешавањи-ма у Ромејском царству. То је нарочито био случај када је ријеч о његовој другој фази, која се поклопила са грађанским ратом из 1341–1347. године. Сложени сукоб између Григорија Паламе и Григорија Акиндина разријешен је осудом потоњег, а у њега је била укључена и царица Ана Савојска. У циљу подробнијег упознавања са теолошким пи-тањима која су била у игри, она је у једном трeнутку затражила изјашњење од глав-них протагониста спора. Палама је своје ставове саопштио у виду кратке посланице, у којој се настоји одбранити од оптужбе за „двобоштво“ и показати како је његово разликовање суштаства и енергија у Богу у складу са отачким предањем.У тексту се даје историјска, богословска и филолошка анализа ове Паламине посланице, са посебним освртом на до сада непознати српскословенски препис који је пронађен у манастиру Свете Тројице код Пљеваља. На крају је дат српскословенски превод напоредо са грчким изворником и преводом на савремени српски језик. Упоредна анализа показује да између грчке и српскословенске редакције постоје разлике, што је вјероватно посљедица чињенице да је средњовјековни преводилац имао нешто другачији предложак од оног којим располажемо данас, After the first phase of the hesychast controversy, which was resolved in Synod held in 1341, the key-figure amongst the opponents of Gregory Palamas became his former pupil Gregory Akindynos. The controversy actually began in 1341, when Palamas in his Third Letter to Akindynos, referring to the distinction between essence and energies in God, used problematic notions of “higher” and “lower” deity. From that point on, he was accused of ditheism and introduction of novelties in theology. In his evised edition of the same Letter, Palamas tried to explain that the aforementioned notions actually were Barlaam’s own, who used them to discredit his doctrine on the distinction between divine essence and energies. Proving that these notions can be applied sensu stricto only when one – as was the case with Barlaam and Akindynos – confesses the created character of divine energies, Palamas indicated that they can also have an orthodox meaning: namely, when they are used properly, i.e., to show both unity and distinction in the uncreated divine being.
This accusation of ditheism followed Palamas during the entire second phase of the hesychast controversy, which took place at the times of the Civil War in Eastern Roman Empire (1341–1347). The conflict between John Kantakouzenos, on one side, and Patriarch John XIV Kalekas, Alexios Apokaukos and Empress Anna of Savoy, on the other, was finally resolved in 1347, by the victory of John Kantakouzenos, who, however, preserved the royalty of Empress Anna and her son John V Palaiologos.
Before the end of the war, the Empress Anna Palaiologina became more personally involved in the theological dispute. In order to get better acquainted with theological issues that were at stake, she asked for the opinion of the main protagonists of the dispute. Akindynos sent her his Confession of Faith, while Palamas expressed his views in the form of a short letter, in which he sought to defend himself from the accusation of “ditheism” and to show that his distinction between essence and energies in God is actually in accordance with patristic tradition. Forced by theological argumentation or, rather, by the force of political circumstances, Anna of Savoy finally changed her position and favoured the standpoint of Gregory Palamas.
Along with some other Palamas’s works – such are Apodictic Treatises on the Procession of the Holy Spirit, Contra Bekkos, On Divine Unity and Distinction, Confession of Faith, Exposition of Impities of Barlaam and Akindynos – this short Letter to Anna Palaiologina was also translated into Serbian Church Slavonic language (most probably in the final quartal of the 14th century). A comparative analysis shows that there are certain differences between Serbian Church Slavonic translation and the Greek original, which could suggest that the Serbian medieval translator might have had a slightly different source text before him than the one we use today. Out of five versions of Serbian Church Slavonic translation of the Letter, three are older than the oldest preserved Greek transcript (deriving from the 15th century). However, judging by the tone of the Serbian Church Slavonic text and also by the differences which appear when this text is compared to the Greek source, one might conclude that it represents a translation of a second version of the Letter. As is known, Palamas has relatively often resorted to the revision of his works, so this could also be the case with his Letter to Anna Palaiologina.
A comparison of five Serbian Church Slavonic transcripts of the Letter shows linguistic tendencies of the times of their origin, the transition from Raška orthography to Resava orthography, and so on. The recently discovered transcript of the Letter, found in Monastery of the Holy Trinity of Pljevlja, is characterized by the intermingling of these two orthographies",
publisher = "Београд : Византолошки институт САНУ,",
journal = "Зборник радова Византолошког института",
title = "Посланица Ани Палеологини Григорија Паламе (уз издање српскословенског превода из Зборника 41 Манастира Свете Тројице код Пљеваља)",
pages = "197-231",
volume = "56",
doi = "10.2298/ZRVI1956197K",
url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_dais_15572"
}
