Studia Patristica. Vol. XLVII - Cappadocian Writers, The Second Half of the Fourth Century (Greek Writers) 9042923733, 9789042923737

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Cappadocian Writers
CAPPADOCIAN WRITERS
Johan LEEMANS, Leuven
Andrew RADDE-GALLWITZ, Chicago
Charlotte KÖCKERT, Heidelberg
HOWARD, Martin, Tennessee
Martin LAIRD, O S A , Villanova, Pennsylvania
Sandra LEUENBERGER-WENGER, Zürich
Giulio MASPERO, Rome
Ilaria RAMELLI, Milan
Terttu HAIKKA, Helsinki
Matthieu CASSIN, Paris
Marcello LA MATINA, Macerata, Italy
Anne Gordon KEIDEL, Boston
Darren SARISKY, Cambridge
Manuel MIRA IBORRA, Roma
Shigeki TSUCHIHASHI, Tokyo
Claudio MORESCHINI, Pisa
Jaclyn MAXWELL, Ohio
Suzanne ABRams RebillaRD, Ithaca, New York
Thomas BRAUCH, Mount Pleasant, Michigan
Verna E F HARRISON, Kansas City, Missouri
Peter BOUTENEFF, Crestwood, New York
Brian E DALEY, Notre Dame, Indiana
THE SECOND HALF OF THE FOURTH CENTURY
Young Richard KIM, Grand Rapids, Michigan
STEIGER, Honolulu, Hawaii
Byard BENNETT, Grand Rapids, Michigan
Andrew LOUTH, Durham
Monica TOBON, Canterbury
RICH, London
Luke DYSINGER, Valyermo, California
Augustine CASIDAY, Lampeter
Elias MOUTSOULAS, Athens
David RYLAARSDAM, Grand Rapids, Michigan
Constantine BOSINIS, Thessaloniki
Cyrille CRÉPEY, Strasbourg
DE WET, Pretoria
Silke SITZLER, Brisbane
Livia NEUREITER, Graz
Ulrich VOLP, Mainz
Emilio BONFIGLIO, Oxford
Lee BLACKBURN, Johnson City, Tennessee
Walt STEVENSON, Richmond, Virginia
Turhan KAÇAR, Denizli

Citation preview

281.1 23

SAL Stanford University Libraries

3 6105 211 735 464 STUDIA

PATRISTICA

VOL. XLVII

Papers presented at the Fifteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies held in Oxford 2007

Cappadocian Writers The Second Half of the Fourth Century (Greek Writers)

Edited by J. BAUN, A. CAMERON, M. EDWARDS and M. VINZENT Index Auctorum and Table of Contents of Vols. XLIV-XLIX in Vol. XLIX

STANFORD UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

JUN 25 2010

PEETERS LEUVEN - PARIS - WALPOLE, MA 2010

!

STUDIA PATRISTICA

VOL. XLVII

O Peeters Publishers

Louvain

Belgium 2010

All rights reserved, including the right to translate or to reproduce this book or parts thereof in any form. D/2010/0602/52 ISBN: 978-90-429-2373-7 A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

Printed in Belgium by Peeters, Leuven

STUDIA

PATRISTICA

VOL. XLVII

Papers presented at the Fifteenth International Conference on Patristic Studies held in Oxford 2007

Cappadocian Writers The Second Half of the Fourth Century (Greek Writers)

Edited by J. BAUN, A. CAMERON, M. EDWARDS and M. VINZENT

Index Auctorum and Table of Contents of Vols . XLIV-XLIX in Vol. XLIX

PEETERS LEUVEN - PARIS - WALPOLE, MA 2010

Table of Contents

XIV. CAPPADOCIAN WRITERS

Anthony MEREDITH, London 3

Divine Incomprehensibility in Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine ...... Johan LEEMANS , Leuven

9

Epinoia and Initial Concepts : Re-assessing Gregory of Nyssa's Defense of Basil ......

21

21

Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church: Gregory of Nyssa's First and Second Homilies on Stephen the Protomartyr .. Andrew RADDE- GALLWITZ , Chicago

Charlotte KÖCKERT, Heidelberg The Concept of Seed in Christian Cosmology: Gregory of Nyssa, Apologia in Hexaemeron .... Nathan D. HOWARD, Martin , Tennessee Familial Askêsis in the Vita Macrinae ........ Martin LAIRD, O.S.A. , Villanova, Pennsylvania Gregory of Nyssa and Divinization : A Reconsideration ........... Sandra LEUENBERGER-WENGER, Zürich Ethics and Christian Identity in Gregory of Nyssa .. Giulio MASPERO, Rome

27

33 39 45

Remarks on Eros in Plato and Gregory of Nyssa ...... Ilaria RAMELLI, Milan

51

Aióvios and Aióv in Origen and in Gregory of Nyssa …………………………………………. Terttu HAIKKA, Helsinki

57

Gregory of Nyssa's Canticum behind the Akathistos Hymn? ............ Matthieu CASSIN, Paris

63

Réfuter sans lasser le lecteur: Pratique de la réfutation dans le Contre Eunome de Grégoire de Nysse ......... Marcello LA MATINA, Macerata, Italy Analytic Philosophy of Language and the Revelation of Person.

71

Some Remarks on Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus the Confessor ... Anne Gordon KEIDEL, Boston Basil of Caesarea and Free Will ........ Darren SARISKY, Cambridge

77

The End of Interpretation in Basil of Caesarea's De spiritu sancto .. Manuel MIRA IBORRA, Roma

91

About the Structure of De Spiritu Sancto by Basil of Caesarea ........

97

85

VI

Table of Contents

Shigeki TSUCHIHASHI , Tokyo Homotimia and synarithmēsis in Basil of Caesarea's De Spiritu Sancto ......

105

Claudio MORESCHINI, Pisa Tritheism in Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus ... Jaclyn MAXWELL , Ohio The Attitudes of Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus toward Uneducated Christians ....………….

111

117

Suzanne ABRams RebillaRD, Ithaca, New York The Autobiographical Prosopopoeia of Gregory of Nazianzus ......... Thomas BRAUCH, Mount Pleasant, Michigan Gregory of Nazianzus' Letters 24 and 38 and Themistius of Constantinople ........

123

129

Verna E.F. HARRISON, Kansas City, Missouri The Logos Cries Out from the Virgin's Womb: Gregory of Nazianzus, Oration 45.13

135

Peter BOUTENEFF, Crestwood , New York Whatever That Was ! Paradise According to Gregory of Nazianzus . Brian E. DALEY, Notre Dame, Indiana Who is the Real Bishop of Constantinople? A Reconsideraton of Gregory of Nazianzus' Will ......

141

147

XV. THE SECOND HALF OF THE FOURTH CENTURY (GREEK WRITERS) Maxine WEST, London Jesus Speaks to/in Us : A Connection of Theme between Serapion of Thmuis' Against the Manichees and Sacramentary.......

155

Young Richard KIM, Grand Rapids , Michigan Bad Bishops Corrupt Good Emperors: Ecclesiastical Authority and the Rhetoric of Heresy in the Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis ... Peter D. STEIGER, Honolulu , Hawaii

161

Peter and Paul in the Commentaries of Didymus the Blind ..............

167

Byard BENNETT, Grand Rapids , Michigan The Person Speaking: Prosopopoeia as an Exegetical Device in Didymus the Blind's Interpretation of Romans 7. Andrew LOUTH , Durham Evagrios on Anger ...... Monica TOBON, Canterbury The Health of the Soul : 'Алά0ɛια in Evagrius Ponticus .........

173

179

187

Table of Contents

VII

Antony D. RICH, London Discerning Evagrius Ponticus Discerning: Alάkpiσis in the Works of Evagrius .............. Luke DYSINGER, Valyermo, California Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus. Augustine CASIDAY, Lampeter Universal Restoration in Evagrius Ponticus ' ' Great Letter' Elias MOUTSOULAS, Athens La personne du Christ dans l'histoire selon Saint Jean Chrysostome.. David RYLAARSDAM, Grand Rapids, Michigan On Earth as if in Heaven: John Chrysostom on Christ, Priests , and the Making of Angels ....... Constantine BOSINIS, Thessaloniki

203 209 223

229

237

What does Paganism Mean for a Church Father? An Inquiry into the Use of the Term ɛidwλoλatpɛía in the Rhetoric of John Chrysostom

243

Cyrille CRÉPEY, Strasbourg Le vrai sens de la littéralité de l'exégèse dans les Homélies sur la Genèse de Jean Chrysostome : Illustration à partir de l'exégèse de Gn 1 : 1

249

Chris L. DE WET, Pretoria John Chrysostom on Envy Silke SITZLER, Brisbane

255

Deviance and Destitution: Social Poverty in the Homilies of John Chrysostom... Livia NEUREITER, Graz

261

Health and Healing as Recurrent Topics in John Chrysostom's Correspondence with Olympias . Ulrich VOLP, Mainz

267

'That Unclean Spirit Has Assaulted You from the Very Beginning': John Chrysostom and Suicide . Emilio BONFIGLIO, Oxford

273

Notes on the Manuscript Tradition of Anianus Celedensis' Translation ofJohn Chrysostom's Homiliae in Matthaeum [CPG 4424] ...... Lee BLACKBURN, Johnson City, Tennessee 'Let the Men be Ashamed': Public Insults, Angry Words , and Figures of Shame in Chrysostom's Homilies on Acts .......... Walt STEVENSON, Richmond, Virginia

287

295

John Chrysostom, Maruthas and Christian Evangelism in Sasanian Iran .........

301

Turhan KAÇAR, Denizli The Election of Nectarius of Tarsus: Imperial Ideology, Patronage and Philia.........

307

Abbreviations

AA.SS AAWG.PH AB AC ACL ACO ACW AHDLMA AJAH AJP AKK AKPAW ALMA ALW AnalBoll ANCL ANF ANRW AnSt AnThA АРОТ AR ARW ASS ATHANT

Aug AugSt AW ᎪᏃ ВА BAC BASOR BDAG BEHE BETL BGL BHG BHL

see ASS. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen Philologisch-historische Klasse , Göttingen. Analecta Bollandiana, Brussels. Antike und Christentum, ed . F.J. Dölger, Münster. Antiquité classique , Louvain. Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum, ed . E. Schwartz, Berlin. Ancient Christian Writers, ed. J. Quasten and J.C. Plumpe, Westminster (Md .)/London. Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen âge, Paris. American Journal of Ancient History, Cambridge, Mass. American Journal of Philology, Baltimore. Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht, Mainz. Abhandlungen der königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin. Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi (Bulletin du Cange), Paris/Brussels. Archiv für Liturgiewissenschaft , Regensburg. Analecta Bollandiana, Brussels . Ante-Nicene Christian Library, Edinburgh. Ante-Nicene Fathers, Buffalo/New York. Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, ed H. Temporini et al., Berlin. Anatolian Studies , London. Année théologique augustinienne , Paris. Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, ed . R.E. Charles, Oxford. Archivum Romanicum, Florence. Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, Berlin/Leipzig. Acta Sanctorum, ed. the Bollandists, Brussels. Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments, Zürich. Augustinianum, Rome. Augustinian Studies , Villanova (USA). Athanasius Werke, ed . H.-G. Opitz et al., Berlin . Archäologische Zeitung, Berlin. Bibliothèque augustinienne, Paris. Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, Madrid. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, New Haven, Conn. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd edn F.W. Danker, Chicago. Bibliothèque de l'École des Hautes Études , Paris. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, Louvain. Benedictinisches Geistesleben , St. Ottilien. Bibliotheca Hagiographica Graeca, Brussels. Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina Antiquae et Mediae Aetatis, Brussels.

X

Abbreviations

BHO BHTh BJ

Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis, Brussels . Beiträge zur historischen Theologie , Tübingen. Bursians Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft , Leipzig.

BJRULM BKV

Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, Manchester. Bibliothek der Kirchenväter, ed . F.X. Reithmayr and V. Thalhofer, Kempten. Bibliothek der Kirchenväter, ed . O. Bardenhewer, Th. Schermann, and C. Weyman, Kempten/Munich. Bibliothek der Kirchenväter. Zweite Reihe , ed. O. Bardenhewer, J. Zellinger, and J. Martin, Munich. Bulletin de littérature ecclésiastique, Toulouse. Bonner Jahrbücher, Bonn. Bibliotheca sacra, London. Bolletino di studi latini, Naples. Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten Testament, Leipzig/Stuttgart. Byzantion, Brussels. Byzantinische Zeitschrift, Leipzig. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft , Berlin. Cahiers Archéologique , Paris. Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Washington.

BKV2 BKV3 BLE BoJ BS BSL BWAT Byz ᏴᏃ BZNW CAr CBQ CCCM CCG CCL CCSA CH CIL CP( h ) CPG CPL

CQ CR CSCO

CSEL CSHB CTh CUF CW DAC

Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis, Turnhout/Paris. Corpus Christianorum, Series Graeca, Turnhout/Paris. Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, Turnhout/Paris. Corpus Christianorum, Series Apocryphorum, Turnhout/Paris. Church History, Chicago. Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum , Berlin. Classical Philology, Chicago. Clavis Patrum Graecorum, ed . M. Geerard, vols . I-VI , Turnhout. Clavis Patrum Latinorum (SE 3), ed. E. Dekkers and A. Gaar, Turnhout. Classical Quarterly, London/Oxford. The Classical Review, London/Oxford. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, Louvain. Aeth = Scriptores Aethiopici = Scriptores Arabici Ar Arm = Scriptores Armeniaci Copt = Scriptores Coptici Iber = Scriptores Iberici Syr = Scriptores Syri Subs = Subsidia Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Vienna. Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae, Bonn. Collectanea Theologica, Lvov. Collection des Universités de France publiée sous le patronage de l'Association Guillaume Budé, Paris . Catholic World , New York. Dictionary of the Apostolic Church , ed . J. Hastings , Edinburgh.

Abbreviations

DACL DAL ᎠᏴ DBS DCB DHGE

Did DOP DOS DR DS DSp DTC EA ECatt ECQ EE EECH EKK EH EO EtByz ETL EWNT ExpT FC FGH FKDG FRL FS FThSt FTS FZThPh GCS GDV GLNT GNO

XI

see DAL Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, ed. F. Cabrol , H. Leclercq, Paris. Dictionnaire de la Bible, Paris. Dictionnaire de la Bible, Supplément, Paris. Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature, Sects, and Doctrines, ed. W. Smith and H. Wace , 4 vols, London. Dictionnaire d'histoire et de géographie ecclésiastique, ed. A. Baudrillart, Paris. Didaskalia, Lisbon. Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Cambridge, Mass., subsequently Washington, D.C. Dumbarton Oaks Studies, Cambridge, Mass. , subsequently Washington, D.C. Downside Review, Stratton on the Fosse, Bath. H.J. Denzinger and A. Schönmetzer, ed ., Enchiridion Symbolorum, Barcelona/Freiburg i.B./Rome. Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, ed . M. Viller, S.J., and others, Paris. Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, ed. A. Vacant, E. Mangenot, and E. Amann, Paris. Études augustiniennes , Paris. Enciclopedia Cattolica, Rome. Eastern Churches Quarterly, Ramsgate. Estudios eclesiasticos, Madrid. Encyclopedia of the Early Church, ed . A. Di Berardino, Cambridge. Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament, Neukirchen. Enchiridion Fontium Historiae Ecclesiasticae Antiquae, ed . UedingKirch, 6th ed. , Barcelona. Échos d'Orient, Paris. Études Byzantines, Paris. Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, Louvain. Exegetisches Wörterbuch zum NT, ed . H.R. Balz et al., Stuttgart. The Expository Times, Edinburgh. The Fathers of the Church, New York. Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, Berlin. Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte, Göttingen. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments, Göttingen. Festschrift. Freiburger theologische Studien , Freiburg i.B. Frankfurter theologische Studien , Frankfurt a.M. Freiburger Zeitschrift für Theologie und Philosophie, Freiburg/Switzerland. Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller, Leipzig/Berlin. Geschichtsschreiber der deutschen Vorzeit, Stuttgart. Grande Lessico del Nuovo Testamento, Genoa. Gregorii Nysseni Opera, Leiden.

XII

GRBS GWV HbNT HDR HJG

HKG HNT HO HSCP HThR HTS ᎻᏃ ICC ILCV ILS J(b)AC JBL JdI JECS JEH JJS JLH JPTh JQR JRS JSJ

JSOR JThSt KAV KeTh KJ(b)

LCL LNPF L(O)F LSJ LTHK MA MAMA Mansi MBTh

Abbreviations

Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, Cambridge, Mass. Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht , Offenburg. Handbuch zum Neuen Testament. Tübingen. Harvard Dissertations in Religion, Missoula. Historisches Jahrbuch der Görresgesellschaft, successively Munich, Cologne and Munich/Freiburg i.B. Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte, Tübingen . Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Tübingen. Handbuch der Orientalistik , Leiden. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Cambridge, Mass. Harvard Theological Review, Cambridge, Mass. Harvard Theological Studies, Cambridge, Mass. Historische Zeitschrift, Munich/Berlin. The International Critical Commentary of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, Edinburgh. Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres, ed . E. Diehl, Berlin . Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae , ed . H. Dessau , Berlin. Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, Münster. Journal of Biblical Literature , Philadelphia, Pa. , then various places. Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Berlin. Journal of Early Christian Studies, Baltimore. The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, London. Journal of Jewish Studies, London. Jahrbuch für Liturgik und Hymnologie, Kassel. Jahrbücher für protestantische Theologie, Leipzig/Freiburg i.B. Jewish Quarterly Review, Philadelphia. Journal of Roman Studies, London. Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period, Leiden. Journal of the Society of Oriental Research , Chicago. Journal of Theological Studies , Oxford . Kommentar zu den apostolischen Vätern , Göttingen. Kerk en Theologie, ' s Gravenhage. Kirchliches Jahrbuch für die evangelische Kirche in Deutschland, Gütersloh. The Loeb Classical Library, London/Cambridge, Mass. A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, ed. P. Schaff and H. Wace, Buffalo/New York . Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Oxford. H.G. Liddell and R. Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, new (9th) edn H.S. Jones , Oxford. Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, Freiburg i.B. Moyen-Âge, Brussels . Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua, London. J.D. Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, Florence, 1759-1798 . Reprint and continuation : Paris/Leipzig, 1901-1927 . Münsterische Beiträge zur Theologie, Münster.

Abbreviations

MCom MGH ML MPG MSR MThZ Mus NGWG NH(M )S NovTest NPNF NRSV NRTH NTA NT.S NTS OBO OCA OCP OECS OLA OLP Or OrChr OrSyr PG PGL PL PLRE PLS PO PRE PS PTA PThR PTS PW

QLP QuLi RAC RACH RAM RAug RBen RB(ibl)

XIII

Miscelanea Comillas, Comillas/Santander. Monumenta germaniae historica. Hanover/Berlin. Mediaevalia Lovaniensia, Louvain. See PG. Mélanges de science religieuse, Lille. Münchener theologische Zeitschrift, Munich. Le Muséon, Louvain. Nachrichten der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Nag Hammadi (and Manichaean) Studies, Leiden. Novum Testamentum, Leiden. See LNPF. New Revised Standard Version. Nouvelle Revue Théologique, Tournai/Louvain/Paris. Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen, Münster. Novum Testamentum Supplements , Leiden. New Testament Studies, Cambridge/Washington. Orbis biblicus et orientalis, Freiburg , Switz. Orientalia Christiana Analecta, Rome. Orientalia Christiana Periodica, Rome. Oxford Early Christian Studies, Oxford. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, Louvain. Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica, Louvain. Orientalia. Commentarii editi a Pontificio Instituto Biblico, Rome. Oriens Christianus, Leipzig, then Wiesbaden. L'Orient Syrien, Paris. Migne, Patrologia, series graeca. A Patristic Greek Lexicon, ed. G.L. Lampe, Oxford. Migne, Patrologia, series latina. The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, ed . A.H.M. Jones et al., Cambridge. Migne, Patrologia, series latina. Supplementum ed. A. Hamman. Patrologia Orientalis , Paris. Paulys Realenzyklopädie der classischen Alterthumswissenschaft, Stuttgart. Patrologia Syriaca, Paris. Papyrologische Texte und Abhandlungen, Bonn. Princeton Theological Review, Princeton. Patristische Texte und Studien, Berlin. Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, ed. G. Wissowa, Stuttgart. Questions liturgiques et paroissiales , Louvain. Questions liturgiques , Louvain Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana , Rome. Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum, Stuttgart. Revue d'ascétique et de mystique , Paris. Recherches Augustiniennes, Paris. Revue Bénédictine, Maredsous . Revue biblique, Paris .

XIV

RE

Abbreviations

Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, founded by J.J. Herzog, 3e ed. A. Hauck, Leipzig. Revue des études Augustiniennes, Paris. REA(ug) REB Revue des études byzantines, Paris. RED Rerum ecclesiasticarum documenta, Rome. RÉL Revue des études latines, Paris. REG Revue des études grecques, Paris. RevSR Revue des sciences religieuses , Strasbourg. RevThom Revue thomiste, Toulouse. RFIC Rivista di filologia e d'istruzione classica, Turin. RGG Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, ed . Gunkel-Zscharnack , Tübingen RHE Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique, Louvain . RhMus Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, Bonn. RHR Revue de l'histoire des religions, Paris. RHT Revue d'Histoire des Textes, Paris. RMAL Revue du Moyen-Âge Latin , Paris. ROC Revue de l'Orient chrétien, Paris. RPh Revue de philologie, Paris. RQ Römische Quartalschrift, Freiburg i.B. RQH Revue des questions historiques , Paris . RSLR Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa, Florence . RSPT, RSPh Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques , Paris. RSR Recherches de science religieuse , Paris . RTAM Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale, Louvain. RthL Revue théologique de Louvain , Louvain. RTM Rivista di teologia morale, Bologna. Sal Salesianum, Roma. SBA Schweizerische Beiträge zur Altertumswissenschaft, Basel. SBS Stuttgarter Bibelstudien, Stuttgart. ScEc Sciences ecclésiastiques , Bruges. SCH, SC Sources chrétiennes, Paris . SD Studies and Documents, ed . K. Lake and S. Lake. London/Philadelphia. SE Sacris Erudiri, Bruges. SDHI Studia et documenta historiae et iuris, Roma. SH Subsidia Hagiographica, Brussels. SHA Scriptores Historiae Augustae. SJMS Speculum. Journal of Mediaeval Studies, Cambridge, Mass. SM Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktinerordens und seiner Zweige, Munich. SO Symbolae Osloenses, Oslo. SP Studia Patristica. Papers presented to the International Conference on Patristic Studies held in Oxford, successively Berlin , Kalamazoo, Louvain. SPM Stromata Patristica et Mediaevalia, ed. C. Mohrman and J. Quasten, Utrecht. SQ Sammlung ausgewählter Quellenschriften zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte, Tübingen. SQAW Schriften und Quellen der Alten Welt, Berlin.

Abbreviations

SSL StudMed SVF TDNT TE ThGl ThJ ThLZ ThPh ThQ ThR ᎢᏂᎳᎪᎢ ThWNT ThZ TLG TP TRE TS TThZ TU USQR VC VetChr VT WBC WUNT WZKM YUP ZAC ZAM ZAW ZDPV ZKG ZKTh ZN(T)W ZRG ZThK

XV

Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense, Louvain. Studi Medievali , Turin. Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, ed. J. von Arnim, Leipzig. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Grand Rapids , Mich. Teologia espiritual , Valencia. Theologie und Glaube, Paderborn. Theologische Jahrbücher, Leipzig. Theologische Literaturzeitung, Leipzig. Theologie und Philosophie, Freiburg i.B. Theologische Quartalschrift, Tübingen. Theologische Rundschau , Tübingen. Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament, Stuttgart. Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, Stuttgart. Theologische Zeitschrift, Basel. Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Lancaster, Pa. Theologische Realenzyklopädie, Berlin. Theological Studies, New York and various places; now Washington, D.C. Trierer theologische Zeitschrift, Trier. Texte und Untersuchungen, Leipzig/Berlin. Union Seminary Quarterly Review, New York. Vigiliae Christianae, Amsterdam. Vetera Christianorum , Bari (Italy). Vetus Testamentum , Leiden. Word Biblical Commentary, Waco. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, Tübingen . Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, Vienna. Yale University Press, New Haven. Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum , Berlin. Zeitschrift für Aszese und Mystik , Innsbruck, then Würzburg. Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, Giessen, then Berlin. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins, Leipzig. Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, Gotha, then Stuttgart. Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie , Vienna. Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche, Giessen, then Berlin. Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte, Weimar. Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche, Tübingen.

XIV.

CAPPADOCIAN WRITERS

Suzanne Abrams Rebillard Peter Bouteneff Thomas Brauch Matthieu Cassin Brian E. Daley Terttu Haikka Verna E.F. Harrison Nathan D. Howard Anne Gordon Keidel Charlotte Köckert Martin Laird Marcello La Matina Johan Leemans Sandra Leuenberger-Wenger Giulio Maspero Jaclyn Maxwell Anthony Meredith Manuel Mira Iborra Claudio Moreschini Andrew Radde- Gallwitz Ilaria Ramelli Darren Sarisky Shigeki Tsuchihashi

Divine Incomprehensibility in Gregory of Nyssa

and Augustine

Anthony MEREDITH, London

I shall begin by making what I take it is a universally accepted and acceptable proposition, namely that there is to date no available evidence to suggest any knowledge of and therefore any influence of Gregory of Nyssa on Augustine. Gregory of Nazianzus is indeed cited ' but not his namesake. On the other hand the possibility of Gregory having come across any writings of Augustine is remote. He died in about 395 and seems to show no knowledge of any Latin writings. This means that any similarity to be found among their writings is unlikely to be a result of any influence exercised either way. Despite this fact, as I hope to show, there do exist important similarities between the two Fathers in their handling of the topos of divine incomprehensibility. It is worth noting that there also exists an important and significant difference. For Gregory, on the one hand, the stretching out to God creates ¤ɛσi , never comes to an end and is the portion of all created intelligences, angelic and human alike. On the one occasion listed by Drobner² when Gregory employs Psalm 104: 4 in Homily VII 2 on Ecclesiastes (' Seek the Lord and his face, seek his presence for ever'),3 he argues that to have found God is always to seek him. Tò (ηtet̃v and tò εúpíσкɛɩv are not distinct operations. A similar point is made in Life ofMoses II 163. Augustine offers a very similar exegesis in De Trin. XV 2. However, in his treatment of the same text in his Enarration on Psalm CIV (CChr.SL 40, 1537) he insists that the searching condition will not last: 'Love hopes to see God face to face and when that moment arrives there will no longer be room or need for further searching.' Turning to Gregory of Nyssa first, it is interesting to observe that the notion of ἀκαταληψία and its linkage to ἀοριστία and ἀπειρία occurs only in his later writings and not in all of them. If we assume that Gregory began his writing career with his De Virginitate in 371/2 the influence of Plato above all the Symposium on that work is clear. The joint notions of incomprehensibility and infinity are both absent.

1 Augustine in his Contra Iulianum Pelagianum I 5,15 (PL 44, 648. 650) cites three passages from Gregory of Nazianzus on the subject of original sin from 38 , namely from Eiç tà Oɛoçáνεια 4 and 17; 40, Εἰς τὸ βάπτισμα 8 . 2 Bibelindex zu den Werken Gregors von Nyssa , ed . Hubertus R. Drobner (Paderborn 1988). 3 GNO V 400,20,21.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 3-7. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

A. MEREDITH

4

What is perhaps more surprising is that in an important later writing, the Catechetical Oration of about 385, although much is said about the divine perfection and the idea of Оεолрέлɛια¹ we hear nothing at all about the divine mysteriousness and infinity. Perhaps this is to be accounted for considering the particular audience, catechists , that Gregory has in mind and those catechists would have been eager to establish the rational rather than the mysterious character of Christianity. Neither the treatise On the Inscriptions on the Psalms nor the 8 Homilies on Ecclesiastes employ such language . On one occasion in the former work God is defined in accordance with his universal oversight and in the latter God is referred to as tò åλη¤èç öv³ language which has Platonic overtones in the Timaeus. It is only when we come to the controversy with Eunomius before and during the council of Constantinople that we find an emphasis on the divine infinity, a subject which has been thoroughly explored by Ekkehard Mühlenberg. At some time after this , we cannot be too exact, we find the idea being used less in a dogmatic than in an exegetical context in the Homilies on the Song of Songs and in an even more pronounced fashion in part of On the Life of Moses. Several questions emerge. 1) Did Gregory invent the idea or did he exploit one already existent? 2) Would he have used it at all had there been no Eunomius to unmask? 3) Did the use of the term/idea of infinity in his exegetical writings derive from a previous dogmatic conviction or from the work of exploring the deeper meaning of the scriptural text? In other words , is there any connexion between the dogmatic and exegetical use of similar language? The language of yvóçoç or darkness which prompts Gregory to insist on the non availability of God to created intelligence is always related to certain key passages in Ex. 20:21 as is clear from On the Life ofMoses II 162-4 . The Exodus passage occurs only twice in his dogmatic writings, on both occasions in his Adversus Apolinaristas, but nowhere does either the language or the Exodus passage occur in any of the treatises Contra Eunomium . At any rate, in the last mentioned works dating to 380, Gregory used the idea of infinity in order to deal with the Anomoean argument that because the nature of God could be defined as άyévvηtoç or unbegotten, the Son could not be equal to the Father in nature. Basil had faced a similar challenge at an earlier date of about 363 in his own Contra Eunomium, but made aparently little use of the language of infinity and its correlatives . Only at I 12 does he come close to the Gregorian position in his assertion that both scripture , tradition and

4 On this see myself, God-Fittingness in Gregory of Nyssa : SP 18 ( 1989) 507-15 . 5 All the references are from GNO V. In Homily 7 (GNO V 406.7 and 407.1) God is said to be τὸ ὄντως ὂν ἢ αὐτοαγαθότης and ἡ παντέλης ἀρετή . 6 Die Unendlichkeit Gottes bei Gregor von Nyssa (Göttingen , 1966). 7 GNO III/1 , 122,7 and 123,21.

Divine Incomprehensibility in Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine

5

philosophy (koivaι čvvoiai)8 are at one in affirming the idea that the substance of God is beyond human comprehension. Of the seven or so other refutations of the Eunomian position offered by Basil in his Contra Eunomium some of them argue against the possibility of so defining God or indeed anything by a simply negative designation (C. Eun . I 9). In I 6 Basil had appealed to the notion of έлívοta or conception as a way of predicating something of the divine, language which was to be taken up again by his brother in his Contra Eunomium II 180ff. In I 5 Basil had also argued that the term ayέvvηtog was not a scriptural term . Unfortunately the same could be said for the more orthodox expression ὁμοούσιος. Gregory's own argument for the infinity of all three members of the Trinity occurs at Contra Eunomium I 167-71 . There, he argues, goodness and power have nothing to restrict them and where there is nothing superior to them, there they have no opoç or limit. There can be neither evil nor weakness in God. Therefore here we are in the presence of limitless goodness . And where we find άлɛɩρíɑ and άopioría there can be no greater or less. In other words it is an argument from the naturally unlimited character of goodness . What is not altogether clear in this argument is whether Gregory is talking about the ideas of power and goodness, which are not circumscribed or the goodness of the particular being of God. The assumption that the absolute is both good and beautiful is familiar from the Symposium 211a and Republic 509b of Plato, though for Plato goodness is beyond έлέкɛƖуα being, but not for Gregory. A similar way of deriving the infinity of God from the notion of divine goodness occurs elsewhere in Gregory, notably in his fifth Homily on the Song of Songs on which Langerbeck notes that it became the source of all subsequent affirmations of the divine infinity. An argument very like the above is made also in Gregory's De vita Moysis II 236 and 237. Where there is nothing to limit the good and the beautiful , there we have an infinity of beauty and good of which Gregory hardly ever writes, indeed possibly only once in his Homily on the Song ofSongs 1110 where he speaks of an aïolnois rapovoiɑç , a sensation or awareness of presence. A further point needs consideration : The assertion that the divine nature was incomprehensible, ȧкаτάληлтоç, had already been made by among others . " Why did Gregory feel the need to go beyond this, especially when it is remembered that Origen, his theological master had refused to go so far? Partly it is because

8 Unlike Gregory, Plotinus does appeal to experience at Enn . I 6,7,2 . He is even so remarkably reticent about his own mystical experiences - on one occasion at Enn. IV 8,1,1ff. does he directly allude to them . His disciple Porphyry, however, devotes chapter 23 of his On the Life of Plotinus to an account of his master's spiritual experiences: ‘His end was to be united with and close to the god above all. This goal he achieved four times, while I was with him'. 9 GNO V 157,15-21. 10 GNO VI 324,10. 11 Philo of Alexandria , for example, in Posterity and exile of Cain 169 and elsewhere.

6

A. MEREDITH

simply to be beyond the reach of the human mind does not of itself mean that the object of cognition is itself absolutely unlimited, it may simply indicate human limitation. At Contra Eunomium I 270ff. Gregory wishes to establish the total transcendence of God, and by that he means, as he states, not only is God beyond the empirical , sensory realm, he also transcends the realm of the intelligible world, that is human and angelic beings. The voηtǹ qúσis comes from and is created by its source and fountain, which lies beyond it. To be aкtιOTOS (C. Eun. I 280) means being utterly beyond the realm of created reality, whether that reality is sensory or intellectual. In section 276 Gregory argues that the ideas of greater or less play no part at all in the uncreated nature of the deity. There cannot be more or less of infinity. The argument can be summed up as follows: God in three persons is infinite, because God is uncreated . Therefore, because there can be no more or less , greater or smaller in the divine uncreated nature of God, it is improper to speak of degrees of being in the deity. Throughout the whole of this argument there is little appeal made to scripture. If it is true that Gregory's conviction about the infinite nature of God was forged in the field of controversy and exegesis of scripture, the same seems prima facie not to be true of Augustine. To begin with, as we have already seen, Augustine offers the hope of passing from faith to sight, when we pass from this world to the next. In his mature writings God for Gregory remains perpetually opaque to us. Even the angels cannot penetrate beyond the stage of endless search for the infinite God . Basing himself largely on 1Cor. 13:12 , Augustine argues that present incomprehensibility will pass away.¹2 Arguably the most celebrated affirmation of the divine transcendence occurs in Sermon 117,5,13 where he writes simply: si comprehendis non est deus.¹4 It may be the case that here Augustine is defining his position against the arrogant presumption of those who claimed to have an accurate knowledge of the divine nature . He does indeed lay stress above all in book XV of the De Trinitate on the inadequacy of the human mind, yet , as we have seen this inadequacy is removed once this life is at an end. His difference from Gregory is that whereas for the latter, Gregory, the distinction between creature is absolute and marks a permanent divide between God and ourselves, for Augustine the created spirit is much closer to God than is material creation and this may well reflect the influence upon him of the

12 Augustine's fondness for 1Cor. 13:12 is clear both from the Confessions, where it is used at VI 3,4 ; X 5,7 and elsewhere. In the De Trinitate it is employed on at least 26 occasions, usually, especially in book XV to underline the difference between the life of faith in this world and that of face to face vision. 13 PL 38 , 663. 14 The sermon was delivered in 418. At an earlier date between 410-2 in Sermon 52,6,16 (PL 38 , 360), Augustine writes : non est Deus, si comprehendere potuisti, aliud pro Deo comprehendisti.

Divine Incomprehensibility in Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine

7

Neoplatonism, as represented by Plotinus and Porphyry which had helped to emancipate him as he narrates in Confessions VII from the influence of the Manichees. It is indeed hard to decipher his mind and to decide to which of the two Neoplatonists he owed the more. It is true that in the City of God X he mentions Porphyry by name, he does also mention Plotinus by name in the same book and the main evidence for actual dependence occurs in the Confessions.15 This acknowledged acquaintance or even familiarity with the writings of the two most prominent Neoplatonists argues in favour not only of their influence upon his thought, but also in favour of connecting awareness of the incomprehensibility of God in this life to and availability in the next to Neoplatonism . As Abbot Butler pointed out in his Christian Mysticism, Augustine's own mysticism is only really to be found in his earlier Confessions in his account of the vision of Milan in book VII and at Ostia in book IX and not in his later writings. The distinction made in the end of the De Trinitate XV between faith now and vision hereafter seems to replace the Plotinian optimism of the earlier writings. A not dissimilar process of maturation is discernible in the writings of Gregory, with the proviso that for Augustine the condition of faith ends with death, whereas for Gregory epectasis is a perpetual state from which created intelligences, human and angelic, never emerge either in this life or in that to come. In both cases the Platonic optimism of the earlier writings, in the case of Gregory above all the De Virginitate and in that of Augustine the Soliloquies and Confessions, are replaced by an enhanced understanding of the mystery of the divine nature. There is the added point of difference that Gregory's conviction of the infinite nature of God seems not to derive from ecclesiastical tradition or from philosophy or from his own experience . Indeed, unlike Augustine, he appeals to his own experience very rarely, as we have seen. For Augustine, the influence of Plotinus is clear and he was more concerned in his more mature writings to explore the mystery ofthe holy Trinity than to defend the true deity of the Son. The creed of Nicaea hardly figures in his writings by name; that of Constantinople never.16 However, both Gregory and Augustine reject the Plotinian theorem derived from Republic 509b that the absolute is stated to be έлέкɛiva τñs ovoías, above or beyond being. Plotinus cites the words of Plato often enough as for example at Enn. V 1,8,8 . For Gregory God is indeed mysterious, but he always IS ,¹7 and for Augustine God est, est.18

15 At De beata vita I 4 Augustine writes that he had read very few (paucissimi) books of Plotinus. Gregory arguably cites Plotinus though without mentioning his name, in the opening sentence of his De Instituto, where the language seems to echo closely Enn . IV 8,1,1-7. See the note ad loc. in Reinhart Staats, Makarios- Symeon Epistola Magna (Göttingen, 1984). 16 For a list ofthe appearances of the symbolum see the article by Joseph T. Lienhard , Creed, Symbolum, in: Augustine through the ages: An Encyclopedia , ed . Allan D. Fitzgerald (Grand Rapids, 1999), 254f., 254. 17 Vita Moysis II 23. 18 Confessions XIII 31,46 :... ab illo enim est, qui non aliquo modo est, sed est, est.

Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church : Gregory of Nyssa's First and Second Homilies on Stephen the Protomartyr

Johan LEEMANS, Leuven

1. General introduction

Gregory of Nyssa's First and Second Homily on Stephen the Protomartyr are surprisingly little- studied sermons by one of the leading theologians of the second half of the fourth century A.D. Moreover, these two sermons contain the lion's share of the Cappadocian Fathers' reception of Acts 6-7 and they play a pivotal role in the development of the ' image' of Stephen as Protomartyr in Greek patristic literature .' On the basis of internal evidence and thematic parallels with Gregory's other sermons and texts, Jean Daniélou has dated both sermons on two consecutive days, namely 26 and 27 December 386, a dating which has been retained in the discussions of these texts by J. Bernardi and J. Rexer.2 Taken together both sermons offer an interesting, multifaceted image of the Stephen we read about in Acts 6-7. The main aim of this paper is to show how the image the bishop of Nyssa presents of Stephen is, on the one hand, very much linked to the biblical story while, on the other, also modelling him into a fourth century martyr and saint. In conducting this research, the differences in theme and tone of both sermons have to be taken into account.3 Gregory's First Homily on Stephen was delivered on the 26th of December, the feast-day of Stephen. The sermon stands out by its continuous borrowing from Acts 6-7. In fact the sermon can best be described as a sort of lectio

1 A survey of the patristic reception of these chapters of the Book of Acts is offered in the Habilitationsschrift of Susanna Müller-Abels (on the patristic interpretation of Acts 1-8). The hagiographical material on Stephen is presented by François Bovon, The Dossier on Stephen, the First Martyr: HTR 96 (2003) 279-315. 2 Jean Danielou, La chronologie des sermons de Grégoire de Nysse : RevSR 29 ( 1955) 346-72 , 367; see Jean Bernardi, La prédication des Pères Cappadociens: Le prédicateur et son auditoire (Paris, 1970), 290-4 and Jochen Rexer, Die Festtheologie Gregors von Nyssa: ein Beispiel de reichskirchlichen Heortologie (Frankfurt am Main, 2002), 106-14. 3 Frances Young, Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture (Cambridge, 1997), 113f.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 9-19. Peeters Publishers , 2010.

10

J. LEEMANS

continua of this pericope. Indeed, after a quite extensive prologue (75,4-77,6) ,4 Gregory announces that 'it would be desirable to describe, through this sermon, the fight as accurately as on a painting, so that through the succession of the events the order of the miraculous deeds might become clear to us step by step' (77,7-9). This is exactly what he does: the rest of the sermon essentially is a series of ekphraseis, each of them panels of a painting as it were, in which the series of events from Pentecost onwards until Stephen's martyrdom is described . The whole presents itself as a continuous commentary on the text of the Scriptures, which is quoted with an unusual frequency. Within this framework Gregory succeeds in sustaining a panegyrical tone, avoiding the impression that he is writing an exegetical commentary proper. In the final section the gifted theologian Gregory of Nyssa appears behind the back of the panegyrist, inserting within his sermon a digression in which he explains to the audience the theological relevance of the vision of Stephen , narrated in Acts 7,54-55 . There it is narrated that Stephen had seen the heavens open and the Son standing at the right hand of the Father. Gregory explains that this verse shouldn't be misunderstood as a Scriptural argument in support of Neo-Arian or Pneumatomachian ideas. The so-called Second Homily on Stephen the Protomartyr was delivered on the 27th of December, on the feast-day of the Holy Apostles. Compared to the previous one, the nature, tone and drive of this sermon are completely different. It is much more a festal sermon, in the sense that it is less panegyrical and more liturgical; biblical passages are quoted but linked to the topic in more associative ways; theological arguments seem to be the last thing the homilist bothers about . Instead, Gregory's major concern is to give all the saints their due : Stephen, about whom he had not been able to preach all too long the day before, and the saints of the day: Peter, John and James. Thematic unity is achieved by stressing the chronological order - Stephen being the first , introducing the coming of the others after him as well as by indicating an essential continuity, Stephen and the other ones are all apostles, saints and exemplars to be followed by the other Christians . All in all, the different topics lent the sermon a somewhat more multifocal character. Stephen gets in the so- called Second Homily on Stephen the Protomartyr only a modest share of the homilists's time and attention. As already mentioned , both the First and the Second Homily on Stephen were delivered at the end of December, in the days immediately following Christmas , which was in Cappadocia by then established as a major liturgical feast . The Feast of Epiphany, January 6th , was also a major feast, as we hear from Gregory

4 References to the two sermons are by page- and linenumber to the edition by Otto Lendle in volume X , 1/2 of the Gregorii Nysseni Opera (Leiden , 1990).

Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church

11

in the prologue to his Homily on the Day of Lights. From Gregory's stress on the fact that the Apostles whose memory was celebrated are equal with Stephen and worthy of having their own feast, it would seem that their feast- day wasn't that long before established. Add to these Gregory's attempts to motivate people to give also New Year's day some Christian touch by coming to Church and it would seem that we witness here the bishop's attempt to establish gradually a 'liturgically strong period' between Christmas and Epiphany. Surely from Gregory's viewpoint this period provided the bishop and homilist with a series of occasions to address and to inspire his flock. At the same time his complaints in the prologue of On the Day of the Lights about the meagre attendance the Sunday before Epiphany and his rebukes to his congregation for not having church on a New Year's day, indicate that not every Christian in Nyssa was as eager to come to Church as his bishop would like ." Such precious glimpses of the life of Early Christian communities and of their ordinary members are exceptional. In general, sermons show us the Christian community through its bishop's eyes. In reading these texts one gets a sense of how the leaders of these communities, as part of the office entrusted to them , endeavoured to shape the minds and the souls of their flock. One of these ways was that he tried to inspire and to encourage them to persevere in their efforts at following that difficult but rewarding path towards Christian virtue. In this context Scriptural or historical persons who embodied this ideal played a crucial role. They were presented by the homilists as examples of Christian virtue." Thus, at the end of his Second Homily on Stephen Gregory of Nyssa admonishes his audience to embody in their lives the good qualities and pious, faithful life of the saints and martyrs. He argues: it is good that I have narrated and eulogised at length on the virtues of these men, whom we justly call saints and whose remembrance we rightfully cultivate and honour. This remembrance, however, is incomplete and idle if it doesn't result in imitation

5 Gregory of Nyssa, On the Day ofLights (GNO IX 221,3-15 Ernst Gebhardt) ; Against Those Who Cannot Bear Criticism (GNO X/2 , 323-332 Dörte Teske) . On the Feast of Epiphany and the liturgical year in Cappadocia , see Hans Forster, Die Feier der Geburt Christi in der Alten Kirche: Beiträge zur Erforschung der Anfänge des Epiphanie und des Weichnachtsfest (Tübingen , 2000) and Jill Suzanne Burnett, Aspects of the Liturgical Year in Cappadocia 325 to 430 C.E, diss. Drew University (Ann Arbor, 2003). 6 I explored this topic in the following contributions: Johan Leemans, Schoolrooms for Our Souls . Homilies and Visual Representations: the Cult of the Martyrs as a Locus for Religious Education in Late Antiquity, in : Marc Depaepe and Bregt Henkens (eds .), The Challenge ofthe Visual in the History of Education (Gent, 2000), 113-31 ; id. , Preaching Christian Virtue: Basil of Caesarea's Panegyrical Sermon on Julitta, in: Gert Partoens, Geert Roskam, and Toon Van Houdt (eds .), Virtutis imago : Studies on the Conceptualization and Transformation of an Ancient Ideal (Leuven, 2004) , 259-85 ; id., Martyr, Monk and Victor of Paganism: an Analysis of Basil of Caesarea's Panegyrical Sermon on Gordius, in: id . (ed .) , More than a Memory: The Discourse ofMartyrdom and the Construction ofChristian Identity in the History ofChristianity (Leuven, 2005), 45-81 .

12

J. LEEMANS

in our concrete, daily lives. Words and panegyrics about the saints are good but only when they awake in the hearer the impetus to become true disciples of the saints, to share in their life because ours is directed by the same inspiration as theirs. In the final, rhetorically refined sentence, Gregory relativizes the unattainability of this ideal: after all, the saints did attain the ideal thanks to divine grace and this grace and the rewards that are to be expected from it are not exclusively reserved for them but common to all ( 105,15-28). From this follows that in reading these homilies on Stephen and looking to how the martyr is presented , it is worthwhile to keep in mind that part of the homilist's purpose was to present the saint as a model to imitate . The exemplarity of the martyr's behaviour also entails that he embodies support for the homilist's religious and theological stance . Just like Athanasius of Alexandria's Egyptian eremite Antony is an ardent supporter of Nicene orthodoxy, Gregory's Stephen is exploited to support his rejection of ‘ the Jews ' and groups of fellowChristians he considered as not eusebès, not orthodox . The story of Stephen lent itself very well to be retold and re-interpreted within such a dichotomic framework: the conflict within the Jerusalem community, the theological exchanges, Stephen's long speech in which he demonstrates Christianity as the heir of Judaism and , ultimately, the infuriation of his opponents and his martyrdom are all elements that can be easily inserted into such an oppositional framework. Against this background the portrayals of Stephen in Gregory's sermons can now be explored.

2. Stephen as the Imitator of the Lord

The beginning of the First Homily on Stephen (75,4-12) is a good starting-point for this exploration . Endeavouring to make a connection between the preceeding feast-day of Christmas and the actual one, Gregory opens his sermon by juxtaposing Christ and the Proto-martyr. The opposition between the two is developed in six-times-two clauses, whereby the homilist aims at attaining echo and rhythm by repeating in each clause at least one keyword of the corresponding part. The lyric quality of the passage may be appreciated from the following quotation: Χθὲς ἡμᾶς ὁ τοῦ παντὸς δεσπότης εἱστίασε, σήμερον ὁ μιμητής τοῦ δεσπότου . πῶς οὗτος ἢ πῶς ἐκεῖνος; ἐκεῖνος τὸν ἄνθρωπον ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐνδυόμενος, οὗτος τὸν ἄνθρωπον ὑπὲρ ἐκείνου ἀποδυόμενος. ἐκεῖνος τὸ τοῦ βίου σπήλαιον δι ' ἡμᾶς ὑπερχόμενος, οὗτος τοῦ σπηλαίου δι ' ἐκεῖνον ὑπεξερχόμενος. ἐκεῖνος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν σπαργανούμενος,

Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church

13

οὗτος ὑπὲρ ἐκείνου καταλιθούμενος. ἐκεῖνος ἀναιρῶν τὸν θάνατον, οὗτος ἐπεμβαίνων τῷ θανάτῳ κειμένῳ. Yesterday the Master of Everything entertained us hospitably, today the Master's imitator is doing the same. How the former and how the latter? The former by putting on humanity because of us, the latter by putting off humanity because of Him; the former by entering the cave of life because of us, the latter by leaving the cave because of Him; the former by being wrapped up in swaddling clothes because of us, the latter by being lapidated because of Him ; the former by annihilating death, the latter by trampling upon the allayed death. The poetic quality and rhythm of this passage serve to underline what is being said in the second line : Stephen is, in a way an opposite mirroring, the mimètès tou despotou. By dying for the Christian faith Stephen followed in the footsteps of the salvific work of Christ, of which Incarnation and Resurrection are explicitly hinted at. Thus he is reminding his audience of the basic tenets of the Christian faith while at the same time making a connection between Christ and Stephen. In other words : already from the start of the sermon Stephen is not presented as a virtuous first century Christian but as an imitator of his Lord. The rest of the sermon must be read against this background . As imitator of the Lord, Stephen takes his place in the history of salvation. This aspect is elaborated in the prologue to the Second Homily on Stephen (97,4-9). Christ came in the world for its salvation and after him the fruits of the Church (karpoi tès ekklèsias) sprouted . Christ, the witness for the truth shone and the witnesses to the great dispensation shone together with Him (sunelampsan). The disciples followed in the footsteps of their Teacher; the Christbearers followed Christ (meta Christon); the luminaries of the oikoumene followed (meta) the sun of righteousness. The symbolic language is used to denote in the first place the saints and Apostles that are the subject of the festal sermon but by extension it should also be taken to include the other Apostles and saints. Gregory stresses a chronological continuity: Christ came first and they came after him. At the same time there is also participatory language involved. The saints and Apostles shine together with Christ; they are Christbearers and the luminaries coming after the sun of righteousness . In other words: the hallmark and meaning of their lives is that they are Christ's people, that they reflect in their lives something of His being. This is their place in the plan of salvation and in the Church, of which they are the first fruits. The opening of the sermon thus serves to underpin the thought that constitutes the backbone of the sermon : Stephen and the Apostles whose remembrance is being

14

J. LEEMANS

celebrated are 'equal in holiness '. It also points towards the end, where the audience will be admonished to follow the saints' example: the continuity between Christ and the Apostles and saints is enlarged and broken open by the invitation to the audience to get involved in this plan of salvation too by imitating these examples.

3. Styling Stephen as Martyr In the narrative of Acts 6-7 Stephen's martyrdom is certainly the culmination point of the story. But by no means can it be said that the few verses about his death as a martyr are the most important thing the writer of Acts wants to convey to his readers about Stephen. This is different in Gregory's panegyrics, especially in the First Homily on Stephen where the focus clearly is on Stephen as martyr for the Christian faith. Drawing on the many stock motifs which he inherited from the martyrial literature of the centuries before him and which can also be found in his other hagiobiographical writings, Gregory restyles the Stephen of Acts 6-7 into a martyr-saint of the fourth century, as he had been doing with the historical martyrs Theodore the Recruit and the Forty of Sebaste but, mutatis mutandis, also with characters like Basil of Caesarea or Meletius of Antioch . To highlight this mechanism , I single out two elements : martyrdom as a struggle with the Devil and the use of agonistic terminology. Firstly, Stephen's life and death in martyrdom is presented as a struggle with the Devil, the wicked adversary of human life (76,1-2) . The destructive , lethal nature of Satan's activities and the life -giving nature of Christian faith are highlighted in the following antithetical construction (76,17-9) :

Ὅπλα δὲ κατ' ἀλλήλων ἀμφοτέροις ἦν, τῷ μὲν εὑρετῇ τοῦ θανάτου ἡ πρὸς τὸν θάνατον ἀπειλή , τῷ δὲ μαθητῇ τῆς ζωῆς ἡ ὁμολογία τῆς πίστεως. Both had at their disposal arms against each other. To the inventor of death there was the threatening with death, to the disciple of life there was the confession of faith . Stephen is the disciple of life ; the Christian life and the confession of the faith are seen as intimately connected to one another. The Devil's arms is threats of death and annihilation ; Stephen's arm is the confession of faith. Stephen is presented here as a fighter for the Christian faith, the Devil as the opponent to that faith. Just like in Gregory's other martyrial homilies, the Devil is also present at every turn of the story throughout the First on Stephen . He is

7 Monique Alexandre, Les nouveaux martyrs. Motifs martyrologiques dans la vie des saints et thèmes hagiographiques dans l'Éloge des martyrs chez Grégoire de Nysse, in: Andreas Spira (ed.), The Biographical Works of Gregory ofNyssa . Proceedings of the Fifth International Colloquium on Gregory ofNyssa (Mainz, 6-10 September 1982) (Cambridge MA, 1984), 33-70.

Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church

15

presented as the Adversary par excellence in the setting of the stage at the beginning (75,13-76,11) ; he incites and tempts the Alexandrians, the Freedmen, the Cyreneans and ' the other people from everywhere' to act together against Stephen (79,12-80,8). Despite the initial failure of his conspiracy the Devil persists: when Stephen is to appear before a court he influences the accuser, the judge and even the executor (80,8-81,3). When this fails he inspires a new accusation against Stephen (81,19-82,5) . All of this is in vain and in the end the Deceiver is deceived himself: Stephen's conviction by the court and his ensuing martyrdom resulted in the worldwide dissemination of the Christian faith (80,16-81,19) . Secondly, to speak about martyrdom Gregory employs the habitual agonistic terminology taken from the worlds of the stadion and the military. Martyrdom is a run (dromos) or contest (agon⁹, athlèsis¹º or athlos¹¹), which takes place in the stadion¹² . The martyr is an athlete or champion (athlètès¹³ or agonistès¹ ). In this contest, he is the victor (nikè, nikein¹5), receiving the crown (stefanos16) or the prize (nikètèrion¹7 or brabeion18). Besides these worn-out metaphors Gregory occasionally makes more inventive use of agonistic language in the form of longer comparisons. Thus he likens the Devil's mishap with Stephen's martyrdom which signalled the start for the expansion of Christianity to a move in wrestling whereby the one who lies beneath through an ingenuous turn succeeds in bringing his opponent to fall.19 Stephen's teaching Gregory's audience how to deal with the heretical Pneumatomachians is likened to what experienced senior trainers in the gymnasium are doing for their young apprentices.20 In his use of the crown-metaphor our homilist is at times equally ingenuous. There is of course the double entendre of crown (stefanos) and the name of the Protomartyr2¹ and in his Second on Stephen the other saints are called ' other stefanoi' – other crows and other Stephens.22 And in the First on Stephen the circle of people standing around him while stoning him are seen as his crown of victory.23

8 In Stephanum II (102,14-16). 9 In Stephanum I (84,3 ; 84,21-85,1) ; In Stephanum II ( 100,11-12 ; 103,3-6 : à02ńoas). 10 In Stephanum I (77,7; 84,21-85,1 ; 88,17-19 ; 94,10-11); In Stephanum II (102,14-16). 11 In Stephanum I (84,21-85,1) . 12 In Stephanum I (76,2 ; 76,12 ; 81,20; 85,16-20). 13 In Stephanum I (76,1 ; 76,11 ; 88,7; 88,17) . 14 In Stephanum I (76,1 ; 76,12 ; 76,16 ; 85,14; 86,2); In Stephanum II (98,14-15 and 100,11-12). 15 In Stephanum I (84,21-85,1 ; 85,14) . 16 In Stephanum I (76,4-5; 84,21-85,1 ; 88,7-10) ; In Stephanum II ( 100,20-23) . 17 In Stephanum I (85,19 ; 88,9). 18 In Stephanum II (105,26). 19 In Stephanum I (80,17-81,3). 20 In Stephanum I (88,23-89,8). 21 In Stephanum II (97, 9 and 19). 22 In Stephanum II ( 100,18-23). 23 In Stephanum I (88,7-10).

16

J. LEEMANS

As already said, all these martyrological motifs are also present in Gregory's other hagiobiographical writings. Drawing on the material of Acts 6-7 and these traditional motifs, Gregory detaches the Scriptural character of Stephen from his narrative NT-background in order to turn him into a model of inspiration for his audience. Most definitely steadfastness in the Christian faith in difficult times was one lesson Gregory wanted his audience to learn from Stephen. In what follows we will explore what else ' Gregory's Stephen' has in store.

4. Stephen as Protomartyr Stephen is not only a martyr but also the Protomartyr, the first of the martyrs. While one can concur with Glen Bowersock that the term protomartys was not uniquely reserved for Stephen ,24 in the large majority of the Greek sources up to the end of the fourth century the designation Protomartyr functions as a sort of standard epitheton attached to the name of Stephen.25 More interestingly, Gregory of Nyssa seems to be the first to offer some thoughts about what it actually means that Stephen was the first Christian martyr. In the prologue of the First Homily on Stephen he elaborates briefly on this theme. Stephen is not just a martyr but in passing Gregory stresses he is the first martyr. ' Stephen, who was the first to put on the crown of martyrdom , the first to provide entrance in the world to the row of martyrs, the first who fought against sin until blood' (76,4-6). A more elaborate development of the Protomartyr-theme is offered in the prologue of the Second Homily on Stephen . The passage and argument can be paraphrased as follows. Christ came into the world for its salvation and after Him flourished the fruits of the Church, the first of which was Stephen . This man was not made of Jewish akanthus but he was offered to the Lord as the very first fruit of the Church. For the Jews had made a crown of akanthus and put it on the head of the Savior. In doing so they showed themselves to be the fruits of bad agriculture or, as has been foretold by the prophecy (sc. Is . 5 :7 and 5 :2) : the House of Israel is the vineyard of Israel and Judah the beloved , chosen plant. I had expected it to yield grapes but instead it brought forth only thorns '. The labourers for the truth of the Gospel, however, offered as the first fruit of

24 In Appendix I to Martyrdom and Rome Glen Bowersock rightly stresses that the term protomartus is not unique for Stephanus but that in its first applications it means: the first of a group to suffer martyrdom (see Martyrdom of Lyons and Vienne) . Bowersock is right to stress that this term is not always applied to Stephen but also to Thecla, to Eleasar (Chrysostom on the first of the Maccabean brothers who died) and even Jesus (Gelasius) . He is also right that it can also have different shades of meaning, varying from the first of a group to die to the first to die as a martyr in general. 25 Observation based on a TLG - search for the keyterm ' protomart-' in the first four centuries A.D.

Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church

17

their faith, as the first fruit of their agriculture, Stephen, a holy man who, just like a veritable crown, was a composition of many and diverse virtues: a man of faith, filled with the Spirit and blessed with a lot of spiritual wisdom. In this passage Stephen is explicitly styled as the first fruit of the Church, opening the row of the saints. He is proof of the Church's superiority over and against Judaism who rejected the offer of salvation in Christ. Stephen becomes the symbol of the new way the Christian community went. This is born out in the narrative restyling of the story of Acts 6-7 in the remainder of the part of the sermon devoted to Stephen. There the story of Acts is retold within the oppositional framework of the good (the ' Christian' Stephen) versus the bad (the 'Jews' ). This framework is present in the story of Acts but Gregory makes it much more forceful. Thus, the narrative of Acts 6-7 is allowed to speak in a different context to assert Christianity's truth claims in a polemical way. By the 380's the polemical rejection of Judaism had taken on a traditional allure, but passages such as these do not cease to surprise because of the sharpness of the polemic present in them.

5. Stephen and Orthodoxy The narrative of the Protomartyr was, however, not only instrumental in developing a discourse of Christian supremacy over and against the Jews. It gave rise also to an anti-heretical discourse, a polemical discourse against the ' heretics'. In itself this is no surprise. Gregory of Nyssa was strongly involved in the Arian Controversy. Besides in his theological writings , this involvement has also left traces in his homilies. It is present in his portrayals of Basil of Caesarea, Meletius of Antioch and the emperor's wife and daughter Flacilla and Pulcheria as supporters and pillars of orthodoxy.26 Perhaps more surprisingly the doctrinal developments of the latter decades of the fourth century are also present in his First Homily on Stephen . They are brought to the fore when, in his lectio continua of Acts 6-7, Gregory has arrived at his last ' painting': Stephen's vision, seeing the heavens open and the Son standing at the right hand side of the Father. These verses Acts 7: 55-56 could give rise to subordinationist positions with regard to either the Son or the Spirit; they obviously played a role in the exchanges with Pneumatomachians and neo-Arians. Gregory takes his time to lead his audience through a surprisingly sophisticated argument, showing that these verses shouldn't be interpreted in a subordinationist way but on the contrary should be understood as support for the co - essentiality of the three persons of the Trinity. While it is certainly remarkable to have a

26 Johan Leemans, Communicating Truth: The Construction of Orthodoxy in Gregory of Nyssa's Sermons, in: Mathijs Lamberigts, Lieven Boeve, and Terrence Merrigan (eds.) , Orthodoxy, Process and Product (Leuven , 2009), 61-83.

18

J. LEEMANS

quite sophisticated theological argumentation in a sermon on a feast- day (assuming a substantial audience) two more features of this final section of the sermon ask for our attention . Firstly, Gregory stresses that Stephen was only able to see this vision of the Father and the Son because he was filled by the Spirit, as is written in 7:55 . This was necessary, because only like is able to know like, according to one of Gregory's basic, epistemological presuppositions. By no means the martyr Stephen could have transcended the boundaries of the laws of nature and received his vision without divine grace. Secondly, Gregory also interprets this vision as an exhortation of the audience to pursue 'orthodoxy' and fight ' heresy ' . He writes : 'We should , I think, ourselves be trained by the great Stephen towards orthodoxy (eusebeia) so that we may escape the attacks of the Pneumatomachians' (89,5-7) . At the end of the sermon , in the final exhortation, he returns to this idea , admonishing the audience : 'May it be given to us to participate in Stephen's fight not only as spectators but also as sharers of grace, filled with the Holy Spirit, in order to destroy the unlawful ...' (94,10-12). From the context it is clear that the unlawful are the Pneumatomachians and the Christomachians (Neo-Arians). Also at the end of his Homily in Praise of Theodore and his Funeral Oration on the Empress Flacilla there are admonishments to the audience to engage in the battle for orthodoxy against heresy, as he defines these.27 Thus the martyr's battle is also seen as a battle against heresy and the audience is invited to join him in this battle. The Scriptural past is transcended and turned into a liturgical present.

6. Stephen as the ideal deacon and leader of community

In presenting Stepen as an example of eusebeia , Gregory certainly had, besides the audience in general, also the leaders of Christian communities in mind . It is not too far fetched to assume that he intended to put, implicitly and in a somewhat veiled form , his colleagues and clergy on their guard over and against deviant doctrines such as the Arian and Pneumatomachian ones and that he was providing them with Scriptural arguments to do so. The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to the relation with the Jews, with the difference that the story of Stephen in Acts 6-7 provided an easy way to introduce what we call today suprasessionary theology. Alongside this , however, Stephen was exemplary to the leaders of the Church communities also in another way. Acts 6 presents Stephen as a man, filled with the Spirit, who takes care of the widows and at the same time , inspired by divine grace, proves to be a gifted speaker and preacher. In his Second on

27 In Theodorum (GNO X, 1/2 , 71,5-11 Johannes P. Cavarnos); In Flacillam (GNO IX, 489,4-14 Andreas Spira).

Reading Acts 6-7 in the Early Church

19

Stephen Gregory develops the Scriptural passage under consideration to a fullblown digression (97,20-98,13) . Stephen provides the widows with material food and the others he provided with spiritual nourishment. But in doing this he shut the mouth of the enemies of truth. Thus, he is presented as the guarantee of truth and the one that overcomes deviant opinions and religions. In the First on Stephen Gregory underlines that the notion of service (diakonia), which is employed to describe Stephen's support of the widows, should not be taken to mean that as a diakonos his position was subordinate to that of the apostles. Gregory underlines that the dignity of the diakonos Stephen is equally high: not only did also Paul present himself as a diakonos of Christ's mysteries but also, and more important, Stephen was a man filled with the grace of God and the Spirit, a grace which enabled him to perform his diakonia , both in the service ofthe word and in that of charity towards the needy (78,15-79,3). This is Gregory's message : leaders of Christian communities should be concerned about their flock's material well-being, especially the poor and the widows. They should make sure that all receive spiritual food but they should also take care that the enemies of the truth are treated like Stephen treated his opponents.

7. Conclusion

In his First and so-called Second Homily on Stephen the Protomartyr Gregory of Nyssa reshapes the biblical character of Stephen into a model for his late fourth century audience and their leaders. Thereby he draws on the biblical story of Acts 6-7, on traditional martyrological motifs , on anti-Jewish polemic and, for the section against the Neo-Arians and Pneumatomachians, on the exegesis of Acts 7: 55-56 which had already been developed by Basil in his On the Holy Spirit. The result is a rewritten Stephen who serves as an example worthy of imitation by the members of his audience and their leaders: they should adhere to the Christian faith , particularly in difficult times, and this faith should be a Nicene form of Christianity. Moreover, they should be prepared to reject with the Scriptural argument of Acts 7 : 55f. Pneumatomachian and Arian ideas. For the leaders of Christian communities Stephen is also an example in the sense that he combined a justified concern to teach the Christian faith with an equally important pastoral-diaconical concern .

Epinoia and Initial Concepts: Re-assessing Gregory of Nyssa's Defense of Basil

Andrew RADDE-GALLWITZ, Chicago

In his Contra Eunomium, Gregory of Nyssa comes to the defense of his brother Basil. In Book II, he takes up the contested topic of epinoia or ' conception'. Gregory sides with Basil over against Eunomius, claiming that epinoia is a valid instrument of the theologian. In the course of this defense, he offers an encomium on epinoia that appears to go too far: What, then, was the origin of our higher brances of learning, of geometry, arithmetic , the logical and physical sciences, of the inventions of the mechanical arts, of the marvels of measuring time by the bronze dial and the water-clock? What, again, of the philosophy of being and the study of the intelligibles, in short, of the soul's pursuit of great and sublime objects? What of agriculture, of navigation, and of the other pursuits of human life? How has the sea become a highway for us? How are things of the air brought into the service of things of the earth, wild things tamed , objects of terror brought into subjection , animals stronger than ourselves made obedient to the rein? Have not all these benefits to human life been achieved by epinoia? For, according to my account, epinoia is the method by which we discover things that are unknown, going on to further discoveries by pursuing what adjoins to and follows from our first apprehension of the thing we are studying.' Here Gregory ascribes the origin of practically every human endeavor to epinoia. Alcuin Weiswurm noted over fifty years ago that in Gregory's zeal to save epinoia from Eunomian derision by making it the indispensable tool of all human arts and sciences, ‘ it is not unlikely that the heat of controversy carried him too far'.2 Moreover, John Demetracopoulos has recently argued that in this passage, Gregory betrays Basil's understanding of epinoia.³ The thrust of these interpretations leads us to believe that Gregory's defense of Basil simply misses the point. And , indeed, it is not immediately obvious

1 Gregory of Nyssa , Contra Eunomium [Eun .] 2.181-82 (GNO I 277); transl . M. Day in: William Moore and Henry A. Wilson (eds .), Select Writings and Letters ofGregory, Bishop ofNyssa, NPNF, Second Series V (Peabody, MA, 1994 [orig. pub. 1892]), 268 , altered. 2 Alcuin A. Weiswurm , The Nature of Human Knowledge According to Saint Gregory of Nyssa (Washington, DC, 1952), 141f. 3 John A. Demetracopoulos , Glossogony or Epistemology? Eunomius of Cyzicus ' and Basil of Caesarea's Stoic Concept of EIINOIA and its Misrepresentation by Gregory of Nyssa , in: Lenka Karfíková, Scot Douglass, and Johannes Zachhuber (eds.) , Gregory of Nyssa: Contra Eunomium II: An English Version with Supporting Studies (Leiden, 2007) , 387-97, 392.

Studia Patristica XLVII, 21-26. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

22

A. RADDE-GALLWITZ

what navigation, for instance, has to do with theology. Yet, I want to suggest that the scholarly inability to grasp the significance of Gregory's encomium on epinoia derives directly from misunderstanding what epinoia is. Once we understand this , we can see the appropriateness of Gregory's defense of Basil and, more importantly, can tackle one barbed accusation the scholars have levelled against Basil and Gregory. This charge says that the Cappadocian brothers fall into inconsistency by maintaining both that God is simple and that God is known by multiple epinoiai. I will argue that, once we are clear on what epinoia is, it will appear that the scholars have raised dust rather than a problem . I will refrain from discussing the philosophical background for the simple reason that, whereas some interpretations of Basil and Gregory are driven largely by appealing to a source claim , I want my interpretation of Basil and Gregory to stand independently of any source hypothesis. The case for a renegade Gregory gains some weight from the fact that Gregory qualifies Basil's definitions of epinoia. In Basil's Contra Eunomium, he offers two definitions of epinoia , as it is understood in ' common usage .' The first reads like this : whatever seems simple and singular to the general application of the intellect, but which appears complex and plural upon detailed scrutiny and thereby is divided by the intellect - this sort of thing is said to be divided by epinoia alone.4

The second definition goes thusly : epinoia is the name given to the more subtle and precise reflection about an intellectual object after an initial concept of it has arisen for us from sense perception.5 In his response , the Apologia Apologiae, Eunomius paraphrased Basil's definition , saying: Basil said that after the initial concept has arisen for us concerning the thing, the more subtle and precise scrutiny of the intellectual object is called epinoia. Gregory responds by saying that Eunomius has taken this definition out of context. He notes that Basil divides his discussion of epinoia into sections . The first deals with epinoia in ' common usage' . The second deals with epinoia in the 'divine oracles' - here Basil deals with Christological titles Origen called epinoiai in his Commentary on John and with the question of whether one can employ epinoia for ' the God of the universe '. Gregory notes that Basil's definitions appear in the section dealing with epinoia in common usage. He says that Basil never intended his definition to cover every kind of epinoia .? We can get 4 Basil, Contra Eunomium [ CE ] CE 1.6.21-25 (SC 299, 184). 5 Basil, CE 1.6.41-44 (SC 299, 186). 6 Eun., Apologia Apologiae apud Greg. Nyss., Eun. 2.344 (GNO I 326.15-21) : eine, qnoiv, ὁ Βασίλειος μετὰ τὸ πρῶτον ἐγγενόμενον ἡμῖν περὶ τοῦ πράγματος νόημα τὴν λεπτοτέραν καὶ ἀκριβεστέραν τοῦ νοηθέντος ἐξέτασιν. 7 Greg. Nyss., Eun. 2.345-46 (GNO I 326-7) .

Epinoia and Initial Concepts: Re- assessing Gregory of Nyssa's Defense of Basil

23

a sense of what an appropriate general definition looks like, according to Gregory, from the passage with which we started, which ends with Gregory's definition : For, according to my account, epinoia is the method by which we discover things that are unknown, going on to further discoveries by pursuing what adjoins to and follows from our first apprehension of the thing we are studying. Despite some differences, this looks very much like Basil's definition in one key respect. Both brothers stress the difference between an ' initial concept' or a 'first apprehension' on one hand and further scrutiny on the other. From here onward, I will call the former ' initial concept' and the latter ' epinoia'. I would submit that grasping this distinction is the key to understanding the doctrine of epinoia; that is, we will never understand epinoia until we are clear on how epinoia relates to initial concepts. The picture for both Basil and Gregory is roughly this: at some time, the mind is in possession of a concept; it then reflects upon this concept, discovering further truths about it than it initially grasped . The latter process is called epinoia. What makes initial concepts initial? The definitions suggest that the initial concepts form the starting-point and the subject matter of the subsequent reflection. Without the initial concepts, there can be no epinoia . Perhaps surprisingly, there is precedent for such a distinction in the Eunomian texts to which the Cappadocians are responding. Eunomius distinguishes between good notions (ennoiai) and bad ones (epinoiai) in a way that lines up nicely with the Cappadocian distinction between initial concepts and subsequent reflection, though they of course drop the valuation of good and bad. What makes the former good for Eunomius is that they are common and natural notions implanted in human beings .' And Basil and Gregory accept that there are common notions and that these line up in many cases with initial concepts . So, one thing that makes at least some initial concepts basic is that they are innate and providentiallyguaranteed.10 In his section on epinoia in ' common usage', Basil offers the example of grain. Of the initial concept of grain he says, ' the concept of "grain” exists in

8 For Eunomius , see, e.g., Apologia [Apol.] 8.10-11 ; Richard Vaggione (ed.), Eunomius: The Extant Works (Oxford, 1987), 42 : τῆς ἀληθοῦς περὶ θεοῦ ἐννοίας καὶ τῆς τελειότητος αὐτοῦ; ibid. 18.6 (54 Vaggione), where Eunomius speaks favorably of attending taîç dè tàv útokεiµέvæv έvvoíarç; ibid. 22.7-8 (62 Vaggione): Eunomius says that at this point we have ‘ accurately refined our notion concerning these matters' (τὴν δὲ περὶ τούτων ἔννοιαν ἀκριβῶς διακαθαίροντας). 9 Apol. 7.1-2 (40 Vaggione): Εἷς τοίνυν κατά τε φυσικὴν ἔννοιαν καὶ κατὰ τὴν τῶν πατέρων διδασκαλίαν ἡμῖν ὡμολόγηται θεός. 10 See Richard Vaggione, Eunomius of Cyzicus and the Nicene Revolution (Oxford, 2000), 87-93.

24

A. RADDE-GALLWITZ

everybody as something simple, by means of which we recognize grain as soon as we see it '. Here there are three features of the initial concept: (1) it exists in everybody', that is , it is a common notion; (2) it is a ' simple' concept (note that Basil does not say that grain is simple, but that the initial concept of it is); (3) it enables recognition of instances of grain through sense-perception . One engages in epinoia with respect to this initial concept when one reflects on grain from various perspectives. As the result of completed farming, grain is ' fruit'; as the starting- point for next year's farming, it is ' seed '; viewed from the perspective of its usefulness for the human body, it is ‘ nourishment' . Some commentators have used this passage as evidence that epinoiai should be understood in a realist manner, and realism on any account requires there to be mind-independent objects.¹2 But ' seed', ' fruit ', and ' nourishment' are not parts of grain to which these terms refer regardless of whether there are humans around, but simply diverse perspectives on grain, different ways grain can be used, which are not untrue simply because they are mind - dependent. Recall that in Gregory's encomium, agriculture is one art developed through epinoia. Let us turn to the Christological titles like ' Door', 'Way', and 'Bread'. Basil discusses these under the heading of the use of epinoia in the ' divine oracles'. Basil's discussion obviously owes something to Origen, though it is important to be precise on the exact nature of this debt. For Origen, in his Commentary on John, the Christological titles are epinoiai. According to Origen, we are justified in attributing multiple terms to Christ because, unlike the simple Father, Christ is complex or at least becomes complex in the Incarnation . This has been taken as Basil's position as well, which is supposed to cause Basil no small embarrassment since he calls Christ simple. But Basil does not understand Christological titles to refer to a complex reality. The diversity of titles is justified not by the complexity of the referent . Rather, ' on the basis of how [Christ's] activities differ and how he relates to the objects of his divine benefaction, he employs different titles for himself.'¹³ There are two reasons here: diversity of activities (energeiai) and relation (skhesis). In his discussion of this passage , Gregory repeats exactly this rationale.¹4 To say that these titles are epinoetic is to say that they are true of Christ, yet

11 Basil, CE 1.6.44-47 (SC 299, 186). 12 E.g., Joseph S. O'Leary, Divine Simplicity and the Plurality of Attributes (CE II 359-386; 445-560), in: Karfíková , et al . , (eds .) , Gregory ofNyssa: Contra Eunomium II (2007) , 307-37, 308f. 13 Basil, CE 1.7 (SC 299, 186-88) ; transl. Mark DelCogliano and Andrew Radde- Gallwitz, Basil ofCaesarea: Against Eunomius, Fathers of the Church (Washington , D.C. , forthcoming 2011). 14 Greg. Nyss., Eun . 2.353-56 (GNO I 329).

Epinoia and Initial Concepts: Re-assessing Gregory of Nyssa's Defense of Basil

25

not in his own nature, but rather in virtue of how he acts and how he relates to human beings, just as to call grain ' nourishment ' is to think of it as it relates to human sustenance. Basil next turns to the crux of the debate with Eunomius , which is whether epinoia can be used for ' the God of the universe' and in particular whether the term ' unbegotten' (¿yévvηtog) was devised through epinoia . Basil answers 'yes' and 'yes'. Basil gives an account of how ' unbegotten' was devised from the concept of the divine ' life' (Swń ) . According to both Basil and Gregory, the divine life is one of the goods humans naturally and without instruction participate in and desire, which implies that it is not derived through the process of epinoia.15 Life is also one of the properties they predicate of God's substance (ovoía), which they do not do for epinoiai or merely relational properties.16 So, life is both epistemologically and ontologically prior to concepts derived from it. As with the mundane and Christological cases of epinoia, ' unbegotten' involves a basic, initial concept ('life') and reflection upon from various perspectives or, in Basil's terms, ‘ in accordance with the diverse applications of the mind'.17 So , whenever we consider ages past, we find that the life of God transcends every beginning and say that he is "unbegotten" . Later in the treatise, Basil says that the divine life has ' unbegottenness ' as an ‘ accompaniment' (parhepomenon) .18 Gregory offers a slightly different account of the origin of 'unbegotten'. He derives it from the notion of God as ' first cause', reasoning that no absolutely first cause can have a beginning.19 Yet, he also accepts Basil's derivation of 'unbegotten' from life.20 Both Basil and Gregory begin with an initial concept and then draw implications from it. The term ' unbegotten' does not refer to any inherent property of God, though it is truly said of God . The slight diversity between Basil and Gregory suggests that there need not be just one way of arriving at any epinoetically-derived concept . It further suggests that there can be as many epinoiai of God as there are ways of standing in relation to God. And this multiplicity says absolutely nothing, positive or negative, about the inherent simplicity of God. It merely says something about how God relates to us or we to God.

15 Basil, Regulae fusius tractatae (PG 31 , 909D-912A, 913B -D) ; Greg. Nyssa, De hominis opificio 16, 19 (PG 44, 184A-B); oratio catechetica 5 (James Herbert Srawley, ed. The Catechetical Oration ofGregory ofNyssa (Cambridge, 1956), 23 ; GNO III/IV 17) ; see Greg. Nyss., Eun. 2.491 (GNO I 369). 16 See Basil, CE 2.29.13-23 (SC 305, 122) and 1.11.12-14 (SC 299, 208) ; for Gregory, see David L. Balas, METOYƐIA OEOY: Man's Participation in God's Perfections According to Saint Gregory ofNyssa (Rome, 1966), ch. III. 17 Basil, CE 1.7 (SC 299, 188), transl. Mark DelCogliano and Andrew Radde- Gallwitz, Basil ofCaesarea: Against Eunomius, Fathers of the Church (forthcoming 2011 ). 18 Basil, CE 2.29 (SC 305, 122). 19 Greg. Nyss., Eun. 2.192 (GNO I 280). 20 See Greg. Nyss ., Eun. 2.507-8 , 513, 528 , etc. (GNO I 374. 376. 380).

26

A. RADDE-GALLWITZ

We began with Gregory's encomium on epinoia, according to which all arts and sciences rely on this activity. We can now see how theology is like navigation, and how Gregory is in line with Basil. Knowing that water is navigable depends upon knowing inherent properties of water and wood, just as knowing God is unbegotten depends on knowing the divine life. We should understand the predicate ' life ' in a realist manner. But being navigable is not a mindindependent property of the Mediterranean any more than being unbegotten is a mind-independent property of God . And, obviously enough, only intrinsic properties can count for or against something's inherent simplicity. As a result, all the fuss about epinoiai violating God's simplicity is just that fuss.

The Concept of Seed in Christian Cosmology : Gregory of Nyssa, Apologia in Hexaemeron

Charlotte KÖCKERT, Heidelberg

The concept of generation from a seed is widely spread in ancient cosmologies. Gregory of Nyssa, too, uses this model in his Apologia in Hexaemeron .' In this treatise, written about 380,2 he presents an ambitious interpretation of the biblical account of creation. As I will show, he thereby dissociates himself from cosmological concepts among Platonists as , for example, Plutarch, Plotinus, and Porphyry. Gregory reads the first chapter of Genesis as a philosophical treatise on the generation of the world that leads from the observation of the visible to the cognition of God.3 His exegesis, therefore , serves a twofold purpose . On the one hand he aims at interpreting creation in a manner appropriate to God's omnipotence and transcendence. On the other hand he wants to adhere closely to the biblical narrative which presents a continuing process of generation. For that reason Gregory does not regard the biblical account as a didactic-rhetorical description of a simultaneous and timeless action . He takes it as the description of a real process from which God's wisdom and power can be deduced . Against this background Gregory develops a particular cosmological concept. This concept describes the creation of the world using the analogy of generation from a seed. 'In the beginning', that is at once and in an instant, God brings forth the intelligible powers and principles of the world . " To this initial act of creation

1 Apologia in Hexaemeron (hex.): CPG 3153. Citations are taken from Georges H. Forbes (ed .), S.P.N. Gregorii Nysseni, Basilii M. fratris, quae supersunt omnia I (Burntisland , 1855), 1-95. 2 See Franz Xaver Risch (ed.) , Gregor von Nyssa: Über das Sechstagewerk, BGL 49 (Stuttgart, 1999), 10-5. 3 Gregory, hex. 8 ( 14.34-16.1 Forbes). Vgl . hex. 5 ( 10.29-32); 64 (78.26); De vita Moysis II 156 (GNO VII 1 , 88.23-84.4 Musurillo). 4 For the biblical narrative as a didactic-rhetoric description see Philo of Alexandria, De opificio mundi III 13 (4.1-4 Cohn); Origen, Catenae in Genesim fragmentum 193 (CChr.SG 2, 134 Petit); Didymus of Alexandria, In Genesim 33.23-35.16 (SC 233, 90-4 Nautin). Compare similar explanations regarding the narrative of Plato's Timaeus reported in Philoponus, De aeternitate mundi contra Proclum VI 21 (BSGRT, 187.2-188.8 Rabe) ; VI 27 (220.22f.). See Matthias Baltes, Die Weltentstehung des platonischen Timaios nach den antiken Interpreten 1, PhAnt 30 (Leiden, 1976), 18-22, 82f. 5 Hex. 9 (16.15-28 Forbes) . See hex. 7 ( 14.22-29); De hominis opificio 24 (PG 44, 213B).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 27-32. O Peeters Publishers , 2010.

28

C. KÖCKERT

Gregory relates the first two verses of the biblical narrative. He refers to it as the foundation of the world (Kataẞoλń) or as generation in the primary sense of the word." With this initial act the successive formation of the world called Kataokɛvý begins. According to Gregory it is described in the biblical narrative from Gen. 1 : 3 onwards. The world develops in a process of continuing differentiation according to a divine order which is inherent to the initial foundation .? This order is indicated in the narrative by the divine commands . First the four elements come into being, than all parts of the universe emerge. Gregory regards the formation and the development of the world only as generation in a secondary sense." Gregory relates the initial foundation of the universe to its successive development by using the intellectual model of potentiality and actuality. The 'world in the beginning ' is already the entire universe, but only potentially. It is compared to a seminal power which develops, and successively comes to full realisation . 10 " Comparing the initial foundation to a seminal power (σπερματικὴ δύναμις) , Gregory establishes explicitly the analogy to generation from a seed and describes the initial world in a twofold way. The initial foundation is similar to a seminal principle because it contains all intelligible powers and qualities which constitute the corporeal world. Therefore, from the perspective of space and time, it is like a seed because it constitutes the totality of the undifferentiated corporeal nature in which an immanent principle of development is embedded . Further observations show that the concept of seed is not only a restricted comparison but underlies Gregory's cosmological model as a whole. Firstly, Gregory describes the creation of the world by the word kataßoλń . This decision is not influenced by Origen's cosmological interpretation of the word but clearly follows the specific usage of кaταẞoλń as technical term for

6 See hex. 9 ( 16.15f. Forbes); 16 (26.14,29) . See 7 ( 14.24); 9 ( 16.23) ; 16 (26.20). 7 For the divine order inherent to the foundation see hex. 9 ( 16.28-18.2 Forbes) ; 64 (78.3380.2,6f.). 8 See hex. 9 ( 18.2-12 Forbes) ; 10 ( 18.29-37) ; 11 (20.1-8). 9 Gregory avoids the term yέvɛots for the succesive formation of the world and uses words like ἀπεργασία ( 14.22-24 Forbes) , τελείωσις ( 16.28-30), κατασκευή (36.19), ἀνάδειξις (80.7), diαokεvý (88.6) instead. He stresses that everything came into being ‘ in the beginning' (36.18 ; 86.33-35). 10 According to Gregory, hex. 16 (26.18-21 Forbes), Gen. 1 : 2 shows ötɩ tỷ µèv dvváµɛi tà πάντα ἦν ἐν πρώτῃ τοῦ Θεοῦ περὶ τὴν κτίσιν ὁρμῇ , οἱονεὶ σπερματικῆς τινος δυνάμεως πρὸς τὴν τοῦ παντὸς γένεσιν καταβληθείσης, ἐνεργείᾳ δὲ τὰ καθ᾽ ἕκαστον οὔπω ἦν. For the existence tn duvάμɛi compared to a seed see Aristotle, GA I 19 ( 726b 15-9) . The category of potentiality is also presupposed in hex. 16 (21-3) where Gregory says that the earth Gen. 1: 2 ' was and was not ' which is a circumscription for potential existence (see Aristotle, Ph. I 9 [ 192a]; Plotinus, Enn. II 5 [25] 4).

The Concept of Seed in Christian Cosmology

29

'throwing down' and , hence, ‘sowing' of a seed.¹¹ Secondly, Gregory's depiction of the formation of the world (KATαOKEVŃ) shows striking structural similarities with depictions of generation from a seed , as they can be found in biological treatises.12 Therefore, I conclude that Gregory's cosmological concept of Katαβολή-κατασκευή is derived from the concept of generation from a seed. Applying this model to the generation of the world, Gregory can connect both the concept of an instantaneous and simultaneous creation of the world (καταβολή) and the idea of a successive process of generation (κατασκευή). Thus, he fulfils the expectations which his exegesis of the biblical account of creation had raised : on the one hand he reads the biblical narrative as a successive process of generation ; on the other hand he advances a philosophical interpretation of the narrative which rejects an anthropomorphous idea of divine action. The concept of καταβολή- κατασκευή offers an explanation how the intelligible and incorporeal God can generate the plurality of the visible and corporeal world.¹3 To take up the concept of generation from a seminal principle in order to answer this philosophical question is fairly common among Platonists of the Early Empire. Plutarch, Plotinus, and Porphyry, for example, all use it in different ways. Plutarch occasionally describes the generation of the world metaphorically as impregnation of matter by God.14 God sows a particle of himself, an åлóσлаσμа , into matter. This divine particle is to be identified with the rational world-soul. It is compared to a seed which gives form to shapeless matter from

11 See LSJ, Kataßáλλw II 6, 884; kataßoλń a), 885. For Origen's understanding of the word kataẞoλń see Origen, De principiis II 5.4 (GCS Origenes 5 , 273.18-275.27; 273.17-274.1 Koetschau); In Iohannem XIX 22.149 (GCS Origenes 4, 324.18-25 Preuschen); Commentariorum series in Mt. 71 (GCS Origenes 11 , 167.20-168.5 Klostermann). 12 See Porphyry, Ad Gaurum (K. Kalbfleisch [ed .] , Die neuplatonische fälschlich dem Galen zugeschriebene Schrift Πρὸς Γαῦρον περὶ τοῦ πῶς ἐμψυχοῦνται τὰ ἔμβρυα, Anhang zu den Abhandlungen der königl . preuss . Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin vom Jahre 1895 [Berlin 1895 ], 60.1-11.18-20). Galen explains the concept of generation from a seed in his biological treatises, e.g. , De semine, De foetuum formatione. See also Philo, Opif. 67 (22.13-19 Cohn) ; Alexander of Aphrodisias in : Simplicius, In Aristotelis Physica commentaria (CAG 9, 311.1-16 Diels). The seed contains the principles of all future limbs and parts in a united and undifferentiated way (apóov) . The development of the future being immediately (ɛv¤úç) begins when the seed is sown into the ground or into the maternal womb. The individual limbs and parts of the embryo develop in an alloted time according to a defined order. The natural power (qúσig), which is embedded in the seed, is the movens of the process. Gregory differs from the biological model in a characteristic point: the ' seed of the world' is not sown into underlying matter but contains the intelligible principles of order and matter. 13 Gregory poses this question in hex. 7 ( 14.5-12 Forbes), De anima et resurrectione (PG 46, 124C), hom. opif. 23 (PG 44, 209D-212A). Plotinus , Enn . V 1 ( 10) 6 ; V 2 (11 ) 1 and Porphyry in: Proclus, In Platonis Timaeum commentaria (BSGRT, I 396,5-24 Diehl) ask similar questions. 14 See Plutarch's interpretation of Ti. 28c 3f. in Platonicae quaestiones 2.1 ( 1000E- 1001B). See Quaestiones convivales VIII 1.3 (718A).

30

C. KÖCKERT

inside and, thus, produces the cosmos.15 Plotinus picks up the model of a seminal principle in order to describe how the plurality of the visible universe can derive from the unity of the intellect.16 The intellect gives λóyoç as a particle of itself into matter. This rational shaping power is compared to a seed which produces a differentiated and in parts opposing plurality from a unity. Although Plotinus does not regard matter as an ungenerated and independent principle, in the given context he presupposes that it underlies the activity of λóyos. Like Plutarch, he keeps to the concept of generation from a seed according to which the seed is always sown into underlying matter. On this very point Porphyry's adaptation of the biological model character17 istically differs from his predecessors . According to him , the action of the divine demiurge goes beyond the model of seed . The λóyos which inheres in a seed requires matter and cannot act in separation from it. In contrast, the divine demiurge surpasses the σπερματικός λόγος. He is a δημιουργικός λόγος which does not need an underlying matter but produces the visible universe out of himself. Porphyry likens the demiurge to a seed which is without any extension, but which nevertheless generates extension from itself so that the extended visible world can unfold . Unlike Plotinus, Porphyry uses the analogy to seed not only in order to demonstrate how plurality may spring from unity, but also to illustrate how an intelligible and incorporeal cause may produce corporeality. Porphyry presents this demonstration in his only partly preserved commentary on Plato's Timaeus. It has often been regarded as a source of Gregory's concept of creation.18 However, for the time being the tricky questions which this famous fragment poses and which are related mainly to Porphyry's concept of matter can be neglected . I have treated them in more detail in my doctoral dissertation. Nevertheless, it can be shown that Gregory's adaptation of the concept of seed characteristically differs from Porphyry's usage. Let me summarize the main points: Gregory does not compare God but the created initial foundation of the world to a seed ; its production is not an eternal process but the initial act of the world's generation which develops in an allotted time. towards a final end. Gregory, obviously, presents the cosmological concept of Kataẞoλń - KatαOKEVŃ in order to describe the generation of the world as creatio ex deo.19 Compared

15 Plutarch, Plat. quaest. 4 (1003B). 16 Plotinus, Enn . III 2 (47 ) 2. 17 For the following see Porphyry, In Platonis Timaeum commentariorum fragmentum 51 (38.30-39.14 Sodano) = Proclus, In Ti. (BSGRT, I 396.10-26 Diehl) . Frg. 51 (Sodano) presents Porphyry's interpretation of Ti. 30a. 18 See Richard Sorabji, Matter, Space and Motion: Theories in Antiquity and their Sequel (London, 1988), 55. 19 Harry Austryn Wolfson claimes that Gregory identifies the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo with emanation, see id. , The Identification of ex nihilo with Emanation in Gregory of Nyssa:

The Concept of Seed in Christian Cosmology

31

to Porphyry, his characteristic adaptation of the biological model suggests that he thereby deliberately opposes the idea that the visible world eternally emanates from God. Plutarch , Porphyry and Gregory present three different adaptations of the biological model in a cosmological context. Besides Plutarch's dualistic interpretation and Porphyry's Neoplatonic monistic approach, Gregory offers a third adaptation, which I understand as a Christian monistic model . That Gregory's cosmological concept has to be understood as an alternative model, can be supported by an interesting text which - to my knowledge - has hitherto not been connected with Gregory's treatise: the so- called cosmology of Basilides in Hippolytus' Refutatio.20 This text does not offer an early example of the concept of creatio ex nihilo, as Gerhard May has suggested.2¹ Rather, it presents the creation of the world as creatio ex deo using the concept of generation from a seed. Against the background of an extreme, negative theology, the unknown author of this text explains how God may generate the corporeal world out of himself without underlying matter. Thereby, he picks up the model of generation from a seminal principal. God generates the unextended seed of the world which includes all future parts and beings.22 This act of creation is called кaτaßoλń.23 From the initial seed the world, then , develops in a defined and continuing process.24 On the one hand this cosmology is directed against the idea of a divine craftsman which fashions the world out of underlying matter. On the other hand the model of Kataẞoλń is put forward in order to replace the idea of лроẞoλń , that is the concept of emanation which is held by a rival philosophic Gnostic school.25 Of course, I do not propose a direct relation between Gregory's treatise and Gnostic circles of second century Alexandria. But, besides fundamental differences, both texts incorporate the concept of generation from a seed into a cosmological concept that opposes a cosmic dualism as well as a kind of emanation -theory. HThR 63 ( 1970) 53-60 . But Gregory does not mention creatio ex nihilo in his cosmological treatise. And his theory of creation characteristically differs from Neoplatonic theories of emanation. 20 See Hippolytus, Refutatio omnium haeresium VII 20-22 (GCS Hippolytus 3 , 195.19-200.15 Wendland) . For a recent analysis of Hippolytus ' summary and its probable origin see Winrich Alfried Löhr, Basilides und seine Schule: Eine Untersuchung zur Theologie- und Kirchengeschichte des zweiten Jahrhunderts, WUNT 83 (Tübingen, 1996), 284-323. 21 Gerhard May, Schöpfung aus dem Nichts: Die Entstehung der Lehre von der creatio ex nihilo, AKG 48 (Berlin and New York, 1978), 68-85. 22 Hippolytus, haer. VII 21.2-4 ( 197.1-9 Wendland). 23 Hippolytus, haer. VII 22.8 ( 198.29 Wendland) : [ʼn rpáτŋ kataßoλń ] ; VII 21.5 (197.8,14) : καταβάλλειν. 24 Hippolytus, haer. VII 22.1 (197.17-22 Wendland). 25 Hippolytus, haer. VII 22.2 ( 197.24-198.7 Wendland) . For the rejection of the Valentinian concept ofлроẞoλń see A. Orbe , Hacia la primera teologia de la procesion del verbo, Estudios Valentinianos I 2, AnGr 100 , SFT Sectio A (n.18) (Rome, 1958), 699-709 ; W.A. Löhr, Basilides und seine Schule (1996), 307f.

32

C. KÖCKERT

In his Apologia in Hexaemeron Gregory picks up the concept of generation from a seed in order to present a Christian cosmological concept which meets the philosophical debate of his time. It has to be regarded as one of his major achievements that he develops this concept in a systematic exegesis of the biblical account of creation . Thereby, he supports the biblical narrative against critics as the basic text for a Christian natural philosophy. In this paper I could offer only a brief glance on Gregory's cosmology. As ancient Christian cosmology in general, it has hitherto not yet received sufficient attention. Therefore , I take the liberty to draw your attention to my recently completed doctoral dissertation in which I have investigated the interpretation of the biblical account of creation in Origen, Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa with a special emphasis on the relation to the philosophical debate about Plato's Timaeus among Platonists of the Early Empire.26

26 Charlotte Köckert, Christliche Kosmologie und kaiserzeitliche Philosophie: Die Auslegung des Schöpfungsberichtes bei Origenes, Basilius und Gregor von Nyssa vor dem Hintergrund kaiserzeitlicher Timaeus-Interpretationen, STAC 56 (Tübingen, 2009) .

Familial Askêsis in the Vita Macrinae

Nathan D. HOWARD, Martin , Tennessee

In the year 380 Gregory of Nyssa was emerging as the new leader of his family. His older brother, the influential Basil, had died in 379, followed by his saintly sister Macrina in 380.¹ For years Basil had combated the teachings of Eunomius , a native Cappadocian and a zealous proponent of a form of Arianism called anomoeanism.2 Now, facing the upcoming Council of Constantinople in 381 , Gregory had to take up the struggle against Eunomius formerly carried out by his brother, whom he called ' Christ's noble soldier and frequent protagonist against the Philistines'.3 Gregory was compelled to recreate an identity for his beleaguered family, one that would perpetuate the family's role as champions of a vibrant Christian orthodoxy and protect this dynastic body from literary assaults that would be coming from his Arian counterpart.4 Toward this end, Gregory composed a family portrait couched in the form of an oration to the recently deceased Macrina. The obvious purpose of this

For an excellent discussion of Gregory's complex relationship with his brother Basil and sister Macrina, see Raymond Van Dam, Families and Friends in Late Roman Cappadocia (Philadelphia, 2003), 67-73, 99-113. 2 See Richard Vaggione, Eunomius of Cyzicus and the Nicene Revolution (Oxford, 2000) and Thomas Kopecek, A History ofNeo-Arianism I, Patristic Monograph Series 8 (Philadelphia, 1979); for the disputes between Basil and Eunomius and Gregory of Nyssa and Eunomius , see the chapter 'Eunomius' in: Philip Rousseau, Basil of Caesarea (Berkeley, 1994), 93-132 ; and Anthony Meredith, Gregory of Nyssa (London, 1999), 12-5 , 27-30. 3 Gregory of Nyssa, Contra Eunomium 2.1.10-11 , transl. Stuart George Hall, Gregory ofNyssa: Contra Eunomium II: An English Version with Supporting Studies, Proceedings ofthe 10th International Colloquium on Gregory ofNyssa (Olomouc, September 15-18 , 2004), eds . Lenka Karfiková, Scot Douglass, and Johannes Zachhuber, SVigChr 82 (Leiden, 2007) ; also see Gregory of Nyssa, Ep. 29, in: Anna Silvas, Gregory ofNyssa: The Letters, SVigChr 83 (Leiden, 2007). 4 Because of their networks of powerful associates and friends , the Cappadocian Fathers were susceptible to the corruption chastised by authors of Greek and Roman invective . Thus it was a benefit for the bishops to enjoy close ties to individual holy persons and sacred communities. For a thorough discussion of the Cappadocians and their associates, see Raymond Van Dam, Kingdom ofSnow: Roman Rule and Greek Culture in Cappadocia (Philadelphia, 2002), especially 73-156; also consult Van Dam's earlier work, Emperors, Bishops, and Friends in Late Antique Cappadocia: JTS N.S. 37 ( 1986) 53-77. 5 Gregory was sustaining the image of an episcopal family guided by what Philip Rousseau calls ' a transition from 0ɛoλoyia to oikovouía, from theological reflection and argument to religious experience in the company of fellow believers ', Ph. Rousseau , Basil of Caesarea (1994), 127.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 33-38. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

34

N.D. HOWARD

work was to celebrate the life of his eldest sibling, a woman of great merit in every way. But Gregory also understood multiple functions that this text could accomplish. These included bolstering the status of his family as an example of Basil's Nicene orthodoxy, underscoring his own episcopal authority and that of his brother Peter, and posing an effective model of participatory Christianity for the lay audience. In this portrayal, it was critical for Basil, Gregory, and their brother Peter to have access to Macrina's holiness as a way of infusing their office with the aura of the sacrosanct. Thus Gregory extended their individual identities to a numinous kinship, embodied by Macrina's лрãžɛis – her acts of spiritual discipline. Macrina served as mediator between the sanctified life of a holy woman and the civic lives of her brothers in the episcopate. Macrina augmented her brothers ' roles as church leaders by sustaining the image of a dynastic άokηois through which her brothers could graft onto their office the rigors of their sister's holiness .' Gregory depicts Macrina as a gifted student from her early years, thriving in every curriculum she studied . But according to Gregory she did not engage the works of Homer, Greek poetry, or Greek comedies , which were shameful for a Christian woman to read because of their undignified tales about immoral women.8 Instead, Macrina immersed herself in the scriptures of the Bible in order to keep herself undefiled . The tenor throughout the Life of Macrina vilifies profane pursuits , with Macrina bringing others to a spiritual focus. She witnesses to her mother, ' drawing her on (èqέλк∞) little by little to the immaterial and simpler life" Macrina became for her mother ' a guide (σúµẞovλoc) towards the philosophical and unworldly way of life ...'10 She was consumed with pursuing matters eternal, a life in which an understanding of God's nature translated to a life of selflessness and devotion . And throughout the text , she appears the epitome of an active Christian , putting her understanding of the Godhead 6 See Derek Krueger, Writing and Liturgy of Memory in Gregory of Nyssa's Life ofMacrina: Journal ofEarly Christian Studies 8 (2000) 483-510. 7 See Susanna Elm's discussion in 'Virgins': The Making of Asceticism in Late Antiquity (Oxford, 1994), 39-47; for Macrina as a paradigm for holy living in an urban setting and her place in Gregory of Nyssa's writings, see J. Warren Smith, A Just and Reasonable Grief: The Death and Function of a Holy Woman in Gregory of Nyssa's Life ofMacrina : Journal ofEarly Christian Studies 12 (2004) 57-84 ; P. Wilson-Kastner, Macrina: Virgin and Teacher: Andrews University Seminary Studies 17 ( 1979) 105-17; and R. Albrecht, Das Leben der heiligen Makrina auf dem Hintergrund der Thekla-Traditionen: Studien zu den Ursprüngen des weiblichen Mönchtums im 4. Jahrhundert in Kleinasien (Göttingen, 1986) . 8 Gregory of Nyssa, Vita Macrinae 3.10-15; citations follow chapter and line numbers from Grégoire de Nysse: Vie Sainte Macrine, SC 178 (Paris, 1971) ; also see the discussion of this text in Peter Brown, The Body and Society: Men , Women , and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity (New York, 1988) , 272-78, 297-301. 9 Vita Macr. 5.48-50 ; translations in this essay come from Saint Gregory ofNyssa: Ascetical Works, transl. Virginia Woods Callahan, FC 58 (Washington , 1967). 10 Vita Macr. 11.6-8.

Familial Askêsis in the Vita Macrinae

35

into practice through her deeds of kindness. As bishops, and civic leaders, her brothers could stake their claim to godly virtue, but not in the same sense as Macrina. Contrasting Macrina's disdain for worldly fame is Gregory of Nazianzus' praise of Basil, for example, in the In laudem Basilii : Let them tell what glory he gained in a short time in the sight of all, both of the common people and the leaders of the city, exhibiting a learning beyond his years and a constancy of character beyond his learning. He was an orator among orators, even before the lecturer's chair, a philosopher among philosophers even before the advancing doctrines. " An ability to influence large audiences through speeches and an ability to win acclaim constitute two of Basil's virtues in this laudation . These characteristics were critical to the bishop's functioning as a public leader. They also reflect the idealized conception of a civic persona - a man of eloquence . Yet these praises are not appropriate for Gregory of Nyssa's portrait of Macrina, who was instead situated in a more benign setting.12 The differences between Gregory of Nyssa's portrayal of Macrina and Gregory of Nazianzus' ode to Basil underscore an acknowledgment that bishops operated in a sphere that commanded strengths for which Macrina had no use. She did, however, complement her brothers' leadership in a vital way, without which their influence would have diminished . Her untainted life redounded to the glory of her family, notably to her brothers in the clergy, and it encouraged other Christians to embrace ascetic lives. In the vita , Macrina serves as a trope for the lay audience. The laity as a whole could look to her as a living exemplum of piety for their station in life . As a woman, Macrina could never become bishop. But her acts of άokηoiç stood as an impressive testament of holiness - all the more so considering her frail female nature. Therefore her locus of spiritual authority stood in her ability to transcend ephemeral boundaries as a model of strength and purity rather than performing overt acts of patronage to the лóλɩç in the form of governance. In a family constantly embroiled in theological warfare, Macrina appeared as a refreshing, even stabilizing force. Furthermore, the narrative praises Macrina for rebuking and ultimately moderating her famous brother Basil's pride . Gregory of Nyssa writes that Macrina curtailed her brother Basil's vanity after his studies at Caesarea and Athens had made him proud of his skills : 11 Gregory of Nazianzus , Oratio 43.13 (In laudem Basilii Magni), in: Funeral Orations by St. Gregory Nazianzen and St. Ambrose, transl. L.P. McCauley et al. , Fathers of the Church: A New Translation 22 (New York, 1953). 12 On Gregory's construction of the Vita Macrinae and specifically the domestic rather than institutional nature of Macrina's community of ascetics, see Philip Rousseau , The Pious Household and the Virgin Chorus: Reflections on Gregory of Nyssa's Life ofMacrina : Journal ofEarly Christian Studies 13 (2005) 165-86.

36

N.D. HOWARD

He was excessively puffed up (ὑπερφυῶς ἐπηρμένον) by his rhetorical abilities and disdainful of all great reputations, and considered himself better than the leading men in the district, but Macrina took him over and lured him so quickly to the goal of philosophy that he withdrew from the worldly show and began to look 13 down upon acclaim through oratory Gregory refers here to a period from 357 to 363, when Basil joined his family in retreat at Annesi in Pontus.¹4 Here, after years of perfecting his skills in rhetoric and Greek philosophy, Basil received instruction from his older, humbler sister on the art of the highest philosophy - denying oneself of fame, wealth, and public concerns in order to enjoy union with God.15 The impression is that Macrina provided a spiritual foundation for Basil, so that he had been prepared to meet the challenges that bishops faced in the public arena. She furnished the private, feminine balance to his masculine civic virtue. This depiction of Macrina curbing Basil's self-absorption appears to contravene accepted societal norms because it has a sister instructing her brother. But by using Macrina as a model of piety that contrasts with Basil's predilection for civic engagements, Gregory does not threaten or undermine his brother. After all, Macrina is a woman dedicated to bodily άokηois rather than civic machinations and thus cannot understand the nature of episcopal business. Moreover, because they are brother and sister, Macrina with her ascetic tendencies and Basil with his public disposition function as a familial entity of ideal Christian/classical deportment. They furnish a great rhetorical display. It also appears surprising that Gregory of Nyssa gives more details about his younger brothers Naucratius and Peter in the Life of Macrina than about his oldest brother Basil - who was the family's contribution to civic service. But the younger brothers reflected more ideally the form of asceticism embodied by Macrina. Whereas Basil had ultimately left a life removed from human distractions by becoming bishop, Naucratius rejected any responsibility that would pull him away from his union with God . He surpassed his other brothers 'in the excellence of his nature and the beauty of his body and strength and swiftness and adaptability', but he refused to become entangled with any activity that might compromise his life of monasticism and poverty.16 Unlike Basil he chose a life ' far from the noises of the city, military activities, and the business of rhetoric in the lawcourts'.17

13 Vita Macr. 6.5-15. 14 For a discussion of this period in Basil's life and the chronology, see Ph . Rousseau, Basil of Caesarea (1994), 9-11 ; P.J. Fedwick, The Church and Charisma of Leadership in Basil of Caesarea (Toronto , 1979), 137 ; and S. Elm, 'Virgins ' ( 1994) , 102-5 . 15 Vita Macr. 6.11-3. 16 Vita Macr. 8.1-10. 17 Vita Macr. 8.17-20.

Familial Askêsis in the Vita Macrinae

37

In the eyes of many Greco -Roman readers , this would have appeared a shirking of duty, an effeminate evasion of service for the greater good of the community. Perhaps Gregory does not hesitate to praise Naucratius' decision to avoid clerical office because he had an elder brother (Basil) to carry on the civic, familial duty expected by Cappadocian citizens. Naucratius died in the wilderness in 356, never having held office in the church. Writing some 25 years after his death, Gregory accentuates his personal asceticism as a balance to a family driven by public service. Meanwhile, Gregory portrays his youngest brother Peter as a product of Macrina's personal training.18 She turned his attention to sacred learning from his earliest days so that he would not be inclined toward vanity, as his older brother Basil once had . Gregory describes Macrina's role in Peter's life as 'father, teacher, attendant, mother, and counselor of every good ...' (лaτýp, didáσkaλος, παιδαγωγός, μήτηρ, ἀγαθοῦ παντὸς σύμβουλος). Under the supervision of Macrina, Peter became ' above all a co-worker with his sister and mother in every phase of their angelic existence'.20 Unlike Naucratius, Peter went on to become a bishop at Sebaste around 377, thus reflecting the notion so crucial to Basil and continued by Gregory - reflection leading to action.21 His sister had prepared him well for challenges he would face as a church leader. By underscoring disparate strengths in the lives of his family members, Gregory casts them as one body, with many complementary members.22 Basil, Peter, and Gregory himself serve in the public arena, with the holy Macrina and the other brothers sustaining the dynastic άokno . It is both a Christian and Stoic portrait. Gregory is also creating an ideal portrait for members of the laity to mimic. Macrina was an excellent trope for the laity because she served as a resource to the church through her piety. Persons listening to the vita in a public gathering were encouraged to support the bishops through their spiritual labors . The bishops needed access to the sanctity of the congregations, even as they carried out their public administrative tasks. And Gregory calls on all Christians to lives of spiritual participation. Gregory's depiction of Macrina was consistent with Basil's program of encouraging Christians to set themselves apart from the world. In order to sustain an effective model of asceticism for his Christian audience, Gregory had to downplay the personal responsibilities of bishops in accounts like the Life ofMacrina, a text which encouraged spiritual withdrawal from the community. The episcopal office was a role of spiritual leadership that commanded respect from the community of saints. Some practices of the bishopric, how-

18 19 20 21 22

Vita Macr. 12.1. Vita Macr. 12.11-3. Vita Macr. 12.27-30. For life of Naucratius and Peter, see Ph. Rousseau , Basil of Caesarea (1994) , 244f. 1Cor. 12: 12-31.

38

N.D. HOWARD

ever, simply could not be reconciled with admonishments toward holy living. Negotiating with tax collectors and deciding civil lawsuits did not pose a persuasive image of asceticism. Macrina could embody the asceticism supported by her brothers largely because she did not participate in the public life that attenuated their claims to holiness.23 In her body, a site for familial adherence to άokηois, Gregory found a haven of unbroken purity that was paramount for church leaders now engaged in state administration and intense theological debates.24 Macrina was the consummate holy person in her family. Thus she provided her clerical brothers access to a vital source of sanctity that their station did not yield. Moreover, Macrina was the ascetic Christian that Gregory and Basil envisioned for all saints who did not face the stumbling block of municipal challenges. As the impenetrable virgin , Macrina served as a trope for the ideal of an inviolate, pristine Christian community, and a metonym for the boundaries of orthodoxy. She lived as part of a broad community, interacted with non- Christians , and witnessed through her self-abnegation. At the same time, though , she did not become involved with the mundane matters that surrounded her. State administration the concern of bishops - did not defile her. Thus Macrina's portrait preserved the powerful image of an ascetic episcopal family in Cappadocia. She provided answers to Gregory in his crisis, as he emerged the new overseer of his family.

23 P. Brown, The Body and Society (1988) , 270-9. 24 P. Brown, The Body and Society (1988), 277.

Gregory of Nyssa and Divinization : A Reconsideration

Martin LAIRD, O.S.A., Villanova, Pennsylvania

Prevailing scholarly opinion holds that Gregory of Nyssa appeals to the doctrine of divinization only rarely. This opinion is based largely on the philological observation of Gregory's infrequent use of explicit divinization language (Оɛолоιέш , σννалоέш) and has therefore led to the conclusion, in the words of Norman Russell, that Gregory ' finds the concept of deification in the end inadequate for the paradoxical " union" of man with God which he wishes to express '.' This short communication will counter this by suggesting the following. First, to get a fuller sense of the extent to which Gregory appeals to this doctrine one must take account of the work (largely overlooked) in which the theme of divinization appears the most frequently, the Homilies on the Song of Songs. Second, it is crucial not to limit oneself to the search for technical terminology of divinization and instead to pay close attention to theological imagery: to what is happening to the bride, to Paul, to the Beloved Disciple, especially in Christological contexts of all sorts, notably baptism, Eucharist, and divine union. Third, this will lead to the conclusion that far from finding divinization inadequate for expressing union with God , divinization is among Gregory's preferred ways of expressing it . To demonstrate this I will concentrate on two images in the Homilies on the Song of Songs, the wound of love, and the fountain of life.³

The Wound of Love

Gregory takes up the theme of the wound of love at three significant places in the Homilies: Homilies 4, 12 , and 13. Homily 4, where he comments on ' I am

1 Norman Russell, The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (Oxford, 2004), 232. John McGuckin, by contrast, says that ‘deification is as much in the fabric of Gregory Nyssen's thought as it was in the teaching of his older mentor, Gregory Nazianzus'; see his 'The Strategic Adaptation of Deification in the Cappadocians', in: Michael Christensen and Jeffery. Wittung (eds.), Partakers of Divine Nature: The History and Development of Deification in the Christian Traditions (Madison , 2007) , 95-114, 104. 2 An observation made similarly by Verna Harrison , Grace and Human Freedom according to Gregory ofNyssa (Lewiston, NY, 1992). 3 English translations are taken from Casimir McCambley (transl.), Commentary on the Song ofSongs (Brookline, MA, 1987 ).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 39-43. Peeters Publishers , 2010.

40

M. LAIRD

wounded by love ' is by far the richest. Here we see divinizing union but, crucially, with no technical terminology of divinization . Moreover, we see divinizing union under an aspect we often see in these homilies : the double face of union. That is, when the bride experiences union with God she is at the same time in ecclesial mission.

Gregory opens his commentary on this lemma by having the bride break into words of praise, praise for the archer's fine marksmanship, ' because he hits her with his arrow'. This praise quickly takes the form of boastful paradox as she sees the sweet arrow of love within her: ' O beautiful wound and sweet blow by which life penetrates within'.5 In this text indwelling presence is clearly signaled, and Gregory leaves no doubt that it is the indwelling presence ofthe Trinity. He says: ' The archer of these arrows is love who sends his chosen arrow, the only begotten Son to those who are saved , dipping the triple pointed tip of the arrow in the Spirit of life. The tip of the arrow is faith, and by it God introduces the archer into the heart along with the arrow. As the Lord says, "I and the father are one; we will come and make our home with him"." Both the Spirit-moistened arrow and archer indwell her. And look what happens to her as a result of this indwelling presence. Gregory says: ' Earlier we said that the bride was the target; she now sees herself as the arrow in the bowman's hands ." She has become the arrow, who is Christ and is now in communion with the Archer. And she takes on the qualities of the arrow as she, like an arrow, is shot forth. ' His right hand receives me and draws me back , easing my journey upward where I am directed without being separated from the archer. Simultaneously I am carried away by his act of shooting and am at rest in the hands of the bowman.'8 This is a startling coincidence of opposites . The bride is both at rest in the arms of the Bridegroom and at the same time shot forth. As she flies forth she does not remain silent , but exhorts the daughters of Jerusalem that their love for God might increase. The text is an important example of his understanding of the double face of divinizing union . Personal as it is to the bride, it is not private to her: at one with the Bridegroom/Archer she is yet in ecclesial mission, as she exhorts the daughters of Jerusalem , arousing their love of God." Throughout this passage Gregory has not used technical terminology of divinization. Instead we witness the bride becoming something divine, as he puts it.

4 GNO VI 4, 127, 7-8 ; Casimir McCambley (transl.), Commentary ( 1987 ) , 103 . 5 GNO VI 4 , 128, 3; Casimir McCambley (transl.), Commentary ( 1987) , 103. 6 GNO VI 4, 127, 11-17; Casimir McCambley (transl.), Commentary ( 1987 ), 103. For more on the Christian appropriation of the arrow see Catherine Osborne, Eros Unveiled: Plato and the God ofLove (Oxford, 1994). 7 GNO VI 4, 128 , 12-14; Casimir McCambley (transl.), Commentary ( 1987 ) , 103 . 8 GNO VI 4, 129, 12-16; Casimir McCambley (transl .), Commentary ( 1987 ), 104. 9 For a more detailed examination of union in the Homilies see Martin Laird , The Fountain of His Lips: Gregory of Nyssa's Homilies on the Song of Songs: Spiritus 7 (2007) 40-57.

Gregory of Nyssa and Divinization: A Reconsideration

41

She takes on the qualities of the divine arrow and the incarnational, revelatory dynamics associated with it. Regarding divinization, it is clearly an example of res non verbum.

Fountains and Springs

This 'becoming something divine' is a phrase Gregory uses a couple of times in Homily 8, and notably of water. And we do well to think of baptism ; for Gregory uses the phrase while speaking of the River Jordan. Commenting on: 'You will come and pass from the summit of faith, from the top of Sanir and Hermon', he says this text speaks of ' the mystery of our birth from above'.10 From Sanir and Hermon springs forth the River Jordan, which is ' the beginning of our transformation into what is divine'. " It is well worth looking at Gregory's imagery of springs and fountains for examples of divinization without technical terminology of divinization. It should be said that water imagery (in fact the imagery of flow generally, from dew drops on the locks of the beloved to honey flowing from the comb) is a deep reservoir of epistemology and divinizing union in the Homilies. An illustrative example of this is seen in the bride drinking from the fountain. When the bride drinks from the fountain of the bridegroom, her thirst is neither quenched nor excited . Instead, when she drinks from the fountain, she becomes a fountain, or to use the phraseology Gregory uses in Homily 8 , she 'is changed into something divine', just as she was when wounded by the divine arrow. The fountain appears in various places in the Homilies.¹² We see it first in Homily 1 , when Gregory comments on, ' Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth'. Here Gregory introduces a principle of divinization: ' The words of the bridegroom are spirit and life (John 5:24), and everyone who clings to the Spirit becomes spirit.'13 And we see this demonstrated when the bride comes into contact with the fountain. Gregory says that the bridegroom's mouth is a fountain, flowing with words of eternal life. The mouth of the one drawn to it is filled with words, 'just as with the prophet when he drew in the spirit through

10 GNO VI 8 , 250, 10; Casimir McCambley (transl .) , Commentary (1987), 163. IGNO VI 8 , 250, 13-5: πρὸς τὸ θεῖον μεταποιήσεως Casimir McCambley (transl .), Commentary (1987), 163. Very similar phraseology is used at GNO VI 8, 253, 15-6 (µɛtaποιηθεῖσα πρὸς τὸ θειότερον) to describe how the efficacious power of the Word bids the soul to approach: the soul ' becomes what [the Word] wishes , that is, changed into something divine' (Casimir McCambley, transl., Commentary, 1987, 165). 12 On the symbolism of the fountain in Gregory's writings see Mariette Canévet, Grégoire de Nysse et l'Herméneutique Biblique : Études entre le Langage et la Connaissance de Dieu (Paris, 1983), 317f. 13 GNO VI 1 , 32 , 8-10; Casimir McCambley (transl .), Commentary (1987) , 51 .

42

M. LAIRD

14 his mouth'.¹ Gregory then quotes the Gospel ofJohn (7:37) : 'If anyone thirsts , let him come to me and drink', and concludes that ' the thirsting soul wishes to bring her mouth to the mouth that springs up with life. As a result of putting her mouth on the fountain of his lips the soul says : "Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth" (Sg. 1 :2) '.15 The drinking in of divine water results not in the quenching of thirst but in the utterance of revelation , of divine speech. The words of scripture, ‘ let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth' have been placed by the bridegroom in the mouth of the one who drinks from the fountain of his lips . This eliding of images, of mouths and fountains, of kissing and drinking is typical of the Homilies ; also typical is this coincidence of inner and outer, of interior union with God and external manifestation of the sacred . The images of union suggested by kissing and the drinking-in of the Word coincide with the manifestation of revelatory speech: She drinks from the source and becomes source, source of revelation. This is another example of the double face of union elaborated in a general context of epectasy. We see this fountain again in Homily 2, where Gregory comments on, 'Tell me ... where do you pasture? ' For by finding it, 'I will be filled with food from heaven.'16 Suddenly the bride calls the bridegroom a fountain and runs towards him prepared to drink. In contrast to Homily 1 , it is not the fountain of his lips but, with another Johannine allusion, a fountain flowing from the side of the Crucified , ' water pours out from your side'.¹7 The bride remarks : ' The person who tastes it will become a spring welling up into eternal life.'18 John 19:34 has long had Eucharistic associations, and scholars have noted the Eucharist to be one of Gregory's preferred contexts for speaking of divinization , 19 but again no technical terminology of divinization , even though it is happening before our eyes. The person who tastes of the fountain becomes a fountain. Homily 9 Gregory comments on the bride being called a ' well of living water' . Gregory says ' this is indeed paradoxical. All wells contain still water only. Only the bride has running water with both a well's still depth and a continuous flowing of water.'20 Like the bride as an arrow being both at rest and shot forth, here she is both still and flowing. Why is this an example of divinization? Gregory gives us two important clues. First, he says this is a paradox. For Gregory paradox relates immediately to his Christology. In Homily 8, for example, he speaks of incarnation and redemption in language of the coincidence of opposites.21 When the bride .

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

GNO VI 1 , 32, 14-5 ; Casimir McCambley (transl.) , Commentary (1987), 51. GNO VI 1 , 32 , 17-33 , 2 ; Casimir McCambley (transl .), Commentary ( 1987 ), 51. GNO VI 2, 61 , 17-8 ; Casimir McCambley (transl .) , Commentary ( 1987) , 67. GNO VI 2 , 62 , 5; Casimir McCambley (transl .) , Commentary (1987), 67. GNO VI 2, 62, 6-7; Casimir McCambley (transl.), Commentary ( 1987) , 67. Norman Russell , The Doctrine ofDeification (2004), 228. GNO VI 9, 293, 3-6; Casimir McCambley (transl .), Commentary ( 1987 ) , 184 . GNO VI 8 , 255-6 ; Casimir McCambley (transl. ), Commentary (1987 ), 165-7.

Gregory of Nyssa and Divinization : A Reconsideration

43

embodies a paradox she is manifesting her union with the divinizing humanity of Christ.22 Second, for Gregory rivers flowing with living water have associations with the divinization of baptism. Here in Homily 9, Gregory says that 'living water is the divine nature'.23 The bride as embodiment of a coincidence of opposites, both shot forth like an arrow and at rest, both a well and a flowing stream is the bride divinized in the divinizing humanity of Christ. Gregory insists that the Song ' teaches us that we can acquire the bridegroom's own beauty by always sitting near the "plentiful waters","24

Conclusion Many more examples can be given from the Homilies to illustrate further the argument of this communication . What has been taken for more than half a century as the status quaestionis on this topic will not do. We cannot limit our understanding of the extent to which Gregory of Nyssa appeals to the concept of divinization if we limit ourselves to those texts which use technical language of divinization. Gregory's thought is far too allusive and elusive for that. If we look for divinization language , especially in the Homilies on the Song ofSongs where the theme is dominant, we will overlook important examples of divinization that show just how deeply woven it is into the fabric of his thought.25

22 Mariette Canévet, Grégoire de Nysse et l'Herméneutique Biblique ( 1983) , 342 ; Brian Daley, Divine Transcendence and Human Transformation: Gregory of Nyssa's Anti-Apollinarian Christology: SP 32 ( 1997) 87-95, reprinted in: Sarah Coakley (ed .), Re -Thinking Gregory of Nyssa (Oxford, 2003), 67-76. 23 GNO VI 9, 292 , 19-20; Casimir McCambley (transl.), Commentary ( 1987 ), 184. 24 GNO VI 13, 397, 9-10; Casimir McCambley (transl.), Commentary ( 1987), 240. 25 See John McGuckin, The Strategic Adaptation of Deification in the Cappadocians (2007 ), 104.

Ethics and Christian Identity in Gregory of Nyssa

Sandra LEUENBERGER-WENGER, Zürich

A close examination of the ethical reflexions in Gregory of Nyssa, which I can't provide in this context, shows the importance of the question of Christian identity for Gregory's treatment of ethical questions. I will concentrate on a few points: 1 ) The relevance of ethics to identity; 2) The importance of the concept of virtue, its anthropological foundation and the way in which Gregory links it with the question of Christian identity; 3) The importance of the affirmation of the Christian faith and lifestyle in the context of the end of the fourth century.

1. Ethics and Identity Ethics is one of the main areas where Christians could profile and reaffirm their sense of community, otherness, and superiority : As a reflection on action or lifestyle ethics offers a theoretical framework which connects the life of the individual to a community and gives sense to or justifies one or another form of behaviour through its foundation in a system of values and principles . Thinking about how Christians should behave and what is an appropriate Christian view of life offers a distinctive perspective on life and action . Ethical reflection thus provides a sense of community or group identity through a common value system and a common ideal of what life should be, but also through the interpretation of action in the light of a certain story - the salvation story in the Christian context of Gregory. Christian identity means here the sense of an individual or a group as being part of a broader community with a common history in a continuity over time and the sense of distinction from other groups or individuals who do not share the same religious and ethical ideals and principles and are not part of the common history of the group . ' Christians could feel different from their environment even if their behaviour didn't show much difference because their behaviour was founded in convictions and ideals that differed from the convictions and ideals of their pagan contemporaries.2

¹ On the shaping of Christian identity see Judith Lieu, Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World (Oxford and New York, 2004) . 2 For the similarities between Christian moral rules and behaviour and the behaviour and rules of the pagan contemporaries, see for example John Whittaker, Christianity and Morality in the Roman Empire: VigChr 33 (1979) 209-25 ; Wayne Meeks, The Origins ofChristian Morality: The First Two Centuries (New Haven and London, 1993), 109f.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 45-50. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

46

S. LEUENBERGER-WENGER

The place of ethical reflection in the fourth-century Church was mainly in Christian worship. This ' Sitz im Leben' of ethical reflection provided a close connection between reflection and practice . During a service, the community participated in a ritualised form of typical Christian behaviour (such as prayer for those in misery and the collection of alms for the poor), whereas the sermon interpreted life in light of the Christian salvation story. The relevance of ethical reflection to the shaping of Christian identity becomes especially obvious in Gregory's treatise De professione Christiana.3 The treatise represents the literary type of ethical reflection primarily destined for a learned and interested audience with special interest in questions of the good life and Christian faith, like Gregory's addressee Harmonius . In this short treatise Gregory explains the significance of a good Christian life starting from the significance of the confession of Christian faith. The confession of faith must have consequences for the lifestyle and become visible in the life of a Christian: 'If one could find out carefully what through the name is shown, we would have much help for the virtuous life (кat' åpɛtǹv ẞíov) and we would be called in truth like that and would aim to be like this through a noble lifestyle 14 (διὰ τῆς ὑψηλῆς πολιτείας) . The confession of the Christian faith is not a theoretical act, it is a lifestyle: the lives and actions of the Christians are the confession of their faith . Gregory claims that, faced with the competing conceptions of the good life, the superiority ofthe Christian faith and lifestyle has to be shown and argued. Christians should know why they act as they act and why their faith , worldview and lifestyle are more convincing than others and this superiority should be visible also to all others. When looking at the behaviour and lifestyle of Christians, everybody should be able to realise the superiority of the Christian God and faith: 'If the definition (ó öpoç) calls Christianity (xploτiavioμóv) an imitation of God (θεοῦ μίμησιν) , the one who has not yet adopted the word of the secret (δ μήπω δεξάμενος τοῦ μυστηρίου τὸν λόγον) believes this to be our divinity, which he sees in our life --- a life he thinks to be set right (Katoрlovσlαi) through the imitation of God." Gregory connects the question of good behaviour with the recognisability of Christians in the world and with the conscious behaviour of Christians as Christians. Through their lifestyles Christians should be recognised in the world and profess their faith before the world, but they should also be able to judge their behaviour in the light of their faith. Ethical reflection in this sense is the capability to interpret and judge one's behaviour in the light of the Christian faith. The transposition of this knowledge into a certain lifestyle is the task of virtue.

3 De prof. Christ. (GNO VIII/1 , 92-142). 4 De prof. Christ. (GNO VIII/ 1 , 130.22-131.1 ). 5 See Alden A. Mosshammer, Gregory of Nyssa as Homilist: SP 37 (2001) 212-39, 212. 6 De prof. Christ. (GNO VIII/ 1 , 137.12-5) .

Ethics and Christian Identity in Gregory of Nyssa

47

2. The good Christian life as the virtuous life Although Gregory aimed for a distinctly Christian view of the good life, he owed much to the ethical reflection and conceptions of the philosophical tradition. This is most obvious in his understanding of the good life as the virtuous life. Many of Gregory's prologues define the scope of the work as the description of the virtuous or perfect life as it can be found in the Scriptures or as it is constitutive of the Christian faith . He thus postulates that the Bible offers an answer to the traditional philosophical question of what the good life is . 'The teaching of this book [ Ecclesiastes] looks only to the lifestyle of the Church which leads to a life of virtue."8 The good Christian life is, as for philosophical conceptions , a life of virtue and its goal is blessedness (uakapιóτηç), as Gregory tells in the Homilies on the Inscriptions ofthe Psalms. "The goal (téλoç) of the virtuous life (Kat' ȧρtηv βίου) is blessedness (μακαριότης).” Virtue consists not only of virtuous actions; it is mainly a description of a life achieving its perfection. What does the perfection of life consist of? For Gregory, as for his philosophical contemporaries, virtue or perfection consisted of the realisation of the full potential of human nature. Diogenes Laertius explained that for the Stoics virtue meant the perfection which belongs to each thing (ἀρετὴ δ ' ἡ μέν τις κοινῶς παντὶ τελείωσις).10 The perfection of nature was also the central Peripatetic definition of virtue as it can be found in Alexander of Aphrodisias: "The virtue of man consists in the excellence (ȧkpótηs) of nature and soul.' For Aspasius in his commentary on the Nicomachean Ethic virtue is the perfection of nature (ἡ ἀρετὴ τελειότης φύσεως) and its successful accomplishment (κatóр0@μα)'. Narrower is the Platonic definition of virtue, which concentrates on the harmonious and perfect state of the soul, as Alcinous did explain in his handbook of Platonism . " For these philosophers, as for Gregory, human nature is not a descriptive but rather a normative concept. In the ethical context human nature describes an ideal of what and how man should be: 12 virtue consists of the realisation of all the positive potential

7 See the beginnings of De perf. (GNO VIII/ 1 , 173.1-2) ; Inscript. Psal. (GNO V 24,1-12); De vita Moys. (GNO VII/1 , 1.15-2.9); De an. et resurr. 1 (PG 46 , 17B -20A). 8 Eccl. 1 (GNO V 279.20-280.1). 9 Inscript. Psal. (GNO V 25.11). 10 Diogenes Laertius, Vitae philosophorum VII 90 (335.6 Long) ; Alexander of Aphrodisias, De fato 27 (198 Pierre Thillet); Aspasius, In ethica Nichomachea commentaria (47.15-16 Heylbut). 11 Alcinous, Didasc. 29 ( 182.15-19 Whittaker) : diáßeois yuxñs teλɛiɑ. 12 For the normativity of the concept of nature see Julia Annas, The Morality of Happiness (Oxford et al. , 1993), 140. Johannes Zachhuber, Human Nature in Gregory ofNyssa: Philosophical Background and Theological Significance (Leiden et. al. , 2000) , 125, stresses that Gregory sees human nature in the light of the divine economy.

48

S. LEUENBERGER-WENGER

of something or somebody. This perfect nature and the corresponding way of living are most often described as rational. For Gregory, the particular Christian definition of perfect human nature and the ideal state of humanity is the condition humanity was destined for by its creator: ‘ In the first creation the end appeared together with the beginning without gap (ådiαotátos) and the nature began to be in perfection.'13 Gregory thus defines the ideal state of humanity through the will and work of God, and more precisely in its being godlike : ' Now a definition of human blessedness is likeness to God.'14 Gregory claims the definition of man as the image of God to be the truly Christian one, whereas descriptions of the human being as a rational being or as a micro cosmos are philosophical in nature because they don't see humanity in its essential relationship to God.15 This definition of human perfection through its likeness to God was not that particular for a Christian concept. Especially for the Middle Platonists the central goal of the virtuous life was to become like God, as Alcinous describes in his handbook.16 This concept of the virtuous life as assimilation to God was taken over by Christian thinkers such as Clement of Alexandria and Origen (and also by Philo) and combined with the biblical creation story.17 The artificial distinction nevertheless shows Gregory's interest in developing a distinctly Christian view of man, with human nature defined through its relation to God. The stress on the immediate and personal relationship between God and man rather than godlikeness is in fact the more important distinction between the two concepts. The concept of godlikeness in Gregory goes also beyond the Platonic one. Important for Gregory's ethical argumentation is the fact, that the godlikeness of men is not only the scope and end of the virtuous life but it is also an inner dignity independent of the virtuous life : godlikeness describes the full potential of humanity which one can reach. At the same time, it constitutes the moral challenge to honour the godlikeness of every person, not only one's own godlikeness but also the godlikeness of the dirty beggar lying on the street, the undutiful slave or the leprous sick, where humanity is hardly visible.18 This postulate of the dignity of each human being as image of God is a combination of the Stoic principle of equality of all human beings through their rational nature and the more Platonic theory of godlikeness as the distinguishing human feature.

13 Cant. 15 (GNO VI 458.10-2). 14 Inscript. Psal. 1.6 (GNO V 26.10-1). 15 De hom. opif. 16 (PG 44 , 177D- 180D). 16 Alcinous, Didasc. 28.1 , referring to Plato's Theatet (176a-b) . 17 Philo, De fuga et inventione 63 ; Clement of Alexandria, Strom . II 22.133 ; Strom. V 14.9; Strom. VII 3.13.3 ; VII 7; VII 14; Origen, De princ. III 6.1. 18 Eccl. 4 (GNO V 336.10-4); De pauperibus amandi I (GNO IX/ 1 , 98.23-5 ; 103.8-12; 103.21-5); De pauperibus amandi II (GNO IX/ 1 , 116.11-7; 118.2-3 ; 120.8-10) .

Ethics and Christian Identity in Gregory of Nyssa

49

The moral challenge for Gregory consists of the fact that the relationship with God and the godlikeness have faded. Through his highest good – his free will - man has chosen a life far away from God, concentrated only on his own interests and worldly pleasures. Therefore the likeness to God must be regained through assimilation and the reorientation of the free will towards God: The virtuous life is not simply the taming of the passions or the practice of virtues ; rather, each virtue is an expression of the right relationship to God. The story of the creation and the fall and the project of restitution through virtue by the aid of Christ and the Church serve Gregory as a framework for interpreting life and actions from a distinctive Christian perspective. Only through this story can one know what the human being is and what his goodness and goal in life consist of. The foundation of human nature in the story of the Christian God with humankind enables Christians to see their life and actions in a broader horizon with a specific Christian shape. As part of the salvation history, each Christian participates in the Christian community and interprets life and actions through this story. This Christian interpretation of human action goes one step further in the worship of the Church or in prayer where the virtuous and good life of the Christians is interpreted as a response to the salvific action of God. In particular, the sermons for the special liturgical feasts as the Easter sermons or the sermon for Epiphanias show the integration of human action and virtue with the broader scope of the salvation history and the grace of God . ' The time has come bringing the remembrance of the holy mysteries which purify man. It purifies even from the sin which is hard to wash from body and soul and brings back the original beauty which God, the best of artificers, impressed 19 upon us.' Through the relationship to God and the remedy of the sacraments, virtue can grow and the ideal and original state of nature can be regained. To see one's action as an answer to the action of God or the realisation of his grace is central for the Christian faith and serves again as a distinction from different ethical concepts . This anthropological framework offers Gregory the foundation to treat a broad scale of different ethical questions, such as the individual's quest for a good life or social questions and problems.

Conclusion: Gregory's quest for a distinct Christian ethic in its historical context

There are two main reasons why the affirmation of Christian behaviour and identity received so much attention in the ethical reflections of Gregory. One was the fast-growing Church with a huge number of newly converted Christians 19 In diem luminum (GNO IX/1 , 222.13-7).

50

S. LEUENBERGER-WENGER

who had to be shown the impact of the Christian faith on their lifestyle. With the great number of educated Christians, familiar with philosophical concepts of a good life, it became important to have a distinct Christian concept and to argue for its superiority. In this context the discussion of ethical problems had to show the relevancy of the Christian faith for one's orientation in the world , the quest for meaning, and for a good life. The second reason was the discussion of the position of the Church towards Hellenistic culture as it was raised by the restoration policy of the emperor Julian. Julian negated the Christian's claim that they were the worthy heirs and interpreters of Hellenistic culture and tried to expel them from cultural life , arguing that Hellenistic culture couldn't be separated from the Hellenistic gods.20 This raised an intra-Christian discourse about the relationship of the Church towards Hellenistic culture. If Christians wanted to remain within the tradition of Hellenistic culture, the claim of Julian had to be denied and new ways to be found to preserve the riches of Hellenistic culture . Gregory and his fellow Cappadocians took this path and defined Christian identity not through sharp distinctions - as especially some ascetical groups did - but via the transformation and adoption of the Hellenistic culture into a Christian perspective and cultural system. What constitutes Christian identity in the eyes of Gregory is not the drawing of sharp boundaries and distinctions or a list of particular forms of Christian behaviour. Rather, it is the capacity to judge and interpret one's life and action in the horizon of the Christian salvation history and to see oneself and everybody else as an image of God . The development of this capacity was the main focus of Gregory's ethical reflection in different areas , such as social problems or the individual's quest for a good and blessed life.

20 See Glen W. Bowersock, Hellenism in Late Antiquity (Cambridge, 1990), 9-13.

Remarks on Eros in Plato and Gregory of Nyssa

Giulio MASPERO, Rome

Introduction

Speaking of Eros with regard to Gregory of Nyssa, one might immediately invoke the relation between poc and άуáлη, something already extensively analysed in literature. ' But the work of the Cappadocian is worth being studied also from the point of view of the Platonic myth of Eros, as it appears in the speech of Diotima of Mantinea.2 This study begins with a theological remark and, through philological analysis, comes back to theology, interpreting the results from the perspective of Gregroy's method.

The Negative Moment

The initial theological remark is that Gregory was obliged to face the myth of Eros, as it has a clear religious meaning: first of all , Diotima is a priestess and the context of the speech is clearly that of revelation and religious initiation; the very name of the priestess recalls the idea of honouring God (Ato- tíμa); and, most of all, the myth could be associated with the healing force of the Cross, as Diotima's authority is proved by the fact that she had saved Athens, teaching the inhabitants a kind of sacrifice that stopped a terrible plague.3 Finally, the character itself of Eros plays a priestly role as mediator between gods and men. A first text will show this clearly: I said: so, what is Eros? Is he a mortal? Absolutely not . And what, then? As already said, he is something intermediate between a mortal and an immortal (µɛtağù Ovηtod kai ảľavátov). What is he , then , Diotima? He is a great daemon (Aaíµœv µέyas) , Socrates. In fact, every daemon is intermediate ( µɛτažú) between god and mortal.

See Jean Daniélou , Platonisme et théologie mystique (Paris , 1944), 199-208 ; Claudio Moreschini, L'amore nei Padri Cappadoci, in : Sofia Cavalletti, et al. (eds.), Amore, carità , misericordia: Dizionario di spiritualità biblico-patristica III , (Roma, 1993) , 274-93 ; Anders Nygren , Eros und Agapé (Gütersloh, 1937 ), 232-51 ; Walther Völker, Gregor von Nyssa als Mystiker (Wiesbaden, 1955), 249-54. 2 Plato, Symposium , 201d-212c. 3 See ibid. 201d. 4 See ibid. 202e 3-203a 1.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 51-56. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

52

G. MASPERO

I asked : and what kind of power has he? That of interpreting and of bringing (SɩaлоρОμεõоν) to the gods from men and to men from gods prayers and sacrifices of the first and orders and rewards of the latter. He, who is halfway between them, completes (σvμrλnpoĩ) both of them , so that he gives unity in himself to the whole universe (τὸ πᾶν αὐτὸ αὑτῷ συνδεδέσθαι) . By means of him, every mantic and the priestly art (ǹ tv iɛpέov tέxvη ) , and what is connected with sacrifices, initiations and spells and every divinization and magic takes place. A god does not mix himself up with a man (θεὸς δὲ ἀνθρώπῳ οὐ μείγνυται), but by means of him gods have every relation and communication with men, both sleeping and awake . And who is wise about such things is a daemonic man.5 Diotima explains here that Eros is not a god, but a daemon, an intermediate being. The philosophical framework is clearly that of the conception of an ontological continuum , which links the world of men with the realm of gods. Eros is just an intermediate degree, which carries out a mediating task . One can discover in the background of this Platonic character the metaphysical chain presented in the Leges to show that the soul is the first motor or, in the Lysid, to get to the First Friend (лpãtov qiλov).? The picture from the Nyssen's perspective is completely different . An easy way to see this is to compare the text of the Symposium with the Catechetical Oration of Gregory of Nyssa: In the Gospel everything is said or happens with a supreme and divine meaning and there is nothing in it that is not such to look as a real compenetration of divinity and humanity (ὃ οὐχὶ πάντως μίξις τις ἐμφαίνεται τοῦ θείου πρὸς τὸ ἀνθρώπινον), because the expression and the facts are narrated in a human form, but the hidden meaning reveals the divine element. [...] We learn that through the Cross , whose form is divided in four parts, so that one counts four branches, starting from the middle (μέσov) that in itself keeps them together (σvváлtetai) : He who was stretched on the Cross at the moment (κaɩp@) of the economy of His death is the One who in Himself brings to unity the Universe (ὁ τὸ πᾶν πρὸς ἑαυτὸν συνδέων) and harmonises it, leading the different natures of the beings to a unique conspiration and harmony (ἁρμονίαν) . Here the context is the question of why God asked Jesus to die precisely on the Cross. The meaning of that form of death is, according to Gregory, the expression of the power of the Father, who, through the sacrifice of Jesus, unifies all the universe : the four branches of the Cross should be put in connection with the dimensions of the world , from the sky to the underground dimension, and

5 Ibid. 202d 8-203a 5. See id., Leges 893b-896a. 7 See id., Lysid 219d. 8 For an analysis of the metaphysical difference between Gregory's and Plato's thoughts , see Giulio Maspero, El Espíritu, la Cruz y la unidad: συνδέω, σύνδεσμος y συνδετικός en Gregorio de Nisa: ScrTh 38 (2006 ) 445-71. 9 Gregory of Nyssa , Oratio Catechetica 32,40-46.54-61 (GNO III/4 , 79-80).

Remarks on Eros in Plato and Gregory of Nyssa

53

from East to West, forming a Cosmic Cross.10 It is striking that Gregory expresses this action by having recourse to some Platonic quotations . In fact, in the text there are three clear references to the Symposium: the d τὸ πᾶν πρὸς ἑαυτὸν συνδέων (32,59) is practically parallel to the Platonic τὸ πᾶν αὐτὸ αὑτῷ συνδεδέσθαι (202e 6-7) and the Nyssen's ὡς ἐκ τοῦ μέσου, καθ΄ ὃ πρὸς ἑαυτὸν συνάπτεται (32,56-7) recalls the ἐν μέσῳ δὲ ὂν ἀμφοtéρæν σvμлληpoĩ (202e 6) . But it is essential to note a third correspondence, which explains the deep meaning of the similarities of the two texts: Plato in 203a 1-2 radically excludes the union of God and man (0ɛòç dè åv¤ρáлæ où μɛíɣvuτaι) , whereas Gregory, talking of the Gospel (32,43) , makes exactly the opposite assertion (μίξις τις τοῦ θείου πρὸς τὸ ἀνθρώπινον). The Nyssen has to meet two needs simultaneously : he must reaffirm as well as deny. In fact, all the Trinitarian discussion with the Arians could only be clarified by assessing the infinite metaphysical distance between the Triune Creator and the created world . Because of that, there is no space left for an intermediate ontological degree, as Eros is in Plato's view. But at the same time, the reality of man's salvation and divinization also demands the announcement of the mediating action of Christ, perfect God and perfect man. Therefore, the μέσoç in the Platonic text is absolutely different from Gregory's μέσoç: the first is a μɛtačú , i.e. an intermediate ontological level, whereas the latter is a place in the universe and in history, as it is the crucified Humanity of Christ, i.e. a µέσoç with a кaιpóç. Besides, the change from the Platonic συμπληροῖ to the Nyssen's συνάπτεται expresses the same idea : the first verb makes reference to a void which is filled, whereas the latter is absolutely physical and horizontal . In this sense one can also read the change to the active form of the verb ouvdéo in Gregory's text as a way to emphasize the personal dimension. Gregory expresses this reality through some allusions to the Platonic myth of Eros , where the very literary form has a theological meaning, through a sort of (anti) -parallelism of the two texts . Both authors are facing the same realities - the unity and beauty of the world - but they explain them in opposite ways¹¹ : for the philosopher, harmony is ontologically present, whereas for the theologian, it is a gift of God . The same can be found in the Refutatio at the core of the discussion with Eunomius : In fact, because of his being Son and generated , He has been made obedient in words and in actions. Meaningless doctrine : you make the Word obedient to the words and put other words before the One who is really the Word , so that another word acts as a

10 See Hubertus R. Drobner, Die drei Tage zwischen Tod und Auferstehung unseres Herrn Jesus Christus (Leiden, 1982), 150f.; Jean Daniélou , Théologie du judéo-christianisme (Tournai, 1958), 303-15 and id., Le symbolisme cosmique de la croix chez Grégoire de Nysse: MD 75 (1963) 23-36. 11 In Symposium, 206d 1-2 Plato says that beauty is harmonically connected with the divine (ἁρμόττον).

54

G. MASPERO

mediator (µεσɩtεúε1) of the Word that is in the Principle, bringing (diaлoplµɛúwv) to the Word the will of the Principle. And this word is not unique, but there are different words halfway ( µέσov) between the Principle and the Word , inserted by Eunomius, words which make use of the obedience of the Word as they like.¹2 The aim of Gregory's criticisms is the metaphysical conception of the ladder¹³ of ontological levels which characterises the Platonic µέσoç : it seems plausible that the terminology is again the same as in Diotima's speech for this purpose, as the diaлорµɛúшν recalls Symposium 202.e.3.

The Positive Moment

At this point, Gregory is free to apply the religious allusions of the same myth to the saints , who are undoubtedly creatures . And he does it by resorting to the same expressions as those of Diotima. For example, speaking of Moses, Gregory affirms that the one who has climbed up to the supreme heights is himself a frontier ( µɛ¤ópɩog) between the changeable nature and the eternal one (τῆς τρεπτῆς τε καὶ ἀτρέπτου φύσεως). He can intercede with God on behalf of those who have been converted from sin and he can dispense (διαπορθμεύων) the mercy (τὸν ἔλεον) of the supreme power to those who need it.¹4 The action is very similar to that of Eros according to the Platonic description. Again the verb diалорОμɛúшν геcalls immediately Symposium, 202e 3, but it is used here with a different intention, as the movement is descending from above and the existence of an ontological chain is explicitly ruled out through the reference to the divine mercy. Gregory also describes Moses' feelings as those of a soul possessed by a loving passion (¿ pwtikḥ tivi dialέσɛɩ ) for the essential Beauty.15 The ascent, unlike in the Eros myth, cannot here reach an end , as God is infinite, but Moses is defined in a Platonic way: ' the passionate lover (ô σpodρòç έpaotńs) of Beauty, always receiving the visible realities as images of what he desires, longs for getting overwhelmed with the original model of this image.'16 The same thing is repeated in the case of Paul , who is defined as ' lover of the divine Beauty' ( ἐραστὴς τοῦ θείου κάλλους) , 17 in a context clearly related to baptism (to μvστik@ λovтρ@) . 18 The parallelism is based on the fact that for Diotima Eros is not the Beloved, but the lover.19

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Gregory of Nyssa, Refutatio 139,10-140,8 (GNO II 372). In Symposium 211c 3 Plato uses explicitly the word έлavаßаσµois. Gregory of Nyssa, In inscriptiones Psalmorum, 57 (GNO V 45,7-12). See id., De Vita Moysis II 231,1-2 (SC lbis, 106) . Ibid. II 231,5-8 (SC 1bis , 106 ). Id., In Basilium fratrem 7,3 (GNO X/1 , 113,21-2) . See ibid. 7,8 (GNO X/1 , 113,26). See Plato, Symposium, 204c 1-6.

Remarks on Eros in Plato and Gregory of Nyssa

55

A last text can be useful to see how Gregory applies some of Eros ' traits to Moses: It seems to me that the great Moses (ó µέyaç Mwüσñç) in the theophany came to know that nothing of what is under the domain of the senses and of what is known by reason really subsists, but only the transcendent Being, Cause of everything and Cause on which the unity of the universe depends (ප ñ5 ¿¿ ñntai tò nāv).20 This text is especially interesting, because Moses is called ' great' , just as in Symposium 202d 13 Eros is defined as a great daemon. But Moses ' greatness is due to what God revealed to him, i.e. that only the transcendent Being really subsists and that He is the One who brings unity to the universe, where the ἀφ ' ἧς ἐξῆπται τὸ πᾶν recalls again the τὸ πᾶν αὐτὸ αὑτῷ συνδεδέσθαι in Symposium 202e 6-7. Eros' traits can be attributed to Moses, and more generally, to holy souls, precisely because the source of unity and of any good and beauty is God, and only God : this is the Christian wisdom. Clear proof that the quoted expressions can be read as allusions to Symposium are the lines that follow in the Nyssen's text (24,6-25,11) : these have long been recognised as an explicit reference to Symposium 210e - 211b.21 Usually they are considered only from the point of view of the participation theory, because of the similarity between the vocabularies of Gregory and Plato; but so far, the specific reference to metaphysical hierarchy in the Eros myth has not been highlighted . The same can be said of the eleventh chapter of the De virginitate : though generally connected with the Phaedrus myth, it can also be read from the point of view of Eros. In fact, Gregory's tendency to fuse Phaedrus and Symposium doctrines, correctly highlighted by H.F. Cherniss , 22 can be connected at a philological level with the definition of Eros as ПItépora in Phaedrus, 252b 9, because of its power of making wings grow. At a theological level, it can be considered as another example of the Nyssen's use of the Eros myth quotations . The religious context of the Phaedrus myth is, indeed , very similar to that of Diotima's speech, as it is expressed by Socrates in a palinode , i.e. a purification rite where the initiation context is clear also from the citation of the Delphi and Dodona priestesses (244a 8 – b 1) . Again, Plato speaks of a salvific sacrifice, and Gregory has to respond. A last remark can point out Gregory's originality : in Symposium 212b 3, Socrates says precisely to Phaedrus, that for the soul who seeks the true Beauty, there is no better helper (ovvɛpyóv) than Eros. Gregory writes, in a context related to sacramental initiation , that for a Christian the change itself becomes helper in the never-ending ascent ( avkýσɛws σvvɛpyóv) towards God.23

20 21 22 23

Gregory of Nyssa, De Vita Moysis II 24,1-5 (SC 1bis , 38). See J. Daniélou , Platonisme et théologie mystique ( 1944), 66. See Harold Fredrik Cherniss, The Platonism of Gregory ofNyssa (Berkeley, 1930), 69 n. 36. See Gregory of Nyssa, In Canticum Canticorum 8 (GNO VI 252,8-17 ).

56

G. MASPERO

Conclusion

Jean Daniélou wrote that Gregory has free recourse to Plato's terminology to 24 express concepts of his own, and that is true. But it also seems noteworthy that this usage has a theological motive and a theological meaning, as the Nyssen had to respond to the theological questions posed by the Platonic intuitions . He was able to make a clear separation between the philosophy of the ontological ladder on the one hand, and Christian theology on the other; but at the same time, he presented the gift of Revelation and sacramental initiation as the real and universal answer to the desire which was the source of this conception . And that is also accomplished through the literary allusions to the Eros myth.

24 See J. Daniélou, Platonisme et théologie mystique (1944), 154.

Aióvios and Aióv in Origen and in Gregory of Nyssa

Ilaria RAMELLI , Milan

A careful and systematic study of the use of alávios and alov and aîdios and aïdiótηs in Origen and Gregory of Nyssa' leads to a better and deeper understanding of their conceptions of the history of salvation and apokatastasis. Methodical analysis for Origen reveals that the many passages referring to the aiάvios life in his writings - the main use of this adjective in Origen – emphasise its pertaining to the next world or alov rather than its temporal infinity, as is stated in Philocalia I 30.21-3 , where the alávioç life is defined as that which will occur in the future aióv. It is also possible to point out many passages in which life in the world to come is associated with salvation and apokatastasis, sometimes with an emphasis on submission to Christ as salvation.2 Final salvation is a gift from God and will come after punishments commensurate with the evils committed in the present life (Comm. Rom. XXII 11) : thus, they have a limit, whereas life given by God as a gift has no limits.3 Only when it refers to God and what pertains to God does alávioç mean absolutely ‘ eternal ', as it is the case already in the Greek Bible. 'Aîdios , which, differently from aiovios, means ' eternal' in the proper sense, is almost always used by Origen with reference to God or his attributes , or for eternal life, åîdios ( wń , an expression that he employs when he stresses that it is limitless in duration rather than that it is in the next world. It is most significant that, when Origen uses aióvioç to designate death or punishment and fire in the next world, according to Biblical usage, he never uses ȧîdios for these, but only for life and beatitude. Only life is eternal, not death and suffering, which will come to an end. Thus , the луρ aiάviov is never called aîôtov : it is alóvtov because it belongs to the next world, as opposed to the fire we experience in this , and will last during the aeons, but will not endure into the άïdióτηç , the absolute eternity of apokatastasis, which will be

On these terms in Origen see my ‘ Origene e il lessico dell'eternità' : Adamantius 14 (2008) 100-29; see the section devoted to Gregory in Ilaria Ramelli and David Konstan, Terms for Eternity (Piscataway, 2007), where Patristic usage is studied against the background of philosophical and Biblical usage. 2 Orig., De princ . I 6.1 ; III 5,6-7 ; id. , Comm. Matth. Ser. 8. See my ' Christian Soteriology and Christian Platonism ': VChr 61 (2007) 313-56, and 'Hebrews 10:13 , the eventual elimination of evil and the apokatastasis ', Augustinianum 47 (2007) 85-93. 3 Documentation in Ilaria Ramelli , Origen's Exegesis of Jeremiah : Resurrection Announced Throughout the Bible and its Twofold Conception : Augustinianum 48 (2008) 59-78.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 57-62. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

58

I. RAMELLI

characterized by the complete and definitive elimination of evil and its consequence, death.4 Origen's doctrine of the sequence of ai @vɛs , the end of ai@ves, and apokatastasis, well attested e.g. in De principiis III 3.5 , Comm. Io. XIII 3, and Sel. Ps. 60,5 does not contrast, but rather exalts, the uniqueness and eternal value of Christ's sacrifice, as is clear especially from De oratione 27.15 , where he relies on Heb. 9:26 together with Eph . 2 :7, where he found support for his claim that there will be an end to the aiõvɛç and that Christ's sacrifice was made once and for all. These aiõveç display God's grace because they point to one end, the final restoration of all, attained not by necessity, but by all rational creatures' voluntary adhesion and thanks to God's grace. After it, there will be no more ai vɛç , but the dïdiótηç of apokatastasis, characterized by unity. To similar conclusions leads the systematic analysis of aióv and aióvios in Nyssen, who closely depends on Origen and strongly supports the doctrine of apokatastasis. He exhibits an abundant use of the philosophical adjective aïdios, in comparison with aióvios, mostly employed in scriptural citations and reminiscences . ' Aîdtog is applied to the Trinity and its attributes and , in reference to the Son, it is a key-term in Gregory's polemic with the so-called 'Neo-Arianism', which, especially in In Illud: Tunc et Ipse Filius, is strongly linked to his argument for apokatastasis. Like Origen, Gregory often refers aîdios also to eternal life that awaits all humans by the grace of Christ (De tridui spatio, GNO IX 278.10) . This absolutely eternal life is God's very life, in which all humans will participate (e.g. Homiliae in Canticum, GNO VI 69.3); it is eternal life in the aïdióτηs of apokatastasis, after the end of time and αἰών. It is noteworthy that, like Origen , Gregory never refers åîdios to punishment or death in the afterworld , and , least of all , to evil, which is not έ άïdíov and thus cannot subsist eternally (Inscr. Psalm. , GNO V 100.21-5 ; 101.3) . This is the main metaphysical argument for the apokatastasis in both Origen and Gregory ; it will be taken up especially by Evagrius .?

4 Similarly, the ¬úp äσßɛσtov of Mark 9:43 is a way of differentiating it from this world's fire, which can be extinguished , and in 9: 48-49 the worm that où tɛλɛută indicates that it is different from this world's worms. Origen understood the äoßɛσtov πup as eliminating evil: see my ' Origene'. 5 See also Hom. Ex. 6.13 . See the essay on apokatastasis in Origen and Gregory in my Gregorio di Nissa: Sull'anima e la resurrezione (Milan , 2007) . 6 See Ilaria Ramelli , The Universal and Eternal Validity of Jesus's High-Priestly Sacrifice. The Epistle to the Hebrews in Support of Origen's Theory of Apokatastasis, in: A Cloud of Witnesses: The Theology ofHebrews in Its Ancient Contexts, eds Richard J. Bauckham, Daniel R. Driver, Trevor A. Hart, and Nathan MacDonald (London, 2008 ), 210-21 . 7 See the philosophical essay in my Gregorio; ead., art. Soteriology; Alden A. Mosshammer, art. Mal, in: Diccionario de san Gregorio de Nisa , eds . Lucas-Francisco Mateo- Seco and Giulio Maspero (Burgos, 2006), 583-91 . For Evagrius, see my Apocatastasi (Milan, forthcoming), chapter devoted to him.

Αἰώνιος and Αιών in Origen and in Gregory of Nyssa

59

Alóvios is used by Gregory mostly in connection with biblical reminiscences. As in Origen, it means ' absolutely eternal' only when it refers to God . It often is employed in reference to life in the world to come: like Origen, Gregory too uses ζωή άΐδιος to emphasize its eternity, and ζωή αἰώνιος το underline that it is in the next world. This is particularly clear in De professione Christiana, GNO VIII/1 , 79.4 , where the aiάvios joy characterizing the future life is that which the saints will enjoy ‘ in the future age that is expected', ¿v τ@ лρоσаокоμέvo aiõvi. To describe punishment, fire, destruction or death in the life to come, instead, Gregory exclusively uses aiάvioç , never åïdɩoç. Death, fire and punishment are merely aióvia , for they will be commensurate to sins and will cease for everyone either earlier or at the end of the aióv, with apokatastasis, the reign of absolute åïdióτηs, where life will endure, but not death and punishment, and all evil will disappear. This is why only life can be called ἀΐδιος . Especially in De anima and De infantibus , Gregory refers aióv and aióvios to purifying punishment, at the same time openly denying that it is eternal : for he, like Origen, understands this aióv as that between the death of the individual and the apokatastasis, after which there will be no more aeons, no intervals of time, but only the aïdiótηs of all in God. A particularly illuminating example is in De anima (PG 46, 101.17), where Gregory refers aióvios to punishment in the next world, precisely in a passage where it is denied that punishment will be eternal. Thus , by calling it aiάvios, he cannot mean that it is eternal. From the context, it is evident that aióv is understood as the longest possible period for the purifying suffering, between the death of the individual and the universal apokatastasis, as in Origen . It is precisely by лõρ αióνɩov (De anima , PG 46, 100A) that souls will be purified for the purpose of salvation: it will destroy evil (ibid. 157A) and cease when such purification is achieved . Likewise, aióvios refers to purification in De infantibus (GNO III/2 , 91.23-92.2), where it is explicitly stated that this Kalapoι , far from being eternal, will come to an end, after long, when God will restore the purified person τῷ τῶν σῳζομένων πληρώματι , 'to the totality of those who are saved'. From the above-mentioned analysis, which I have summarized very briefly, it results that Origen, who influenced Gregory's view, held an essentially ' ethical' rather than cosmological conception of the sequence of aiovε , which will cease in the dïdióτηs of apokatastasis : their succession is governed not by

* He speaks of κόλασις ' measured out over an entire aeon', συνδιαμετρεῖται πρὸς ὅλον αἰῶνα , as a parallel to the expression εἰς αἰώνιόν τι διάστημα, where διάστημα obviously refers to a limited interval. Both expressions mean an extension , as σvvdiaµɛtpeitai confirms , since infinite is beyond measure, eternity beyond diaoτńμata . We shall pay our debts ' up to the last coin': thus, we shall come to an end of this payment sooner or later, finally attaining complete purification and liberation from sin (PG 46 , 101.25-43). 9 Panayiotis Tzamalikos , Origen: Cosmology and Ontology of Time (Leiden , 2006) , 272-309.

60

I. RAMELLI

necessity, but by the rational creatures' freewill. Indeed , the apokatastasis was maintained by Origen precisely in polemic against Gnostic deterministic predestinationism.10 This aióv will pass away, because in it there is much evil , which must be purified by the fire , and the constitution and duration of all alovɛç depends on the free moral action of the vóɛs, who, at the end of each alov, survive in that they are not material but intelligible entities, and their condition in the subsequent ai @veç is determined by their free choices in the present. Origen's notion is original in respect to the Stoic theory, but also to Platonism and Pythagoreanism, which too had conflagrations and periodical cataclysms. For Origen , the aeons are the theatre in which rational creatures make choices and bear their consequences, but when all have been purified and have attained knowledge of the Good , all will voluntarily adhere to it, as Gregory too will maintain. This view is very far from the Stoic cyclical conception of ai vɛs, in which each period is governed by necessity. Origen contests such a vision of τεταγμέναι ἀνακυκλήσεις occurring ἐξ ἀνάγκης, in which Jesus should dwell on this earth many times and do the same things, not once (äña§), but in cyclical periods , кaτà лɛpiódovę (C. Cels . IV 67-8) . The cyclicity of Origen's aiovεç¹¹ does not mean repetition of identical cycles, and moreover does not go on indefinitely, but it comes to an end with the apokatastasis. For both Origen and Nyssen asserted all rational creatures' freewill and the centrality of Christ's role for the apokatastasis.¹² As I endeavoured to demonstrate,13 Origen insists on the universal and eternal validity of Jesus' sacrifice , performed by offering himself as a victim . The universality of the effectiveness of this sacrifice is pointed out by Origen in Comm. Io. I 35.255, where he states that Jesus, as a great high- priest, offered himself in sacrifice once and for all , ' not only for the sake of human beings, but also for all rational creatures'.14 In Contra Celsum III 49 Origen presents Jesus as the saviour and propitiatory offering for definitely all : owτǹρ návτæv

10 See my ' La coerenza della soteriologia origeniana', in : Pagani e cristiani alla ricerca della salvezza (Roma, 2006) , 661-88 ; Emanuela Prinzivalli (ed.), Il commento a Giovanni di Origene (Verucchio and Roma, 2005), introduction. See Ignacio Escribano-Alberca, Zum zyklischen Zeitbegriff der alexandrinischen und kappadokischen Theologie: SP 11 (1972) 42-51 . On Gregory's conception of time also Brooks Otis, Gregory of Nyssa and the Cappadocian Conception of Time : SP 14 ( 1976) 327-57; Andreas Spira, Le temps d'un homme selon Aristote et Grégoire de Nysse , in: Le temps chrétien de la fin de l'Antiquité au Moyen -Âge (Paris , 1984) , 283-94. 12 For Origen see my ' Origen and the Apokatastasis : A Reassessment,' lecture at the Origeniana X, Cracow 31st August - 4th September 2009, forthcoming in Origeniana Decima ( Leuven) ; for Gregory see my Gregorio di Nissa, first Integrative Essay. 13 In: ' Validity '. 14 He relies on Heb. 2:9. Both its variant readings support the apokatastasis: xúpítɩ Oɛov úлÈρ παντὸς ἐγεύσατο θανάτου, and χωρὶς Θεοῦ κτλ . Origen concludes that, if Christ experienced death for the sake of all (apart from God), he died not only for humans, but also for all rational creatures.

Αἰώνιος and Αιών in Origen and in Gregory of Nyssa

61

ἀνθρώπων ... καὶ ἱλασμός ... οὐ μόνον δὲ περὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων [ἁμαρτιῶν] , åλλà kai nepi öĥov toũ kóσµov (similarly ibid. IV 28). The universality of salvation held by Origen, including the devil, was already criticized during his life, as his Letter to Friends in Alexandria attests, but was retained not only by his faithful follower Didymus , but also by Gregory, especially in In Illud: Tunc et Ipse Filius, where he states that no being will remain outside the saved (undèv ¤¿æ tãν σ@soµέvæv), and in De anima et resurrectione.15 The eternal validity of Jesus ' sacrifice is demonstrated by Origen on the basis of the assertion in Hebrews that Jesus' high priesthood is ɛiç tòv aiõva , as opposed to Hebrew yearly high priesthood.16 Precisely because Christ's priesthood is eternal, he didn't need to perform many sacrifices: the uniqueness of his sacrifice , proclaimed by Origen in Hom. Job 387.14 (äлağ yéɣovev 8 d σtavρóc) , is stressed by him in several passages and contrasted with the multiplicity of aiovεç. This is why it can provide the eternity (åïdiótηs) of the apokatastasis, beyond all ai vε , when all multiplicity will be brought to unity. The power of Jesus' sacrifice is such that it is able to bring about salvation for all aiõves and all rational creatures.¹ From this and much else it is clear that Origen's doctrine of apokatastasis is strongly Christocentric . " Against all accusations of owing his apokatastasis theory to pagan philosophy, 19 Origen thought that universal salvation is made possible, not by metaphysical or cosmological necessity, but by Christ and divine Grace: combining Eph. 2:7 and Rom. 6:23 in Comm. Rom. Cat. 22.11 , Origen proclaims that eternal life is a gift from God, which does not come from us. While retribution is commensurate to sins, blessed life after purification is a gift from God and has no limit . This crucial idea Gregory takes up and demonstrates in De anima.20

15 On which see my Gregorio, with edition, essays and commentaries. 16 In Heb. 9:12 the uniqueness of Christ's sacrifice, which occurred έpáña , is connected to the eternity of its effectiveness (aiwvíav λútpwoɩv); in Heb. 9-10 it is stressed in opposition to the iteration of the Hebrew high priests' sacrifices, repeated yearly. 17 Comm. Rom. IV 10 : tantam esse vim crucis Christi……. quae ad sanitatem et remedium non solum praesentis et futuri, sed etiam praeteritorum saeculorum, et non solum humano huic nostro ordini, sed etiam caelestibus virtutibus ordinibusque sufficiat. 18 See Hans Urs von Balthasar, Origenes: Geist und Feuer (Salzburg, 19382), Prolog; Samuel Fernández Eyzaguirre, El carácter cristológico de la bienaventuranza final, in: Origeniana Octava, ed. L. Perrone (Leuven , 2003), 641-48 . Panayiotis Tzamalikos , Origen: Philosophy of History and Eschatology (Leiden , 2007) , 65-116, underlines the centrality of Christ to Origen's philosophy of history. 19 That Origen was Christian more than Platonist is pointed out by Mark J. Edwards, Origen against Plato (Aldershot, 2002), and Tzamalikos , Origen: Philosophy (2007). For the accusations e.g. Elizabeth A. Clark, The Origenistic Controversy (Princeton, 1992) ; Emanuela Prinzivalli, Magister ecclesiae (Roma, 2002); Wolfgang A. Bienert, Zur Entstehung des Antiorigenismus, in: Origeniana Octava (2003) , 829-42. 20 See commentary in my Gregorio.

62

I. RAMELLI

The doctrine of apokatastasis, far from being a sort of yielding to Stoicism, is decidedly Christocentric in Origen's and Gregory's thought, and grounded in Scripture . Origen maintained it against Gnostic predestinationism , and Gregory, in his In Illud, against 'Arian' subordinationism.21

21 See essay on In Illud in my Gregorio.

Gregory of Nyssa's Canticum behind the Akathistos Hymn?

Terttu HAIKKA, Helsinki

Introduction In her study on early Mariology Ph.D. Leena Mari Peltomaa relocates the Akathistos hymn, celebrating the Birth-giver of God, into the context of Nestorian controversy and redates it in between the councils of Ephesus (431) and Chalcedon (451) . ' She also suggests, that the Akathistos might in some aspects draw from the writings of Gregory of Nyssa.² That possibility is discussed in this paper particularly concerning Gregory's treatise In Canticum Canticorum . The content of the Akathistos connects to the incarnation and nativity of Christ. Theological substance of the hymn proclaims full divinity of Christ, manifested and crystallized in the term Theotokos.3 In the Canticum Gregory, in the framework of exegesis of the Song of Songs, guides the listeners and readers in their spiritual development. After the purification the virginal soul receives God as does the virginal womb of Theotokos in the Akathistos.

Narratives

Both the Akathistos and the Canticum narratives are set into the context of the whole salvation history, culminating in the victory of Christ and recapitulation of Man. Many biblical stories and themes are intertwined . Fall and redemption are presented as Adam's disobedience and Christ's compensation . The parallel

1 Leena Mari Peltomaa, The Image ofthe Virgin Mary in the Akathistos Hymn , The Medieval Mediterranean 35 (Leiden, 2001) , 100f. , 113f. The Akathistos text edition and translation by C.A. Trypanis, Fourteen Early Byzantine Cantica, Wiener Byzantinische Studien 5 (Vienna, 1968), 29-39. 2 L.M. Peltomaa , The Image of the Virgin (2001 ), 175, 178f. , 214f. Peltomaa refers especially to Gregory's De virginitate. 3 L.M. Peltomaa , The Image of the Virgin (2001 ) , 31-9, 125f. For the development of the nativity cycle feasts see Jill Burnett Comings, Aspects of the Liturgical Year in Cappadocia 325430, Patristic Studies 7 (New York, 2005), 61-94, Everett Ferguson, Preaching at Epiphany: Gregory of Nyssa and John Chrysostom on Baptism and the Church: Church History 66 (1997) 1-17; Beth Elise Dunlop, Earliest Greek Patristic Orations on the Nativity: A Study Including Translations, Diss. (Boston, 2004), 1-9.

Studia Patristica XLVII, 63-70. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

64

T. HAIKKA

with Eve and Mary is also given.4 A victory of good over evil, light over darkness, right faith over idolatry, othodox dogma over heresy or life over death is gained only when all predicted manifestations of evil have taken place . The result and fruit – noetic, ethical, saving , joyful , wondrous, incomprehensible – of the victory attained by Christ is offered to everybody by means of the holy mysteries of the Church , baptism and eucharist. Love story and marriage between the bridal soul and Christ develops and marriage is contracted .? Both narratives emphasize God's love of mankind , filanthrōpia , to be the basic motive for his descent from high into the form of mortal man. Because offilanthrōpia God pays man's debts , creates him anew and finally returns him 8 to his all initial glory. But man must actively co - operate by allowing God to purify him. The purgation of the womb (Akathistos) and the soul (Canticum) with virtuous, chaste mode of life constitute the intermediary link - steps, ladder (3.10) or bridge (3.11) – in man's ascent to God and God's descent to man: ὁρῶμεν τοίνυν ὥσπερ ἐν βαθμῶν ἀναβάσει χειραγωγουμένην διὰ τῶν τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀνόδων ἐπὶ τὰ ὕψη παρὰ τοῦ λόγου τὴν νύμφην. In details the descent is a wonder, thauma . Gregory points out that Christ's wondrous carnal birth, unless all other human births, was virginal, painless, joyful and mystical. Mary, the mother of life , did not exactly know how her divine son was delivered, because she did not undergo any labor pains. Both pains of birth and pains of death were loosened by the first born of new creation.10 The Akathistos celebrates the miracle of infinite God being conceived in the finite created being: limitless , omnipresent God was circumscribed by Virgin Mary's pure womb (Proeemium I 4-6, 1.13 , 15.1-2 , 15.6, 23.3-4). The state and position of Mary is that of a passionately loving bride . This is exactly the state towards which the churchgoers are urged to aim : spiritual marriage with Christ by means of receiving baptism, willingly adopting a new chaste and pure conduct of life as well as correct notions 'divine knowledge ' -- about God (strophes 20-21 ) . This new life is to be lived within the impregnable walls of

4 Gregory of Nyssa, In Canticum Canticorum (GNO VI 427-8 , 389); Akathistos 1.8-9. Gregory of Nyssa, Oratio in diem natalem Christi (Gregorius Nyssenus TLG 48 , F. Mann, Die Weihnachtspredigt Gregors von Nyssa, Diss. Münster, 1975, 263-92 : 1140,32-7, 1148,13-6). 5 Cant . GNO VI 147-53, 242-3 , Akath . , strophes 9 and 11. See also In diem natalem Christi (F. Mann, Die Weihnachtspredigt Gregors von Nyssa, 1129,41-1133,33) ; B.E. Dunlop, Earliest Greek Patristic Orations on the Nativity (2004), 41-83 , 154-79. 6 Cant. (GNO VI 77, 156) ; Akath . , strophes 20-21. 7 Cant. (GNO VI 179-81 , 263 , 318) ; Akath . 19.14 , 19.17. 8 Cant. (GNO VI 255-6 , 304-5, 427-8), Akath. 5.8 , 9.11 (love of mankind), 22.1-5 (depts), 1.16, 13.1 (new creation), 13.12 (captives), 7.17 (recapitulation). 9 'We see now that the Word leads the bride up the staircase by the steps of virtue', Cant. (GNO VI 158,19-21). For the steps of the bride in detail see Cant. (GNO VI 175-9) and of Moses 354-6; Akath. 3. 9-10. 10 Cant. (GNO VI 386-90) ; Akath. 3.14-5, 13.3-5, 14.1 . See also In diem natalem Christi (F. Mann, Die Weihnachtspredigt Gregors von Nyssa, 1136,1-20).

Gregory of Nyssa's Canticum behind the Akathistos Hymn?

65

the Church, supported and headed by the emperor (strophe 23) . The mystery of incarnation grows into the love story between Christ and the soul or the Christians within the Church. Similar narrative pattern can be recognized in the Canticum as well. The virginal soul, the bride of Christ allows him to enter and live in her. Christ's presence sanctifies the soul and she becomes the inner sanctuary, the Holy of Holies. " Christ and his bride live in a spiritual marriage, symbolizing the union 12 with God.¹² Both texts assure, that in the end of the times the community of all holies will reach the initial and final purpose of humanity, arkhē and telos: common worship, which will grow into the harmonious concelebration of all creation when God will be all in all and all persons will be united together in fellowship of the good.13

Symbols, Types and Images¹4

Christ came to live among us people as in a tent, skēnē, which he pitched by his incarnation (John 1:14). For Gregory the tabernacle of Israel in its journey from Egypt to the Promised Land is a type of this tent of Christ, whereas the writers before him had preferred the eschatological interpretation.15 Also in the Akathistos the Virgin's womb is a tabernacle of God and the Word, the Holy of the Holies or even greater than that and the ark gilded by the Spirit (23.6-8). Other related images of the infinite God dwelling in a finite human being in both texts are the chair of the king (1:12, 15 : 10-11) - the chair of king Solomon in the Song of Songs 3 : 9-10,16 the container of uncontainable ( 15 : 6) , vessel (17:6), treasure (17 :7, 23: 9), ship (17:16), haven ( 17:17), and bridal chamber (19:14).17 The sign of Mary's perpetual virginity for Gregory is either the burning bush or the torch, as in the Akathistos (21.1-5 ) ,18 Virginity enables fertility. In the Akathistos Mary's womb is the fertile virginal field for the harvest to grow or the Christ-lamb to pasture on (4.4-5, 7.4-7) .

11 Cant. (GNO VI 22, 25-6, 40). 12 Cant. (GNO VI 15 , 22-3) ; Akath. 19.15. 13 Cant. (GNO VI 469); Akath. 7.10-11 , 9.17, strophe 16. See also In diem natalem Christi (F. Mann, Die Weihnachtspredigt Gregors von Nyssa, 1128,21 – 1129,13, 1149,35-40) ; B.E. Dunlop, Earliest Greek Patristic Orations on the Nativity (2004), 72-4, 82. 14 L.M. Peltomaa, The Image of the Virgin (2001 ), 31-9, 116-25. 15 Cant. (GNO VI 43-50), which is the exegesis of Song of Songs 1 : 5, Gregory of Nyssa, Vita Moysis (GNO VII/2, 2.170-88). For tent as a type in Gregory see also B.E. Dunlop, Earliest Greek Patristic Orations on the Nativity (2004), 67-75. 16 Cant. (GNO VI 206-14), the exegesis of Song ofSongs 3: 9-10. 17 Cant. (GNO VI 68-9 , 88 , 428 , 444 [container of uncontainable] , 341-2 , 441 [vessel , ship], 33, 39-40 [treasure] , 80 [ haven] , 93-4, 263 [ bridal chamber]). 18 Cant. (GNO VI 388), Vita Moysis 2.21 , In diem natalem Christi (F. Mann, Die Weihnachtspredigt Gregors von Nyssa, 1136,21-35 ).

66

T. HAIKKA

Christ is both the shepherd and the lamb (7.6 ), as in the Canticum also.19 With the bread from heaven the created spiritual sheep grow into soul-brides , compared to flowering gardens of virtues, scenting like finest perfumes - like the Christ himself.20 Both texts praise God the wine tiller or gardener who loves the mankind so that he cultivates his garden of souls to its full blossom again.21 Christ was according to the Akathistos paradoxically carnally born of the Virgin (13.3-4, 15.12-13, 17.3-4), who at the same time is a bride in a spiritual marriage. In the Canticum Gregory teaches virginity with the metaphor of marriage.22 Love and beauty are connected with marriage. The whole Canticum sings the praise of indescribable beauty of both spouses and their mutual noetic passion.23 Also the Akathistos bride is hailed as the passionate love, conquering all desire ( 13.17), and described as a fair nursing-mother of virgins and a precious diadem of pious kings (19.16, 23.10) . Events in Israel's desert journey serve as the types of the sacraments in both the Canticum and the Akathistos. A newborn Christian may wash his sins and drown the old man in the purifying water of a fountain , river, rock, font or bath.24 Other baptism types used are sun (21.6) , illumination (4.17, 17.15 , 21.5 ), fire (21.9), lights and lamps (21.7-8 , 21.10) and initiation to mysteries (3.6, 9.9) or mystical kiss.25 Another kind of an image for the conversion to the new life, typical for Gregory and also used in the hymn is clothing and unclothing. Gregory exhorts his listeners and readers to take of the garments of skin, symbolizing sin, and putting on the robe of righteousness of Christ.26 The hymn praises the Virgin , through whom Hades was stripped bare and the Christians are clothed in glory (7.16-17) . Eucharist is referred to as wine (21.15), mixing bowl (21.15) , mystical feast (21.17) , wedding ( 19.14 , 19.17) and buffet table (5.11).27 The Church is the institution within which the sacraments are administered . The images of the established state church in both the Canticum and the Akathistos tell how important roles the empire and the emperor played for the Church at the time of their creation.28 The verse twenty-three of the Akathistos

19 Cant. (GNO VI 431-9) , the exegesis of Song of Songs 6: 1-2. 20 Cant. (GNO VI , homily 9) ; Akath . 21.16. 21 Cant. (GNO VI 436-7) ; Akath . 5.6-12. 22 Cant. (GNO VI 29-30). 23 Cant. (GNO VI 264, 439-50) . 24 Cant. (GNO VI 32-3 , 77, 224, 292-3) ; Akath . 11.10-11 , 21.11-14 . Gregory discusses the symbols of baptism in length in his sermon In diem luminum (GNO IX 221-42). 25 Cant. (GNO VI 49, 145 [sun and illumination] , 26 [fire] , 44 [ lights and lamps], 324 [mystical kiss]). 26 Cant. (GNO VI 327-9). 27 Cant. (GNO VI 303-14) , which is the exegesis of Song of Songs 5 : 1-2 , teaching watchfull sleep and sober inebriation. 28 Cant. (GNO VI , homilies 7 and 13) ; Akath. , str. 7 and 23 .

Gregory of Nyssa's Canticum behind the Akathistos Hymn?

67

about the Church as an immovable, impregnable tower with trophies of victory on it is of special interest here. It reminds closely Gregory's exegesis of David's tower in the Song of Songs 4: 4.29

Philosophy and Ethics

Uncontainability and uncircumscribability of God are important for Gregory because of the weight he gives to the notion of infinity of God . He also defends unchangeability of God in the genuine Greek spirit.30 When God's Logos incarnated mysteriously in Virgin Mary, he did not change in any way; according to the Akathistos he entered ' whole': unchanged (Pr. I.5), uncircumsribed ( 15.1), uncontainable ( 15.6), incomprehensible (1.10-11), creator ( 13.1), maker of all things ( 18.1) , the High One ( 14.3), holy King (20.4) , perfect God (12.4) . So an ontological abyss separates the created soul from the creator, as also in Grego31 ry.³¹ The Most High attracts human souls upwards according to the principle 'like by like', homoiō homoion . By creation the soul has certain likeness with God in having free will and reason.32 By participation they may receive divine perfections limitlessly, but proportionally to the level of her purity. When the soul by means of detachment gets lighter and rises towards God, she may eternally expand and receive more God . He will never be exhausted , and she will never stop receiving him.33 The exhortations to estrangement from the world in Akathistos (14.1-2 , strophe 19) conform to Gregory's teaching of detachment, purification, virtuous life, tranquility and gradual elevation by means of virtuous life to an even greater likeness with God. The hymn points out that the fundamental conversion and ascent are of noetic character (3.16 , 7.7, 12.5, 14.1-2 , 17.14-15 , 19.8 , 21.4-5) , which is Gregory's message in all his works . The influence of current philosophies, in this matter mainly neoplatonic and stoic , can be seen in both texts . Virginity, celebrated in multiple salutations of the Akathistos, is the enabler of true Christian life. For Gregory virginity means purity, katharotēs, integrity, incorruptability and thus immortality, aphtharsia, and also freedom from emotional disturbances, apatheia.34 These are acceptable connotations for the notion of virginity in the Akathistos also. Only the pure may see God, only the chaste are worthy receiving God . Noetic renewal has to lead to chaste and pure

29 Cant. (GNO VI 231-8). 30 Cant. (GNO VI 107, 337-9). 31 Cant. (GNO VI 117). 32 Cant. (GNO VI 55, 458); Akath., str. 18. 33 Cant. (GNO VI 246-54) . See also David L. Balás, METOYΣIA @EOY: Man's Participation in God's Perfections According to Saint Gregory ofNyssa (Rome, 1966), 56 , 60 , 162-7. 34 Werner Jaeger, Two Rediscovered Works of Ancient Christian Literature (Leiden, 1954), 25-7.

68

T. HAIKKA

conduct, maybe even to its highest stage of asceticism, angelic life.35 Chastity is reached by means of imitation . Gregory presents Mary, saints , soul-bride and his sister Macrina as the models of the true imitators of Christ.36 Purification and virginity are needed for the soul as a preparation to receive God, as they were for Mary a preparation to become God -bearing flesh, the receptacle of Spirit.37 Gregory might have been the first to insist that Mary made a vow of 38 virginity after living her childhood in a temple as a consecrated offer to God . " The Akathistos also confirms, that Mary's flesh was holy by the usage of the term Theotokos and explicitly by using the adjective hagios (2.1 , 3.3-4, 15.10, 23.7, 24.2). Gregory had contacts with many communities of virgins during his life . Macrina gradually changed the family mansion in Annisa into a female monastery. His brother Basil founded a retreat for male ascetics in the neighborhood on Pontus and there was a ' chorus of virgins' in Nyssa also.39 Gregory wrote some of his works to be used in monasterial communities either by the ascetics themselves or by the leader. Deaconess Olympias, an aristocrat and a founder of a female monastery in Constantinople, was a close friend to Gregory. She was also the recipient of Gregory's Canticum, written for her monastery, but inevitably meant for wider circulation also.40 The target group of the Akathistos and Gregory's Canticum is the same: the people of Constantinople. Constantinople was very receptive to exhortations to virginity on the turn of the fifth 41 decade.¹¹ Gregory of Nazianzus expresses the spirit of the age in his famous homily: Χριστὸς ἐκ Παρθένου· γυναῖκες παρθενεύετε , ἵνα Χριστοῦ yévnoƉe µntépɛç.42 Virginity does not, however, stand for its own sake. As the soul-bride's virginity leads to marriage , so does Mary's virginity lead to childbirth: χαῖρε, ἡ τἀναντία εἰς ταὐτὸ ἀγαγοῦσα· χαῖρε , ἡ παρθενίαν καὶ λοχείαν ζευγνῦσα · 43

35 Cant. (GNO VI 29-30, 134-5, 442-8) ; Akath . 13.9. 36 Cant. (GNO VI 46-7, 68, 126 , 231). 37 Cant. (GNO VI 71 ). See also In diem natalem Christi (F. Mann, Die Weihnachtspredigt Gregors von Nyssa, 1136,32-3 , 1141,11-2); B.E. Dunlop, Earliest Greek Patristic Orations on the Nativity (2004) , 166-9. 38 In diem natalem Christi (F. Mann, Die Weihnachtspredigt Gregors von Nyssa, 1137,22 1140,28). 39 Anna M. Silvas, Gregory of Nyssa: The Letters. Introduction , Translation and Commentary, SVigChr 83 (Leiden, 2007), 1-57. 40 Franz Dünzl , Braut und Bräutigam: Die Auslegung des Canticum durch Gregor von Nyssa (Tübingen, 1993), 23-35. 41 L.M. Peltomaa, The Image of the Virgin (2001), 72-7. 42 'Christ is of a Virgin. Women, preserve your virginity, that you may become mothers of Christ.' Gregory of Nazianzus, In theophania (PG 36, 313.3). 43 'Hail, you who bring opposites together; Hail you who unite virginity and childbirth.' Akath. 15.12-13.

Gregory of Nyssa's Canticum behind the Akathistos Hymn?

69

Doctrinal Emphases

The child born from Virgin Mary united in himself God and man. The epithet Theotokos guarantees in Gregory and in the Akathistos full divinity of Christ and constitutes the criterion of orthodoxy. In the Akathistos the doctrine of Christ's two natures is expressed according to the statements of the Ephesus council and particularly to the triumphant Cyrillian party view (strophes 12-15). The paradox of the separatedness and unity of the two natures of Christ is not yet addressed in the hymn.44 The most urgent theological question in the times of creation of the Akathistos as Dr. Peltomaa has timed it was the possibility of the infinite God to fit into a woman's womb. Would the uncreated let the created to circumscribe him?45 Gregory holds that in a mysterious way he would, and indeed does: îρòç ö βλέπουσα ἐκεῖνο γίνῃ , ὅπερ ἐκεῖνος ἐστι , μιμουμένη τὸν ἐν σοὶ λάμποντα διὰ τῆς ἀντιλαμπούσης αὐγῆς ἐκ τῆς σῆς καθαρότητος. ... ἀλλ ' ὅμως ὁ τοσοῦτος, ὁ τοιοῦτος, ὁ πᾶσαν τῇ παλάμῃ περισφίγγων τὴν κτίσιν, ὅλος σοὶ χωρητὸς γίνεται καὶ ἐν σοὶ κατοικεῖ καὶ οὐ στενοχωρεῖται τῇ σῇ Quoε ...46 The discussion about incarnation got very technical tones towards the turn of the fifth decade, but the weight of Gregory's Christology is on the impact of incarnation and on the full divinity of Christ, not on finding an answer to the question ' how' . Gregory draws a line from the incarnation of Christ in Mary's womb to conceiving him in human soul. He deals with the place and the prerequisites of the incarnation , but do not yet touch the place and the mode of the unity in Christ. It is possible, that Gregory's Christological statements ,47 written to disprove the arguments of, among others, Eunomius and Apollinarius , might have been re-used in the context of the Nestorian controversy. Virginal conception and childbearing means new creation, nea ktisis, which according to the Akathistos is the pivotal moment in the history of mankind and the universe (1.16, 13.1-2). Thus virginity constitutes a sign of resurrection, which brings freedom from the curse of death and corruption.48 The Akathistos conforms to Gregory's consistent teaching about the virginity as the gate to divine immortality ( 13.8-9) . In Christ the mankind reaches its maturity and the initial purpose of God's creative work is fulfilled .

44 Gregory of Nyssa, Gregorii Nysseni Epistulae, editio altera (GNO VIII/2 , 3.24); L.M. Peltomaa, The Image of the Virgin (2001 ), 85-101. 45 L.M. Peltomaa, The Image of the Virgin (2001 ), 107f. , 135-9, 181-5 . 46 'By looking at him you will become what he is . By imitating him who shines within you, his gleam is reflected by your purity ... Although he holds all creation in his palm, you can wholly contain him , he dwells in you but is not confined in you.' Cant. (GNO VI 68,8-16). 47 Cant. (GNO VI 108, 125-7, 381-2). 48 Cant. (GNO VI 351-2).

70

T. HAIKKA

Conclusion

In addition to being a liturgical masterpiece, the Akathistos may be seen as a summary of the developments in christology up to the Ephesus council, and also as a collection of representative examples of the philosophical and linguistic tools utilized in teaching the right faith. Most of the elements used in the Akathistos were used by all serious current theologians. However, some aspects , emphasized in the Akathistos, central in the Canticum and typical also in Gregory's earlier texts make it reasonable to assume the connection between the texts possible. These are particularly the dominance of the metaphor of marriage, connecting virginity with fertility, holiness of the flesh, high regard of asceticism as an enabler of the spiritual ascent, the notion of infinity and the images of the infinite dwelling in the finite. Canticum's soul-bride and her ascent to the heavenly bridegroom might have lent some features to Mary of the Akathistos. These two texts had a common goal : to promote right faith and chaste, virginal form of life to the people of Constantinople .

Réfuter sans lasser le lecteur : Pratique de la réfutation dans le Contre Eunome de Grégoire de Nysse

Matthieu CASSIN, Paris

Les trois livres du Contre Eunome de Grégoire de Nysse appartiennent à un petit groupe d'œuvres patristiques de langue grecque, qui ont pour caractéristique d'être la réfutation suivie de l'ouvrage d'un adversaire; elles sont constituées par l'alternance entre citations du texte adverse et réponses de l'auteur. Si on arrête ce recensement avant la querelle nestorienne, il semble qu'on puisse proposer la liste suivante, pour les œuvres conservées: Origène , Contre Celse; Eusèbe de Césarée, Contre Marcel, Théologie ecclésiastique ; Basile de Césarée, Contre Eunome I - III ; Grégoire de Nysse, Contre Eunome I-III , Réfutation de la profession de foi d'Eunome, Contre Apollinaire ; Cyrille d'Alexandrie, Contre Julien. Si j'inclus dans cette liste aussi bien des textes tournés contre les païens que ceux, les plus nombreux , qui s'opposent à des adversaires chrétiens, j'en exclus volontairement les traités qui ne réfutent pas directement un texte précis et suivi, même s'ils attaquent un adversaire et ses positions , ou bien ne retiennent qu'un élément de ce texte , non son déroulement,² ainsi que les traités aujourd'hui perdus , dont il faudra cependant dresser la liste.3 Il faudra aussi, par la suite, étendre l'enquête au domaine latin. Il me semble qu'il est possible de dégager ainsi un groupe d'œuvres , doté d'une certaine cohérence, dont l'examen en termes de composition , d'écriture , de méthode de réfutation peut se révéler fructueux et à l'intérieur duquel des comparaisons seront plus largement justifiées. Ce groupe traverse les frontières

1 Cf. par exemple le Monogénès de Macarios de Magnésie et toutes les autres œuvres se présentant sous la forme de dialogues, fictifs ou non. Les livres IV-V qui suivent le Contre Eunome de Basile, et dont la paternité est encore discutée, n'entrent pas du tout dans notre corpus , dans la mesure où ils ne suivent pas un texte précis mais s'opposent à des arguments, extraits sans doute d'œuvres diverses. 2 On peut évoquer ici le Contre Hiéroclès d'Eusèbe de Césarée , qui s'attache à un seul point de l'ouvrage de Hiéroclès , à savoir le parallèle établi entre le Christ et Apollonius de Tyane; on pourrait toutefois retenir l'ouvrage, à la marge, pour sa réponse à la Vie d'Apollonius de Tyane de Philostrate. Le cas des trois Discours contre les Ariens d'Athanase est plus complexe: il y a plusieurs textes visés (Arius, Astérius) et ils ne sont pas réfutés de manière suivie. 3 Pour une première liste concernant la controverse eunomienne, voir Jürgen André Röder, Gregor von Nyssa, Contra Eunomium 1 1-146 , Patrologia 2 (Frankfurt, etc. 1993), 33-9.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 71-76. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

72

M. CASSIN

établies d'ordinaire entre littérature apologétique et littérature anti-hérétique.4 Il ne semble malheureusement pas y avoir de terme décrivant ce sous-genre dans la pratique littéraire antique ; les termes d'avτíppηois (réfutation) ou de λóyog ȧvtippηtɩkóg (discours réfutatif), qui peuvent recouvrir ce corpus , n'en sont pourtant pas caractéristiques, puisqu'ils sont aussi employés à propos du Contre Apion de Flavius Josèphe , qui n'est pas une réfutation suivie. Ces termes apparaissent, au vu d'une première enquête, comme une désignation plus tardive que la période patristique, et appartiennent sans doute davantage à l'histoire littéraire byzantine, telle que la reflètent les manuscrits et les titres qu'ils transmettent.5 Je mènerai un premier examen à partir des traités Contre Eunome de Grégoire de Nysse, pour dégager les principaux traits de son attitude face au texte qu'il réfute. En effet, dans la majorité des cas évoqués, les textes réfutés ne nous sont conservés que par l'intermédiaire des œuvres qui les réfutent . Il est donc de la première importance de mieux comprendre la manière dont le réfutateur traite le texte de son adversaire: suit-il l'ordre du texte qu'il réfute , ou bien le recompose -t-il? cite -t-il à la lettre, ou bien récrit-il à sa manière? cite-t-il la totalité du texte adverse , une majorité de celui- ci , ou bien quelques passages seulement?' quelle proportion la réfutation a -t- elle par rapport au texte réfuté?8 Je ne suis pas le premier à soulever ces questions; tout éditeur d'un texte fragmentaire, conservé uniquement par l'œuvre qui le réfutait , les pose au cours de son travail . Dans le cas de l'Apologie de l'apologie d'Eunome, cependant, l'abondance de méta-discours , de commentaire sur sa pratique de réfutateur, qui est notable dans le Contre Eunome de Grégoire de Nysse , m'a paru propice à une enquête de ce genre. En voici les premiers éléments: j'envisagerai successivement le cas particulier que constitue la première partie du livre I (1-146) , puis ce qui concerne l'ordre du texte réfuté dans le texte réfutant et enfin le processus de sélection du texte effectivement réfuté.

4 À ce titre, cette catégorie d'ouvrages n'a pas directement retenu l'attention d'Alain Le Boulluec, La Notion d'hérésie dans la littérature grecque II-IIIe siècles (Paris, 1985) . 5 Jacques Schamp, Photios historien des lettres: la Bibliothèque et ses notices biographiques (Paris, 1987), n'évoque malheureusement pas ces termes. À l'exception du Contre Eunome I-III de Basile et de la Réfutation de la profession de foi par Grégoire. 7 À ce titre , l'étude des deux œuvres pour lesquelles nous avons à la fois l'ouvrage initial et sa réfutation est assez instructive. Le Contre Eunome de Basile cite environ 25% du texte d'Eunome qu'il réfute (cf. Louis Doutreleau , dans Basile de Césarée , Contre Eunome II , SC 305, Paris, 1983 , 224), quand , dans la Réfutation de la profession de foi d'Eunome, Grégoire cite près de 60% du texte de son adversaire (cf. Richard Paul Vaggione, Eunomius ofCyzicus: The Extant Works, Oxford , 1987, 140). 8 À titre d'exemple, le Contre Eunome I-III de Basile compte cinq fois plus de mots que l'Apologie d'Eunome, quand la Réfutation de Grégoire en compte environ vingt fois plus que la Profession de foi du même Eunome. Q Voir par exemple Richard Paul Vaggione, Eunomius of Cyzicus ( 1987), 89-94.

Réfuter sans lasser le lecteur

73

Grégoire semble tout d'abord annoncer qu'il va drastiquement sélectionner et réorganiser le texte adverse: 'J'omettrai de parler de tout cela, que je considère comme un amoncellement de paroles vaines et inutiles [...]. En revanche, s'il a élaboré une défense de ses idées hérétiques, il est bon, à mon avis, d'y apporter la plus grande attention' (Eun . I 22-3¹º) . Puis il ajoute: ' Si quelqu'un demande que notre réfutation soit rédigée selon le même ordre que le sien, qu'il en définisse l'avantage ' (Eun. I 24), Grégoire semblant ainsi écarter une réfutation pas à pas de l'écrit d'Eunome; on pourrait donc en conclure que l'horizon d'attente des lecteurs correspond à une réfutation linéaire du texte adverse, qui en conserve l'ordre . Cependant, ces remarques concernent en fait uniquement les cent quarante- six premiers paragraphes du livre I , qui portent sur la partie historique, narrative et rétrospective de l'ouvrage d'Eunome. Grégoire en laisse entendre lui-même le caractère singulier, en soulignant combien la partie narrative est marquée par l'axpηotía , l'inutilité (Eun . I 29). Le début de la seconde partie du livre I marque clairement la césure , au moyen d'une seconde introduction (I 147-50) et d'un second exposé de la méthode , qui se clôt ainsi : 'Pour montrer que son argumentation contre la doctrine de la vérité est au plus haut point menteuse et sans consistance, je citerai d'abord littéralement ses déclarations à ce sujet et ensuite, je reviendrai sur ce qui a été dit, en examinant chaque point séparément .' Le caractère atypique de la première partie du livre I est souligné par Grégoire lui-même dans la lettre à son frère Pierre de Sébaste , qui précède généralement le Contre Eunome dans la tradition manuscrite, et qui est connue comme Lettre 29 du corpus épistolaire de Grégoire: ' Pour favoriser la clarté et ne pas interrompre l'enchaînement des discussions sur la doctrine en intercalant les réponses à ses calomnies, nous avons été contraint de diviser l'ouvrage en deux : nous nous sommes occupé pour commencer de nous défendre des accusations portées contre nous; après quoi nous nous sommes mis, autant que nous le pouvions , à ce qu'il a dit contre la doctrine.'ll Venons-en maintenant à la pratique majoritaire dans le traité, et qui vaut aussi bien pour I 147-691 que pour II et III. Si Grégoire ne dit pas, contrairement à Origène par exemple,¹² qu'il suivra l'ordre du traité de son adversaire , il semble cependant qu'il se tienne à ce procédé , à la différence d'autres auteurs de notre corpus.13 En effet, il signale à quelques reprises , comme un fait exceptionnel , qu'il va chercher en amont ou en aval du texte d'Eunome un fragment, afin de

10 Grégoire de Nysse, Contre Eunome, éd . Werner Jaeger, GNO I-II (Leyde, 1960-1). Pour traduire Eun. I, je me suis parfois inspiré de la traduction que m'a aimablement communiquée M. Raymond Winling, à paraître dans la collection des Sources chrétiennes, en la remaniant largement. 11 Grégoire de Nysse, Lettres, 29.8 , éd . et trad . Pierre Maraval, SC 363 (Paris, 1990), 314-5. 12 Cf. Origène, Contre Celse, Prol . 6; I 41 ; etc. 13 Le cas le plus net est celui de Cyrille d'Alexandrie ; cf. Contre Julien II 2 et l'introduction de Pierre Évieux , SC 322 ( Paris, 1985), 29-30.

74

M. CASSIN

le rapprocher, pour les besoins de la réfutation , du passage qui l'occupe alors.¹4 Au contraire, dans la majorité des cas, Grégoire suit sans aucun doute le fil du texte d'Eunome, et indique souvent que le fragment se situe un peu après, ou bien à la suite du précédent.15 Ainsi , Grégoire commente fréquemment la manière dont il intègre le texte adverse dans son propre texte. Cependant, ces commentaires sont insuffisants pour qui voudrait reconstituer exactement le plan de l'Apologie de l'apologie d'Eunome, ou du moins replacer les fragments conservés par Grégoire dans l'ordre du texte d'origine ; en effet, lorsque Grégoire indique qu'il rapproche un fragment éloigné de celui qu'il commente , il n'indique que sa position relative par rapport au passage d'où il part; il reste impossible de le situer, dans la plupart des cas , par rapport à la série continue des fragments réfutés. Les commentaires de Grégoire, plus que sur l'œuvre d'Eunome, nous renseignent donc sur la méthode de Grégoire, sur son attention au texte adverse, et son éventuelle fidélité à celui-ci.16 Il en va de même pour l'activité de sélection exercée par l'auteur sur le texte adverse. La première difficulté envisagée par Grégoire est une difficulté d'écrivain et de pasteur: il ne veut pas lasser son lecteur.¹7 Il envisage le plus souvent la question sous la forme d'un dilemme : il vaudrait mieux se taire, mais il faut pourtant répondre, afin de ne rien laisser de côté, de ne pas sembler ne pas pouvoir répondre. Mais nous, même s'il paraît superflu au plus grand nombre de passer du temps à ce qui est évident et d'essayer de réfuter chaque point, tout ce que le plus grand nombre considère être par soi mensonger, dégoûtant et sans aucune force, cependant, pour ne pas paraître avoir laissé l'une de ses paroles sans examen par incapacité à réfuter, nous nous y attaquerons aussi, autant que nous pourrons (I 225) .18 En effet, la difficulté principale semble être pour Grégoire la longueur du texte adverse, et donc la longueur de son propre écrit. Cependant, une autre préoccupation se fait jour, qui se renforce au fur et à mesure des trois livres , celle de la clarté à atteindre.19 Grégoire cherche avant tout, semble-t-il , une efficacité de la réfutation qui vaille pour tous; il considère le raisonnement de l'adversaire comme sans force, mais reconnaît qu'il ne l'est pas pour tous : Pour ma part, j'estime que les propres mots de l'impiété suffisent à prouver l'absurdité de ce qui a été dit. En effet, de même que celui qui donne une description orale d'un

14 Cf. par exemple III 1.6; 67; 130; 2.66; 3.32 ; 4.39-40; 7.7. 15 Cf. les exemples relevés par Richard Paul Vaggione, Eunomius of Cyzicus (1987 ), 92 et n. 93-5. 16 Pour la question de l'écart plus ou moins grand entre le texte - source et les citations / paraphrases / reformulations de Grégoire, voir les pages très claires de Richard Paul Vaggione, Eunomius ofCyzicus (1987) , 89-92 . 17 Cf. par exemple III 2.72 ; 3.1 ; 49; 4.1; etc. 18 Cf. I 603 ; III 4.40. 19 Cf. par exemple III 1.21 ; 87 ; 2.43 ; 66 ; 72-4; 4.1 ; 5; 5.61 ; 6.1-2 ; 6.25-7.

Réfuter sans lasser le lecteur

75

visage défiguré par la souffrance20 ferait mieux de montrer la maladie en enlevant les voiles qui couvrent le visage, si bien qu'il n'est plus besoin de paroles pour la faire connaître à ceux qui la voient apparaître telle qu'elle est, de même, à mon avis , l'aspect hideux et les déformations de la doctrine hérétique apparaissent assez clairement à ceux qui perçoivent par le regard de l'âme, ces aspects étant dévoilés par la seule lecture. Mais puisqu'il faut, en plaçant le discours démonstratif comme un doigt sur les décrépitudes de sa doctrine, rendre plus évidente au grand nombre la déformation contenue en sa doctrine, je reprendrai de nouveau , dans l'ordre, ce qu'il a dit (I 407-8). On pourrait, en s'appuyant sur ce passage et sur d'autres semblables, entrapercevoir les destinataires de l'œuvre de Grégoire, au- delà du public très restreint des spécialistes , sans aller pour autant jusqu'à la totalité du troupeau de l'Église. Grégoire dit aussi écarter tout ce qu'il juge injurieux , blasphématoire , tout ce qui relève proprement de la polémique, et non plus du débat théologique. On peut de nouveau s'appuyer sur le témoignage de la Lettre 29.7, où Grégoire dit vouloir éviter de disperser la µáxη partout en son écrit – terme que P. Maraval traduit par polémique. Précisons aussitôt: Grégoire n'écarte pas toute polémique avec l'adversaire, il veut simplement qu'elle soit clairement identifiée, cantonnée à une partie bien déterminée de son discours - ici , les 146 premiers paragraphes du livre I – et de celui de l'adversaire, et non pas mêlée à l'argumentation.¹¹ Si Grégoire relève volontiers les écarts de langage de son adversaire, il ne se prive pas pour autant d'insulter abondamment Eunome, bien que, il est vrai, il rassemble généralement ses attaques en des passages bien délimités , presque séparables du reste de l'argumentation. Revenons, pour conclure, à l'ensemble du corpus envisagé: Grégoire de Nysse semble relativement isolé lorsqu'il commente les choix qu'il effectue dans le texte adverse et mentionne ses difficultés de réfutateur. Chez les autres auteurs , les commentaires sur leur pratique sont rares, ou bien isolés en préface, comme dans le Contre Celse, ou bien encore dans les deux traités d'Eusèbe contre Marcel d'Ancyre . En rassemblant les caractéristiques principales de la pratique de Grégoire, on pourra retenir les traits suivants: suivre globalement le fil du texte adverse, en le réfutant pas à pas, sauf pour la première partie du livre I, trop polémique et narrative ; ne retenir que les passages pertinents pour la démonstration des questions centrales, en écartant tout ce qui n'est pas essentiel ; ne pas lasser le lecteur; ne rien laisser sans réponse. Les deux derniers

20 Ou bien faut-il plutôt comprendre « mangé par le mal » , en référence à l'action de la lèpre, ce que confirmerait la référence aux voiles masquant le visage? Cf. pour l'emploi des mots de la racine de óẞn dans ce contexte, Jean Gascou, ‘L'éléphantiasis en Égypte gréco-romaine (faits, représentations, institutions)', Mélanges Jean-Pierre Sodini, Travaux et mémoires 15 (Paris, 2005), 261-85. 21 Pour un aperçu sur la théorie littéraire et les goûts du frère aîné en matière de polémique littéraire, on pourra se reporter, comme Pierre Maraval l'indique en note, à la Lettre 135 de Basile.

76

M. CASSIN

points marquent la contradiction principale de l'entreprise , et expliquent sans doute la difficile réception de l'œuvre : Grégoire est déchiré entre le souci de concision et la crainte d'être pris en défaut, ce qui explique peut-être cette œuvre monumentale et souvent peu structurée . On en trouve un correspondant, à échelle plus réduite , dans le Contre Marcel et la Théologie ecclésiastique d'Eusèbe.

Analytic Philosophy of Language and the Revelation of Person. Some Remarks on Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus the Confessor

Marcello LA MATINA, Macerata, Italy

Foreword

It happens everywhere that people refer to other people by means of the word 'Person' or some translations of it. In many cases the word is used regardless of any particular semantics so that it works as a mere dummy. Sometimes , however, in more technical contexts it is employed as a term conveying - or stating - a well- definite notion. These technical usages entangle us for they nevertheless spread some ideology. It is a crucial question whether such modern ideologies comply with the notions of ' Person' in current use among the Fathers of Christianity. I think unless we try to state this question as a logical claim too, we cannot appreciate the epistemological richness concealed in the Christian revealed ontology. In this short paper I want only to suggest that a correct formulation ought to ascertain the right semantics of ' Person' by use of some logical devices drawn from modern philosophy of language.

Glimpses Let me begin with a historical divide. According to modern usages, being a person seems to be a matter of agency. This causes the word ' Person' to refer, on the one hand, to the intentional states of mind and, on the other, to the selfconsciousness of individuals. Being a person is the same as having a moral stance, possessing reason, behaving with freedom, etc. A psychological amount is thus expressed by such conceptions, so that the meaning of ' Person' draws very closely on the Cartesian self: a sort of individual, who can be talked about, at the last, only in terms of ' speciesism'.¹ What is troubling in almost all similar conceptions is their unaware use of a sort type logic. For being a ' Person' is somehow being a special sort of entity rather than being just an entity. It goes without saying that modern usages are not in accordance with the ancient

¹ By ' speciesism' it is meant a conception assigning different values to different beings on the basis of their membership to a given species.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 77-83. Peeters Publishers , 2010.

78

M. LA MATINA

ones, for ' Person' was not a sort type term. Neither the Greek nor the Latin did associate with ' Person' primarily any psychological or ethical or legal content. On the contrary, classical words likе лрóσшлоν ог persona were commonly used with reference to nothing but the participants in acts of speaking. Namely, they expressed both the role-taking of communicating people – as in everyday life as in drama - and the indexical slot of verbal forms . Such words belonged to the lexicon of grammar as well as of theatre. It was thanks to its theatrical nuance that the word ' Person' played such a crucial role in the Orthodox debate against Sabellianism . For the sake of completeness, there was also an astronomical sense of лрóσшлоν, documented specially in late Antiquity, but it is not influential here. As all of us know, the words лрóσшлоν and persona were regularly used by theologians as technical terms during the 4th century, though relevant differences can be observed between Western and Eastern traditions from a logical point of view. The former one - represented e.g. by Augustine and seems not to have been very sensitive to the semantic aspects of Boethius 'Person ', whilst the latter developed an original concept starting precisely from the analysis of the biblical sentences pertinent to the three-personal account of God . This is perhaps the reason why the notion of ' Person' was developed in Western theology as a solely moral concept, whilst it remained a specifically logical-semantic notion in the Eastern concept (though not yet approached until now as it deserves) . Particularly - as here we will only suggest - in Gregory of Nyssa's and Maximus' writings .

Sources

From the origins of Christianity, Church Fathers acknowledged the genuine God as a speaking entity. Of course, he used some human devices like utterances and words; he spoke the same Greek as his interpreters. A complete set of God's utterances was furnished by the Bible. However, at least some of these are token-reflexive³ sentences, provided they are not only sentences about God, but also sentences by God about himself. Since both God and his interpreters spoke Greek, understanding God meant quoting or paraphrasing his statements within the same language. With the singular relevant exception of Ex. 3:14 . In this famous passage, instead of the indexical account of God expressed by the original Hebrew text ' Ehjeh asher ehjeh', the LXX's translation gives 'Eyó εiμi ô öv, ‘I am the being', instead of ‘ I am who I am '. The substantive term does

2 This feature is already present in the LXX as well as in the early Fathers . See e.g. Philo, Mos. 1.75.2 , Ps .-Justinus, Cohort. ad gent. 19D 2 and 19E 3. 3 The expression is due to Hans Reichenbach, Elements ofSymbolic Logic (London and New York, 1947).

Analytical Philosophy of Language and the Revelation of Person

79

replace the indexical one, modifying not only the surface grammar but also the deep logical form of the sentence. As an awkward consequence, every indexicality is narcotized from God's account, for He is not yet just the ' speaking I ', the subject of the enunciation, but also one among the constituents of the sentence, i.e. the term ' the Being': His place moves from the extra-sentential act of uttering to the intra-sentential roles of subject and predicate. Many ontological consequences resulted from such a linguistic change. Apart from such a remarkable exception, the rule was the Greek to Greek translation. By the way, it is notable that up to now the interpretive basis of Greek theology is this sort of endolinguistic translation, in which the Metalanguage of the interpreters (i.e. the Greek of the Fathers) does incorporate the Object-language (i.e. the Greek pretended to be spoken by God). Though restricted in a sole language the word of God remained often mysterious , especially as for its ontological commitments." The New Testament, by revealing the three-personal God , made things harder to understand . What could the right semantics of Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἓν ἐσμεν be?? How could the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost be, at the same time, a threefold person and a unique God? The more interesting sentences about God began to be logically analysed by the Cappadocian Fathers first by means of the categories of Greek philosophy. From then on, such a new Christian ontology will try to free itself from the metaphysical commitments of both Neo-Platonism and Neo-Aristotelism .

Backgrounds Speaking in technical terms , the main problem consisted in giving sentences a logical form that could preserve both the three -personal account and the substantial unity of God . Answering this question could have settled - all in one go - both a metaphysical and a semantic perspective . From the one side , it had meant understanding how universals do melt with particulars; from the other, how any word like ' God', 'the Father', 'the Son' etc. does work in any sentence about God. But where can they find the logical devices they would have needed to accomplish such a task? The first candidate was the theory of Forms of Plato. The Sophist dialogue offered an original bridge between ontology and language to the Greek Fathers; for instance, in that famous passage (261e) where the 4 See the analysis made by Gregory of Nyssa in GNO I/1 , 182. 5 Such a category was first established by Roman Jakobson, The linguistic aspects of translation, in: Reuben Arthur Brower (ed .), On translation (Harvard , 1959), 232-9. 6 Eunomius' heresy might easily be portrayed by use of this dichotomy. In fact, he inserted discontinuity between Object Language and Meta-language just modifying the expressive resources of the latter by means of names as génnema, poíema and so on (See Adv. Eun. I 1.74ff.). 7 See GNO I/1 , 170-2.

80

M. LA MATINA

Stranger argues that there are two classes of words apt to denote substance : ỏνóμata and pńμata . According to his view, naming commits differently from denoting and words could not express anything before names combine with verbs in the logical form of a sentence (262c) . Plato clearly differentiates the logical work of a name from that of a sentence and the ontological commitment of the subject from that of the predicate (262d). The question arose whether oɛóc ought to count as a subject or as a predicate? A large part of Gregory's Against Eunomius is devoted to this subject : Is ‘ 0ɛó ' the name of God? In the strict sense, the Sophist did not account for sentences including names like Oɛóc in predicative position; for they denote universals , i.e. unchangeable Forms. To make things more difficult, Christian theologians also incorporated within the sphere of Godhead some terms like ' the Son' and ' the Logos', which committed them not to a dualistic ontology of divinity. How to reconcile a particular entity like that referred to by ' the Son' with the universal Form denoted by the predicate 0ɛóç? Applying the ' particular' vs the ' universal' dualism to Jesus Christ could have resulted in an aporia. Christ is expressly termed as χαρακτήρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως τοῦ Θεοῦ in Heb. 1 : 3 , and that was unacceptable to Plato's ontology, according to which Forms are absolutely separated from their concrete instances. The point was whether admitting Jesus not to be really God , or, conversely, God not to be really unchangeable. Whatever one may think nowadays, Greek theologians could not have been Platonistic with regards to ontology. A second candidate remained . Aristotle's logic really expanded that of Plato's Sophist, though radically modifying it. As we said, in Plato's view a sentence is well-formed, provided it holds a subject part and a predicate part. Now, according to Aristotle's new account of what a sentence is - currently termed as two-terms theory – every sentence can be viewed as well-formed , provided it holds two terms (two horoi), regardless of any structural difference of predicate and subject. However, as Sir Peter Geach once observed : 'It is logically impossible for a term to shift about between subject and predicate position without undergoing a change of sense as well as a change of role . Only a name can be a logical subject; and a name cannot retain the role of a name if it becomes a logical predicate; for a predicate purports to give us what holds good or does not hold good of an individual, but a name just serves to name or refer to an individual." The Aristotelian settlement was a false move that resulted in the logical confusion of naming and being predicable of, so that the two terms of a sentence were reduced to being just the two names of a sole thing. Since a pair of names is not a sentence but just the beginning of a list - what remained of the sentence in such an approach?

8 See e.g. GNO I/2, 321 . 9 See Peter Thomas Geach, Logic Matters (Oxford , 1972), 47f. , 48 .

Analytical Philosophy of Language and the Revelation of Person

81

A reformation of both the Platonic and the Aristotelian logic was unavoidable for there was no room in them for ' Person' (e.g. ' the human-divine Son of God') and their related events (e.g. ' the birth of Christ') . According to Plato's theory of Forms the universal was the very subject of true philosophy, whereas the particulars were dismissed . Aristotelian logic was centered on general statements like 'Wales are Mammals', while it took no interest in sentences like Socrates is mortal ' or 'Χριστὸς θεοῦ δύναμις καὶ θεοῦ σοφία ' for their singular terms were not suitable to occur, in turn, now as the subject and now as the predicate of a syllogism.10 This is perhaps the reason why Greek Fathers were urged to exceed the boundaries (the horoi) of the Logica Vetus looking for new implements . Almost surprisingly, both Gregory and Maximus seemed to anticipate some notions of modern philosophy of language; for instance, that of 'places in a predicate'.¹¹

The hidden places Suppose I am a 4th century Church Father - or a simple-hearted man of faith -– looking for the correct semantics of John's famous sentence:

(1) ' God is love.' By using Plato I might understand ( 1) as committing to just an ontology of relationships among Forms : God, Love, perhaps Sameness. I might also wonder what happens here with the Sophist's machinery of Subject and Predicate. Neither word is a verb, while the ' is ' does not express but a relation of identity. Then, is Identity another - a third - Form? Of course, it could be troubling. Unfortunately, it does not work better with the help of Aristotelian logic. ‘ God' and 'Love' could be taken into consideration just as universal terms (for instance, occurring in the general premise of a syllogism). So that the logical form of (1) turns into (2) : (2) " God" is predicated of (all) “Love”. (or vice versa) Perplexity increases: What might the informative content of the latter be for believers? Perhaps that ' God' is interchangeable with ' Love', is it not? Everything goes as if the entities denoted by both ' God' and ' Love ' were substances overlapping each other. Then, must 'Love' be conceived as something different from God (another ovoía)? Or, in the negative, is God a narcissist substance?

10 For such aspects see Jan Lukasiewicz , Aristotle's Syllogistic from the Standpoint ofModern Formal Logic (Oxford, 1957) , 5-7. 11 The importance of such a notion is rightly stressed by Donald Davidson, Method and Metaphysics, in: Deucalion 11 ( 1993) 239-48 ; now in: id., Truth, Language, and History (Oxford and New York, 2005), 39-45.

82

M. LA MATINA

The answer appeals to the revelation of ' Person' and urges us to commit to an ontology of persons. ' Love - Clive Staples Lewis once wrote - is something that one person has for another person . If God was a single person, then before the world was made, He was not love'.12 So, ( 1 ) has its correct semantics if, and only if, 'Love' is viewed as, at least, a two-place predicate containing blanks or places as follows : x and y love each other'. Equally, ' God' is to be read as 'x is- God'. Thus , God is love thanks not to an impersonal 'Love', but because His being has so many places as x's and y's existing and loving each other. Such places and their logical filling-in are the key for understanding divine as well as human personhood. It was by the close tackling of the Greek ' common notions', that Gregory discovered the blanks of predicates. In the Ad Graecos he describes 0ɛóç as a predicate having three places , ἵνα ᾖ πατὴρ καὶ υἱὸς καὶ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, τουτέστι πρόσωπον καὶ πρόσωπον καὶ πρόσωπον , διὸ καὶ τρία πρόσωπα (GNO III/1 , 1,20). Such a logical form is very close to that of ẞonlóç (analysed as 'x is a helper of y' in Adv. Eun . I 1,571) , for both terms do conceal a gap to fill. As Gregory points out, neglecting the hidden place for y could be the same as missing the semantic target of the word (ἐὰν ὑφέλῃς τὸ τῆς βοηθείας δεόμενον, ἤργησεν ἡ ἐμφαινομένη τῷ ὀνόματι δύναμις, ibid .) .13 Moreover, in the same work, he claims - as already Plato attempted and Aristotle neglected to do - that predicates and subjects are structurally different and not interchangeable terms in any relevant sentence about God. Thus , ' 0ɛóc ' is not the name of God, for [ε ]ὶ τὸ θεὸς ὄνομα προσώπου δηλωτικὸν ὑπῆρχεν, τρία πρόσωπα λέγοντες ἐξ ἀνάγκης τρεῖς ἂν ἐλέγομεν θεούς (GNO ΙΙΙ/1 , 1) . Item, being a лрóσшлоν is not the same as being a special sort of entity for - we can add - it is not a sort of thing at all . Accordingly, committing to лрóσwлɑ does not insert any new entity in ontology. I consider the differentiation of оùσia and лрóσшлоν as the first step of the Patristic revelation of ' Person'. It acknowledged the ontological priority of sentences over any other linguistic category, for it is only within the context of a sentence that оùσíɑ and лρóσшлоν can be discriminated . Therefore , this primacy gave evidence to God's subjectiveness against any Plotinian fusionality in philosophy or any Aristotelian mereology in theology. Discovering the logical role of лроσшлоν епаbled Gregory to refer to particularity, without committing to new entities in God's economy. However, his analogical use of лрóσшлоν аs а synonym of the human individual (tòn tinà tês ousìas) yielded

12 Clive Staples Lewis, Beyond Personality (London , 1944), 25-6 . 13 Of course, relative terms like ẞonlóg were known to the ancient grammarians as well as to philosophers (see Arist. Cat 5b 11-29). However, the two examples discussed by Gregory in GNO I/1 , 191 seem to account for a more comprehensive semantics of such terms, for they are used to relate the sentence plan and the plan of the enonciation. A similar remark can be found in Maximus' Sch. In De div. nom . (PG 4, 225B).

Analytical Philosophy of Language and the Revelation of Person some semantic failures . If - according to some modern scholars

83

a Person is

nothing but an άτоμоν or idiкоν лроσшлоν (as Ad Graecos 3,1.31.13 seems to encourage), then predicates are distributive terms just binding their variables (the x's and their values) within a given sort. What is the difference between such an only presumed sort typе лроσшлоν of the Ancients and the real sort type 'Person' of such modern scholars? Greek Fathers progressively dismissed - though any idea of ' Person' as just a member of a set, and still a difference – difficult to say – ought to be. I think there is much more in the Fathers ' philosophy of language, provided one reads them from a logical point of view too. Anyway, such an inscrutability of reference necessitated a second step, in order to definitely differentiate the sort type notion of 'Person' from the non- sort type one. Whilst the former commits to a world of individuals, each of them belonging to some species, the latter is based on the personal tropos of Christ. Christ is neither an individual nature (like the Phoenix) nor a natural Gattungswesen, as a member of a set. Explaining the paradoxical singleness of the Son of God was the task accomplished by Maximus . At the end of my short paper, there is only space to mention his effort and his personal sacrifice . Should you consider this paper too general in nature , I hope to offer a more complete and extended version at a later occasion.

Basil of Caesarea and Free Will

Anne Gordon KEIDEL, Boston

Within Basil's writings there is evidence that he believed and taught that the human being could knowingly reject the good and choose evil. This runs counter to the position expressed by Brooks Otis in his article, ' Cappadocian Thought as a Coherent System " . According to Otis , the Greeks believed that it was 'unthinkable' that anyone could sin in full knowledge of what one was doing, and because he claims that the Cappadocians fully shared this conception of sin with Socrates and Plato, there is an incoherence in their system.2 Here the classical Greek position as expressed by Otis will be presented first, along with his examples of Basil sharing this position . Following this , specific evidence will be cited showing that Basil saw free will as integral to the human condition and a principal cause of sin. The paper will then show how Basil saw free will as equally important when it came to choosing the good over the bad. For the classical Greek position, Otis cites Plato's Myth ofEr, where he says 'the lesson is that only he who knows can make a wise choice'.3 My reading of the relevant passage from Plato would be: ' to discover who will bring about to him the capacity and knowledge to discern the good and bad life, and always and everywhere to choose the better'.4 Otis claims that the Cappadocians explained the fall of Adam by: the persuasion of Satan, the deception of fleshly passions , and the weakness of the human intellect, but later Otis concludes that they shared the Greek position which rationalized the conception of sin as ignorance, making them unable to account for sin. Otis points to the ambiguity concerning free will that can be found in Basil's treatment of the sin of invisible powers, such as angels . This is particularly clear in his De Spiritu Sancto 16, 38. Here, Basil states that the angelic powers keep their freedom of will, but never fall away from their patient attendance on Him who is truly good'. This seems a contradiction of what it means to have a free will . Then a few lines later, he says that the fall of the wicked and hostile spirits ' establishes

¹ Dunbarton Oaks Papers 12 ( 1958) 95-124. 2 B. Otis, Cappadocian Thought (1958), 110. 3 Ibid. 114. 4 Plato, The Republic 618c. 5 B. Otis, Cappadocian Thought (1958), 110. 6 Ibid. 117.

Studia Patristica XLVII, 85-89. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

86

A.G. KEIDEL

our statement of the freedom of the will of the invisible powers; being as they are, in a condition of equipoise between virtue and vice, and on this account needing the succor of the Spirit'.? Basil is obviously not sure how to account for the fall of Satan and his followers, not to mention how the angels in heaven can have free will, while at the same time be unable to turn away from God. More importantly for us here is how he viewed the freedom of will in the human being. And here we can also find evidence which seems to support Otis ' position. Basil writes both of sin caused by ignorance , as well as, involuntary sin. In his early work the De judicio Dei, he explains the role of knowledge in preventing sin. Here, sin is caused by closing one's mind to the knowledge God offers us, which in turn results in ignorance. The remedy is knowledge of God's commandments. However, Basil writes that people chose to close their eyes, they chose to be darkened . It can be argued that by free will people made a choice against God, they shut the door in his face, and this was the initiating cause of their sin, which in turn promoted ignorance resulting in sin.³ The subject of involuntary sin is more problematic. Two texts will be cited. Both are from the Regulae brevius tractatae. In the first example, Basil expounds on the situation described in Rom. 7: ... it shows that our soul is dominated by other passions and not allowed by them to be free in the directions in which it desires freedom, according to the principle laid down by the apostle: ' But I am carnal , sold under sin . For not what I would that do I practise , but what I hate, that I do' (Rom. 7: 14f.). And again: ' But now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me' (Rom . 4:17) .⁹ The key words here are, ' our soul is dominated by other passions and not allowed by them to be free'. It is true that Basil believed that Satan , through deception, and the fanning of passions, could cause us to sin, but not always, for, we are given the means to resist him. However, if we are in bondage to Satan, we are his servants. Freedom comes when we realize this and become disciples of Christ. While Satan can persuade us towards evil, evil can also spring from within ourselves, when out of carelessness we leave uncultivated the natural seeds of good.10 A more explicit example is found in the same work, where Basil says: Indeed God has allowed this to happen to us for our good, if happily the soul through its involuntary sufferings may come to perceive who it is that dominates it, and recognising the things in which it is involuntarily a slave to sin may regain soberness and

7 De Spiritu Sancto 16.38 (SC 17bis , 382); Engl . transl . Bloomfield Jackson , The Treatise De Spiritu Sancto, The Nine Homilies ofthe Hexaemeron , and The Letters of St. Basil the Great, NPNCF 8 (Oxford and New York 1895, repr. 1978), 24 , henceforth referred to as 'Jackson'. 8 De judicio Dei 3 ( PG 31 , 657A-B) ; Engl . transl. William Kemper Lowther Clarke, The Ascetical Works of St. Basil (London , 1925) , 79, henceforth referred to as ' Clarke'. 9 Regulae brevis tractatae 16 (PG 31, 1092B- 1093B), henceforth referred to as ' Reg. br.'; Engl. transl. Clarke, 236. 10 Reg. br. 75 ; Engl. transl. Clarke, 258.

Basil of Caesarea and Free Will

87

escape from the snare of the devil, finding the mercy of God ready to help those who truly repent.¹¹ This shows a situation where deception is at play, and our escape from this situation is possible when our ignorance of the deception is dispelled, and we repent. The Church acknowledges the possibility of involuntary sin. We see this in the Byzantine liturgy in the confession before communion: ' forgive my transgressions both voluntary and involuntary, of word and of deed , committed in knowledge or in ignorance'. So, there is no question that sin is possible through ignorance, though this could still be challenged. However, while sinning through ignorance is possible and acknowledged by Basil, he sees that it is also possible to sin in full knowledge, that the human being can knowingly choose to reject the good. When referring to the part played by human intention in causing sin, it refers to the willing of the human subject. One can intend something evil either because one is ill informed , or fully informed . Basil indicates that God creates us with the potential to refrain from choosing sin, by purifying that part of us responsible for directing our choices. We find this teaching in his homily on the importance of maintaining an awareness of oneself. He says: We [human beings] are easily prone to sins of thought. Therefore, he who has formed each heart individually, knowing that the impulse (õpµñ) received from the intention (лрóðεσιν) constitutes the major element of sin, has ordained that purity in the ruling 12 part (ηуεμoviк@) of our soul be our primary concern.' Intention is the initiator of sin by sending an impulse, which then sets the sin in motion. The ruling part is the free will which expresses itself in the intention. Here the word лрółɛσiу can also mean resolve or will. However, one could still cite evidence in a letter to Amphilochious which indicates other forces at work. But there are in it (the mind) two faculties (dittai duváµɛiç) ; in accordance with the view of us who believe in God , the one evil, that of the daemons which draws us on to their own apostasy; and the divine and the good, which brings us to the likeness of God. When, therefore , the mind remains alone and unaided, it contemplates small things, commensurate with itself. When it yields to those who deceive it, it nullifies its proper judgment, and is concerned with monstrous fancies... If on the other hand it assents to its diviner part, and accepts the boons of the Spirit, then, so far as its nature admits, it becomes perceptive of the divine.¹³ This points to an anthropology which sees in the human being two powers and three operations. As to the two powers, one evil and the other good, this is

11 Reg. br. 16 (PG 31 , 1092B-1093B); Engl. transl. Clarke, 236. 12 Attende tibi ipsi 1 (PG 31 , 200B) ; Engl. transl. Monica Wagner, Saint Basil: Ascetical Works (Washington D.C., 1950), 432. 13 Epistle 233, 1 (Yves Courtonne, St. Basile, Lettres III (Paris 1966), 39, henceforth referred to as 'Courtonne' ; Engl. transl . Jackson, 273 .

KEIDEL

A.G.

888

reminiscent of moderate Messalianism, which taught that the human being was inhabited by two spirits, one evil and the other good , who are constantly fighting for control of the human being.14 At the same time this passage highlights a still earlier problem, to be found in the writings of Philo, and possible earlier, namely, the nature of conscience. Is conscience represented by the presence within the human being of outside forces, or is conscience an intrinsic part of created human nature? This passage would seem to support the first of these pictures, with its mention of the two powers, the evil faculty dominated by daemons, and the soul's ' diviner part'. But the passage is a bit ambiguous, for there is mention of a mind which can remain alone , uninvolved with the other two parts, but which can also, either yield to deceptive forces , or give ascent to its diviner part. The soul operates by yielding or giving ascent. The ambiguity is further strengthened a little further along in this letter, in the mention that the soul operates in a mean, whereby the operations (¿ vέpyɛɩα ) in the choice of evil or good are determined by the will. The key point in this passage is that the operations of the soul can incline either toward vice or toward virtue depending on the will , the free choice of those putting the activity to use. The agent of sin is not ignorance here , but the will.15 But, what happens to the will when it yields to deception , resulting in the nullification of its proper judgment? One clue to this can be found in Basil's homily on Psalm 7, which describes a situation where the mind does not prevail over the baser thoughts , but permits its reason to be enslaved by the passions.16 The mind permits its reason to be enslaved , choosing to relinquish its freedom. The most explicit evidence that Basil believed that the human being could choose evil with full knowledge of the good is found in his homily on Psalm 61 . This brings together judgment, knowledge, and deliberation as operating freely within the human being. He writes: That there is a certain balance (Çvyóg) constructed in the interior of each of us by our Creator, on which it is possible to judge (Staкpivɛσ0αt ) the nature of things. 'I have set before you life and death, good and evil' (Deut. 30:15) , two natures contrary to each other; balance them against each other in your own tribunal; weigh accurately which is more profitable to you ; to choose a temporary pleasure and through it to receive eternal death, or, having chosen suffering in the practice of virtue, to use it to attain everlasting delights... It is not possible for you to say on that day of Judgment, ' I did not know the good' (oùк йdεiv tò ȧyalóv) . Your balances, which provide sufficiently the discrimination between good and bad, are presented to you . We test the weight of the body by the inclination of the balance , but we determine (Staкpívoμɛv) the choices

14 See for an example of this position, the Fifty Spiritual Homilies of Ps .-Macarius, and the Liber Graduum . 15 Epistle 233, 1 (Courtonne 3, 40; Engl. transl. Jackson, 273). 16 Homiliae Super Psalmos, Psalm 1 : 5, henceforth referred to as HPs 1 : 5 (PG 29, 221 B-C); Engl. transl. Agnes Clare Way, St. Basil: Exegetical Homilies (Washington D.C. , 1963), 160, henceforth referred to as 'Way'.

Basil of Caesarea and Free Will

89

of our life by the free judgment of our soul. This we call the balance, because it can incline equally both ways.¹7 The balance within the human being functions by weighing and choosing between two opposing natures. In response to the thesis of Otis , Basil says here clearly, that ' it is not possible for you to say on that day of Judgment, " I did not know the good" . Our choices are determined by the free judgment, which he calls the balance, because it can incline equally in either direction . Our judgment is free , discriminating between good and bad, and weighing things in the balance. Another passage also states clearly Basil's belief that the responsibility for the choice is with the creature. In an early writing, his Adversus Eunomium, he writes of the inhabitants of darkness who by ' their own deliberate choice of the deprivation of the good they flow off to the point of evil'.18 The key words here are, ' deliberate choice'. To say that ignorance is the only way to explain why people choose evil, is to say that the Creator programmed the human being to be unfree, which Basil sees as being a criticism of the Creator. We have seen how Basil viewed the role of free will and deliberate choice in the rejection of the good and the preference for evil. There is also evidence that he saw, deliberate choice and intention as being the determining factors in recognizing virtue. In his homily on Psalm 33 he states : Poverty is not always praiseworthy, but only that which is practiced intentionally (ÈK лроαιρέσεжç) according to the evangelical aim . Many are poor in resources, but very grasping (πλεονεκτικώτατοι) in intention (τῇ προαιρέσει) ; poverty does not save those; on the contrary, their intention (ǹ îрoɑíρɛσic) condemns them. Accordingly, not he who is poor is by all means blessed , but he who has considered the command of Christ better than the treasures of the world. These the Lord also pronounces blessed , when he says, ' Blessed are the poor in spirit' (Matth. 5:3) not those poor in resources, but those who from their soul (EK yuxñs) have chosen (лроɛλóμɛνot) poverty. For, nothing that is not deliberate (àлроaipέtov) is to be pronounced blessed . Therefore, every virtue (διότι πᾶσα ἀρετή ) , but this one especially before all others (μάλιστα δὲ αὕτη πρὸ πάντων), is characterized by the action of the free will (τῷ ἑκουσίῳ) .19 The practice of virtue can only be certain if the act is something chosen from one's soul, as a deliberate action of free will. The virtue of poverty is so acknowledged if it is practiced with the intention towards spiritual poverty, and not necessarily being poor in resources. While ambiguity can certainly be found concerning Basil's position on free will, I believe that the bulk of the evidence shows that he saw free will as enabling the human being to knowingly reject the good and choose evil, and knowingly reject evil and choose the good.

17 HPs. 61 :4 (PG 29, 480B); Engl. transl. Way, 348. 18 Adversus Eunomium II 27, 39-47 (SC 305 , 114. 116), my translation; see SC 305, 115. 117. 19 HPs. 33 :5 (PG 29, 361A-B) ; Engl. transl. Way, 255f.

The End of Interpretation in Basil of Caesarea's De spiritu sancto

Darren SARISKY, Cambridge

Criticisms of patristic exegesis sometimes presuppose modern historical-critical standards as the measure against which judgment is made.' In such cases, the stricture is usually that the early Christian reader did not use the proper techniques or did not arrive at the right results . This paper stays away from the question of method all together and centers instead on what Basil of Caesarea says about the purpose according to which he interprets scripture . Some brief, apparently passing, remarks Basil makes in the exordium of his treatise De spiritu sancto, and one of the key concepts of that section, will be the focus for this consideration of the end of biblical interpretation . The comments Basil makes as he opens his treatise concern his addressee, Amphilochios, but their significance derives from how they point to Basil's notion of humanity's vocation.2 Basil commends Amphilochios on three counts, each of which builds on the previous one. First, Amphilochios is eager to learn. In making this point , Basil quotes Luke 11:10 and associates it with Amphilochios: 'Every one who asks, receives, and he who seeks, finds ."3 Amphilochios is not daunted by the need to study theological issues rigorously ; he is so eager to learn that his example should motivate others to follow him. And not only is he keen to ask questions, but he genuinely desires to grasp the true answer. He differs significantly at this point from those who ask to test their teacher. There is no shortage of such people, Basil says , but Amphilochios is different. What ultimately sets Amphilochios apart, however, is not that he asks questions, or that he wants to know the truth, but that he puts the truth to a certain end : 'It is difficult to find someone who loves truth in his soul, who seeks the truth as medicine for his ignorance.

Amphilochios ' theological question is

1 For an example in which Basil is the target, see J. Verhees, Die Bedeutung der Transzendenz des Pneuma bei Basilius : Ostkirchliche Studien 25 ( 1976) 286-9. 2 For a much fuller exploration of the connection between reading scripture and anthropology in pro-Nicene theology, see Lewis Ayres, Nicaea and its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth- Century Trinitarian Theology (Oxford , 2004), 325-43 . 3 Basil of Caesarea, De spiritu sancto 1.1 (SC 17 bis, 250,7-8 ) ; Basil of Caesarea, On the Holy Spirit, transl. David Anderson (Crestwood , N.Y. , 1980), 15. I have modified Anderson's translation in note 8 but have followed him otherwise . I refer to further quotes from the translation simply as Anderson. 4 Basil, DSS 1.1 ( 252,13-5) ; Anderson 15.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 91-95. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

92

D. SARISKY

part of his quest to reach what Basil deems the tέλoç of humanity, knowing God.5 This notion of humanity's end sets the parameters for how Basil proposes to read the Bible in the balance of the treatise : simply put, the Bible helps humanity reach its téλos and therefore should be read in light of that goal . A phrase that Basil introduces in section 1.2 and uses a few times (sometimes with modifications) in De spiritu sancto shows this to be the case. This phrase is σuvɛTÒS άкρоaτηs (wise hearer), of which Basil considers Amphilochios to be an example. Amphilochios has asked Basil about the appropriate form for the doxology: whether it is acceptable to put Father, Son, and Spirit on the same plane, as in the form Δόξα τῷ Πατρὶ καὶ τῷ Υἱῷ καὶ τῷ Πνεύματι τῷ ἁγίῳ. As Basil begins to answer that question , he says : ' Those who are idle in the pursuit of righteousness count theological terminology as secondary, together 7 with attempts to search out the hidden meaning in this phrase or that syllable .” The wise hearer, on the other hand , makes it his goal to become like God insofar as this is possible , and he analyzes prepositions for the sake of this greater purpose. In four crisp and elegant sentences, Basil works backward from the nature of human calling to the need for a certain sort of reading of the Bible:

Likeness is not without knowledge. Knowledge derives from lessons. The beginning of teaching concerns language. 8 The basic units of language are syllables and words. By concatenating these concepts, Basil expresses in a remarkably succinct fashion a view of reading the Bible which he does not unpack expressly in De spiritu sancto, but which functions as a sub-text for much of what he does say. In addition, Basil illustrates his view with a couple of examples of directing skills toward a set end. First, seeking truth is like hunting game in that one must follow its tracks, though they are small and difficult to discern , in order to find the quarry. Second, acquiring truth resembles learning a trade: one's knowledge grows little by little until one reaches proficiency. The specific brand of intelligence, then, that sets the wise hearer apart is an ability to interpret theological terminology for the sake of godliness or piety. In addition to this first and most significant instance of the phrase σUVETÒS akρoaτηs in De spiritu sancto 1.2 , the treatise contains one other reference to it as 5.11 comes to a close . With this second example, the hearer's location in the economy of redemption, so clearly delineated in 1.1-2 , recedes into the

5 6 7 8

Basil, Basil, Basil, Basil,

DSS DSS DSS DSS

8.18 (310,43-4) ; Anderson 37. 1.2 (252,22); Anderson 16. 1.2 (252,7-9) ; Anderson 16 . 1.2 (252,12-254,14); translation mine.

The End of Interpretation in Basil of Caesarea's De spiritu sancto

93

background and his dialectical- cum-interpretive skills come to the fore. Basil has marshaled numerous instances of the flexibility with which Scripture uses prepositions in order to rebut his opponents' claim that each person of the Godhead ought to be systematically correlated with only one preposition: that is, that ' from ' goes only with the Father, ' through' only with the Son, and ' in' only with the Spirit. Having just mentioned a handful of biblical counterexamples to his opponents ' rule – passages where ' in' is used in connection with the Father - Basil leaves off citing any more evidence with these words : ' But I cannot refrain from remarking that the "wise hearer" may easily discover that if terminological differences indicate differences in nature , then our opponents must shamefully agree that identical terminology is used for identical natures. Thus ample proof of our proposition has been provided." Basil's point here is that the Pneumatomachian position (at least as he sees it) founders on the biblical evidence. This second reference to the wise hearer does not deny that piety directs the skills of the wise hearer. The focus in this section is simply on the actual use and deployment of the skills themselves. Although the phrase σvvετòç åкρоατηs occurs verbatim only twice in Basil's treatise, he uses strikingly similar language as he sums up his argument at the end of De spiritu sancto, thus creating a coda for his discussion of the Spirit. In 1.1 , Basil commends Amphilochios for the sincere and heartfelt desire he has to know the truth, a quality that distinguishes him from others whose questions Basil likens to traps set to ensnare him and to an ambush of soldiers who are camouflaged and hidden from view. In closing the treatise and referring back to the argument he has constructed, Basil says that those who are well-disposed will have seen enough evidence to be convinced that there is ample basis for the coordinated form of the doxology.10 Those who are not properly disposed, by contrast, will not only take exception on this point but will come into open rebellion against Basil . ‘An array of enemies fights against us, and every city and village is full of slanderers, even in the remotest regions. 911 These things cause sadness and pain for hearts that seek after peace.'¹¹ So many are sufficiently ill-disposed that Basil compares the condition of the churches to a naval battle in which violence and chaos reign to such a degree that it is almost impossible to distinguish friend from foe.12 Because of the prevailing conditions of the church, Basil asks Amphilochios not to circulate widely his De spiritu sancto – it deserves to be read, certainly, but passing it out to those opposed to its viewpoint would only foster further dissension.¹³ Although Basil regards his arguments as having significant, even probative force, the words

9 Basil, DSS 5.11 (282,15-20) ; Anderson 26-27. 10 Basil, DSS 29.75 (516,17-9) ; Anderson 112. 11 Basil, DSS 29.75 (514,6-9) ; Anderson 112. 12 Basil , DSS 30.76 (520,1-522,33) ; Anderson 113-115. 13 Basil, DSS 30.79 (530,20-1) ; Anderson 118 .

94

D. SARISKY

with which he closes the treatise reflect a chastened hope, one that springs less from the power of his argument to persuade than from his assurance that, while God has allowed the church to decline from its original state of health, he will not finally abandon his people : 'We place our trust in the Spirit's help, and boldly proclaim the truth.'14 In the final analysis, '[God ] gives knowledge to those 15 He has chosen, by the Holy Spirit." The obverse of the wise or well disposed hearer has already come under some discussion : the heart of the matter consists in a failure to direct interpretive skills toward their proper end . While Basil indicates that his enemies have opposed him, he is probably speaking of himself in his capacity as bishop, as leader of the church. Hence , those who will not countenance a doxology that puts each person of the Godhead on the same level have true religion as their real enemy. Their concern is not a simple and sincere interest in understanding theological terminology. Their intent is evil in that it aims to subvert εvσέßɛiα , which could refer to orthodoxy in the sense of right belief, but more likely has in view piety or devotion to God.16 Basil's argument is patently ad hominem : he impugns the character and motives of those who disagree with him. The charge, however, is not a gratuitous insult, one simply calculated to score points with his audience . From the perspective of his theology, there is a certain rationale for it. If the scope of human calling is to become like God insofar as this is possible, then interpretive principles that detract from one's achievement of this goal are de facto keeping one from becoming the sort of person one is called to be. And, as Basil sees the matter, his opponents do indeed hold to a hermeneutical principle that inhibits their pursuit of God . 'They assign', Basil says of the Pneumatomachians , ' the words "from whom" to God the Father as if the expression was His one special allotment ; for God the Son they select the phrase "through whom", and for the Holy Spirit " in which", and they say that this assignment of prepositions must never be interchanged.'17 On this account, each person has a different nature : the Father is Creator, the Son an instrument, and the Spirit time or place. But it is essential to redemption that the persons have the same nature. For instance, as Basil will go on to argue, if the Son represents the Father only partially, then the knowledge required for likeness is thrown into jeopardy. Basil terms this line of reasoning, whereby the prepositions are technical terms, an impious argument : that is, one whose conclusion is false to the nature of God and which therefore trammels a person's pursuit of true humanity.18

14 Basil, DSS 30.79 (530,10-1) ; Anderson 118. 15 Basil, DSS 30.79 (530,25-8 ) ; Anderson 118. 16 Basil, DSS 2.4 (260,4) ; Anderson 18. Both ‘ orthodoxy' and 'peity' are glosses given under εvσέßɛia in Geoffrey Lampe, A Patristic Greek Lexicon (Oxford , 1961) . 17 Basil, DSS 2.4 (262,20-4); Anderson 19. 18 Basil, DSS 2.4 (262,27) ; Anderson 19.

The End of Interpretation in Basil of Caesarea's De spiritu sancto

95

In De spiritu sancto 6.15, Basil provides a worked example of interpreting a text toward a certain end. At issue is Ps . 109: 1 (LXX) , which refers to sitting down at the Lord's ' right hand'. Basil cross -references this text with Heb. 1 :3: 'He [Jesus] sat down at the right hand of the majesty of God .' If Jesus sat down at the right hand of the Father, is this to imply that he assumed a subordinate position in relation to the Father? It does not: what the passage indicates , when read figuratively, as it ought to be, is a relationship of equality between Father and Son. Basil produces a catena of biblical texts which speak of the majesty, glory, and power of Jesus Christ : e.g. , Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God ( 1Cor. 1:24) ; He is the image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15) ; He is the brightness of His glory (Heb. 1 : 3) . The torrent of citations gives the impression that evidence against Basil's opponents is mounting. The point is not precisely that those who subordinate the Son fail to interpret Heb. 1 :3 according to the σколóс of Scripture, although Basil is clearly presupposing that the various texts he cites form a coherent whole. That is not how Basil himself explains what he deems fallacious exegesis . His strategy is rather to cast his critique in terms of how biblical interpretation is situated within the economy of God's dealing with humanity. He says : "This evidence [i.e., the various texts cited] is not insignificant to the well-disposed listener.'19 The alternative to being well disposed is to take the text σαρêɩêãç (in a fleshly way). This key term carries a double meaning: in the first instance , it has to do with the object of interpretation , indicating that readers should not construe ‘right hand' as a literal, physical right hand ; but secondarily, the term ' fleshly' speaks to the character of the interpreting subject. As opposed to being welldisposed, this listener is so transfixed with what is earthly that even God is brought within the purview of what is physical. This reading ' confine[s] God within prescribed boundaries'.20 The results of the reading are a category mistake - attempting to apply notions of form, shape, and bodily position to a Deity who is immaterial and infinite – and a subordinationist Christology. What drives Basil's critique of this interpretation , and what stands behind his counterproposal, is less a commitment to method (efficient causality) than his understanding of the tέhoc of the interpreting subject (final causality). To sum up: the ' wise hearer' reads scripture for knowledge of God, thereby putting his interpretive skills toward the end of becoming truly human. This end is an important touchstone against which Basil judges his opponents ' readings of the Bible. If Basil is taken on his own terms , questions of method should be framed in terms of whether they allow readings to meet their proper goal .

19 Basil, DSS 6.15 (294,46 ) ; Anderson 31 . 20 Basil, DSS 6.15 (294,47-9); Anderson 31.

About the Structure of De Spiritu Sancto

by Basil of Caesarea

Manuel MIRA IBORRA, Roma

The structure of Basil's treatise De Spiritu Sancto has been studied by many different scholars . According to Dörries, Basil wrote chapters 9-29 using the proceedings from a conversation held with Eustathius of Sebaste; we will call this document the Protocol of Sebaste . ' Drecoll, on the other hand, rejects Dörries' theory, and holds that the objections which Basil introduces through speech verbs are passages taken from different treatises on the Holy Spirit.2 Pouchet asserts that some of the ideas found in the treatise were directed against Eunomius of Cyzicus , not Eustathius.³ Amand de Mendieta has thrown light upon the expression ' non-written tradition', which is much used in the treatise. He understands this phrase to denote both the mystagogical explanations and the ecclesiastical doctrines defended by the disciplina arcani.4 At the beginning of the ninth chapter, Basil announces that he is going to examine the common notions held on the Holy Spirit, ' those taken from the Scriptures together with those received through the non-written tradition of the Fathers ." Then, at the end of the same chapter, he affirms that he has just expounded the notions about the Holy Spirit which were taught to him ' through the own words of the Spirit' (De Spiritu Sancto 9.23.28) . From this we can expect that once seen the Scriptures, to which he refers as "the own words of the Spirit", Saint Basil should dedicate himself to explaining the common notions about the Holy Spirit found in the non-written tradition. We would like to analyse expansively in this paper the structure of the chapters from 10 to 15 of the treatise, whilst comparing it to Jerusalem's Catecheses Mystagogicae.

¹ Hermann Dörries, De Spiritu Sancto: Der Beitrag des Basilius zum Abschluss des trinitarischen Dogmas (Göttingen, 1956) , 81-90. 2 Volker Henning Drecoll, Die Entwicklung der Trinitätslehre des Basilius von Cäsarea: Sein Weg vom Homöusianer zum Neonizäner (Göttingen, 1996), 185-95 . 3 Jean-Robert Pouchet, Le traitè de Basile sur le Saint-Esprit: Son milieu originel: RSR 84 (1996) 325-50, 329. 4 Emmanuel Amand de Mendieta, The ' unwritten ' and 'secret' traditions in the theological thought ofSt. Basil ofCaesarea : Scottish Journal of Theology Occasional Papers, n. 13 (Edinburgh, 1965), 39-50, 60-70. 5 De Spiritu Sancto 9.22.2-4 . I quote the work according to the edition of Benoît Pruche, Basile de Césarée. Sur le Saint-Esprit (SC 17 bis) (Paris, 1968).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 97-103. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

98

M. MIRA IBORRA

1. The Holy Spirit's divinity from the profession of faith in baptism Basil starts his refutation of the objections by recollecting that his adversaries say that it is impossible to associate the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son , because of their diverse natures and the inferior dignity of the Spirit. He replies that it can be demonstrated that there is a certain unity between the Spirit and the Father and the Son. The Lord's baptismal mandate (Matthew 28:19) reveals this union, and Basil concludes that he prefers to obey Christ rather than his opponents." According to Dörries' theory, this objection would be the first taken from Sebaste's protocol . The language verb with which Basil introduces it, 'they say' (paoi), would indicate this . Furthermore, he observes that the objections rehearsed here do not correspond with the ideas of the anomoeans . While these stress the diversity of position and order, the ones found in the treatise actually focus on nature and dignity.? Drecoll thinks that the use of the third person of the plural makes it impossible that this objection is taken from the acts of the dialogue between Basil and Eustathius. If this were so, the second person should have been used . He thinks that it could correspond with an attack made by some unknown person hostile to the Cappadocian . The observation has little weight, though, as in the course of the piece Basil relates to Amphilochius other people's thoughts , and is therefore required to shift from the second to the third person. On the other hand, it is important to observe that first Basil introduces the objection and then goes on to centre his ideas upon the baptismal form . He affirms that an attack which seems to be directed against him is actually trying to destroy the Faith , especially that which comes from non-written testimony of the Fathers . According to Basil, the Lord handed down the conjunction of the Holy Spirit and the Father as a dogma necessary for salvation ; those who separate the Spirit and give it a servile nature, are setting their blasphemy above God's law. Because of this he will fight." Dörries reminds us that Basil in ep. 125.3.34-35¹º notes that the Holy Spirit is not a ' servile spirit' (λɛitovρyɩêòν лvɛõµа), and includes these words in his enumeration of parallels between the letter and the treatise which allegedly show that the opponent against whom Basil speaks is Eustathius of Sebaste.¹¹ As Basil's opponents ignore the ' non -written tradition of the Fathers', and Basil wants to demonstrate that they are wrong, in this paragraph we find a foundation of the theory we are trying to demonstrate.

6 De Spiritu Sancto 10.24. 7 Hermann Dörries, De Spiritu Sancto (1956), 56-67. 8 Volker Henning Drecoll, Die Entwicklung der Trinitätslehre (1996), 193. 9 De Spiritu Sancto 10.25. 10 I quote the edition of Yves Courtonne (ed .), Basile . Lettres (2 vols.) (Paris , 1961) . 11 H. Dörries, De Spiritu Sancto (1956), 90.

About the Structure of De Spiritu Sancto by Basil of Caesarea

99

Basil asks two questions which he immediately responds to: Why are we Christians? Because of Faith. How are we saved? When we are reborn through baptismal grace. And because this salvation is united to the Faith in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, it is absurd to abandon this saving creed. To die with an incomplete baptism, Basil continues, is the same as not being baptised. He maintains that those who do not preserve the 'confession' (ôμoλoyíα) which they accepted when they denied their idols and turned to God , close themselves to God's promises . If the day of baptism is a day of ‘rebirth' (ʼn tñs nadiyyεvεσías ημέpa ) to a new life, then, the most important word is that said ‘ in the (reception of the) grace of filial adoption' (¿v tñ xápiti tñs violɛoías). How absurd it would be to abandon the tradition which comes from God and makes us His children, just to follow the wiles of the enemies of faith! Basil expresses his wish to persevere in the faith until his death, and exhorts his adversaries to avoid separating the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, either in the profession of faith or in the glorification.¹2 The initial questions, the language used to talk about professing the confession of faith (seen as an abandoning of the idols and turning to the living God), the description of baptism as the means which introduces a person to the knowledge of God and turns slaves into sons , all seem to have been taken from a previous text. The solemnity of Basil's diction, and the fact that his argument commences here, support this conjecture, although it is not sustained by parallels in the Catecheses Mystagogicae. Even so, the first resemblances with the mystagogical homilies already start to appear: the term ' confession' (ôμoλoyía) appears in Cat. Myst. 2.4.4-5,13 applied to the triple profession of faith taken by the catechumens with the triple immersion in the baptismal font; the word 'rebirth' (лaλуyɛvɛσía) can be found in Cat. Myst. 1.10.5; the reception of the ‘grace of divine filiation' (ǹ xápis tñs violɛoias) alludes to Cat. Myst. 2.6.2, where the reflection that, through baptism, not only are all sins forgiven and the grace of divine filiation granted, but we participate in Christ's sufferings, is highlighted. The need to conserve the sign which has been transmitted, a responsibility we will have to respond about before God, appears in Catechesis 5.12-13.14 This text is not a mystagogical homily, but forms part of the homilies preached to those immediate candidates for baptism. Basil argues that condemnation awaits those who renege on the faith, because they 'professed' ('Qµoλóynσav) that they believed in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit' ' when they rejected the devil and his angels'. That is why they can have no other name than traitors (лαраßáτat), since they have abandoned

12 De Spiritu Sancto 10.26. 13 Auguste Piedagnel, Cyrille de Jérusalemme. Catéquèses mystagogiques (SC 126) (Paris, 1966), abbreviated in what follows 'Cat. Myst.'. 14 I follow Wilhelm Karl Reischl and Josef Rupp, Cyrilli Hierosolymorum archiepiscopi opera quae supersunt omnia (2 vols.) ( Munich, 1848, 1860).

100

M. MIRA IBORRA

the Alliance (ovveńкαç) which was established for their salvation. Whoever relegates the Holy Spirit is as much of a traitor as he who reneges on the Father or the Son. Basil solemnly testifies that as faith in the Son is of no use for one who renounces the Father, so he who denies the Holy Spirit makes vain his faith in the Father and the Son. This is so because the Scriptures aver that it cannot be said that Jesus is the Lord except in the Holy Spirit (1Cor. 12: 3), and that no-one has seen the Father but the Son, who is in his bosom (John 1:18). Whoever denies the Holy Spirit, he concludes, is not paying real adoration to the Son, nor to the Father, who must be adored through the Son.15 The grammar used when speaking about the renunciation of the devil and his angels might belong to an older script on baptism. In fact, we find a long description of the renunciation of Satan, which the illuminated took whilst looking towards occident, in Cat. Myst. 1.4-8 . In it, the catechumen also committed himself to renounce the devil's works , pomp and cult. And thus in Cat. Myst. 1.2.3 we find the expression ' you renounced Satan as if he was present ' ( ç лаρóvti åretátteσ0ɛ tã Latavặ); and Cat. Myst. 1.4 uses the verb åлotάttεiv seven times , once in the plural, though it never refers to the devil and his angels . And Cat. Myst. 1.5.8 explains how he who promised in baptism to renounce Satan's works , yet goes back to those works , called irrational actions, becomes a traitor (лараßáτηç) . The declaration of faith in the three Persons is also found in Cat. Myst. 1.9.6-8 . When the neophyte finishes renouncing Satan, he turns eastward and proclaims: ' then you were ordered to say: I believe in the Father and in the Son and in the Holy Spirit, and in one baptism of penance'. The word ' alliance' (σvv¤ýêŋ ) also appears in Cat. Myst. 1.9.2-3 , though it refers to the alliance with the devil , while the synonym diα0ýêη is used for speaking of the alliance with God . But Basil does not take all of his ideas from the Catecheses Mystagogicae. The similitude affects only some of the arguments. Furthermore, he develops a new line of deliberation when he asserts that it is impossible to believe in the Father and the Son, not even possible to adore them, without faith in the Holy Spirit. He also enriches the description of baptism by adding new and different notes.

2. The baptism in Christ and the difference between the angels and the Holy Spirit In De Spiritu Sancto 12.28 , Basil's opponents assert that the Holy Spirit has no important place in baptism, because there is also a baptism in Christ. But Basil answers that mentioning Christ, that is ' the anointed', is to mention too the Father who anoints, and the Holy Spirit who is the unction . This trinitarian

15 De Spiritu Sancto 10.27.

About the Structure of De Spiritu Sancto by Basil of Caesarea

101

explanation of the name Christ appears in Cat. Myst. 3.2.1-3; four of the quotations of the Scripture used by Basil can be found too in this homily dedicated to the confirmation: Romans 6: 3, Acts 10:38 , Psalm 44:8 as well as Isaiah 66: 1. This objection is not introduced by a verb of speaking, and Dörries says that 16 is directed against the anomeans, who administered a baptism in Christ." A quick survey of De Spiritu Sancto 13.29-30 shows that Basil has to reply the objection that we should not 'glorify' the Holy Spirit ' with' (ovvdožáÇetai) the Father and the Son, though we 'co numerate ' (σvνаρiêμοúμεva) Him with Them, just as we don't put the angels together with the Father and the Son, although Paul says to Timothy: ' I speak to you before God and Christ and before His chosen angels' (1Tim. 5:21) . Basil affirms that the mention of angels stands at a different level from that of the Holy Spirit : the angels are mentioned only as witnesses of a promise, while the Holy Spirit is united to the Father and the Son as One who gives together with Them freedom, divine filiation and live. As Basil's adversaries invoke God in their objection, so too do the mystagogic homilies in enjoining neophytes to be true to their promises: for example , in Catechesis 5.13, Cyril quotes 1Timothy 6: 13-4 . Besides, the description of the Holy Spirit as giver of divine adoption and life is well documented in the mystagogic teachings: Cat. Myst. 5.5.3-4 says that God gives us the Spirit of filial adoption (лvεúμatos vioƉɛσiag katηkiwσev), while Cat. Myst. 3.3.9-10 calls the Holy Spirit vivifying ( woroi@ Пvεúµati). Basil's adversaries use baptismal arguments, and Basil criticizes their interpretations of this rite.

3. The Types Basil next presents another objection of his opponents , according to which we are not obliged to believe in the divinity of the Holy Spirit just because we are baptised in him and because we believe in his existence. That we believe in God and Moses, and that some were baptised, in the cloud and the sea, in Moses (1Cor. 10 :2), does not mean we believe in Moses as a divinity. Basil explains that faith in the Holy Spirit is the same kind that we have in the Father and the Son, whilst faith in Moses, the cloud and the sea is faith in the types. These are frail human realities which represent superior divine realities. Basil then explains the value of the type of Adam, the rock, the water which sprung from the rock, the manna and the serpent in the desert . He continues explaining the significance of the events which comprise the Israelite liberation from Egypt : the angel of death that passed over the doors marked with the blood from the Lamb, the passing of the Red Sea , the protection in the cloud ... deeds that were all but human realities, but which prefigured Christ's salvation , and through which we receive a special grace not given 16 H. Dörries, De Spiritu Sancto (1956), 59.

102

M. MIRA IBORRA

before.The reality of grace must not be scorned because of the littleness of the type. If this was so, we would not give any value to Christ's death on the Cross , because it can be compared with the ram's sacrifice offered in Isaac's place , nor would we prize His burial and resurrection because they are compared with Jonah's sojourn in the whale's stomach. This same error is committed when baptism is despised , that same baptism which gives us Christ's own life, just because it is compared to the passing of the Red Sea by the Israelites . Basil finishes this chapter by accusing his opponents of not believing that God uses a progressive pedagogy. God shows us first the shadow of the types, to strengthen our intelligence and make us adapt, so that He can then show the divine realities presently. Basil accuses them of being like little children because of this, children who can only grasp the immediate value of things.17 The Catecheses Mystagogicae also use the blood of the paschal lamb as a type for Christ's blood , the manna as a type for the eucharist, the passing 18 through the Red Sea as a type for baptism and Moses as a type for Christ." And in this same way, they see baptism as a symbol of Christ's death, through which we can really participate in the new life reached for us by the Saviour.19 There are many precise parallelisms found, parallelisms which can even reach the order in which the elements are used.20 Basil has taken the types found in the mystagogic descriptions used by the Church of Caesarea to explain the meaning of baptism , and elaborated them in different ways to serve his polemic. In some instances, he has framed them into a general theory of types. We see this, for example, in the first and the final reflections , where he explains the nature of the types and, at the same time, reproaches his opponents for not having understood them. Sometimes he just reproduces an explanation about the typical value of an event from the Old Testament, like the example of the exterminating Angel or the passage of the Red Sea. Elsewhere he just re- elaborates the way the type is presented , to show how absurd it is to undervalue the reality because of the type that prefigured it. We find an example of this when he expounds the different types found for the death of the Saviour, or when he explains baptism as real participation in the death of Christ in contrast to the passing of the Red Sea, which prefigures baptism, but lacks its saving power. The richness and diversity of Basil's exegesis cannot have sprung ‘ex nihilo.' As in the thirteenth chapter, the objection is a rash interpretation of information found in the mystagogic catechesis. And, as before, Basil's answer develops the ideas found in this catechesis. The discussion thus consists in a debate about the meaning of this tradition .

17 18 19 20

De Spiritu Sancto 14.31-3. See Cat. Myst. 1.2-3. Ibid. 2.5-7. Both, De Spiritu Sancto 14.32 and Cat. Myst. 2.2 quote Col. 3:9.

About the Structure of De Spiritu Sancto by Basil of Caesarea

103

Conclusion

Basil uses ideas and words which appear in the Catecheses Mystagogicae of Cyril of Jerusalem for composing De Spiritu Sancto 10-15. The order in which these ideas appear remind of the order of the mystagogic homilies: profession of faith, baptism , confirmation, eucharist. As in chapter nine he states that he will set forwards the common notions held by the non-written tradition on the Holy Spirit, and as in chapter twenty-seven he explains how the traditions includes the way the mysteries should be celebrated, we can conclude that Basil used the material which the church of Caesarea used to explain the mysteries to the neophytes for redacting this part of the treatise. This fact is not opposed to the theory of Sebaste's Protocol. It seems that Basil leans towards the Trinitarian way of baptism as an argument to defend the divine condition of the Holy Spirit, against opponents who have tried to refute his thesis with arguments from that same mystagogical tradition.

Homotimia and synarithmēsis in Basil of Caesarea's

De Spiritu Sancto

Shigeki TSUCHIHASHI , Tokyo

There was definitely a transformation or development in Basil of Caesarea's theological teaching, especially trinitarian theory. He kept on defending, however, the Nicene creed , not only by guaranteeing the divinity of the Son against Eunomians, but also by insisting on the truth of the divine plurality against Paulinians. As a result, such doctrinal debates made him explore the difference between ousia and hypostasis. On the one hand, the three hypostaseis subsist as the individuals . On the other hand, three hypostaseis are, however, still unified and homoousioi. If so, how could those three subsistent hypostaseis possibly be unified as one ousia? How could Basil elucidate the divine simplicity? So in this article , I would like to examine Basil's attempt to answer that question in de Spiritu Sancto [abbreviated to 'de Sp. S.'¹] , especially focusing around the concepts of homotimia and synanarithmēsis.

1. The divine unity and the divine plurality

In about the mid-370s, Basil had been involved in a controversy with Paulinians on their refusal to confess three subsistent hypostaseis; meanwhile he wrote de Spiritu Sancto, in order to refute pneumatomachians ' as well as Eunomians' insistence on subordination. In Ep. 236 (ca. 376), to Amphilochius of Iconium , he accused those who said that ousia and hypostasis are the same, of their Sabellianism , which ' tried to distinguish the Persons (prosōpa) by saying that the same hypostasis changed its appearance (metaschēmatizesthai)' like a mask², 'according to the need arising on each occasion' (Ep. 236,6; 26-8)3. From their

1 We follow the edition of Hermann J. Sieben, Basilius von Cäsarea, De Spiritu Sancto, Über den Heiligen Geist (Freiburg i. Br., 1993) . I owe the following English translation to Blonfield Jackson (transl.), David Anderson (rev.), On the Holy Spirit (New York, 1980). 2 As if God assumes the mask (prosõpeion) of the Son or the Spirit (see Ep. 214). By Sabellianists, 'Persons ' (prosōpa) were thought of as appearances or modes like masks of the same hypostasis which was supposed to be synonymous with ousia. 3 Translations of all letters are taken (with some changes) from the Loeb edition , Roy J. Defferrari (transl .), Basil, Letters, 4 vols. (Cambridge , Mass. , 1950-3). In the following, references in the text will be to section and line of Courtonne's edition , Yves Courtonne (ed . and transl.),

Studia Patristica XLVII, 105-110. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

106

S. TSUCHIHASHI

point of view, homoousios ( same in substance ' ) means homoousios kath ' hypostasin (‘same in hypostasis ') , and the Persons (prosōpa) are not subsistent . Therefore, Basil inferred , if they drew a distinction between ousia and hypostasis using the general - particular distinction , and supposed that hypostasis is not synonymous with ousia, then they could confess three subsistent hypostaseis. According to Basil, ' the Godhead is something general, the paternity something particular, and combining these we should say: "I believe in God the Father" (Ep. 236,6; 12-4). Similarly too in the case of the Son and the Holy Spirit. Consequently, both the divine unity and the divine plurality could be preserved . If so, however, how could the substance of the Father be homoousios with the substance of the Son? Indeed , both substances cannot be one and the same (tauton), because it is ' in its own sphere of substance (idia perigraphe ousiās)' (Ep. 361,6; 334). On this point, Basil seems to agree with Homoiousians, who think of homoousion as tautoousion . So, in the early 360s , Basil thought that 'like in substance entirely without difference (aparallaktos) could be said correctly' (Ep. 361,6; 334) in such a case. But, from the neo-Arians' or Eunomeans' point of view, the relationship between the Father and the Son is not ' like' , but 'unlike' (anomoios). They denied the divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit, and, especially, those called pneumatomachians insisted that ' the Spirit must not be ranked with the Father or the Son , but under the Father and the Son , not numbered with them (synarithmoumenon) , but under them (hyparithmoumenon)' (de Sp. S. 6,13) . For the purpose of refuting their argument, Basil undertook his championship of the divine unity among three hypostaseis in de Spiritu Sancto.

2. Against subnumeration (hyparithmēsis) The Only-begotten God is , Eunomius insisted , ' not to be compared either with the one who begot him or with the Holy Spirit who was made through him, for he is less than the one in being a " thing made", and greater than the other in being a maker' (Apol. 26)4 . These thoughts of inferior natures and degrees of rank in the Trinity are also expressed by him as subnumeration or ‘ subordination expressed with numbers (hyparithmeisthai) . Similarly, pneumatomachians 'insist that the Spirit must not be ranked with the Father or the Son, but under the Father and the Son ,... not numbered with them (synarithmoumenon)', but numbered under them (hyparithmoumenon) (de Sp . S. 6,13).

Saint Basile, Lettres, 3 vols. (Paris, 1957-66) without Ep. 361 , whose references will be to volume and page of the Loeb edition. 4 Translations of Eunomius of Cyzicus' Liber Apologenticus are taken from Richard P. Vaggione (ed. and transl.), Eunomius: The Extant Works (Oxford, 1987) .

Homotimia and synarithmēsis in Basil of Caesarea's De Spiritu Sancto

107

Against their insistences on subnumeration, Basil advocates the way to number the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son, so called connumeration, "in order that the idea of consubstantiality (homoousios) may be preserved in the oneness of the Godhead , and that the recognition of the reverence (eusebeia) towards the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the complete and perfect hypostasis of each of those named, may be proclaimed' (Ep. 214,4 ; 18-22) . Now, we will somewhat schematically compare Basil's connumeration with Eunomian subnumeration, and then examine the former more substantially. Showing some concern about its truth, Basil writes that Eunomians ' define subnumeration as the division (diairesis) of the whole (to koinon) into lesser parts ' (de Sp. S. 17,41 ). However, Basil's interpretation might miss the point. As mentioned before, Eunomius clearly denies any division of ousia, any equality in substance. Additionally, he recognises that the Holy Spirit possesses ' his own Person (idia hypostasis)', which is something ' numerically other (heteron arithmō) than God', and which ' lacks godhead' (Apol. 25) . In short, according to Eunomius, God the Father is a hypostasis or a particular subsistent, which is the combination of a godhead as ousia and paternity as particular nature, on the one hand; God the Son and the Holy Spirit are each respectively also a particular subsistent hypostasis, but lacking godhead as ousia, on the other hand. All these three hypostaseis have each a particular nature and a common divine nature (physis) only to be perceived by the human mind and having no existence in hypostasis, meanwhile what has divine ousia is only the Father. For Eunomians, therefore, the Father is neither homoousios nor homoiousios with the Son and the Spirit, and , for pneumatomachians, the Spirit is numbered under the Father and the Son. In response, Basil criticises their heretical Hellenised interpretation on the basis of the Scriptures, and presents his own idea of connumeration . The point is what can guarantee the divine unity of three hypostaseis, or how the idea of consubstantiality (homoousios) can be preserved in the oneness of the Godhead. As seen in Ep. 236 , Basil firstly differentiates ousia and hypostasis with reference to a distinction between the general and the particular, and then regards the godhead as a general ousia and the paternity or the sonship or the holiness as particularity (idiōma). Finally, he combines them, for example, the godhead and the paternity into God the Father. In so far as the Holy Spirit shares the godhead as its own ousia , it can rank with the Father and the Son. Therefore, the Spirit should not be numbered under them, but with them. In other words, the Spirit must be homotimos (same in honour) with the Father and the Son.

From what has been said thus far, at least we may say that the pneumatomachians' or Eunomians' argument concerning subnumeration was tentatively refuted . However, a really intractable question remains unsettled . If each of the three Persons is respectively a really subsistent hypostasis, how could those

108

S. TSUCHIHASHI

three subsistent hypostaseis be unified as one ousia? Why one God, not three Gods?

3. Homotimia, connumeration (synarithmēsis), and monarchia In Ep. 52, Basil sets forth a paradoxically necessary condition for homoousion. 'Nothing is itself homoousion with itself, but one thing is homoousion with another thing' (Ep. 52,3 ; 3-4). He must distinguish the individuality of persons while at the same time maintaining the unity of their natures (physeis). As unique persons, however, they are one and one. How could they not add up to two Gods? Basil responds to the question cautiously on the basis of the transcendence of God . He firstly emphasises the point that God , whose essence is ineffable and inconceivable to the human mind, is also beyond numbers and uncountable. Therefore , if we must count, we have the alternative : ‘ either honouring God silently or numbering Him in accord with true religion' (de Sp. S. 18,44). What numeration, then, is truly pious? To put it differently, what is the way to number the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son, not under them? It is likely that there are two problems to be overcome in solving this question. One is materialistic connotations which the concept ‘ousia' carries against a background of the Greek philosophical inheritance . Another is subordinationist connotations included in three hypostaseis. Firstly, we will examine the former more closely. Ousia or substance had originally been thought to be individual things which can exist by themselves without any further substratum and which bear properties . As a result, corporeal individuals are usually regarded as the most typical substances . Certainly, there are other meanings of ousia, e.g. universal concepts like genus and species (eidos), and, essential form (eidos) and matter (hylē) as elements of an individual thing. But , Basil already rejected two of these meanings , which are 'a common overlying genus (genos koinon hyperkeimenon)' in Aristotelian meaning and ' an underlying pre- existing material (hylikon hypokeimenon proyparchon) (Ep. 361,6; 332) in the Stoic meaning" . Moreover, in so far as an essential form is expressed by the same word as its species, e.g. ' man', it cannot properly be called an ousia in this context. The reason could be inferred as

5 In his early treatise, Basil has often used ousia for particular substance. As a result of such an understanding, he has been faced with a dilemma concerning substance: if no substance can exist without its being in any hypostasis, the undivided divine substance subsists dividedly in each of three divine hypostaseis. Therefore, against the Neo-Arian , he had to shift the emphasis from particular to common ousia, for example, universal concepts and an indefinite material substratum . 6 Because a divine unitary shared ousia should be an essential principle, neither any nominalistic universal nor any material element.

Homotimia and synarithmēsis in Basil of Caesarea's De Spiritu Sancto

109

below. Number is defined as a sign which indicates a counted or measured plurality of any plural objects (see de Sp. S. 17,43 : ‘sēmeia pros tēn tou posou gnōsin'; 18,44: ‘ a sign of some objects' measured plurality [plēthos] ')' . And a measure must be something common to the measured things. For example, Peter and John are counted by ' man' as a measure and add up to ' two men'. Therefore, if the distinction between particular hypostaseis and common ousia might be understood as the Aristotelian distinction between concrete particular existence, e.g. three divine hypostaseis, and common species of them, e.g. the Godhead, we could not number the Spirit with the Father and the Son, but rather we would have no other choice than confessing three gods . Because three hypostaseis would be counted by ' God' as a measure and add up to ' three gods'. After all , as we have just seen, the corporeal or materialistic connotation alone 8 has remained as an implicit image for ousia. In these circumstances, however, Basil purged homoousios of the corporeal connotation or dematerialised the relationship among three divine hypostaseis late in his life. He focused on the divine dominion or authority over us, and the glory, honour, or reverence toward God ; we have, in short, incorporeal power or energeia instead of a corporeal substance. Similarly, in his de Spiritu Sancto, the misleading homoousios disappears, but homotimos (same in honour, or equal dignity) is used to express the incorporeal unity among divine hypostaseis, and now in this context, connumeration is approximately synonymous with co-adoration. Basil wrote in Ep. 90: ' the Holy Spirit is numbered with (synarithmeitai) the Father and the Son in like honour (homotimōs) and so adored (syllatreuetai)' (Ep. 90,2; 23-4). Secondly, in so far as each hypostasis or particularity is emphasised , subordinationist connotations remain in the relationship between three hypostaseis. Nevertheless , we do not lose the true doctrine of one God (monarchia) by confessing three hypostaseis' (de Sp. S. 18,47) . Also in this case, dematerialisation of the relationship among three hypostaseis is the point. An incorporeal power, such as divine dignity, dominion , authority, and glory, can unify three particular hypostaseis . For example, such a divine power reaches from the Father thorough the Only- Begotten to the Spirit' (ibid.) . Just as the source of light and the light from light are the same light, so the source of power or the Father without beginning and the power from power or the begotten Son are the equal dignity (homotimon) of their nature (physis) (see Ep. 52,2; 6-18) .

7 This Basil's definition of number is about the same as the Pythagorean or Aristotelian one that ‘ number is a measured plurality or a plurality of measures .' (Aristotle, Metaphysics, Book N, 1088a 5-8). For Aristotle, 'one ' is not a number, but a measure. According to Ross (William D. Ross, Aristotle's Metaphysics, Oxford , 1953, II 473) , ‘perhaps the first to treat 1 as a number were the followers of Chrysippus .' 8 As a result, the battle area of homoousian controversy was divided into the Sabellian tautoousios (that is one substance) and the Arian heteroousios or the moderate homoiousios (that is difference / equality between two substances).

110

S. TSUCHIHASHI

4. Conclusion

Therefore, it is concluded that the connumeration (synarithmēsis) is the way to adore the incorporeal communion among three hypostaseis as equal divine dignity (homotimon). Certainly, homotimos does not aquire any technical status in Basil's Trinitarian vocabulary.? But, connecting itself with synarithmēsis and co-adoration, and introducing practical or liturgical momentum into philosophical interpretations of homoousios, it seems to make a final and significant turning point in his Trinitarian teaching.

9 See Stephen M. Hildebrand, The Trinitarian Theology ofBasil ofCaesarea (Washington D.C. , 2007), 95. He thinks of Basil's use of these vocabularies, such as homotimos and synarithmēsis, as 'minor linguistic developments', not as an important turning point in his Trinitarian theory.

Tritheism in Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus

Claudio MORESCHINI , Pisa

As is well known, the Cappadocian Fathers were accused of tritheism owing to the formula ‘ one substance - three hypostaseis ', though they did not employ it in the strict and rigorous way that some modern manuals suggest. But after the formula was tentatively used by Basil in his Contra Eunomium, another question arose : if ousia had to be understood in an abstract way, as the genos, then the real God was necessarily the hypostasis, and , as a further consequence, the three hypostaseis were three Gods , as three belonging to the same genos. Gregory of Nyssa forcefully confronted this accusation, writing about it in more than one treatise; Gregory of Nazianzus dealt with it in a rhapsodic way. Basil seemed to be uncertain about it, though he was aware of the problem. Perhaps the charge was raised in the Constantinopolitan milieu, not in Caesarea or in Cappadocia. Indeed , Basil uses the word ' tritheism' only in a homily whose authenticity is not certain (Against those who say that we confess three Gods, PG 31 , 1488C- 1496C) . In this homily the level of the theological discussion is low. Anyone who thinks that there are three Gods, the author says, can also suppose that there are many others ( 1489B- 1492A),¹ in which case he denies the formula that he professed at his baptism (1492A) . The accusation is made by the Pneumatomachs: ' I am accused of a theological mistake because I do not leave the Spirit out of the divine nature and I do not place Him in the order of slaves'. 'But tritheism ' - Basil explains – ' is a mere pretence , and is caused by the fact that I condemn those who consider the Holy Spirit a creature' (1492B- C). Nothing else is said here about the problem. In my opinion, this homily seems to contain a lot of chatter, and I am inclined to consider it a spurious piece of Basil's oratory. Basil's discussion of this problem is much deeper in the De Spiritu Sancto, although this work does not employ the word ' tritheism'. In 16.38 Basil warns against believing that he is speaking of τρεῖς ἀρχικαὶ ὑποστάσεις, or, in other words , that his theology is constructed in a Neo-platonic way.2 In NeoPlatonism each ȧpxń derives from the preceding one, and does so, above all,

Which is to say that tritheism is a form of polytheism . Basil also makes this point in De Spiritu Sancto, as we shall see soon after. 2 This is the title of the first tractate of Enn. V a title that could be derived from Porphyry, as many scholars have observed .

Studia Patristica XLVII , 111-115. Peeters Publishers , 2010.

112

C. MORESCHINI

in a hierarchical succession . Hence, Basil says, I am not speaking as a Neoplatonic philosopher, and I do not mean three Gods. It is interesting to note that this passage, which is usually considered a (disputed) witness of Basil's NeoPlatonism , is basic for his opposition to tritheism as well. In De Spiritu Sancto, as in the homily, Basil observes that we must be aware of the danger of polytheism . If we consider each person as divided from the others, we may fall into the Аrian лαρíеnois (17.42), or into a misunderstanding of the doctrine of the hypostasis ( 18.44) . In 18.44-5 Basil says : 'When our Lord gave us the doctrine of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, he did not add the number: indeed , he did not say that we have to believe in the first, in the second and in the third' (où μεtà τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ συνεξέδωκεν· οὐ γὰρ εἶπεν ὅτι εἰς πρῶτον καὶ δεύτερον καὶ Tρítov) , a parallel which means that number, or better, separation by number, is not a suitable way to explain the nature of the persons : 'What is unutterable must be honoured by silence and what is holy must be numbered as devotion requires ... We speak of each hypostasis in the singular (µovaxos) , but when we have to number them together (ovvapi0μɛìolai ), we do not conceive the idea of polytheism , due to a wrong counting (οὐχὶ ἀπαιδεύτῳ ἀριθμήσει πρὸς πολυθεΐας ἔννοιαν ἐκφερόμεθα). We do not count by addition , from one to many, nor do we speak of one and two and three, nor of first, second and third ... we confess the peculiar element of the hypostasis, and yet we remain in the monarchy, since we do not divide theology into a multiplicity of entities separated from each other.' But the Pneumatomachs asked : 'How is it possible, when we speak of “one ” and “ one” , that we do not mean two gods ? (πῶς οὖν , εἴπερ εἷς καὶ εἶς, οὐχὶ dúo 0ɛoí) '. Basil replies that we mean the King and the image of the King, not two Kings, according to Col. 1 : 15,3 where it is said that Christ is the image of the invisible God . With this assumption , Basil changes his position from Contra Eunomium I 19, where he had spoken (in a Homeousian way) of a distinction of number between the Father and the Son. Gregory of Nazianzus explicitly mentions tritheism for the first time in Constantinople, in 379. In Or. 25.18 he encourages Maximus the Cynic, ' not to be ashamed of being charged with tritheism, since there are others who can be charged with ditheism'. We can explain this affirmation through Or. 31.13,

3 Reinhard M. Hübner (see Basilius von Caesarea und das Homoousios, in : Lionel R. Wickam and Caroline Bammel (eds .), Christian Faith & Greek Philosophy: Essays in Tribute to George Christopher Stead, Leiden, New York, and Köln 1993 , 70-91 , 74) understands Basil's objection in a different way, taking into consideration De Spiritu Sancto 17.41 : it is not admissible that the God ofthe universe is a general concept, knowable only through reason, and that his being does not exist in any hypostasis, but is divided into subjects . Basil does not explain his refutation, but his motive for it is clear. Whoever interprets the ousia of Father and Son in terms of abstract concepts of genos or species logically ends up in tritheism. But Basil's polemic against tritheism is more complex, as we can see.

Tritheism in Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus

113

where Gregory, turning to those who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, though they accepted the divinity of the Son, reproaches them for accusing the Nicenes of tritheism . It is clear, then, that Gregory is speaking here about 4 the position of the Pneumatomachs as Basil and Gregory of Nyssa had also concluded (see Ad Eustathium GNO III/2 , 7,8-16) .5 This was, Gregory says, ' a question which had been solved a long time ago and had left the place to the right faith; yet it was revived those very days'. 'If there is God and God and God, how cannot there be three gods? In other words , how can a лоλναрɣíα be the object of our faith?" These are the objections of those who are the most intelligent in their irreligiousness, but also of those who think right thoughts about the Son' (or. 31.13). Gregory's answer is twofold. He first turns to both his opponents, then to the Pneumatomachs alone. To the latter he merely repeats what he had said elsewhere: if he is a tritheist, they are nothing other than ditheists. However, his answer to the community of his opponents makes a greater theological impact. 'For us', he says, ' there is one God , because there is one divinity, and the things that derive from the one (tà è autou) , which are believed to be three, have reference to it ...' (31.14) .? Tà ¿¿ avτou are the divine persons , who come from the Ev, which is the divine nature. And since they derive from it, it is not possible that one is more God, another less ; nor is one first, the other second; nor they are separated by will or power, 'but if it is necessary to put it briefly, the divinity is undivided in things that are divided : just as in three suns that mutually interconnect there is one mixture of light, and it is not possible to see in the divine nature what is peculiar in things divided .' If we consider the divine nature and the first cause (лрóτη aitía), we grasp

the Ev . If, on the other hand, we look at tà ¿ v ois ǹ Đɛótηs or the hypostaseis, who come from the first cause out of time and within a community of glory, there are three that we adore. One might object, Gregory goes on explaining (31.15), that Christian theology teaches just what the best among Greek philosophers do, namely, that there is one divine nature (0ɛóτηç) , as there is one 4 The same is observed by Lewis Ayres, Nicaea and its Legacy: An Approach to FourthCentury Trinitarian Theology (Oxford, 2004), 346: Tritheists are Macedonians, even if Gregory of Nyssa in Ref. 14 (more exactly: 194, GNO II 394,18 – 395,4) considers also Eunomius a tritheist. 5 In a similar manner, he speaks brusquely to catechumens approaching baptism (Or. 40.43) : 'are you afraid of being reproached for tritheism? Keep your treasure safe, namely, the union of the three, and leave the task of fighting to me.' About Gregory of Nazianzus' tritheism see also Karl Holl , Amphilochius von Ikonium in seinem Verhältnis zu den großen Kappadoziern (Tübingen and Leipzig, 1904), 177f. 6 The term refers to the multiplicity of gods, to which tritheism is connected . 7 Translation by Richard Cross, Divine Monarchy in Gregory of Nazianzus : JECS 14 (2006) 105-16. 8 Therefore, the Son and the Holy Spirit do not come from the Father, but from the 0εórns this is the solution by R. Cross, Divine Monarchy (2006).

114

C. MORESCHINI

human nature (av¤pwrótηg) , which is the yέvoc in its totality. But the explanation does not hold . Gods, as in the case of humans, are many, and both possess unity only as an abstraction (έлivoia Dewpηtóv) . Single humans are effectively divided by time, passions and power. It is also interesting to consider (as scholars usually fail to do) how Gregory manages his explanation in a poem (Carmina Arcana I 1.3.74-89. On the Spirit) : 10 "The oneness inheres in the Godhead ; those to whom the Godhead belongs are three in number' (74); ' three lights but one brightness' (78-9). 'Let people call three gods those who are divided from one another by time or understanding, power, or will. For none among them would ever be at one with himself, nor free from strife. In the Trinity I teach that there is one power, one understanding, one glory, one might. That is why the unity is beyond flux , possessing great glory in the single harmony of the Godhead' (84-9). Evagrius Ponticus took up the explanation given in Or. 31.15, most likely when he was in Constantinople as Gregory's pupil . Evagrius shows how he approaches the solution to the problem in an epistle which is numbered as Basil's n. 8 (the attribution to Evagrius has been maintained by Bousset, Frankenberg and Guillaumont).¹¹ God , he says , is one , but his unity is in his nature, not in his number: οὐ τῷ ἀριθμῷ, ἀλλὰ τῇ φύσει (8.2). This explanation does not seem very clear, because Evagrius misses the first part of Gregory's explanation (the example of three suns and one light) . Perhaps he means that, among corporeal things, unity in number is only an abstraction , because what is considered one as a matter of fact is a multiplicity. For instance, the world, which is composed by many elements, is one in number but not in nature. Something similar can be said of the human being, who is divided in body and soul , or angels , and so on. God is quite different. If we maintain that God is one in his nature, nobody can accuse us of worshipping three gods, because we do not say that God is one in number. Number, indeed , involves quantity (τò лоσóν), and quantity is inseparable from bodies, as number is typical of matter (this is an old tenet from Pythagorean and Platonic philosophy). However, μovác and έvás manifest the simple and unlimited nature of God.¹² Unfortunately,

9 This was already said by Basil (CE II 4) , with whom Gregory here disagrees : see Christoph Markschies, Alta Trinità Beata (Tübingen, 2000), 212. Following Apollinarius, Basil proposes the genus of human beings as an example which explains the distinction between divine persons and their unity. As human beings, Peter and Paul participate in the same substance, while their individual characteristics distinguish them as Peter and Paul. 10 It is interesting to see that in this poem, as in Oration 31 , the problem of tritheism has been posed by pneumatomachs. 11 See Antoine Guillaumont, Un philosophe au désert: Evagre le Pontique (Paris, 2004) who summarises the letter at pp . 36, 142 and 337. Gribomont's commentary on this letter (Torino, 1983) is very basic. The letter is addressed ' to the inhabitants of Cesarea in order to justify his retirement', but it is clear that a fictitious title is involved , because nothing is said in it either about the inhabitants of Cesarea or about ἀποχώρησις. 12 Movάs also in Gregory's Poemata Arcana I 1.3.74 .

Tritheism in Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus

115

Evagrius does not tell us how he conceives the relation between one God and three persons, as Gregory had done. Evagrius's solution, therefore , is not as convincing as Gregory of Nazianzus', nor is it more convincing than Gregory of Nyssa's solution with his distinction between θεότης and ἀνθρωπότης as a γένος and the κατάχρησις of the word 'God'.13 But Gregory of Nazianzus, who wrote a rhetorical homily, not theological treatises, as Gregory of Nyssa had done, comes closer to the truth. Richard Cross has pointed out how his solution was reached. In conclusion , I would suggest reconsidering a passage (Or. 2.37) of Gregory of Nazianzus', from a homily which was delivered in 362 , two years before Basil wrote Contra Eunomium. While defining orthodoxy, Gregory does not employ here the usual antithesis between Arianism and Sabellianism ; instead , he introduces a list of three illnesses : atheism , which , in his opinion, means Sabellianism ; Judaism, which is compared to Arianism ; and an unprecise 'polytheism'. What is this polytheism? Certainly, not the usual one, since Gregory is speaking here of the Christian faith. It is the sickness which affects 'some people who, in our community, are too orthodox '. Whom does Gregory have in mind? Such people, he says, ' speak of three opposite principles who engage a battle or make peace, so that they re-introduce Greek polytheism, which we tried to avoid'. They admit the divine hypostasis, since they are labelled as ' orthodox ', but they are ' even too orthodox', that is, ' wrongly orthodox '. Their mistake is a kind of polytheism.14 According to Bernardi (SC 247, 137 n. 9) , they might be the monks in Nazianzus, who a short time later accused Gregory the Older of having subscribed to a Homoean formula. Now, if we reconsider Basil's polemic in De Spiritu Sancto against those who are in danger of polytheism (namely tritheists), I would suggest that Gregory is speaking of those who admit the existence of three hypostasis, but are not able to understand their interrelation and their dependence on divine nature. In 362 it is Gregory who levels the charge of tritheism; later, as we have seen, Basil and Gregory himself will be censured in the same way.

13 This explanation, criticised by George Christopher Stead, Ontology and Terminology in Gregory of Nissa, in : Heinrich Dörrie, Marie Luise Altenburger, and Ursula Schramm (eds .) , Gregor von Nyssa und die Philosophie (Leiden, 1976), 107-27, has been reasserted positively by Ayres, who seems to employ it in explaining Gregory of Nyssa's trinitarian doctrine. 14 Something like this is found in Oration 20 (which is a patchwork of other among Nazianzen's homilies). After condemning Arianism, which cuts divine nature into three substances 'aliens from each other and different ', Gregory also reproaches those who introduce three entities 'lacking in origin, in order' and so ' gods in mutual opposition' (avtilέovç) . In the same way, in Homily 2 he had said that those who are too orthodox introduce gods in a struggle against one other.

The Attitudes of Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus toward Uneducated Christians

Jaclyn MAXWELL, Ohio

Christian leaders in Late Antiquity responded in a variety of ways to the ordinary, mostly uneducated people that made up the bulk of the lay community. Christian attitudes were in large part traditional – their pagan predecessors and contemporaries also simultaneously looked down upon the masses while idealizing the ' old', simple, peasant way of life. But the Christianization of the Roman upper classes further complicated these attitudes and the way they played out in social relations . Numerous factors - including the egalitarian message of Christianity, the low social status of the Apostles, the simple style of the New Testament texts and the rising emphasis on ascetic renunciation and care for the poor - would force the Christian elite to think differently about the rest of their society and their relationship to it. But old prejudices remained , and, not surprisingly, old ways of thinking continued in new social contexts .

Simple doctrine is good doctrine As members of the local elite, Gregory and Basil were aware of the differences between themselves and the mostly illiterate laypeople. The demands on church leaders , however, allowed little room for social or intellectual snobbery. As bishops, pastors and theologians, they were charged with explaining doctrine to the people, and, in particular, they faced the problem of differentiating heresy from orthodoxy. In his letters and homilies, Basil consistently praised the simple style as useful for ' general edification'. ' In his Homilies on the Hexaemeron, Basil interrupted his philosophical arguments in order to reassure his listeners that the truth, the really important part of the truth anyway, is very easy to understand . In several instances , he told the laity not to worry about the details and instead to remember the very simple terms used in the Scriptures.² He admitted that his own sermons could become confusing, but maintained that the main point was always accessible : 'The Word is simple ; all can understand it'.3 In contrast, Basil accused his opponents of ' useless curiosity' and ' philosophizing'.

1 Ep. 135.1 ; Philip Rousseau , Basil of Caesarea ( Berkeley , 1994), 44. 2 Hom. in Hexaemeron 1.18 ; 1.11; 3.6. 3 Hom. in Hex. 2.4.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 117-122. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

118

J. MAXWELL

Their approach was inappropriate, he argued, because of the ' simplicity and absence of refinements of spiritual teachings'.4 In addition to presenting himself as an accessible speaker with a straightforward message, Basil also bolstered his listeners' confidence by making references to their innate intelligence. He praised them for their orthodoxy, their prayers, and orderliness ." He assured them that any person could understand how God created the world : because of the clear- cut account in Genesis and because God endowed all people with reason, he maintained, anyone could perceive the world and understand the greatness of its creator.? Gregory of Nazianzus also believed that Christian teaching should be accessible to anyone who would listen to it : Nothing would be more unjust than our faith, brothers, if it belonged only to educated people and those who are excessively concerned with language and logic ... that which is lofty and attainable by only a few would be near and dear to God, but anything within easy reach of the masses would be rejected and despised.8 Gregory pointed out that Jesus had attracted crowds by speaking to them in an accessible manner, and concluded that Christianity was fundamentally a ‘ simple and uncomplicated religion ', and any attempt to make it more complicated than necessary should be condemned .? Gregory also emphasized the primacy of ' simplicity' as opposed to ' sophistication' in his praise for men he admired . Like other Church Fathers, he called attention to the lowliness of the Apostles : he referred to them, approvingly, as the little people' and pointed out the superiority of these fishermen over intellectuals.10 In his funeral oration for his father, Gregory described a good, simple man who had gotten along well with the laity, and so the attacks made against him for heresy were the result of people taking advantage of his lack of guile. Gregory the Elder had been patient with his rustic congregation and spoke to them on their level. He preached lowliness , which he embraced as a way of life , and remained completely open to conversations with other Christians.12 In his funeral oration for Basil, Gregory mentioned his friend's noble ancestry but in the next breath emphasized that Basil was not at all proud of this . He also compared Basil's manner and way of life to the 'frugality and simplicity of all the disciples'. Gregory described the crowds of all sorts of people who gathered for the funeral of their bishop, a ‘guide for simple

Hom. in Hex. 3.8. Hom. in Hex. 3.3. Hom. in Hex. 4.7. Hom. in Hex. 6.1. Or. 32.26. Or. 37.3; 36.2. 10 Or. 2.24; 36.24; 16.20. 11 Or. 18.18 ; 24-6. 12 Or. 18.16, 23.

4 5 6 1 8 9

The Attitudes of Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus toward Uneducated Christians

119

men'.13 Gregory used similar terms when praising Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria: he was 'lowly in mind' and celebrated for his ' condescension to the lowly' and for being a guide to the simple people.14 In this way, Gregory linked his father, Basil and Athanasius with Jesus and the apostles and set them apart from heretical teachers who attempted to mislead the masses with confusing arguments . The key point here is that the teachers were praised for having students who were 'lowly in mind' and for being able to match them in their simplicity.

Limits of egalitarianism Frustrations stemming from public preaching and other pastoral duties sometimes led men such as Basil and Gregory to express their disdain for the masses. Basil of Caesarea, well known for his concern for laypeople, and especially for his care for lepers and the poor, occasionally expressed outright contempt for the people. In a letter to one of his social peers, Basil remarked that his ' tiresome association with the vulgar' had ‘ soiled ' him, making him feel unworthy to write letters to other educated men.15 In the course of reassuring monks who were being harassed by Arians, Basil reminded them that ' the chosen ones' rather than ' the many' would be saved . Therefore, they should not feel intimidated by the masses.16 In another letter, Basil described how depressing the common people could be : ' I find that my soul was marred when I observed the crowded assembly seeming like a herd of animals ; I could see the completely irrational indifference of the people.'17 Gregory consistently preached against social distinctions based on wealth and poverty and, as we have seen, portrayed his heroes as humble men. But he also wanted people to know their places. In an oration presented in Constantinople, Gregory warned against the danger of people from the ' common crowd' becom-

ing too confident in their knowledge of Scriptures.18 Gregory scoffed at people who mistakenly felt like experts after learning only two or three phrases from the Bible.19 Priests and laypeople should show restraint in their theological discussions and admit their ignorance.20 He advised would-be theologians to keep to the basics and leave such debates to ' wiser men'.21 13 Or. 43.3-4; 76; 80-1. 14 Or. 21.9-10. 15 Ep. 20; see ep. 92.2 . See Ph. Rousseau, Basil of Caesarea (1994), 103f., 302. 16 Ep. 257. 17 Ep. 213.1 . See Benoît Gain, L'Église de Cappadoce au IVe Siècle d'aprés la Corresondance de Basile de Césarée (330-379 ) (Rome, 1985 ) , 189, 232 ; Ph . Rousseau , Basil ofCaesarea (1994), 124. 18 Or. 32.10; 12. 19 Or. 32.17. 20 Or. 32.19. 21 Or. 32.21.

120

J. MAXWELL

For Gregory, this attitude was not just an expression of his privileged status as an educated man. In his view, people who got in over their heads intellectually could easily become heretics. Speaking against an opponent, Gregory accused him of confusing simple priests : 'I will not fault them for their lack of learning; I will blame you for the wrong-doing.'22 As we have seen , in this context, church leaders tended to be simultaneously condescending and sympathetic to the masses : it was not their fault that they sometimes listened to heretics since they were easily confused , but they had a weakness for believing anything if it was well- presented . Given his praise for simplicity as a virtue and his concern for ordinary Christians, it is surprising to find Gregory of Nazianzus making broad generalizations about the bad side of the common people'. In his second oration, which was not meant to be presented in public, Gregory expressed his bitterness toward the masses. To him, the critiques aimed at him by ascetic Christians were due to ' the jealousy and ill-will of the many, who always tend toward what is worse'.23 Later in the same speech, he referred to the masses as those who 'rarely recognize anything that is good'.24 In other speeches, he associated low birth with bad religion . In his eulogy for his father, he admitted that Gregory the elder ' came from a stock that was undistinguished and not well disposed toward piety', and refers to the ' lowly men' who belonged to his father's particular sect of pagan monotheism.25 In another case, Gregory described George, Athanasius' Arian rival in Alexandria, as ' some Cappadocian monster, who had his start in our furthest reaches, of low birth, and lower intelligence, who was not entirely a free man , but of mixed blood '. The villain is also described as having abused his lowly office as a contractor of pork for military rations, and despite being ‘ a good for nothing , who never had a liberal education and lacked fluency in conversation', he managed to pass himself off as a theologian.26 Here, Gregory cast the worst insults he could think of, which made the enemy out to be provincial, lower class and uneducated .

The masses are easily confused Despite the hope that the laity would be naturally drawn to the best teachers , the teaching of Christian doctrine was complicated by the danger that misunderstandings would lead to heresy. Even if the precepts of the Bible were actually as simple and clear as these men claimed , distinguishing between orthodoxy and heresy

22 Or. 26.18. 23 Or. 2.7. 24 Or. 2.83 . 25 Or. 18.5. 26 Or. 21.16.

The Attitudes of Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus toward Uneducated Christians

121

would still be difficult. In this context, we see the Church Fathers' enthusiasm for the uneducated laity give way to frustration over how easily fooled these people could be. Basil accused opponents of manipulating the ' the simple people'.27 The bishop claimed that heretics had infiltrated the church in order to infect the thoughts of innocent believers.28 Gregory accused Novatius of using 'fair-seeming words' to trick the multitudes and warned that George, Athanasius' rival, cited Scripture in his sermons in order to fool the simple people.29 Gregory exhorted other clergymen to be careful with the style they used to present doctrine: they ran the risk of ' shedding the innocent blood of simpler souls'.30 The Cappadocians believed that the average Christian's vulnerability to heresy was partially his or her own fault. Lack of education could be forgiven, but the propensity for flashy oratory and charismatic speakers was a problem. Gregory of Nazianzus repeatedly refers to the ' novel', ‘ artificial' or ' elaborate ' style and the 'buffoonery' that were popular with the general public.31 Unscrupulous speakers, they argued , played on this weakness in order to trick the Christian masses into heresy. This perceived problem was part of the debate over the Christian use of rhetoric, but it was also an indication of the uneasiness felt by Church Fathers about the transmission of theological teachings to a broad audience. If they could do it, then, of course, others could as well . They usually blamed their opponents for misleading the flocks through the misuse of rhetoric, but they could not suppress the notion that the flocks should have been a little smarter about what they listened to. The religious instincts of the crowd could go either way. When Gregory described his father's conversion to Nicene Christianity, he recalled that everyone, ' not only of the highest, but also of the humblest, intelligence ' , could see Gregory the Elder's potential.32 Likewise, according to Gregory, Athanasius became the bishop of Alexandria with the support of the entire Christian people, who poured into the city from the countryside and elected him ' in an apostolic and spiritual manner'.33 Gregory even added a comment from an anonymous member of the crowd, who remarked on his amazement at the number of people, which was even greater than what a visiting emperor would attract.34 Similarly, Gregory compared Athanasius' miraculously unanimous reception by the Egyptians to the crowds who greeted Jesus in Jerusalem.35 These descriptions

27 Ep. 207.3; ep. 243.4 . Ph . Rousseau , Basil of Caesarea ( 1994), 125f., 311f.; Benoît Gain, L'Église de Cappadoce au IVe Siècle (1985), 169. 28 Hom. in Hex. 5.5. 29 Or. 22.12 ; 21.22. 30 Or. 2.46. 31 Or. 32.26; 33.8; 21.12. 32 Or. 18.12. 33 Or. 21.8, 27. 34 Or. 21.28. 35 Or. 21.29.

122

J. MAXWELL

of popular approval are undoubtedly exaggerated , but they show us that the crowd's approval could be seen to express divine favor. In contrast, the masses are also depicted as joining heretical groups out of ignorance and gullibility, lured in by the scheming of sophisticated heretical speakers . Since they prided themselves on teaching simple truths to simple people, Basil and Gregory and their contemporaries had to explain why the simple people might prefer another doctrine. Although the claim to be the anti-sophist – the one speaking clearly and truly as opposed to the one trying to trick his listeners - was as old as rhetoric itself, this claim was also rooted in the experience of orators and pastors trying to convey information to their audiences. Basil and Gregory claimed to have found common ground with their listeners when they presented the basic principles of Christianity. But if anyone else captured the attention ofthe masses, it was due to trickery.

Conclusion Basil and Gregory were important figures in the rise of the ascetic ideal and in the building of institutions for the care of the poor. They said that simplicity was admirable and worthy of emulation by those capable of sophistication, but natural simplicity was in fact dangerous because it was so vulnerable to persuasion. There was nothing new about the masses being swayed by deceptive rhetoric, except for the problem Gregory warned of: theological misunderstandings could shed ' the blood of simpler souls'. Thus , it was not enough for Christian pastors to win over the masses; their minds had to be steered straight and even elevated , as well. Since Basil and Gregory took their duties seriously, they did not just make optimistic comments about the power of simple truths, simple language, and simple natures . They also had to deal with the frustration and danger of ignorance . These were educated men who, on one level, disdained the masses and were well aware of their own superior educations and pedigrees . At the same time, they encouraged lay Christians to listen to and grapple with theological arguments . Basil and Gregory, like other Christian leaders at the time, faced the problem of reconciling the egalitarian elements of Christianity with the practicalities of leadership and their own deeply ingrained notions about social class.

The Autobiographical Prosopopoeia of Gregory of Nazianzus

Suzanne ABRAms Rebillard, Ithaca, New York

It has been at least three decades since Classicists have read ancient Greek ‘lyric' (or first-person) poetry as autobiographical ; the approach was abandoned in favor of a performance oriented perspective.' Yet only recently has this approach to Gregory of Nazianzus' poetry, in particular his Poemata de seipso, begun to be revised. The pieces continue to be thought to offer an illuminated path into the true self of the poet, as well as a reliable source on the events surrounding the Council of Constantinople and his retreat from the capital in 381. The poems themselves , however, warn against taking the poet's voice as definitive: in numerous poems he breaks the continuity of his voice by introducing another voice of his own . This self-quotation is a variation on the technique known as prosopopoeia , the exercise of donning the mask of another person either within a speech or for its entirety; it was a standard element of rhetorical education in antiquity. New critical approaches are unmasking Gregory -– witness the publication last year of Bortnes' and Hägg's collected volume2 - though what many of the old and new approaches to the poems hold in common is an understanding of poetry written in the first person as revelatory of a self- consciously self-contained and autonomous 'I' – rhetorically and philosophically fashioned according to intellectual and aesthetic norms, but still a single unified ' personality'. With this communication, I hope to revise further the current revisions by considering why a poet writing in the first person effectively quotes himself. Do these multiple voices all lead us directly to a Gregory? I will consider how Gregory uses prosopopoeia to suspend our disbelief, creating the illusion of a trustworthy poet's voice, and what this might tell us about his concept of the self. The six personal poems (2.1.7, 14, 23, 32 , 38 , and 44) that contain these selfquotations share little in common formally. Three appear in poems in iambic trimeter (one of which is an acrostic), one in dactylic hexameters, and two in elegiacs. The lengths of the poems vary from seven to sixty- seven lines, as do the lengths of quotation. They are consistent , however, in three significant ways: first, the poet's voice sets the scene for the quoted speech, but these

1 E.g. Paul Allen Miller, Lyric Texts and Lyric Consciousness (London , 1994); Odysseus Tsagarakis, Self-Expression in Early Greek Lyric Elegiac and Iambic Poetry (Wiesbaden, 1977) . 2 Jostien Børtnes and Tomas Hägg (eds .) , Gregory of Nazianzus: Images and Reflections (Copenhagen, 2006).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 123-128. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

124

S. ABRAMS Rebillard

scenes are dramatic productions , not narrations of actual speech; second, the poet's voice is as a priest and/or ascetic; third, the contents of the quotation concern proper performance of these two roles. Poem 7 begins with an address to his fellow priests as if he were in dialogue with them , but neither are they quoted, nor have his words actually been spoken.3

My fellow priests ... ... I left; you shouted in triumph. I will utter only a word of farewell to all: 'Should you find another in place of me, may you honor the Spirit, venerated by me, its advocate .' But now no longer am I the disputed ground of battle . (2.1.7.1 , 3-7) He introduces the quotation with future verbs in line 4. He has already asserted in line 3 that he is gone and he follows the quotation with a statement in his voice as poet that he is ' now no longer' the disputed ground of battle. With the double temporal adverbs , the quotation is emphatically set at a distance, spatial and temporal, when his physical voice can no longer be heard , but when he would thus have greater freedom of speech . Why use two voices that address the same men? The collegiality connoted by ovvlútat in the opening line is sarcastic, as the following three lines indicate. The quotation in lines 5 to 6, however, is less accusatory: brief, as лλýν emphasizes , and focused on the Trinity in comparison to their triumphant shouting. The final line of the poem could be part of the quotation, but the double temporal adverbs at the start of the line emphasizing the present - as opposed to the future of the quotation - suggests it belongs to the poet's voice ; a jibe at his colleagues ' contentiousness . The two voices have two tones : the private bitterness of a colleague not quite dead to their envy, as opposed to the public politeness of a departing bishop speaking in support of the Trinity. The audience of the poem has the illusion of intimacy because they hear both. Poem 44 is a vitriolic response to a monk who supposedly has accused the poet of indulging in luxury, but as in poem 7, the accusing respondent is absent. The poet provides nothing about the monk beyond a brief summary of his attack : Just now one of the ignorant and pampered , a man wealthy and ambitious , stretched himself to the utmost to claim I indulge in luxury, saying much more, even that I am wealthy since I have a garden, leisure time, and a little fountain. 'Keep silent about your tears,' I said ... (2.1.44.1-5 ) The poet's quoted words have virtually no context, such that although he does not qualify his speech as future or potential (his speaking verb is ɛiлоν), the quotation lacks an anchor to an identifiable speech situation. It should be the

3 All translations are my own. The Greek text for poem 7 is from the Budé 2004 edition; all others are from PG 37.

The Autobiographical Prosopopoeia of Gregory of Nazianzus

125

beginning of a dialogue, but the respondent never enters the stage.4 The poem opens with лρóŋv, ‘just now', giving the audience of the poem an initial sense of immediacy that the format of direct quotation intensifies: it is as if they are on the scene to hear an immediate reaction that the elapse of time and revised narration (purportedly) has not perverted . The quotations in poem 14 are, as in poem 7, potential replies to his fellow priests, but this time introduced by a call to Christ as witness : Christ, I dare to say some of what is in my heart. / They abuse with challenges and my stones. / 'Equally is the Spirit sent forth,' I say clearly. (2.1.14.31-33) The poet then offers us two more assertions of the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the latter of which introduces an extensive discussion of his fidelity to the Trinity as a speaker. The format of self- quotation allows the identification of the Trinity as an ally, as do the closing two lines of the poem, a call to the Father following the quotation (lines 66-7). The poet speaks directly to the Trinity, and the audience of the poem - but not the enemies who hear merely the quotation - is privy to this intimate conversation with the divine. Further enhancing this sense of intimacy is the fact that the poem is an acrostic; in the hidden message Gregory promises knowledge to those to whom his poetry is dear. Thus the audience of the poem is welcomed as erudite and members of his intimate circle. The verb paεiv as per its usage in the autobiographical poems connotes speaking with knowledge and rational consideration, but also within human. limitations: humble yet rational speech. The verb in poem 14 suggests that the poet, contrary to his enemies who offer violence, offers reason. It also appears in poem 23 after a direct address to the Trinity and introducing an address to fellow priests ; here again, no actual speech situation is described : Nevertheless , I will speak my own opinion, as far as I am able : / ' Both of these are advantageous - to run and to run toward the good . / Though if these are not possible, I embrace the labor / before an inglorious and base salvation ...' (2.1.23.6-9) As he would 'dare' to speak in poem 14, in 23 he will speak as far as he is able. This line exemplifies the humility before the Trinity that the quotation advises for the shepherds of the people later in the poem. (lines 17-23) The audience of the poem, contrary to the priests to whom the quotation is addressed, is not given direct advice toward salvation; rather, they overhear Gregory's musings before the Logos. They are privy to conversation , not simply warned or advised. In poem 32 , contrary to the previous examples, we are offered a nine-line description of the speech scene , a sermon on the mount or words of Moses from Sinai: I used to wish to be a swift-winged dove or a swallow in order that I might flee this mortal existence, or to live

4 See Simon Goldhill , The Poet's Voice (Cambridge, 1991), 111 : There is no position outside the poem's dialogic exchange from which the lines can securely be read. The poet enters his poem in (the fabrication of) an exchange .'

126

S. ABRAMS Rebillard

in the desert, sharing my home with beasts (for they are more faithful than men), and to pass through my daily existence without pain, unpunished, carefree . This alone unlike the beasts I would have: a nous cognizant of divinity, focused on heaven, thereby always gathering light in a calm existence . Or raised up on top of some airy peak , I would bellow out a thunderous sound to all terrestrial creatures : 'Mortal men, race of clay, being nothing, we who are living in death, we are swollen with vanity ...' (2.1.32.1-11) The poem expresses a wish to return to a state, a paradise, in which the poet would live like the beasts, apart from his recognition of the Trinity. The creation of the fictional scene with reminiscences of Biblical authority figures yields two results: the quotation must be read as a literary creation , in comparison with which the trustworthiness of the poet's voice in the opening of the poem is enhanced. The quotation itself is addressed to three different groups in decreasing circles of intimacy: first ' all terrestrial creatures' (line 9), then ' mortal men' (line 10), then finally ' my children' (line 50) . This gives the audience of the poem the impression that they are even closer to the poet than his children who are called to within merely fictitious speech. Poem 38 is a humble ascetic's prayer to Christ that will be uttered on Easter morning, ending a Lenten period of silence. Lord Christ, you first, when at dawn I offer my word long contained, I shall sound from my mouth, a pure sacrifice of the purest priest, if it is right to say, pouring forth this prayer from my nous: 'Light of the Father, Logos of the Great Nous , beyond myth ... (2.1.38.1-5 ) It is thus a poem written while he is silent, about speech-to- come , or more precisely prayer-to - come. The poet addresses the poem to the Logos, then the quoted prayer as well, making the piece a prayer within a prayer, both of whose central concern is proper use of language. The prayer that will be spoken on Easter can be read as a ' public' voice, physical and to be heard by whomever is within earshot as an example of prayer; but the poem itself, a silent prayer and promise to Christ, grants the poem's audience privileged access to what only the Trinity hears. The poems are layered with voices , but also with audiences, some explicitly identified and some implicit ; hence these emotional monologues should be read as dialogues. There are numerous layers of intimacy; by exposing his readers to all his voices (as opposed to the audiences of only the quotations), Gregory locates them within his most intimate circles, even that consisting only of himself and the Trinity. The exercise ofprosopopoeia trained men to speak in another's voice , hence the speech created was necessarily a fiction . It is because Gregory's self- quotations are primarily potential and set into fictional scenes, or without anchor to

The Autobiographical Prosopopoeia of Gregory of Nazianzus

127

identifiable historical reality, that I liken them to prosopopoeia. The poet, already a mask of a man, puts on a mask of himself as a speaker during his poetic performances; thus the use of prosopopoeia in these poems mirrors the compositional process for the poems themselves. It is significant that in all six cases, it is difficult to define the final limit of the quotation, where the voice of prosopopoeia ends and the voice of the poet resumes, if at all ; are they different voices of a single self? Is there a true Gregory behind these multiple voices in dialogue? Though there are strong claims to knowledge through suffering, which is in turn identified by critics as stemming from specific events in Gregory of Nazianzus' life , those events are at best glossed in the text, rarely detailed enough to point to him as the author without prior knowledge of his biography. Moreover, this approach assumes there is a self-consciously individual man who wishes to be known as such. In conclusion, I'd like to consider the poems in light of Christopher Gill's conception of the ancient self as one ever in dialogue. He writes of Homeric monologues (and later applies to the tragic heroes Ajax and Medea) : What the use of monologue seems rather to signify is the exceptional isolation in which the figures find themselves at these moments, so that ... they have no one with whom to share their dilemmas but themselves. In other words , the use of inner dialogue (and the kind and degree of ' self- consciousness' thus conveyed) is a product of the figure's interpersonal situation at the time rather than of anything resembling the Cartesian assumption that thought is necessarily conscious. The interpretation fits well with Gregory of Nazianzus post-381 : the purportedly self-conscious suffering revealed in the poetry, lauded as evidence of introspection and self-awareness, can instead by seen as a product of his deprivation of his fellow priests or the laity as his audience. We hear the poet's voices without their collocutors because the writer is alone, but this does not necessarily mean that the poems were conceived as self-conscious monologue . The poems then might be seen to provide us with norms for relationships between a religious with others , rather than with a portrait of the individual and self- conscious suffering of a man named Gregory of Nazianzus. An 'I' in the modern subjective sense cannot be found because the poet did not conceive of himself as an autonomous self. This is not to say Gregory did not exist or that true suffering was not part of his inspiration to write, but that these cannot be found in these poems . Different voices , different masks, belong to different situations and different conversations. The layering of voices constructs a hierarchy of intimacy, drawing in the audience of the poems with the illusion that their intimacy with the poet is denied to the audience of the quotations. The rhetorical technique of

5 Christopher Gill , Personality in Greek Epic, Tragedy, and Philosophy (Oxford, 1996), 58 .

128

S. ABRAMS Rebillard

prosopopoeia and its consequent multiplication of voices exemplifies how the poet conceives of himself in dialogue even when apparently in monologue. Recall poem 32 where he is alone with fellow beasts in paradise but still addresses humanity. He is inseparable from community, ever presenting his voice and its contents in relation to human society. What we have is the portrait not of a romantic Gregory inspired to express himself in poetry, but of the masks of a poet: in relation to the divine , in relation to his colleagues, in relation to his poetic audience.

Gregory of Nazianzus' Letters 24 and 38 and Themistius of Constantinople

Thomas BRAUCH, Mount Pleasant, Michigan

The surviving correspondence of Gregory of Nazianzus includes two letters , Letters 24 and 38 ,' addressed to Themistius, the most important pagan living at Constantinople in the second half of the fourth century. Themistius was an eastern senator, imperial adviser, and high officeholder; he was also a prominent teacher, philosopher, and orator.2 Gregory's relationship with Themistius will be of interest to those desiring a broad perspective of Gregory.3 This paper will discuss Gregory's Letters 24 and 38 and what they show about Gregory and Themistius' interactions. Other letters of Gregory will be cited for historical context. Some inferences about Gregory and Themistius ' relations will be made on these letters and on other evidence. A common social background fashioned a cultural bond between Gregory and Themistius that transcended religious differences. Both originated within the Eastern provincial elite class whose wealth and social prestige were founded on landowning and prominence in local civic leadership : Themistius came from Paphlagonia" and Gregory from Cappadocia . A chief feature of this class was a traditional Greek education based upon classical philosophy, oratory, and literature that functioned as a social as well as an intellectual context of elite class consciousness. From this class the fourth- century eastern emperors derived their officials and the Eastern Church obtained its bishops. Christian and pagan members of this class shared similar social , intellectual , and political values formed by their common background and education . Such cultural ties fostered cordial relations between elite Christians and pagans . An important component of the shared culture of the Eastern elite was letter 8 writing. Exchange of letters established ties of tλía (formal friendship) among

¹ Paul Gallay, Saint Grégoire de Nazianze. Lettres I (Paris, 1964), 32f., 47f. 2 For Themistius see John Vanderspoel, Themistius and the Imperial Court (Ann Arbor, 1995) . 3 For Gregory see John McGuckin, Saint Gregory ofNazianzus (Crestwood , NY and London, 2001). 4 Peter Brown, Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity (Madison, 1992), 35-70. 5 J. Vanderspoel , Themistius (1995 ), 31f. 6 J. McGuckin, Gregory ofNazianzus (2001), 1-34. ¹ Edward Jay Watts, City and School in Late Antique Athens and Alexandria (Berkeley, 2006), 1-23. 8 Stanley Kent Stowers, Letter Writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity (Philadelphia, 1986).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 129-134. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

130

T. BRAUCH

members of this class, including those who had little or no acquaintance . Such interaction was important because epistolary contacts enabled members of the Eastern elite to extend their personal influence within contemporary society and the imperial government through mediation and patronage. Part of the increased influence of bishops in the fourth- century East was their participation in epistolary mediation.10 Gregory's correspondence contains several such letters ."1 With this introduction the two letters of Gregory of Nazianzus addressed to Themistius can be discussed. Letter 24 is dated to the late 360s C.E.12 At the time of the letter's composition, Gregory had been a priest and the assistant to 13 his father Gregory the Elder as bishop of Nanzianzus for several years, ¹³ and 14 Themistius had served several Eastern emperors as senator and counselor.¹4 The letter reveals that Themistius is the current prefect of Constantinople: his official power (tò dúvaσ0α1) extends to the entire city (4-5 ).15 Gregory's purpose in the letter is to ask Themistius as chief magistrate of the city to intercede on behalf of his cousin Amphilochius in a lawsuit.16 Letter 24 is a standard letter of mediation.¹ Gregory bases his appeal for Themistius ' assistance on Themistius' friendship with Amphilochius' father (1) and Amphilochius ' being a philosopher (2). As often in such letters , the circumstances of the Amphilochius' case are not given; Gregory only says that Amphilochius will tell Themistius how he can aid him (5) . Two other letters of Gregory provide more information about this case.18 In 367 Gregory sent his Letter 22 to Sophronius as the sitting prefect of Constantinople and his Letter 23 to Caesarius19 as the recently retired prefect of the city in support of Amphilochius in this suit, and from these letters it appears that other parties

9 P. Brown, Power and Persuasion ( 1992), 45-7. 10 S.K. Stowers, Letter Writing (1986), 45f. 11 Jean Bernardi , Saint Grégoire de Nazianze: le théologien et son temps (Paris, 1995 ), 250-4. 12 P. Gallay, Saint Grégoire de Nazianze. Lettres I (1964), 32 . 13 J. McGuckin, Gregory ofNazianzus (2001 ) , 85-168. 14 J. Vanderspoel , Themistius (1995 ) , 51-185 . Themistius was also proconsul of Constantinople 358-9 and prefect of Constantinople in 362 : Marie-Madeleine Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie zu den Schriften Gregors von Nazianz (Bonn, 1960), ' Themistius I', 160; Thomas Brauch, The Prefect of Constantinople for 362 AD : Themistius : Byz 63 ( 1993) 37-78 . 15 Thomas Brauch, Patristic and Byzantine Witness to an Urban Prefectship of Themistius under Valens : Byz 71 (2001 ) 325-82. 16 For the official supremacy of the urban prefect and his judicial authority in a Roman capital see Arnold Hugh Martin Jones, The Later Roman Empire, 284-602; A Social, Economic, and Administrative Survey (Norman, Ok. , 1964), I 481f., 690. 17 For the Greek letter of mediation see Clinton Walker Keyes , The Greek Letter of Introduction: AJP 56 (1935) 28-44; Chan-Hie Kim, Form and Structure of the Familiar Greek Letter of Recommendation (Missoula, 1972). 18 T. Brauch, Patristic and Byzantine Witness (2001 ), 335-42. 19 This official was not Gregory's brother: M.-M. Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie (1960), 'Caesarius II', 51 .

Gregory of Nazianzus' Letters 24 and 38 and Themistius of Constantinople

131

were suing Amphilochius over a business deal. Since the case was not settled under Sophronius , Gregory sent Letter 24 in 368 to Themistius requesting his help as prefect of Constantinople for Amphilochius . All three of these men, either as the current prefect or as an ex-prefect, could influence the outcome of Amphilochius' case. Amphilochius' retirement to Christian asceticism c. 370 suggests that Themistius settled the case in his favor.20 Letter 24 also shows that Gregory and Themistius were not well acquainted at the time of its composition. Gregory's expression of hope at the end of the letter that Themistius would consider him a friend suggests a lack of a relationship between the two men. However, the letter implies a previous meeting between the two. This meeting came in 358 or 359 when Gregory passed through Constantinople on his return to Cappadocia from his studies at Athens.2¹ At that time, Gregory's brother Caesarius enjoyed the sponsorship of Constantinople's philosophers because of his excellent education.22 Themistius was most likely Caesarius' patron, and Caesarius probably introduced Gregory to Themistius as a newly finished student in philosophy and rhetoric. But the brevity of Gregory's stay in Constantinople in the late 350s and the writing of the letter almost ten years after Gregory and Themistius may suggest that the two had little or no other contact during the 360s. Gregory's Letter 38 is the only other witness to their relations . Letter 38 is another letter of mediation written to enlist Themistius' support in relocating the Cappadocian rhetor Eudoxius to Constantinople. Gregory cites Eudoxius' ability in oratory, his noble life, and Themistius' friendship with Eudoxius' father as the bases of his petition (3) . The actual request that Gregory makes in the letter is presented in vague terms : Themistius is to honor Eudoxius' talent appropriately (4). Gregory adds at the end of the letter that Eudoxius will inform Themistius of the exact service that he wishes him to provide . Eudoxius probably wanted Themistius to help him become an official teacher of oratory in Constantinople . The date of Letter 38 is the first concern of this text. The standard date is to the late 360s.23 However, the correct date is to the early 380s.24 This letter is related to two other letters of Gregory, Letter 37 written to Sophronius and Letter 181 written to the general Saturninus. All three letters ask their recipient to help Eudoxius become established professionally at Constantinople . Since Saturninus lived in the eastern capital in the early 380s,25 all three letters should

20 Karl Holl , Amphilochius von Ikonium in seinem Verhältnis zu den grossen Kappadoziern (Tübingen, 1904), 10-2 . 21 J. McGuckin , Gregory of Nazianzus (2001), 85. 22 Gregory of Nazianzus , Oration 7.8 . For Caesarius see M.-M. Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie (1960), ' Caesarius I', 48-50. 23 P. Gallay, Saint Grégoire de Nazianze. Lettres I ( 1964), 47 : ' Vers 369'. 24 M.-M. Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie (1960), 68 , 153 n. 319, 156 n. 325, 160. 25 M.-M. Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie (1960), 68 .

132

T. BRAUCH

be dated to this time. Letter 38 was therefore written during the early years of Gregory's withdrawal to Cappadocia after his stay in Constantinople from early 379 until summer 381 as the city's Nicene bishop.26 During Gregory's early retirement, Themistius promoted the policies of the new emperor Theodosius I in the East and took his last official appointment as Prefect of Constantinople briefly in early 384.27 It should be noted that in early 380s all three recipients of these letters held an office in Constantinople that would enable them to facilitate Eudoxius' transfer from Cappadocia to the eastern capital. Letter 37 presents Sophronius as the sitting prefect of the city in 382 , and Letter 38 shows Themistius in late 383 as the designated successor to Clearchus who replaced Sophronius as prefect in 382. Although the senate of a Roman capital appointed teachers for the city, an urban prefect directed the senate's selection.28 Hence, Sophronius and Themistius could have aided Eudoxius while each was city prefect . In addition, Saturninus was a consul for 382,29 and he could have used his influence to assist Eudoxius in his plan.30 But Gregory's encouragement of Eudoxius to enter Christian asceticism in Letters 178-80, which seem to have been written later than Letters 37, 38 , and 181 , suggests that Eudoxius did not move to Constantinople.31 Nevertheless, a greater familiarity between Gregory and Themistius is evident in Letter 38 than in Gregory's Letter 24. Gregory is more direct in his approach to Themistius in Letter 38. By designating his protégé Eudoxius as his ' son' 32 (viós; 3), Gregory makes a forceful claim on Themistius ' fulfilling his request. In addition, Gregory in the first sentence of the letter repeats a simile from one of Themistius' orations as a compliment to the pagan orator.33 The greater familiarity between Gregory and Themistius developed during Gregory's residence in Constantinople as Nicene bishop of the city from 379 until 381. Soon after his arrival in the eastern capital, Gregory made contacts within the official circles of the city. These connections can be traced through letters that Gregory wrote in the years after his retirement from Constantinople and his return to Cappadocia.34 Gregory sent letters to the civilian officials

26 J. McGuckin, Gregory ofNazianzus (2001), 371-98 . 27 J. Vanderspoel , Themistius ( 1995) , 187-216. 28 Fritz Saaby Pedersen , Late Roman Public Professionalism (Odense, 1976), 41f. 29 M.-M. Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie (1960) , ' Saturninus', 153f. 30 F.S. Pedersen, Public Professionalism ( 1976), 42 . 31 Brian Daley, Gregory of Nazianzus (London and New York, 2006), 254 n. 48 . 32 C.-H. Kim, Letter of Recommendation ( 1972), 48-50. 33 Gregory's assertion that oratory distinguishes Themistius as ivory shoulders identify the Pelopidae seems to be an allusion to Themistius ' Oration 21.250b, where the orator says that certain characteristics define a philosopher like ivory shoulders designate the descendents of Pelops: J. Vanderspoel, Themistius ( 1995), 235 n. 31 . 34 Nicanor Gómez -Villegas, Gregorio de Nazianzo en Constantinopla (Madrid, 2000), 88f.

Gregory of Nazianzus' Letters 24 and 38 and Themistius of Constantinople

133

Themistius (Letter 38), Sophronius (Letters 37, 93, 135) , and Procopius (Letter 128) and to the military commanders Saturninus (Letters 132, 181 ) , Victor (Letters 133-4), and Modares (Letter 136-7) . These letters witness to Gregory's initiating quλía with these men early in his stay in the eastern capital. From this it can be inferred that Gregory met Themistius during this time. Sophronius, the addressee of Gregory's Letters 22 and 37, was most likely the intermediary between Gregory and Themistius. Sophronius35 was a Cappadocian friend of Gregory to whom the bishop had often written during Valens' rule (Letters 21, 22 , 29, 39),36 and Sophronius and Themistius were fellow senators since the early reign of Valens. Perhaps Sophronius introduced Gregory to Themistius much as Gregory's brother Caesarius had introduced the two in the late 350s. In addition, Gregory's residency in Constantinople provided opportunities for Gregory and Themistius to interact on formal occasions . At such events both Themistius as an eastern senator and imperial courtier and Gregory as the Nicene bishop of the city would probably be in attendance. Examples are Theodosius' triumphant entry into Constantinople on November 27, 380, and Themistius' recitation in the eastern capital of his Oration 15 honoring Theodosius ' anniversary as a Roman ruler on January 19, 381.37 Themistius may have been present with the imperial court at Christian festivities in the city that Gregory would also have attended.38 These occasions include the baptism on January 11 , 381 , of the Gothic chieftain Athanaric, an ally of the Eastern Empire, and Athanaric's funeral two weeks later on January 25.39 Themistius may also have accompanied the emperor and his court to Gregory's Sunday sermons at the Church of the Holy Apostles.40 Private contacts between the two men at Constantinople can also be posited . Themistius, the most noted orator resident in the eastern capital, would have been interested in Gregory's oratory and may have heard Gregory speak at the 41 Anastasia Church before the bishop was transferred to Holy Apostles.4¹ Perhaps Gregory heard Themistius give speeches in the theatre of the city as was the

35 M.-M. Hauser-Meury, Prosopographie (1960) , ‘ Sophronius' , 156f. 36 T. Brauch, Patristic Correspondence and the Master of the Offices Sophronius : SP 39 (2006) 7-12. 37 J. Vanderspoel, Themistius ( 1995), 199f. 38 Glanville Downey, Themistius and the Defense of Hellenism in the Fourth Centur: HThR 50 (1957) 259-74, 264. 39 J. McGuckin, Gregory ofNazianzus (2001), 337, 347f. 40 Themistius may have been among the philosophers that Gregory reports were in attendance at his Oration 36, which he delivered soon after his installation at Holy Apostles in late November 380 : Neil McLynn, The Transformation of Imperial Churchgoing in the Fourth Century, in: Simon Swain and Mark Edwards (eds.), Approaching Late Antiquity (Oxford and New York, 2004), 235-90 , 260 n. 86. 41 For Gregory's oratory at the Anastasia see J. McGuckin , Gregory of Nazianzus (2001), 243.

134

T. BRAUCH

pagan orator's custom."42 The allusion to one of Themistius ' speeches in his Letter 38 demonstrates Gregory's awareness of Themistius ' oratory. Although Gregory's Letter 38 shows amiability between Gregory and Themistius, their interactions overall were limited. The short time that Gregory spent in Constantinople was one restriction, and the physical distance between the Eastern capital and Cappadocia where Gregory generally resided was another. While both lived at Constantinople 379-381 , their respective interests were different: Gregory worked to establish the Nicene cause in the Eastern Church,43 and Themistius tried to infuse Hellenism into eastern imperial policy and intellectual life.44 The composition of Letters 24 and 38 several years apart suggests that Gregory and Themistius' relations were sporadic. Only occasions for the exercise of elite q₁λía brought the two men together personally in the eastern capital or into distant written contact at other times. In conclusion, Gregory's relations with Themistius were shaped by the elite culture ofthe Roman East in the late fourth century. As members of the eastern elite, both men participated in traditional quλía that enabled them to conduct mutually accepted social conventions such as mediation and patronage. Gregory's Letters 24 and 38 to Themistius demonstrate the operations of quλía within the interactions of Christians and pagans. These letters also testify to Gregory's contacts within Constantinopolitan circles during his career and illustrate his epistolary mediation.

42 Themistius , Oration 21.243a-b, Oration 23.282d-283b, and Oration 26.311b- d. 43 For Gregory's stay in Constantinople 379-381 see J. McGuckin, Gregory ofNazianzus (2001) , 229-369; N. Gómez-Villegas, Gregorio de Nazianzo (2000), 79-183. 44 For Themistius' activities during Gregory's residency in Constantinople 379-381 , see J. Vanderspoel, Themistius ( 1995) , 195-204.

The Logos Cries Out from the Virgin's Womb: Gregory of Nazianzus, Oration 45.13

Verna E.F. HARRISON, Kansas City, Missouri

For a long time I have been troubled by the following text and have sought to explain it: [Christ was] a Male, because offered for Adam; or rather, the Stronger for the strong, when the first Man had fallen under sin; and chiefly because there is in Him nothing feminine, nothing unmanly; but He burst from the bonds of the Virgin-Mother's womb with much power, and a Male was brought forth by the prophetess, as Isaiah declares the good tidings [Is. 13: 3]. (Browne and Swallow)¹ How could Gregory, who elsewhere in his writings manifests a positive view of his mother Nonna, his sister Gorgonia, and other women, say that Christ is free from any taint of the feminine? Furthermore, how could Gregory portray him as an infant using male power to burst free from his mother? This second question is troubling for both ancient and modern reasons . Many modern women would find the portrayal of Christ as an exemplar of male violence against women to be shocking. Orthodox Christians, however, would have another concern. They have long honoured the Mother of God , and since Proclus of Constantinople in the fifth century have come to speak of her childbearing as virginal in partu. Proclus compared the Christ Child's birth to the Risen Lord's coming to his disciples through closed doors : If the mother had not remained a virgin, then the child born would have been a mere man and the birth no miracle. But if she remained a virgin even after birth, then indeed he was wondrously born who also entered unhindered ' when the doors were sealed' [John 20: 19-26], whose union of natures was proclaimed by Thomas who said, ' My Lord and my God' [John 20:28] .2 For Proclus and the Byzantines who followed him, the idea of the child bursting through the bonds of his mother's womb would have been unthinkable . Why, then, is there no comment on the text cited above , at least to my knowledge, in

1 PG 36, 641A; Charles G. Browne and James E. Swallow (ed. and transl.) , S. Gregory Nazianzen: Select Orations, NPNF, ser. 2 , vol . 7 (Grand Rapids, MI, 1983), 427. 2 Homily 1.2; Nicholas Constas (ed. and transl.), Proclus of Constantinople and the Cult of the Virgin in Late Antiquity: Homilies 1-5, Texts and Translations (Leiden , 2003 ) , 138f. See also Luigi Gambero, Mary and the Fathers of the Church (San Francisco, 1999), 253.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 135-139. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

136

V.E.F. HARRISON

the Byzantine Church, where Gregory's writings were copied more than any text except the Bible?3 I have sought to explain this text in two articles, in 1990 and again in 1998,4 though I did not find my explanations sufficient. This essay will expand upon my earlier reflections, since they provide much of the historical and theological context for Or. 45.13 . Then I will announce a more definitive explanation. The text comes from Gregory's Second Oration on Easter, and is part of an extensive allegorical exegesis of the first Passover, as described in Exodus 12. Christ, of course, is the Passover lamb, and §13 explains how the lamb's characteristics apply to him: innocence , perfection , maleness, an age of one year, and guilelessness . This sermon is interesting because, together with Or. 37, it contains Gregory's longest sustained exegetical effort. John McGuckin has noted Gregory's debt to Origen in Biblical interpretation . Unfortunately, the Alexandrian master's work on Exodus 12 is lost. Perhaps Gregory provides a clue as to what he said . Given the evidence available at present, we cannot know which parts come from this source and which are Gregory's own invention. The text uses allegory to correlate the Passover lamb's characteristics with those of Christ, thus building a bridge between the Passover in Hebrew Scripture and the Christian Easter. So the maleness in question is in the first place the lamb's maleness, not that of the human Jesus. Gregory's allegory makes connections between different events in salvation history : Adam in need of redemption, the Passover during Israel's escape from Egypt, Isaiah's prophesy of a male child, and Gregory's congregation listening to his sermon at the celebration of Christ's resurrection. It is important to note that Christ's maleness in this text is allegorical and not literal. In patristic texts , gender allegories are generally of two kinds. The first refers to a moral level of meaning, in which virtues and vices are named as masculine or feminine . In our text, strength is a masculine characteristic and is thus ascribed to Christ, while he is said to be free of negatively charged feminine characteristics, presumably vices. Elsewhere , however, Gregory ascribes many virtues to women. So this text is coloured by its exegetical and rhetorical context. As an orator, Gregory repeats cultural stereotypes that are commonplaces in late antiquity. He does this to build a bridge of understanding and agreement

3 Jacques Noret, Grégoire de Nazianze, l'auteur le plus cité, après la Bible, dans la littérature ecclésiastique byzantine, in: Justin Mossay (ed.), Symposium Nazianzenum, Louvain-la-Neuve, 25-28 août 1981 (Paderborn, 1983) , 259-66. 4 Male and Female in Cappadocian Theology: Journal ofTheological Studies N. S. 41 (1990) 441-71 , 457f.; Nonna Verna Harrison, The Maleness of Christ: St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 42 (1998) 111-51 , 130-2 . 5 Saint Gregory ofNazianzus: An Intellectual Biography (Crestwood, NY, 2001). See Or. 8, the funeral oration for Gorgonia, and Or. 18, the funeral oration for his father, in which he also praises his mother.

The Logos Cries Out from the Virgin's Womb

137

with his audience so that he can carry them with him to the next point he wants to make. As a skilled rhetor, he was sensitive to what his listeners were able to hear. A rhetor with similar sensitivity today would not use an allusion to masculine virtue and feminine vice because he would realize that for an audience now it would fall flat. However, the idea that some virtues are masculine, such as strength, and others are feminine, such as those of Nonna and Gorgonia, is in conflict with the Cappadocian belief that the virtues comprise a unity and that any human being, male or female, can come to possess all of them. In the text from Or. 45.13 that comes immediately after our passage, Gregory affirms that Christ, the exemplary human being, is crowned with all the virtues. In considering the Savior as one year old, which could not have been literally true at the time of his crucifixion , Gregory speaks of the year as a circle that represents the crown of all the virtues which adorn him: ' He is the blessed crown of goodness and is in every way equal to himself and like himself, and not only this but also as giving life to the circle of the virtues , which are gently commingled and mixed with each other by a law of friendship and order." Gregory's point, which is an ancient commonplace, is that all the virtues are interrelated . So to possess one of them authentically, one must possess all of them. It follows that virtues cannot be divided by gender, so that men would possess some of them while women possess others. If each gender were incapable of acquiring certain virtues, nobody could practice any virtue fully, and nobody could achieve the fullness of all the virtues. Such a presupposition would render impossible what the Cappadocians proclaimed as a goal of human existence. It follows that when Or. 45.13 is read as a whole , its talk about the exclusive maleness of virtue is overturned in the next sentence. The other kind of gender allegory, which we also find in our text, links persons with each other spiritually, in this case Adam and Christ, united by their maleness and by Christ's salvific action. Yet this pairing only provides a partial view of salvation, as Gregory understands it. In Letter 101 , he writes in what has become a classic formula : 'What is not assumed is not healed , but what is united to God , that also is saved." In other words, Christ assumes every part of the human condition and unites it in himself with the divinity, so that through him all that is human can be united with the divine and thus saved. This soteriology explains why his humanity was considered central in the early church, and little was said about his maleness. For how could women be saved if he did not assume full humanity? In Or. 37.7, Gregory says that Christ, who is both Son of David and Son of the Virgin, saves by his passion both Adam

7 PG 36, 641A; Nonna Verna Harrison (ed. and transl .), Gregory ofNazianzus: Festal Orations (Crestwood, NY, 2008) , 173 . 8 See also Gregory of Nyssa, On the Beatitudes 4 (GNO VII/2 , 120-1) . 9 Paul Gallay (ed .) , Grégoire de Nazianze: Lettres théologiques, SC 208 (Paris, 1974) , 50.

138

V.E.F. HARRISON

and Eve, who alike sinned.10 In the fifth century, Cyril of Alexandria will carry this thought further. Cyril says that the original curse upon Eve's childbearing (Gen. 3:16) is annulled when Christ is born of a virgin. His birth, in effect, has brought the source of life into the female reproductive process that, after the fall, brought forth humans subject to death. " It follows that Christ has saved women by dwelling within one and coming forth from her, and he has saved men by assuming male humanity. The considerations we have discussed go a long way toward explaining the text from Or. 45.13 in its larger context , but there is still the statement that the Christ child ' burst from the bonds of the Virgin-Mother's womb with much power. The Greek is ἐκραγὲν βίᾳ δεσμῶν παρθενικῶν τε καὶ μητρικῶν, κατὰ πολλὴν ἐξουσίαν.12 The verb ἔκραγεν, is an aorist third person singular of κpάεiv, which means ' to shout', ' to cry aloud'.¹³ It does not mean ‘ to burst' . The Byzantines read the text in the original , so they saw no offense to the Virgin in it. On this occasion, Browne and Swallow must have succumbed to a common temptation of translators, to render an author's metaphor in what they think is its literal sense . It is better to let authors keep their metaphors , provided they can be rendered intelligibly in another language . Browne and Swallow may have read the text in accord with Victorian ideas of muscular masculinity. In 21st century English , the text reads as follows: And he is male as offered for Adam, or rather the stronger for the strong, since the first man fell under sin, and most of all because he bears nothing female, nothing unmanly, in himself; but he cried out loudly from the virginal and maternal bonds with great power, and a male was born from the prophetess, as Isaiah proclaims the good news. 14 Perhaps Gregory is saying here that a stronger man, Christ , was needed because the strong man , Adam, had fallen and sinned , had became weak . Paradoxically, to be redeemed Adam needed his sinful action to be repeated and reversed - that is, recapitulated by the Christ Child . The infant's weakness has thus become a strength, greater than Adam's power to sin. Here, the strength and the weakness , the man and the infant, are brought to the same level, just as masculine and feminine virtues are . This levelling is paradoxical , since the contrast between child and man was a commonplace in late antiquity (see 1Corinthians 13:11 ) . The child in such a contrast can even serve as a substitute for a woman, which would imply a levelling of the genders ' strength .

10 Claudio Moreschini (ed .), Grégoire de Nazianze: Discours 32-37, SC 318 (Paris, 1985), 284. 11 Cyril of Alexandria, Homily 2 on Luke (PG 72, 489B-C); Third Letter to Nestorius, in: Lionel R. Wickham (ed .), Cyril of Alexandria: Select Letters (Oxford , 1983) , 26-8; Five Tomes against Nestorius (ACO I 1.6,17) . 12 PG 36, 641A. 13 LSJ, S.V. 14 N.V. Harrison (2008) , 172-73.

The Logos Cries Out from the Virgin's Womb

139

If fact, the incarnation turns the characteristically male competition for strength on its head.15 Gregory, who has been immersed in rhetorical culture from his youth envisages the incarnation in terms of speech . He superimposes the image of the Logos crying forth mightily upon a more familiar image, that of a newborn child's first cry. As so often, he has produced a splendid depiction of the paradox of the incarnation. The text fits well in its context, ascribing to Christ maleness as an identifying mark of the Paschal lamb, because, as Maud Gleason has shown , in late antiquity rhetoric was linked with maleness.16 Rhetorical training served to groom upper class youths for positions of wealth, power and culture . Women were not trained in it. With a few significant exceptions, they were excluded from the practice of public speaking, nor did they work publicly as teachers . However, we know from the many voices of women lecturers whose speech has graced these Oxonian halls that this is not longer the case.

15 Let me thank the editor Markus Vinzent for most of the ideas in this paragraph. 16 Maud W. Gleason , Making Men: Sophists and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome (Princeton, 1995).

Whatever That Was! Paradise According to Gregory of Nazianzus¹

Peter BOUTENEFF, Crestwood, New York

Gregory of Nazianzus' thirty-eighth oration, On the feast of Theophany, is a glorious and joyful homily. Among the topics he covers , Gregory here sets out a concise account of the primordial Paradise and its role in the divine economy. Before exploring this passage, let us examine its context both within the oration itself and within early patristic history.

Oration 38

The center of this oration, repeated verbatim in Or. 45,2 and echoed in his seventh dogmatic poem, On the Soul,³ concerns God's act of creation and redemption in Christ. Gregory focuses on the human person , described as the unique mixture of the spiritual and material creation : a ' second world (кóσμo dεútɛpos) ', or even more strikingly, a ' great world placed in a little one (¿v μiкρ@ μέуaν) '. 4 Like many of the Greek fathers who spoke of the human person as a microcosm, he is echoing the Greek classical tradition. But the overtly Christian marks of this anthropology soon become clear. Firstly, the reason that God has made us out of these two worlds is so that, ' as the final stage of the mystery, [we may be] made divine by [our] inclination towards God', so that we may ' see and experience the brilliance of God '. Secondly, further on in the oration we are shown that this mixture in the human person is analogous to the ' new mixture ' or ' second communion ' of the divine and the human in the person of Christ.“

Portions of this paper are dealt with more fully in my book, Beginnings: Ancient Christian Readings ofthe Biblical Creation Narratives (Grand Rapids, MI, 2008). 2 Or. 38.9-11 (SC 358 , 120-6) . See Or. 45.5-8 . The repetition is deliberate , according to P. Gallay, La vie de Saint Grégoire de Nazianze (Lyon and Paris, 1943) , 159. For the Eng. transl. I am using (and periodically adapting ) Brian Edward Daley, Gregory of Nazianzus (London, 2006), 117-27. 3 Carm . 1.1.8 . See Donald A. Sykes and Claudio Moreschini, St Gregory of Nazianzus: Poemata Arcana (Oxford, 1997) , 32-40, esp. from 36. 4 Or. 38.11 (SC 358, 124) . 5 Or. 38.11 (SC 358 , 126). 6 Or. 38.13 (SC 358 , 134) ; see also Or. 2.23 (SC 247, 120).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 141-145. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

142

P. BOUTENEFF

We encompass these two realities in order to become divinized through the one who himself encompasses both divinity and humanity. But our doublecomposition also involves the moral and ascetical dimension of our divinization . We are spiritual, Gregory says , by the sheer gracious gift of God. But we are material so that we do not become proud , so that we may suffer, and in suffering, 'come to our senses'.? It is this dynamic of salvation and human free choice that Gregory now unfolds through his reading of Genesis 2-3 .

Historical context: the legacy of Origen

This, then, is the immediate context of Gregory's most sustained treatment of the Paradise narrative. But the broader historical context is important to bear in mind as well, particularly as regards the legacy of Origen. Basil and Nazianzen closely studied the texts enshrined in the Philocalia, an anthology which includes the passages in the De principiis where Origen speaks of how Scripture consists in a providential ‘ interweaving' of things that happened and things that could not have happened as written. We will also recall that as examples of the latter, Origen specifically cites the Paradise narrative, which he describes in terms that must have been a startling challenge to many of his initial readers, and continues to rankle some sensibilities today: Who would be simple enough to believe that like some farmer ' God planted trees in the garden of Eden , in the East' and that he planted ' the tree of life' in it - a visible tree that could be touched , so that someone could eat of it with corporeal teeth and gain life, and further, could eat of another tree and receive the knowledge of ' good and evil'? Moreover, God is said to stroll in the garden in the afternoon and Adam to hide under a tree. Surely, I think no one doubts that these statements are made by Scripture in the form of a figure [quod figurali tropo] by which they point toward certain mysteries ." The same Philocalia, however, does not reproduce the most controversial passages in Origen's Commentary on Genesis. The storm caused by the Commentary resulted in its suppression , such that only small fragments have reached us today. The main reason for the uproar - which we know of through Epiphanius,10 not to mention the Antiochene exegetes - was that Origen allegedly allegorized

7 Or. 38.11 (SC 358, 126). 8 In the Greek text, the two trees are erroneously conflated . Rufinus' Latin corrects the error by adding another' (alia). 9 IV 3.1 (Görgemanns/Karpp, 730-732 ). See also Philo, Leg. 1.43 . 10 Ancoratus 55.1 ; also 55.2 , 58.6-8 . See Jon F. Dechow, The Heresy Charges Against Origen, in: Lothar Lies (ed .) , Origeniana Quarta (Innsbruck, 1987 ) , 115-7; Jon F. Dechow, Dogma and Mysticism in Early Christianity: Epiphanius of Cyprus and the Legacy of Origen (Macon , GA, 1988), 306-33.

Paradise According to Gregory of Nazianzus

143

the Hexaemeron account to the point of suggesting that, for example, ‘ the waters' of Genesis 1 were not actual H₂O but angelic powers. Origen, therefore, was understood to be saying that Gen. 1 did not refer to the physical universe at all. He was supposedly employing what could today be called ' translational allegory' , i.e., allegory in which the original or prima facie subject retains no reality of its own. Whether or not these allegations had any basis in Origen's actual thought - and there are good reasons to doubt that they did - the controversy had a profound effect upon subsequent writers, whether admirers or detractors of the Alexandrian master. This spirit of caution , for example, is surely at the root of Basil's famous statement in his Hexaemeron homilies which apparently condemns the practice of allegory. He scorns ' those who say that water is not water', and says, 'When I hear "grass ", I think of grass, and in the same manner I understand everything as it is said, a plant, a fish, ... an ox.'¹¹ When it came to allegorizing the biblical creation narratives, Origen had nearly everyone walking on eggshells for centuries. In this light we return to Gregory of Nazianzus , who is not only steeped in Origen and aware of the controversy, but also knows Basil's Hexaemeron homilies.12

Nazianzen's paradise

We left off talking of Gregory's thirty-eighth oration at the point where God had created the human person, this double being, created with the aim of being made divine and beholding the divine brilliance. But divinization does not happen by magic, or by a simple divine irruption . The divine-human interaction, one that cultivates and respects human freedom , is worked out in the arena of Paradise. And here is my main point : in explaining the dynamic of creation and salvation Gregory sees absolutely no need either to historicize Paradise, nor explicitly to blast it out of concrete existence. His description of it is almost insistently open, unfixed, non-doctrinaire. This spirit of openness is established from the outset, when Gregory says that God placed his creature ‘ in Paradise whatever this Paradise was ! (Öστiç лоτè ην d лapádε1005) '. His characterization is consistently propositional in its character, full of qualifiers such as ' perhaps ( oog ) ', and ' according to my interpretation ( ô5 ǹ ¿ µǹ 0ɛwpia) '. Gregory's explicit conclusions about the divine economy and the role of human choice, therefore, are informed by his implicit assumption about how the scriptural Paradise narrative works, how it operates to evince such conclusions. For example, his idea - already known in Irenaeus - that the eating of

11 In Hex. 9.1. 12 See Or. 43.67 (SC 384, 272-4).

144

P. BOUTENEFF

the tree was simply premature, rather than forbidden by nature, is based on his idea of what the story means by ' the tree of knowledge' in the first place : 'This tree was, according to my interpretation, contemplation (0ɛopia) - something which may only safely be attempted by those who have reached perfection in an orderly way' . So from an analytical perspective that is foreign to Gregory himself, we could say that he has allegorized the tree, implicitly undermining its hypostatic existence. That was challenging, especially - but not only - in the immediate aftermath of Origen. A full millennium later in fact, no less a figure than Gregory Palamas was alarmed by the possibilities suggested by Nazianzen's thinking. Palamas, arguing for the physical reality of the light on Mount Tabor, was wary of symbolical interpretations, and cited Or. 38 in that context: Maximus calls [the light of Tabor] a ' symbol' ... So likewise Gregory the Theologian named the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ' contemplation (0ɛœpiɑ) '. For he considered it - in his own interpretation -– a symbol of that contemplation which is to raise us upward. But it does not follow that he conceives an illusion or a symbol without proper existence (avvлóστatos), 13 Palamas continues : If Moses symbolizes judgment, Elijah symbolizes providence , Peter is faith, James is hope, and John is a symbol of love, were they too mere symbols at the Transfiguration, and not actually present? So Palamas is making sure that no-one takes Nazianzen's allegory for the translational kind. Much like the Antiochenes had already insisted : say what you like about what the trees and the serpent mean , there had to be real trees and a real serpent, otherwise the coherence of our whole story is threatened ." For his part, however, Gregory is decidedly unconcerned about the hypostatic reality of the trees or the serpent, and this is because Paradise is not about them at all. As he reminds us not only in Or. 38 but throughout his corpus, Paradise ultimately concerns two things: us, and Christ. Let us look at each in turn, although they are intertwined . Naturally, Gregory sees Paradise as bearing an etiological significance, and therefore as referring to origins, and as such is set in the past'. But like all etiologies it ultimately means to shed light on the present. Likewise Gregory will periodically refer to Adam as a genealogical starting point, among other things. But when it comes to spelling out the implications of the transgression Gregory almost invariably places himself, or 'us', in the garden, rather than somebody named Adam or Eve. The serpent constantly seduces us, says Gregory (Or. 14.26): 'I came to know my nakedness and clothed myself in a garment of skin , and fell from the garden ' (Or. 19.14). 'My ancestor's weakness is my own' (Or. 38.12). A summation of his thinking is worth citing at greater length:

13 Triads 2.3.22 . 14 See Frances Young, Biblical Exegesis and the Formation ofChristian Culture (Cambridge , 1997), 169-76.

Paradise According to Gregory of Nazianzus

145

We were entrusted with Paradise that we might enjoy life . We received a commandment so that we might obtain a good repute by keeping it ... We were deceived because we were the objects of envy. We were cast out because we transgressed . We fasted because we refused to fast, being overpowered by the tree of knowledge. For the commandment was ancient, coeval with ourselves, and was a kind of education of our souls .., so that we might recover by keeping it that which we had lost by not keeping it [Or. 45.28] . Gregory's universalizing of the Paradise narrative stems in part from the rhetorical and oratorical character of his theology, but it was also a common hermeneutical approach to Genesis 2-3 by Gregory's time. Conversely, the idea (identified with later Western theology) that the person of Adam is to be blamed for our sin, or that we inherit his guilt, was not. Paradise is indeed about us, but it is at the same time about Christ. Gregory's main reflections on Paradise, both in Or. 38 and in his poem On the Soul, culminate in Christ's work of redemption. But in addition Gregory sees Adam as a type for Christ. He is of course building on the well established precedent not only of Rom. 5:14 but of almost every writer before him. In Or. 2.25 , again in the context of his two-nature anthropology, and again explaining why Christ comes as he does, Gregory spells out all the elements of Paradise which foreshadow their respective fulfillment in the redemptive work of Christ. Here he contrasts the tree of the cross with the tree in the garden, the hands of Christ - stretched out in generosity and fixed by nails - with the hand of Adam , stretched out in self indulgence, unrestrained . Christ is lifted up to atone for the fall, is given gall instead of Adam's fruit, he dies for Adam's death, and is raised so that Adam may be raised. And we have come full circle, because this Adam, of course, is us. Here is how Gregory brings it all together:

All of us ... partake of the same Adam , and were led astray by the serpent and slain by sin, and are saved by the heavenly Adam and brought back by the tree of [the cross] to the tree of life from which we had fallen . [Or. 33.9] Gregory of Nazianzus is never explicit about allegory, typology, symbol. He is a theological rhetorician, a pastoral preacher, not a literary critic. He is mindful of the questions Origen posed about the hypostatic existence of Paradise, but they do not concern him. It is enough that the Paradise narrative explains God's economy and our role in it, and that it finds its true fulfillment only in the New Adam. As to whether it is hypostatic, existing in the physical universe or not, Gregory simply says , 'Whatever! '

Who is the Real Bishop of Constantinople? A Reconsideration of Gregory of Nazianzus' Will

Brian E. DALEY, Notre Dame, Indiana

Authority and its exercise were always sensitive matters for Gregory of Nazianzus. As a highly cultured intellectual , a Christian ' philosopher', a humanist trained to savor and to produce Greek literature of the highest quality, Gregory made a point of seeking a life of retirement and simplicity, where he could reflect on the ways of God and express his thoughts with a subtle and polished pen. People in positions of authority seem often to have raised suspicions of manipulation in his mind, and he was always ready to be offended by their administrative decisions . Yet as a man with impeccable connections, the son of a bishop and a relative and friend of bishops and bureaucrats, Gregory also seems to have assumed that he himself had a natural claim on power, in Church and Empire, and took particular offense when that claim was frustrated . This complex relationship to authority comes out most clearly in Gregory's curious , half-willing career as a bishop. Although he allowed his father to ordain him a presbyter during the Christmas season of 361-2 , and reluctantly administered the Church of Nazianzus as acting bishop for a few years after his father's death in 374 , Gregory steadfastly refused to be installed there canonically, either then or after his return from Constantinople in the summer of 381. When his friend Basil of Caesarea , in a campaign to increase the number of loyal Nicene bishops in Cappadocia before the Emperor could divide the province in two, ordained him, in the spring of 372 , bishop of the small but strategically located hamlet of Sasima,2 Gregory exploded with rage: partly, it seems , because his new appointment dragged him into the war-theatre of ecclesiastical politics, partly because his see itself was so unattractive and so culturally backward.³ Gregory never claimed Sasima as his episcopal title , or took up residence there; indeed, after his parents' deaths in 374 he lived for several years in a kind of literary retirement with a women's monastic community near

1 See his poem De vita sua 539-47, where he complains about the unwillingness of his fellow bishops to elect a successor for Nazianzus after his father's death ; also Ep. 153, to Bosporius, from the autumn of 381 or winter of 382 , and Ep. 138 to Bosporius, written towards the end of 382 , where he grudgingly agrees to continue tending to the Church there until a suitable successor can be found. 2 See Gregory, Or. 43.58 ; Ep. 47; De vita sua 439-62. 3 See Gregory, Epp . 48-50; De vita sua 463-85.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 147-152. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

148

B.E. DALEY

Seleucia, in southeastern Asia Minor.4 After Theodosius, a Nicene, became Emperor in 378 , however, Gregory was pressed - probably by the moderate Nicene bishops supporting Meletius of Antioch - to go to Constantinople as pastor of the small Nicene community there, ‘ as helper for the people and supporter of the Word '. " And while he always presented himself, during his two years in the capital city, as an awkward, sickly foreigner who hated the limelight and lacked political skill, " Gregory also worked energetically to promote a robust and daring vision of a triune God and of the Incarnation based on the Nicene creed, and apparently hoped that he would be able to use his position to convince his fellow bishops, gathered for the Council of 381 - like the conductor of a somewhat discordant choir - to agree on the basic terms of Trinitarian and Christological orthodoxy.? The events of that council of June, 381 , as narrated by the fifth- century Church historians and in Gregory's own works , seem to have been unusually turbulent. Gregory's patron, the aged and widely respected Meletius of Antioch , who presided at the opening sessions , died suddenly within its first weeks . Gregory, the de facto Nicene bishop in the capital, seems to have thought he had a good chance of being recognized as canonical bishop of Constantinople by the rest of the synod, and presided in this role for a few sessions over its continuing deliberations; but a mixture of strong personal resistance from the Alexandrian delegation, supported from afar by the Latin West, and widespread hesitancy among the rest to affirm his vision of the full divinity and hypostatic equality of the Holy Spirit within the divine Mystery, quickly made his acceptance a steep uphill battle, and Gregory soon resigned both the presidency of the council and his claim to the imperial see.8 Finding a successor who would not continue to polarize the leadership of the Eastern Churches was not easy. Sozomen tells the unusual story of the election of Nectarius to the see of Constantinople, which he sees as a clear manifestation of divine providence. An elderly civil servant of aristocratic background - at the time, one of five praetors in the capital city, responsible for organizing the games and other public works - and widely respected as a decent, wellspoken and virtuous man, Nectarius paid a casual visit to Bishop Diodore of Tarsus (his own native city) during the days after Gregory's resignation. Diodore

4 De vita sua 545-51. 5 Ibid. 597. 6 See, e.g., Or. 26.4, 14-7; Or. 42.22-5; De vita sua 594. ¹ De vita sua 1525-71 ; for the image of a choral conductor, see 1535-6. 8 For Gregory's account of the political struggles at the council, see De vita sua 1680-1870 . See the more dispassionate accounts of the fifth-century historians: Sozomen, Church History VII 7-8; Theodoret, Church History V 8. The canonical reason for not recognizing Gregory as bishop was that he already had accepted the see of Sasima, and canon 15 of Nicaea - which Gregory himself calls one of those 'long-dead laws ' that did not affect him – prohibited episcopal transfers.

Who is the Real Bishop of Constantinople?

149

- clearly a power-broker as well as a theological activist – immediately saw in this layman a possible compromise candidate for the bishopric, and excitedly enlisted the grudging help of Flavian, the new bishop of Antioch. When the Emperor, a few days later, read the list of names that had been proposed , his eye apparently rested on Nectarius', and he announced him as his own choice. Only then was it discovered that Nectarius, a loyal Nicene Christian, was still a catchumen. So in the last weeks of June he was first baptized , then ordained bishop in his neophyte's robes. Like his contemporary Ambrose, his rise to Church office was sudden and immensely popular ; unlike Ambrose, however, he seems to have had little formal background in Scripture or the fine points of theology. Gregory, who soon returned to literary retirement at his family estate in Cappadocia, has left six letters addressed to his successor, most of them formal and courteous, congratulating Nectarius on his good fortune, urging him to live up to his reputation for virtue, and asking various favors for protégés or relatives, even while Gregory himself complains of being ' treated like refuse and thrown away like floor-sweepings'.10 In his autobiographical poems, Gregory allows himself a few oblique references to that 'other, who now has the fruit of my labors',¹¹ or to those now enjoying bread from his graincrop, ' who have not produced a drop of sweat'.12 Some bishops at the Council of 381 , he darkly hints , were ' still learning about God , teachers yesterday and learners today, making others perfect [in baptism ] and only later made perfect themselves.'¹³ Gregory's most outspoken criticism of Nectarius , for theological naïveté and uncritical support of imperial policy, surfaces in his famous Letter 202, on the Apollinarians, probably written in 387. After listing the ' common sufferings of the Churches' at the hands of contemporary heretical groups, Gregory complains bitterly that the Apollinarians have been allowed ' freedom of speech' in the capital, and given the right to gather ' with the same privileges as we have', in contravention of previous legislation.14 Referring ironically to Nectarius' charismatic (but unschooled) grasp on orthodoxy and heresy in relation to the divine Mysteries, 15 Gregory goes on to give a brief and damning summary of the Apollinarians' understanding of Christ's person, based on one of their own pamphlets ; he insists at the end that ' it is not in the nature of

" For the fullest account , see Sozomen, Church History VII 8; see also Socrates, Church History V 8; Theodoret, Church History V 8. On the office of praetor in late-fourth- century Constantinople, see A.H.M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire, 284-602 (Oxford , 1964) I 132 . 10 Epp. 88; 91 ; 151 ; 185 ; 186. The expression of Gregory's own resentment is found in Ep. 88.2, probably written in the autumn of 381 . 11 Carmina I 1.16.76 - Gregory's poem , 'A dream of the Church of the Anastasia, which he founded in Constantinople .' 12 Carm. I 1.10.1272. 13 Ibid. 1712-4.

14 Ep. 202.7, 19-22. 15 Ibid. 8.

150

B.E. DALEY

things for two opposite opinions on the same subject to be true'.16 To allow them to continue meeting is, quite simply, to distance oneself from Church doctrine, and to abandon one's pastoral duty - something Nectarius should have learned by then. In the context of this steady, if quiet resentment of his successor's sudden rise to power and theological incompetence, Gregory's will - a document sel- takes on new significance . dom studied and still lacking a critical edition " – This document, said to be the earliest complete will made under Roman law that survives , 18 formally disposes of Gregory's apparently considerable property, leaving the bulk of his estate - according to his parents' wishes - to a kind of trust for the exclusive benefit of the poor of the Church of Nazianzus , administered by the deacon Gregory, his heir and executor, and two other clerics. Apart from some generous personal bequests to relatives and friends, including his former deacon Evagrius Ponticus , what is most interesting about the will is its first two lines, giving the date and the name and title of the testator. The date is given as: ' In the consulate of the most illustrious Flavius Eucherius and Flavius Syagrius, 19 on the day before the kalends of January', which translates to December 31 , 381 - the last day before a new consulship was to begin.20 The testator identifies himself formally, here and in the final sentence of the document, as ' I, Gregory, bishop of the Catholic Church in Constantinople ...' Here lies the puzzle: if the date is correct, then Gregory was already six months retired by the time he made his will, and had been living in Karbala, in rural Cappadocia, for several months ; in addition , he had never been canonically or legally installed as Catholic bishop of Constantinople - his name appears in

16 Ibid. 20. 17 The most easily accessible Greek text of this will is in PG 37, 589-96. See also Jean-Baptiste Pitra, Juris ecclesiastici graecorum historia et monumenta II ( Rome, 1868), 153-60 , with useful information on manuscripts and earlier printed editions. I have translated and annotated the full text of Gregory's will in Gregory ofNazianzus (London , 2006), 184-9, 254-8. For other discussions ofthe document, see François Martroye, Le Testament de Saint Grégoire de Nazianze: Mémoires de la Société nationale des Antiquaires de France 76 (1924) 219-63; Raymond Van Dam, Self-Representation in the Will of Gregory of Nazianzus : Journal of Theological Studies 46 (1995) 118-48. 18 Edward Champlin, Final Judgments: Duty and Emotion in Roman Wills, 200 B.C. - A.D. 250 (Berkeley, 1991) , 29, n. 1 . 19 The Greek text in PG 39 gives ' Flavius Eucherius and Flavius Evagrius', but the latter name is clearly a misreading - by copyist or modern editor - of ' Syagrius ', since the consuls Eucherius and Syagrius are well attested for the year 381 . 20 In his notes (Juris ecclesiastici graecorum historia II , 1868 , 159), Cardinal Pitra takes 'the day before the kalends of January ' as referring to the day before the beginning of the consulship of Eucherius and Syagrius : i.e. , December 31 , 380. This requires us to reverse the word-order of the Greek, however, in which the consulship – and thus the year 381 -- is given first . It also seems unlikely that Gregory would have assembled seven of his Cappadocian friends and colleagues in the capital to witness his will, at what was otherwise a busy time in his pastoral life there.

Who is the Real Bishop of Constantinople?

151

both the Greek and the Syriac bishops' lists of the Council of June, 381 , among the Cappadocian bishops , as ' Gregory of Nazianzus ' (another title that was never canonically his ! ). 21 As we have seen, Gregory had given up his attempt to be recognized as the bishop of Constantinople in the middle of June, with both resentment and resignation. Since at least the seventeenth century, modern scholars have tried to deal with this apparent anomaly of the date of his will by emending it to read, 'on the day before the kalends of June' (i.e., May 31 , 381 , rather than December 31 , 381), suggesting it was made in the capital in the opening days of the Council itself.22 But such an emendation is difficult to accept on palaeographical grounds - it is not the kind of mistake a scribe is likely to have made; further, one of the bishops who witnesses the will, Theodulus of Apameia in Pisidia, is not listed among the bishops present, and his Church was represented at the council by a presbyter named Auxanon . The presbyter Cledonius of Iconium, who is also a witness, is not known to have been present at the Council either, but was appointed by Gregory in the autumn of 381 to act as administrator of his father's Church in Nazianzus until a new bishop - not himself! - could be properly elected . All of the witnesses, in fact, are clergy from towns and cities in central Asia Minor ; all of them – including his cousin Amphilochius of Iconium , Cledonius ' bishop - close supporters of Gregory. It seems most likely that they had gathered somewhere in Cappadocia at the end of his annus terribilis, to celebrate the New Year's festival with him. Gregory's aim in the will is clearly to continue caring for the poor in Nazianzus, as his father had done, but to do it not as bishop of Sasima, a title he had never accepted, nor as bishop of Nazianzus, but as the real, if unrecognized , bishop of the imperial city. If the date is correct as given, Gregory's will gives a dramatic witness that at least six months after his resignation and the appointment of Nectarius as his successor, Gregory still boldly styled himself, in a private legal document, as ' bishop of the Catholic Church of Constantinople'. Was he simply claiming the title as a courtesy, an echo of past glory – much as today a retired general or statesman might continue to be addressed by his old title? Or was he saying, in what was intended to be read as his final words, that the noble, charming catechumen who had been chosen by emperor and bishops to be his follower

21 C.H. Turner, Canons Attributed to the Council of Constantinople, a.d. 381 , together with the Names of the Bishops, from Two Patmos MSS POB á and POг á : JTS 15 (1914) 161-78 ; Oskar Braun, Syrische Texte über die erste allgemeine Synode von Konstintopel, in: Carl Bezold (ed.), Orientalische Studien: Theodor Nöldeke zum siebzigsten Geburtstag 1 (Giessen , 1906) , 463-78. 22 Raymond Van Dam, Self-Representation ( 1995), 132-42, even suggests some reasons why Gregory might have wanted to make his will on the eve of the Council : to prove the honesty of his financial stewardship; to attest to the modesty of his personal possessions; to express readiness to resign his office, in the face of opposition.

152

B.E. DALEY

as head of the Nicene community in the capital had neither the theological qualifications nor the battle pedigree to be recognized canonically in his newly- elevated role as ' bishop of the New Rome' ? In the sight of God, Gregory seems to be suggesting - ' In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit' - we who draw up this will, at least, know who the real bishop of Constantinople is.

XV.

THE SECOND HALF OF THE

FOURTH CENTURY (GREEK WRITERS)

Byard Bennett Lee Blackburn Emilio Bonfiglio Constantine Bosinis Augustine Casiday Cyrille Crépey Chris L. De Wet Luke Dysinger Turhan Kaçar Young Richard Kim Andrew Louth Elias Moutsoulas Livia Neureiter Antony D. Rich David Rylaarsdam Silke Sitzler Peter D. Steiger Walt Stevenson Monica Tobon Ulrich Volp Maxine West

Jesus Speaks to/in Us : A Connection of Theme between Serapion of Thmuis' Against the Manichees and Sacramentary

Maxine WEST, London

Whereas it has been accepted by scholars that Serapion of Thmuis is author of the work Against the Manichees (c. A.D. 326), ' a similar acceptance has not been achieved for the Sacramentary (c. A.D. 350) .² Concerning this other principal text attributed to him, the latest study is that of Johnson, who concludes only that the prayers it contains ' may well be... collected and edited by Sarapion, bishop of Thmuis? 3 The intention of this paper is to examine the theme of Christ speaking to us in the first mentioned work of Serapion and that of Jesus speaking in us as dealt with in the latter, the Sacramentary, the context in which these themes appear and the ideas related to them, in the hope that this examination, reinforced by some comparison with other relevant texts and writers, will lend support to the view that the author of the former was writer or editor of the latter. The penultimate chapter of Against the Manichees begins with a vibrant defence of the doctrine of the incarnation and an account of its beneficial results for humankind, and ends with a passage that forms part of the conclusion to the whole work. Here the imagery is of Christ knocking on the diάvoia (mind) of the person, but, if it ' delays and has been subject to sleep' (ẞpadúvṇ ... καὶ ὕπνῳ χρήσηται), he rejects all accusation of slowness' (τοῦ βράδους aitía) and, instead, speaks thus : ' Open to me, my sister, [my] bride, for my head has been filled with dew, and my locks with the drops of [ the] night' (ävoižóv μοι, ἀδελφή μου, νύμφη , ὅτι ἡ κεφαλή μου ἐνεπλήσθη δρόσου καὶ οἱ Booτρuxoi μov YEKάdWV VUKTÓç) (Song of Songs 5 : 2 LXX) . If this invitation remains unheeded, the Word perseveres in the request until the diavola opens and offers a ' place to him who knocks' (tónov tḥ kpoúovti).4

1 For the Greek text with introduction and textual variants, see R.P. Casey, Serapion of Thmuis, Against the Manichees , HTS 15 (Cambridge , MA, 1931 ) . Casey takes for granted that Serapion of Thmuis is author of this text, a conclusion supported by Klaus Fitschen, Serapion von Thmuis: Echte und unechte Schriften sowie die Zeugnisse des Athanasius und anderer, PTS 37 (Berlin, 1992) 4f. who also dates it, 56 and 13. 2 For the Greek text with introduction, notes and dating, see F.E. Brightman, The Sacramentary of Serapion : JTS 1 ( 1899-1900) 88-113 , 247-77. 3 M.E. Johnson, The Prayers of Serapion of Thmuis: A Literary, Liturgical and Theological Analysis, OCA 249 (Rome, 1995 ), 384. 4 Adv. Man. 53.64-71 (77 Casey).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 155-159. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

156

M. WEST

Such an image of Christ approaching the Stávota , speaking, and then of the Word dwelling there has been prepared for in the preceding lines which describe Christ's knocking and coming to be within as causing ' holy orations of praise befitting a sacred place' (πανηγύρεις θεῖαι καὶ ἱεροπρεπεῖς) to come to pass. This reaction the author connects with the diάvota being drawn up and the soul being given wings . The person experiencing the approach of Christ in this way is envisaged as responding to his beauty thus: ' all things I count dung, that I may win Christ” (πάντα ἡγοῦμαι σκύβαλα, ἵνα Χριστὸν κερδήσω) (Phil. 3 : 8) .5 Therefore, in this text, the diάvota is envisaged as the locus of the indwelling of Christ or the Word, and scripture is envisaged as the vehicle of expression of the love that Christ has for the human person and that the human person, in- dwelt by Christ, has for him. Such communication recalls the spiritual worship, the лрòç Оɛòν оuiλía (intercourse with God), mentioned earlier in the work as being prepared for by the law, the ethical teaching of the Old Testament.6 Considering now the Sacramentary: the theme of Jesus speaking in the person is found most clearly in Prayer Twenty: 'After rising up from the sermon a Prayer” (Μετὰ τὸ ἀναστῆναι ἀπὸ τῆς ὁμιλίας εὐχή ), which , in similar manner to the passage from Against the Manichees discussed above, begins with reference to the incarnation and its profit for humanity, and then moves on to the following petition : ' Send holy Spirit, and let the Lord Jesus visit, let him speak in the minds of all, and predispose their hearts to faith; may he himself draw their souls to you , O God of Compassions ' (Пvɛõµ¤ άyiov néµψον καὶ ὁ κύριος Ἰησοῦς ἐπισκεψάσθω , λαλησάτω ἐν ταῖς διανοίαις πάντων καὶ προοικονομησάτω εἰς πίστιν τὰς καρδίας αὐτὸς πρὸς σὲ ἑλκυσάτω τὰς ψυχὰς Θεὲ τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν) . Here, although no content of the communication is given, the title of this prayer, along with this request and the wording of the latter part of Prayer Nineteen, indicate that it comes after the exposition of scripture , so the deduction can reasonably be made that the content of the speech ἐν ταῖς διανοίαις πάντων (in the minds of all is at least related to scripture, even if texts from the scriptures are not expressly quoted .? Furthermore, although Jesus speaks ' in' the Stάvoia rather than before entering

5 Adv. Man . 53.57-64 (77 Casey). 6 Adv. Man . 43.23-25 (61-62 Casey). ¹ Sacramentary, Pr. 20 (99.28-30 Brightman). 8 Sacramentary, Pr. 19 : ‘I entreat you send holy Spirit into our mind and graciously help us to learn the divine writings from holy Spirit and to interpret [them ] purely and worthily that all the people present may be aided (παρακαλῶ δὲ Πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἀπόστειλον εἰς τὴν ἡμετέραν διάνοιαν καὶ χάρισαι ἡμῖν μαθεῖν τὰς θείας γραφὰς ἀπὸ ἁγίου Πνεύματος καὶ διερμενεύειν καθαρῶς καὶ ἀξίως, ἵνα ὠφεληθῶσιν οἱ παρόντες λαοὶ πάντες) (99.14-7 Brightman). 9 Although it is possible that the titles were added at a later date than the writing or editing of this document, the content of Prs . 19 and 20 suggests that they were used in this sequence.

Jesus Speaks to/in Us

157

it as in the anti-Manichaean tract, the correspondence between these two ideas is obvious. Thus, the similarity in the use of this theme in Prayer Twenty of the Sacramentary and of the theme discussed in Against the Manichees is noticeable. Such resemblance becomes all the more striking if the detail found in both of the presence of Jesus or Christ raising the soul to God is included in the equation, and if it is accepted also that the image of Jesus visiting is similar to that of Christ knocking.10 Such acceptance is encouraged by the observation that the designations of 'Jesus ' and ' Christ' can be used synonymously in Against the Manichees¹¹ and that the term ' Christ' is not found in separation from 'Jesus' in the Sacramentary. The difference of vocabulary therefore carries no particular significance. The Sacramentary also contains another example of Jesus speaking in the human person, this time in Prayer One : ' Prayer of Offering of Bishop Serapion” (Εὐχὴ Προσφόρου Σαραπίωνος ἐπισκόπου), where the petition before the pre-sanctus is: ' May the Lord Jesus speak in us and holy Spirit, and hymn you through us' (λαλησάτω ἐν ἡμῖν ὁ κύριος Ἰησοῦς καὶ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα καὶ ὑμνησάτω σὲ δι ' ἡμῶν) .12 Here, although there is no direct mention of the diάvoia , correspondences with Against the Manichees' treatment of the theme under discussion are still present: there is closely previous reference to the incarnation and its benefits, and praise is linked , partially at least (the holy spirit is also involved), to Jesus ' speech ' in' us. A further connection appears in the nature of the praise involved , for this petition of Prayer One is followed by the pre-sanctus and the sanctus, which are made up largely of words of scripture.13 As far as the lack of reference to the Stávota is concerned, it seems reasonable to assume that it is ' in' such that Serapion envisages the Lord Jesus speaking in this instance, since this is what is stated precisely in Prayer Twenty where the speaker is the same and where the speech concerned also takes place ' in' human beings. If this is accepted , then another link can be established between Prayer One of the Sacramentary and Against the Manichees where the description is of the diάvoia offering a place of occupation to the Word. Sufficient has been said now for it to be reasonable to suggest that there is some connection between the theme of Christ speaking to us and its handling in Against the Manichees and the use and theme of Jesus speaking in us in Prayer Twenty principally, but also in Prayer One, of the Sacramentary and that, thus , there is a possibility that the writer of the first work may also have written or edited these 10 The deduction of a link between the two images of knocking and visiting can be made from the final chapter of Against the Manichees where the diάvota ' deceived by the likeness of the knocking [offalse Christs]... opens as to a relative or acquaintance' (tǹ óµoiótηtɩ TĤG KPOÚσEWG ἀπατηθεῖσα ... ὡς οἰκείῳ καὶ γνωρίμῳ ὑπανοίγει) ; Adv. Man. 54.3-5 (77-8 Casey). 11 See Adv. Man. 3.9-14 and 36.29-35 (30 and 53 Casey). 12 Sacramentary, Pr. 1 ( 105.14-5 Brightman). 13 Eph. 1:21 ; Dan. 7:10; Col. 1:16 and Is. 6:2-3 (pre- sanctus), and Is. 6: 3 and Ps. 83 : 1 (sanctus).

158

M. WEST

two items in the second; but might these themes and their handling be sufficiently unusual to provide additional support to a suggestion of co- authorship? In the remaining parts of early Egyptian liturgies¹¹ as represented by the Strasbourg Papyrus, the British Museum Tablet and the Louvain Coptic Papyrus such themes do not occur, perhaps unsurprisingly since these texts have no equivalent to Prayer Twenty of the Sacramentary (also the case with all such liturgies) and either have no sanctus (Strasbourg Papyrus) or an indication that such is missing (the British Museum Tablet and the Louvain Coptic Papyrus). Even in texts where a sanctus is found, such as the Deir Balyzeh Papyrus and the Egyptian text of the Liturgy of Saint Basil, these themes are absent. As far as the context and related ideas are concerned , only the latter mentions the incarnation , albeit briefly. It seems, then, that a comparison with relevant works of theology may be more appropriate, and , indeed, here there are correspondences to be found, but also differences. Whilst Clement of Alexandria describes prayer as ôµiλía 15 лρòç Оεóν , ¹³ almost exactly the same phrase as that mentioned earlier as present in Against the Manichees, he does not envisage such interaction as involving Christ or Jesus speaking to or in the Christian, nor the Stávota as playing a part, nor the means of this being the language of scripture . Clement is mainly interested in scripture as training towards virtue. The closest correspondence with Serapion's use of the motif under discussion in Origen is in his Commentary on the Song of Songs where one of his understandings of the experience of being kissed by the Word of God (Song of Songs 1 : 2) is that of receiving his words, hearing him speaking and seeing him teaching, 16 though there is no role given here specifically to the mind. Considering now monastic writings : whilst the Apophthegmata Patrum speak occasionally of God living in the monk, " this is not related to the dtávota , and whilst God or Christ speaking to the monk is found,18 scriptural language is not employed: scriptural texts are occasionally used for encouragement, but most often for instruction.19 Such again , is the principal use of scripture in the Pachomian writings ,20 where , although verses from the Song of Songs appear occasionally,

14 For the details of the editions of the texts mentioned see the bibliographies in R.C.D. Jasper and G.J. Cuming, Prayers of the Eucharist, Early and Reformed (New York, 1980), 42 and 34. 15 Clement of Alexandria, Strom . VII 7.39.6 , SC 428 ( Paris, 1997), 140. 16 Origen, Commentary on the Song of Songs, I 1.10, SC 375 ( Paris, 1991), 182. 17 Apophthegmata Patrum, anonymous series, J 759 ; L. Regnault , Les sentences des Pères du Désert, série des anonymes (Solesmes -Bellefontaine , 1985), 327. 18 Apophthegmata Patrum, N 583 ; L. Regnault, Les Sentences des Pères du Désert, nouveau receuil, apophtegmes inédits ou peu connus (Solesmes , 1977) , 110. 19 E.g. Apophthegmata Patrum, Am 156,3 (quoting Lk . 15:10 and Ezek. 33:11), in L. Regnault, Les Sentences des Pères du Désert, nouveau receuil et tables (Solesmes, 1976 ) 168; and Antony 22 (quoting Eph . 5:18) (PG 65 , 84A). 20 E.g. The Bohairic Life of Pachomius, 129, where Matth. 7:15 and 1Thess. 5:21 are used; A. Veilleux (transl.), Pachomian Koinonia, Vol. 1 , The Life ofSaint Pachomius and His Disciples, Cistercian Studies Series 45 (Kalamazoo, 1980) , 186.

Jesus Speaks to/in Us

159

they do so in non-devotional contexts ,21 and where the theme of Christ or Jesus speaking to or in the person is not present. Turning to Athanasius: the closest resemblance to the themes under discussion appears in the History of the Arians where the author, speaking of the Saviour's gentle manner of teaching those who wish to be his disciples, imagines him coming to each of them, knocking at the door and saying: ' Open unto me my sister, [my] bride ' (ἄνοιξόν μοι, ἀδελφή μου, νύμφη) (Song ofSongs 5:2 LXX ). Whereas, however, Serapion's envisaged response to any delay is that of patient waiting, Athanasius ' is of the Saviour departing from them.22 In addition, although here there is direct correspondence of text, there is no attendant mention of the Stávota and no connection made to the incarnation. The Life ofAntony also bears some resemblance to Serapion's imagery, in both Prayer Twenty and Against the Manichees, when it speaks of Antony's diavola opening to know the significance of a vision after hearing an unidentified heavenly voice,23 but there is no instance of Christ or Jesus addressing or speaking in the person in Athanasius' main works nor in those likely to produce such, not even in his Letter to Marcellinus on the psalms, perhaps the most obvious place to look.24 It seems, then, to be rare for this theme of Christ or Jesus speaking to or in us to appear in conjunction with talk of the incarnation , appeals to scripture and the identification of the diάvoia as the instrument of cognition. Whilst - according to the necessarily limited comparisons just given – it has been possible to find some elements of Serapion's use of this theme and related ideas in other relevant texts and authors, a complete coincidence of handling has been absent. Given this, it may be deemed unlikely that such a close connection of theme and of its use would be found in two separate writers of the same epoch. This indicates that a further study of ideas and motifs co-present in Against the Manichees and in other prayers of the Sacramentary could yield a more certain ascription of the former work to Serapion of Thmuis as author or editor.

21 E.g. The Letters of Saint Pachomius, Letter 4, 6 ; A. Veilleux (transl.), Pachomian Koinonia, Vol. 3, Instructions, Letters , and Other Writings of Saint Pachomius and His Disciples, Cistercian Studies Series 47 (Kalamazoo, 1982), 62 . 22 History ofthe Arians 33 (PG 25, 732A). 23 Life ofAntony, 66.5, SC 400 (Paris, 1994), 308 . 24 Athanasius, Letter to Marcellinus (PG 27, 12A- 45C).

Bad Bishops Corrupt Good Emperors : Ecclesiastical Authority and the Rhetoric of Heresy in the Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis

Young Richard KIM, Grand Rapids, Michigan

The Panarion is an enormous heresiology that contains information about the origins , beliefs , practices, and corresponding refutations of eighty different heresies. When Epiphanius wrote this text in the mid-370s A.D., he was the metropolitan bishop on the island of Cyprus and had a reputation as a staunch defender of Nicene Christianity.¹ The world as he perceived it was plagued by the lies and bad behavior of heretics , many of whom had infiltrated the church and attained control over powerful bishoprics. Even Valens , the emperor of the eastern half of the Roman empire, would not have passed Epiphanius ' litmus test for orthodoxy. Epiphanius thoroughly condemned Arianism and its derivatives in the Panarion , and one would assume he would have done the same with Valens , a notorious supporter of Arian Christianity. However, when Epiphanius described the emperor, he actually called him a ' very pious man and a lover of God."3 The picture becomes even more interesting if we examine the context in which he specifically mentioned the emperor. In the entries dedicated to the Melitian schism and Arianism, Epiphanius explained the historical circumstances in which these heresies emerged . Arius and his followers thrived under the 'protection of emperors', first under Constantius, then under Valens . But in the case of both, Epiphanius emphasized their pious faith, and he instead attacked the heretical bishops who adversely influenced them (he also said the same about Constantine). The question that I would like to raise is why the resolutely Nicene Epiphanius consistently described emperors as pious and good believers, even in the case of the Arian- supporting Constantius and Valens? One obvious answer is

¹ Epiphanius was elected in 367. Pierre Nautin, Épiphane (Saint) de Salamine: DHGE 15 (Paris, 1963) 618-9 explains that Epiphanius had clashed with Eutychius of Eleutheropolis, who had opposed the Nicene Christology, so he was more than willing to accept the call from the pro-Nicene bishops of Cyprus. See Epiphanius, Panarion 73.23.7. 2 See Noel Lenski, Failure ofEmpire: Valens and the Roman State in the Fourth Century A.D. (Berkeley, 2002), 234-63. 3 Panarion 69.13.1. All translations are my own, based on the edition by Karl Holl, Epiphanius, Ancoratus und Panarion, 3 Vols. (Berlin, 1915, 1922, 1933), revised by Jürgen Dummer (Berlin, 1980, 1985), (GCS 25, 31 , 37).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 161-166. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

162

Y.R. KIM

that to write inflammatory things about the emperor was probably not the wis4 est idea. While this was certainly true, I believe Epiphanius was shrewder than this. I will argue instead that the answer to Epiphanius ' intentional , positive characterization of emperors lies in the highly rhetorical nature of the Panarion itself. It was a text with the potential for generating power and authority for Epiphanius. Through his writing he was fashioning for himself a reputation as a heresy-hunter and trying to become the arbiter of orthodoxy in the empire, and thus Epiphanius could vilify any person he included in his text, past or present, and cast shadows of doubt on the orthodoxy of his subjects.5 Accusations of heresy were all too common in the fourth century as bishops throughout the empire denounced each other as heretics, and Epiphanius contributed by composing a heresiological manual which would aid other Christians in determining who was orthodox and who was not. He essentially compiled a historical blacklist of heretics , and any contemporaries he included in this text would have found themselves among the likes of Valentinus, Marcion, and Mani. By choosing to focus on heretical bishops, Epiphanius was rhetorically undermining their authority and status by linking them directly with heresy. This assertion is made possible through a more open interpretive approach to heresiology. As a literary genre heresiology can be tedious and uninspiring." Scholars have certainly benefited from heresiologies as sources of theological information, but they have also recognized that they are highly constructed , rhetorical texts which often do not reflect the realities of their subject matter, but instead betray the personal convictions and beliefs of their authors. This quality in particular opens the door to reading and interpreting heresiologies as expressions of the concerns of the authors and their times. Another challenge to interpreting the Panarion specifically is the negative modern reception of Epiphanius himself. However, Epiphanius wrote the Panarion on special

4 Though Jerome, Contra Iohannem Hierosolymitanum 4 says : ' For he [Epiphanius] was such a venerated man, that even reigning heretics [i.e. Valens] considered it to their disgrace if they were to persecute such a man.' 5 J. Rebecca Lyman, Ascetics and Bishops: Epiphanius on Orthodoxy, in: Susanna Elm , et al. (eds.), Orthodoxy, Christianity, Heresy (Rome, 2000), 149-61 explains how Epiphanius shifted notions of orthodoxy and heresy in the changing context of the fourth century. The ' language of persuasion' has been replaced with the 'therapeutic combat with internal error', and for Epiphanius unity and obedience were paramount to maintain the purity of the church. 6 Averil Cameron, How to Read Heresiology : Journal of Early Modern Studies 33 (2003) 471-92 , calls the genre ... an embarrassment to scholars ... our modern liberal prejudices make us highly resistant to the idea that there can be much imaginative content in such writing ...' 7 See Aline Pourkier, L'Hérésiologie chez Épiphane de Salamine (Paris, 1992) for the historical development of the genre as it relates specifically to the Panarion . Scholars have criticized Epiphanius both for his lack of intellectual sophistication and his caustic personality. In the ninth century, Photius, Bibliotecha Codex 122 remarked : ' His style is poor, and of such a level as is proper of one who is not guided by Attic elegance.' On Epiphanius' personality, Frank Williams , The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Book I (Sects 1-46) (Leiden, 1987 ) , xxv writes : ' It is Epiphanius' inflated self-esteem which renders him least attractive. It is clear that he considered

Bad Bishops Corrupt Good Emperors

163

request, and his wide popularity is attested in the ancient sources. In his own day he was venerated and loved by a distinct segment of Christendom. Thus the Panarion reveals not only the worldview espoused by Epiphanius himself, but also of other Christians, and together they comprised an important voice of belief and practice which played an important role in the Christianity of the late fourth century and beyond. As the metropolitan of Cyprus , Epiphanius presided over a relatively unimportant see in comparison to Constantinople, Antioch, or Alexandria. He was not educated in the classical tradition of paideia, and his monastic lifestyle reflected a more dogmatic approach, which shunned mysticism and theological speculation. For him the greatest heresies, Origenism and Arianism , were the products of mixing the Greek philosophical tradition with biblical interpretation; and therefore, Christians should only read Scripture and the writings of orthodox church fathers. Thus Epiphanius was doubly disadvantaged in the realm of ecclesiastical politics because of his relatively weak bishopric and non-elite education. So how did he elevate his power and authority in the empire? It was through his masterful use of rhetorical polemic in the Panarion. The particular angle to which I would like to return is how Epiphanius' constructed entries in the Panarion to implicate powerful bishops and their successors as heretics by characterizing them as corrupters and deceivers of good emperors. If we were to strip away the theological content of the final thirteen entries , in essence we would find an ecclesiastical history of the fourth century from Constantine to Valens filtered through the lens of Epiphanius' memory and experience. These were troubled times, marked in particular by the scourge of Arianism. Epiphanius first introduced Arius in the entry on the Melitian schism in Egypt. His chronology is problematic, and Epiphanius seems to have brought to light only what he thought were the most important events . For him the Council of Nicaea in 325 was a monumental moment in the history of the church, and the Nicene Creed represented the clearest articulation of the orthodox

his own scholarship superior to most, and his own word on any question of importance decisive; once he had pronounced , nothing need be added. Nor was he given to regarding opponents with respect.' 8 The Letter ofAcacius and Paul precedes the text of the Panarion . On Epiphanius ' popularity see for example Jerome, Contra Iohannem 11 , who describes the scene when Epiphanius visited Jerusalem : ' a crowd of all ages and both sexes was flocking together to him, offering their little ones , warmly kissing his feet, plucking at the fringes of his clothes .' See also Sozomen, Historia Ecclesiastica VI 32, VII 27. 9 For Epiphanius' monastic formation , see Jon Dechow, Dogma and Mysticism in Early Christianity: Epiphanius of Cyprus and the Legacy of Origen (Macon, 1988), 32-41 , 96-107. Also see J. Rebecca Lyman, Ascetics and Bishops (2000), for Epiphanius' concern for asceticism over and against paideia. For the importance of paideia as the shared language and culture of elites in Late Antiquity, see Peter Brown, Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity: Towards a Christian Empire (Madison, 1992), 3-70.

Y.R. KIM

164

Christian faith. Although the council may have anathematized and exiled Arius , in subsequent years pro-Arian bishops climbed into positions of power and worked toward the reinstatement of Arius . Epiphanius tells us that Arius tried to secure his restoration when he ' denied [the heresy] in the presence of the blessed emperor Constantine and with oaths made statements of orthodoxy under false pretenses.'10 But Arius only succeeded through his partnership with Eusebius of Nicomedia, a notorious supporter of Arius and his teachings and the eventual baptizer of Constantine." Epiphanius implied this was possible when he later described how a number of Melitians strategically ' befriended Eusebius of Nicomedia ... for they knew that he wielded parrhesia before the emperor Constantine.'12 In exchange for his patronage, Eusebius demanded that these Melitians receive Arius back into communion, which they agreed to do. This resulted in an unholy alliance that opened the door to the further spread of heresy, and Epiphanius was at pains to emphasize the dangerous power of heretical bishops in the promulgation of false belief. The coalition of heretics grew bolder and stronger, and Epiphanius described how they plotted to persecute Athanasius, an admired hero and valiant contender for the faith. Through a series of false accusations the Melitians denounced Athanasius before Constantine, and the Arians ' conspired and assisted them because of their jealousy of the holy faith of God and of orthodoxy.'13 They were able to communicate directly with Constantine through Eusebius , who was 'the servant of the entire gang and the one plotting harm against the church and pope Athanasius.'14 Constantine, although he had a ‘ godly zeal ', was deceived and ' had no idea that they were making false charges because of the Arians' aforementioned zeal against orthodoxy'.15 Epiphanius never questioned the orthodoxy of Constantine , and he attributed the unfortunate growing plague of Arianism during his reign to the influence of Eusebius of Nicomedia and his coalition . These events marked the final years of Constantine's rule and the reign of his eventual successor, Constantius II . As the middle years of the fourth century progressed , Christians across the empire convened numerous councils and wrote many new creeds, thereby adding further theological complexities into the debate on Christ's nature, and shifting coalitions and factions competed for power and argued for the orthodoxy of their respective positions . Epiphanius said Constantius was ' meek and good in all respects' and ' pious ', but he lamented that 'in one thing alone did he [Constantius] err, that he did not follow the faith of the fathers, not by his own fault ... but because of the so- called

10 11 12 13 14 15

68.4.6 . 69.9.1-10.3. 68.6.1 . 68.7.7. 68.7.8 . 68.8.1 .

Bad Bishops Corrupt Good Emperors

165

bishops, corrupting the true faith of God' and because Constantius ' being ignorant of the orthodox faith, was led astray by them, and in ignorance yielded to them as priests'.16 Epiphanius further elaborated the troubles related to Constantius in the entry entitled ' Semi-Arians ', who were led by Basil of Ancyra and George of Laodicea. These Semi-Arians fell out of favor with the other Arians , and a conflict emerged among the heretics themselves. Epiphanius described three different disputing factions, and he named the representative heretical bishops of each.17 The picture Epiphanius painted here was that among the heretics themselves disunity and mutual hatred reigned, and in the middle of this mess was the helpless Constantius, who was unable to bring unified consensus to his empire despite his call for a new council and a new creed.18 Epiphanius ' treatment of Constantius in the Panarion underscored his desire to attack those heretical bishops and not the emperor himself. At the end of the entry, Epiphanius again specifically named the factional Arian bishops and their successors, as if he were cataloguing for his readers a list of dangerous criminals who ' not in secret but with boldness, as if they were clueless about what is good, not only teach the doctrines of Arius, but also fight for their heresy and persecute those who teach the truth. They no longer wish to refute true believers with words, but to deliver them up with hostility, conflicts , and violence.'19 In 364 Valens was chosen by his brother Valentinian to co-rule the Roman empire, with the former ruling in the east and the latter in the west. Epiphanius wrote the Panarion while Valens was still emperor, and thus perhaps we have our best example of Epiphanius' strategic characterization of emperor and bishops. Following his lament over the influence of heretical bishops on Constantius, Epiphanius described how the Arian ' gang of serpents prevailed again through Eudoxius , who slithered in and corrupted again the sense of hearing of the most reverent and God -loving Valens , the God-fearing emperor.' 20 This Eudoxius was bishop of Constantinople from 360-70 , and Epiphanius attributed the power of these Arians to the fact that Eudoxius baptized Valens.21 Otherwise, Epiphanius scoffed , the Arians would have been refuted even by ' women and children'.22 The consummation of the corrupting influence of heretical bishops was accomplished through baptism. And the equation of baptism and imperial access was a theme we have already seen before, and Epiphanius seems to have recognized just how powerful this formula could be. He ended his discussion of Valens with the following: 'And through the patronage of the

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

69.12.5-7. 73.27.5-7. 73.23.8. This was the Council of Seleucia, held in 359. 73.37.6. 69.13.1. 69.13.1 . 69.13.2.

166

Y.R. KIM

emperor, which is their shield, they have prevailed, so as to attempt all evil things which have been done and are still done by them in Alexandria, Nicomedia, Mesopotamia, and Palestine, under the patronage of the same, current emperor.'23 Valens' humiliating defeat at Adrianople was divine retribution for later writers for succumbing to heresy. Of course when Epiphanius wrote the Panarion, he had no idea events would unfold in the way that they did. For the time being he had to grit his teeth and accept the fact that the emperor of the eastern Mediterranean was a heretic. In fact the past forty or so years were marked by suspect rulers who were too easily influenced by heretical bishops . While Epiphanius had no means to exact regime change, he did have the ability to attack those church leaders who stood in opposition to his views . He accomplished this first through the written word; and as the latter years of his career attest, he also did this through involving himself directly in theological and ecclesiastical controversies. The world was full of venomous heretics , and Epiphanius provided for the orthodox faithful what he truly believed were the antidotes, which could be found in the ' medicine chest,' that is, the Panarion.

23 69.13.3.

Peter and Paul in the Commentaries of Didymus the Blind

Peter D. STEIGER, Honolulu , Hawaii

In her book Holy Bishops in Late Antiquity, Claudia Rapp has outlined distinctions between spiritual and ascetic authority.¹ Fundamental to her analysis is the role of the apostles, who are both passive receivers of the gifts of the Holy Spirit (πνευματαφόροι) and active imitators of Jesus Christ (Χριστοφόροι). This paper examines how Didymus the Blind , whom Dr. Rapp cites , depicts the apostles Peter and Paul in his commentaries, On Genesis (c. 365) and On Zachariah (c. 385) . It seeks to provide a more detailed analysis of Didymus' theology of the two apostles. Primarily, it will demonstrate that Didymus' commentaries present great nuance with regard to the apostles as inspired authors , teachers and shepherds, as well as authoritative models for Christian exegesis . Secondarily, it will reveal that Didymus' theological insights about the apostles remained constant, though his skill at presenting his ideas evolved between these two works.3 A cursory glance at the indices of the commentaries reveals that Paul has a

more significant role, being quoted more than any biblical author and referred to as 'the Apostle ' . Didymus refers to the apostles by proper name in both commentaries, but what is most telling is the frequent inclusion of an epithet or biblical allusion to specify the apostle in question . GenT designates the apostles in several ways . When referring to Peter, Didymus often labels him the ' first-chosen of the apostles ', even without the apostle's proper name. Paul is frequently modified by the adjective ' blessed ' . " But he is also designated as ' wise', one who teaches and acts as a ' physician of the Word' by adapting himself to the needs of his students ( 1Cor. 9:22). On one occasion, Didymus describes Paul as ' he who speaks in Christ' (2Cor. 13 : 3) . Both

¹ Claudia Rapp, Holy Bishops in Late Antiquity: The Nature of Christian Leadership in an Age ofTransition (Ewing, NJ, 2005). 2 All citations of Didymus taken from Sources Chrétiennes: Sur la Genése, ed. P. Nautin, SC 233. 244, and Sur Zacharie, ed . L. Doutreleau, SC 83-5 , abbreviated as GenT and ZachT throughout and cited according to original papyrus pagination. 3 Richard A. Layton , Didymus the Blind and his Circle in Late Antique Alexandria (Urbana, 2004), 6 for dates of Didymus' corpus. 4 ὁ πρόκριτος τῶν ἀποστόλων: GenT 53, 54, 114, 124, 177, 186. 5 μakapιós: GenT 51 , 54, 58 , 69, 102 , 161 , 166, 180, 212, 214. 6 GenT 57, 104, 111, 107, 72. 7 GenT 57.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 167-172 . O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

168

P.D. STEIGER

apostles are portrayed as possessing ' spiritual children', like the saints and prophets of old, and they possess divine inspiration through participation in the Holy Spirit and Word of God who divinize them . Although the titles and roles given to the apostles in GenT reflect the characteristics of the pneumatophoroi and christophoroi outlined by Rapp, in this early commentary Didymus does not employ this vocabulary. In ZachT, Didymus' practice of assigning titles and biblical allusions to Peter and Paul is more developed . While he continues to refer to them by proper name, he more frequently adds epithets suggesting his understanding of the apostles has evolved . Peter, for example, continues to be referred to as the 'firstchosen of the apostles', but he is now also ' the most- excellent of the apostles', 'the mighty disciple of Christ', ' the head of Christ's disciples', ' the most- excellent of Christ's disciples', ' the most-holy of Christ's disciples', ' the true disciple of the Savior', ' the most excellent of the disciples of the Savior', and ' the disciple on whom the Church is built ? These epithets , extrapolated from the New Testament, illustrate that Didymus' understanding of Peter's pre- eminent status among the first Christians remains constant between the two commentaries , but his ability and concern to express this status has deepened. The use of superlative adjectives is particularly important, since similar superlatives are not applied to Paul. As with Peter, Paul's role receives considerably more development in the epithets and titles of ZachT. Most interesting are those quoted directly from Paul's own epistles and the Acts of the Apostles . Following Gal. 2:20 and 2Cor. 10 13 : 3, Didymus repeatedly calls Paul ' the one speaking in Christ'.¹º Likewise , imitating the Lord's reference in Acts 9:15 , Didymus names Paul the ' chosen vessel'. Unlike GenT, Paul is never designated ' blessed' in ZachT, this term being reserved for Old Testament figures. Also, Paul is the only author whose name is modified with Greek adjectives meaning 'divinely-inspired'.12 These adjectives and biblical epithets suggest that Didymus ' theology of Paul has been enhanced since his composition of GenT. Several epithets occur in ZachT that are rare but particularly important. First, Didymus refers to both Peter and Paul as ' theologians ' ; Peter is labeled ' a wise 8 GenT 46, 230, 246-8. 4 ὁ πρόκριτος τῶν ἀποστόλων : ZachT 58.25, 241.4, 259.19, 292.5; πρὸς τοῦ κορυφαιοτάτου ἀποστόλου : ZachT 110.33, 347.26; ὁ μέγας Χριστοῦ μαθητής : ZachT 277.8; ὁ κορυφαῖος τῶν Χριστοῦ μαθητῶν : ZachT 261.26; ὁ κορυφαιότατος τῶν Χριστοῦ μαθητῶν : ZachT 153.13 ; ὁ τῶν Χριστοῦ μαθητῶν ἁγιώτατος: ZachT 405.9; ὁ γνήσιος τοῦ Σωτῆρος μαθητής: ZachT 330.19; ὁ κορυφαιότατος μαθητής τοῦ Σωτῆρος : ZachT 69.2; ὁ Χριστοῦ μαθητὴς ἐφ᾿ ᾧ ἡ Ἐκκλησία : ZachT 69.11. 10 ὁ ἐν Χριστῷ ἀπόστολος, ὁ ἐν Χριστῷ Παῦλος, ὁ ἐν Χριστῷ λαλῶν : ZachT 169.3, 185.23, 71.27, 105.7, 154.7, 161.21 , 221.12 , 273.8 , 278.23 , 330.5 , 382.3. " τὸ τῆς ἐκλογῆς σκεῦος: ZachT 49.12, 149.7, 161.21 , 177.10 , 262.16 , 278.22, 330.4. 12 θεῖος, θεσπέσιος, ἱερός: ZachT 413.2, 91.16 , 147.20, 192.14, 265.2 , 287.9, 296.10 , 321.25, 350.15 , 405.12 , 36.14, 173.23.

Peter and Paul in the Commentaries of Didymus the Blind

169

spiritual guide' who provides advice to worshipers, whereas Paul is likened to a ' bride wedded in spirit to the heavenly Bridegroom, with milk under his tongue that is his discourse' given to those not yet mature enough to receive the solid food.13 As theologians, spiritual guides and teachers, Peter and Paul emerge as authorities capable of providing leadership to Christians. Neither Peter nor Paul is specifically called a pneumatophoros, but this term is generically applied to all who speak through the grace of the Holy Spirit.14 Paul alone is called a christophoros three times in ZachT. The context of two of these occasions is significant because Paul is first cited as an authority for Nicene Christology and, second, as one who gives support to the ascetic practice of marital abstinence for the sake of prayer.15 In this way, Paul the christophoros resembles Didymus himself, who composed theological commentaries and treatises to address heretical exegesis while simultaneously providing guidance for ascetics . Rapp has noted that spiritual authority resides in those who are pneumatophoroi because they passively receive the gift of the Spirit. This is a pronounced aspect of Didymus' theology of inspiration, since he consistently portrays the writers of holy scripture as possessed through their participation in the Word and Spirit of God. Peter and Paul are included among those who are divinely inspired through participation in the divine. Early in GenT, Didymus cites Paul's reference to the followers of Christ being the ' light of the world' (Phil. 2:15), pointing out that they are not ' lights', but the 'light' because unlike Christ who is uniquely the Light of the World by nature (ovσiac), his followers are the light by their participation in the True Light.16 Later, Didymus notes that those not yet capable of participation in the perfect light benefit from the spiritual light provided by the saints, who act as mediators . Paul is specifically named as one who illuminates others but is himself illuminated by his participation in Christ'.17 Peter is likewise said to be ' moved by the Spirit' to write his epistle, and all apostles, like the Hebrew prophets , give their teaching as spiritual rain for others.18 As teachers who mediate , Didymus illustrates a kenotic element in the apostles ' ministry: they condescend like the prophets who endured exile in order to assist others without losing participation in the divine Spirit.19 Finally, in explicating the ecstasy that gripped Abram in Gen. 15:12 , Didymus distinguishes this state from the irrational pagan oracles . The ecstasy of Abram is like that spoken of by David

13 ZachT 49.8 , 70.27. 14 πνευματόφοροι ἄνδρες, τοὺς πνευματόφορους ἀνθρώπους δι᾽ ἐπιχορηγίας τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος εἰρηκέναι : ZachT 280.8 , 69.24, 94.23, 329.25, 389.7. 15 ZachT 337.16, 344.4. 16 GenT 38. 17 GenT 41. 18 GenT 124, 46. 19 GenT 153.15-20.

170

P.D. STEIGER

and Paul, who are in a divinely elevated state due to their participation in the Holy Spirit.20 In the concluding pages of GenT, while discussing Hagar's exchange with the angel in Gen. 16 : 12-14, Didymus makes note that in the preceding verses , the angel was called the ‘ angel of God' but is now referred to simply as 'Lord' or 'God'. He stresses that this is because the angel speaks with God's authority, like a prophet.21 The designation of the angel as ‘ Lord' and ' God' is due to its activity and not to its nature; the angel is ' God' because of the one dwelling 'in him'.22 Didymus concludes that the angel and prophet possess the authority of God because they do not merely serve in the role of intermediary but actually partake in the divinity they communicate - therefore, they can rightly be called 'gods'.23 By this indwelling of the Spirit, they become divinized by the Word of God.24 This same authority imparted to those divinized by participation is applicable to Peter and Paul , as is more clearly expressed in ZachT. Zacht contains many examples of how the inspired writers are divinized by participation in God and why this participation imparts authority. On the second page of the commentary, Didymus states that ' the Word of God comes to the one who participates in it, just as one becomes virtuous and knowledgeable by participation in virtue and knowledge ... the Word of God communicates and declares to the one under the influence of the prophetic word.'25 In explaining how the angel speaks in the prophet , Didymus argues that the angel can be understood as the Savior himself, the ' angel of great counsel' (Is. 9: 5). The relationship between prophet and angel is likened to that of teacher and student, wherein the teacher speaks in the student when the student participates in the teacher's lesson.26 Here the prophet is not simply a passive recipient of divine revelation, but is actively engaged at some level . On the other hand, Didymus claims that the spirit-bearers were all chosen by God and as ministers of the Word they are possessed by a divine ecstasy in which the Holy Spirit commands the herald to raise his voice.27 Elsewhere in ZachT, Didymus links the apostles to the inspired writers of the Old Testament . He asserts that they receive revelations of the Lord interiorly because the Word of God does not communicate by ears and voice to those possessed of the Spirit, rather, God enlightens their minds , speaking by vision not voice.28 In this way, the inspired writer is rendered clairvoyant so as to

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

GenT 230.8-18. GenT 247.6-248.26. ἐνεργείας οὐκ οὐσίας : GenT 247.12-18. GenT 247.24-248.3. θεωποιήσας: GenT 248.7-10. ZachT 2.14. ZachT 8.10. ZachT 69.21-6, 200.24-201.2 , 237.27-238.3 , 322.20-7. ZachT 71.26-72.14.

Peter and Paul in the Commentaries of Didymus the Blind

171

behold the beauty and mystery of truth and divine wisdom.29 This occurs for all holy ones who are divinized by God's drawing near and for this reason the words they convey ought to be accepted as possessing the authority of God. Similarly, since Christ possesses all the virtues , those who imitate him are also 'christs', and they possess the ' wisdom and power of God' (1Cor. 1:24) .30 Finally, Didymus points out that the 'judges of the Lord's house' mentioned in Zach. 3:7 are understood anagogically as the Church governed by ' apostles, prophets, shepherds and teachers' (Eph. 4:11) . These judges are interpreted as 31 the ' gods' mentioned in Ps. 82 : 1 , among whom God takes his place.³¹ So, as inspired writers, teachers and shepherds who are divinized by participation in the Word and Spirit of God , the apostles possess the authority of God. One of the principles of early Christian hermeneutics was to interpret scripture with scripture. Didymus was a master of this method and his prodigious scriptural memory and ability to apply it to different passages won him high regard from admirers like Jerome. Didymus believed his inter-textual method was authorized by the apostles themselves . While Didymus utilizes verses from Peter to interpret Genesis and Zachariah, Paul is clearly the model that Didymus imitates. His reasons for this may coincide with a distinction of ' true priests ' from ' priests by ordination'.32 Didymus seems aware of this distinction, but develops it along the lines of Eph. 4:11 , where ‘ apostles, prophets , shepherds and teachers' have distinct leadership roles within the Christian community. The leader's principle responsibility is ' for perfecting the saints, not casually, but with careful judgment and discernment, for one person to be appointed in the role of an apostle, another in the place of a prophet, while others are for pasturing Christ's flock and developing divine teaching for those with a holy disposition for learning.'33 The distinction between shepherds and teachers here appears to be a parallel succession from the apostles and prophets , with the teacher having the distinct responsibility for developing those with a disposition favorable to learning. Shortly after, Didymus adds that it is not for everyone to attempt to understand how Jesus is faithful to the God who appointed him apostle and high priest (Hebr. 3: 1-2), but only the mature believer who can speak wisely due to having ' seen Jesus' ( 1Cor. 9 : 1) with the eyes of the heart which behold his true light and who are partners in the heavenly calling.3 Later, in his interpretation of the crown mentioned in Zach. 6:14 , Didymus asserts that it is the prize given to those who have true , orthodox teaching, as in the imperishable crown referred to by Paul in 1Cor. 9:25, and the incorruptible

29 30 31 32 33 34

ZachT 94.10-95.5. ZachT 101.5-7. ZachT 52.16-18. C. Rapp, Holy Bishops in Late Antiquity (2005), 62-6, 92-9. ZachT 52.9-16 . ZachT 54.27-55.3.

172

P.D. STEIGER

crown given to orthodox shepherds who imitate the True Shepherd, according to 1Peter 5 : 1-4.35 Didymus argues that one does not become an elder simply by mandate or appointment and he advocates selecting as elders those who have already demonstrated the virtue and seniority which the office indicates . He notes that teachers have the responsibility of instructing the assembly of Christ with knowledge and understanding, while the shepherds direct their active life and preside over good deeds.37 Thus, Didymus perceives dual authorities operating within the Church, one overseeing the active life, the other the contemplative life. But the source of this authority is the one Lord , who shepherds and teaches. Since Peter is more frequently cited in reference to shepherds and Paul with reference to teachers, it appears that Didymus based his parallel authorities on what he viewed as the distinct roles of these two apostles. As a teacher, but not an ordained shepherd, Didymus could legitimate his position in the ecclesial body by imitating Paul, who exhibits the kenotic responsibility of every Christian teacher to meet students at their level and gently guide them to higher and deeper levels of spiritual understanding. While accepting a distinction between shepherds and teachers, Didymus appears more concerned to encourage obedience of all true Christian leaders, be they shepherds or teachers .

35 ZachT 110.27-111.9. 36 ZachT 152.12-153.18. 37 ZachT 289.4-293.4.

The Person Speaking: Prosopopoeia as an Exegetical Device in Didymus the Blind's Interpretation of Romans 7

Byard BENNETT, Grand Rapids, Michigan

In Romans 7, Paul appears to give a very pessimistic account of his own condition, describing himself as being subject to the power of sin and unable to carry out the good which he desires to do. The interpretation of this material has always been a difficult matter, raising questions about whether in Romans 7 Paul intended to speak autobiographically and whether he aimed to describe the state of a converted or an unconverted individual. The debate over the proper interpretation of this chapter was particularly intense in the fourth century when it became an object of controversy between Manichaeans and Christians , with each side using the text to support its own account of the nature of human existence and religious conversion . ' One of the major contributors to this discussion was Didymus the Blind of Alexandria, a learned ascetic who was also highly esteemed in his own time as a biblical commentator. In a catena fragment on Romans 7, Didymus responds to Manichaean claims that in verses 18 and 24 of that chapter Paul regards his flesh as irreducibly evil and a cause of bondage to sin.2 Didymus rejects this view, noting that Paul's description of himself in Romans 7 contrasts with affirmations he makes concerning himself elsewhere in the Pauline corpus. Didymus argues that in Romans 7 Paul is not speaking autobiographically, as his Manichaean opponents had supposed . Didymus argues that in Romans 7 Paul is instead making use of a standard Greek rhetorical device , prosopopoeia (лроσшлолоιîа ; 'speaking in an assumed persona'), delivering a speech in the person of fallen Adam to arouse pathos in his audience, thus heightening the vividness and dramatic character of the contrast Paul has developed in the preceding chapters ofRomans between human subjection to sin in Adam and the spiritual freedom that is introduced through Jesus Christ. To understand why Didymus believed that prosopopoeia was useful in understanding Romans 7, I will briefly discuss the concept of the person speaking

¹ On Romans 7 as a subject of discussion between Manichaeans and Christians, see my 'Didymus the Blind's Knowledge of Manichaeism' in: J. BeDuhn and P. Mirecki (eds.), The Light and the Darkness: Studies in Manichaeism and Its World (Leiden , 2001) , 45 n. 27, 48 with nn. 40-1 . 2 For the text of the catena fragment see Karl Staab, Pauluskommentare aus der griechischen Kirche (Münster, 1933), 1-6.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 173-177. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

174

B. BENNETT

(τὸ πρόσωπον λέγον) in Greek literary criticism and the use of prosopopoeia in Greek rhetoric, examining when and why these concepts were invoked in the analysis of classic texts . I will then examine how Didymus drew upon these concepts to develop a new and compelling approach to the interpretation of Romans 7. Greek literary education was conventionally divided into three stages.3 After elementary instruction in reading and writing, students received instruction in how to interpret literature, using the basic principles of textual and literary criticism to analyze a classic text . The rhetorical techniques used in classic orations of the past were then studied and the student began to use these to construct his own speeches. One of the major themes examined at the second level of instruction ('grammar' or literary criticism) was the need to identify, in the passage under consideration, the person speaking (τò прóσшnov λέyov).ª Greek literary texts did not always indicate when speakers had changed in a dialogue or narrative . If one failed to determine correctly where one character's speech stopped and another's began, apparent contradictions would appear and the undiscerning student, not being able to understand the text, might erroneously conclude that the text was corrupt and needed to be emended . It was also important to distinguish between assertions that the author made in his own voice and opinions offered by one of the characters introduced by the author, each of whom would naturally speak in a manner appropriate to his or her own personality, temperament and circumstances. As the student advanced from the study of literary interpretation to instruction in rhetoric, the student moved from discerning who was speaking in a given passage of a written text (τò ñρóσwлov λέyov) to actually composing speeches in which one spoke in the character of another person (лроσшлоñoιîα). Prosoрopoeia is a rhetorical device that involves the introduction by a rhetor of a specific character that is made to speak in his or her own voice . Strictly speaking, the character introduced should be one who is removed in time and space from the rhetor and his audience; thus , the character introduced

3 See William V. Harris, Ancient Literacy (Cambridge, 1989), 233-247; Raffaella Cribiore, Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Princeton, 2001), 160-244. 4 See Bernhard Neuschäfer, Origenes als Philologe (Basel, 1987), 263-8 . 5 The use of prosopopoeia was not confined to oratory alone but can also be found in philosophical dialogue and also played an important role in letter writing. For the use of prosopopoeia as a persuasive technique in philosophical dialogue, see Plato, Crito 50a-54d, where Plato engages in an extended dialogue with the laws; in Cicero, De finibus bonorum et malorum IV 61 , Plato's pupils are called upon to engage in a dialogue about certain points. The use of prosopopoeia in Plato's philosophical dialogues is also noted by Aelius Theon , Progymnasmata 68 and analyzed by Laurie Stuart Cosgriff, The Ethopoiia ofPlato's Republic, Ph.D. thesis (Univ. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1994) .

Prosopopoeia in Didymus the Blind's Interpretation of Romans 7

175

might be a well known but long-dead historical person (such as a lawgiver or philosopher) or a figure known from epic poetry or mythology." It was not strictly required that the character introduced should be named, although where the character was not named, the character's identity should be readily identifiable by the audience. Prosopopoeia was often introduced when the rhetor had already demonstrated certain points by reasoned argument and wished to further enhance the persuasiveness of his argument by subsequently introducing a moving, personally engaging speech that explored the issues in a more affective way through another person's experience ? Prosopopoeia allowed the rhetor to vividly depict both characters (non) and emotions (лá◊η) , thereby arousing pathos on the part of the audience and using this appeal to further promote the demonstration of the points under discussion.8 Ifprosopopoeia was to perform this function, it was essential for the rhetor

to evoke a specific person and to make this person's speaking seem credible by adapting the speech to reflect that person's peculiar characteristics. Thus, it was imperative that the person evoked by the rhetor should speak in a way that reflected the age, gender, occupation, temperament, manner of life, degree of knowledge and above all the dignity or status appropriate to that person." Thus, a free man must speak as a free man, but a slave as a slave; in each case, the rhetor must attribute to the person speaking ideas which it is not absurd to attribute to him or her in view of that person's dignity and status.10

6 See J.C.T. Ernesti, Lexicon technologiae graecorum rhetoricae (Leipzig, 1795; repr. Hildesheim , 1962), 311f.; Richard Volkmann, Die Rhetorik der Griechen und Römer in systematischer Übersicht, 2nd ed . (Leipzig, 1885) , 489f. (see also ibid. 280f. , 312f.) ; Heinrich Lausberg , Handbook ofLiterary Rhetoric (Leiden, 1998), 369-72 (see also ibid. 102 , 127, 366-8 , 501) ; R. Dean Anderson, Jr., Glossary of Greek Rhetorical Terms (Leuven, 2000) , 106f. Among the Greek sources, see especially Aelius Theon, Progymnasmata 115 and Alexander, De figuris 12 ( 19, 15-30 Spengel) . Among the Latin sources, see especially [Cicero] , Ad Herennium IV 66: Conformatio est cum aliqua quae non adest persona confingitur quasi adsit, aut cum res muta aut informis fit eloquens, et forma ei et oratio adtribuitur ad dignitatem adcommodata aut actio quaedam, and compare P. Rutilius Lupus, De figuris sententiarum et elocutionis II 6 (31,1-3 Brooks); Quintilian, Institutio oratoria IX 2.30-2 ; III 8.52; Aquila Romanus, De figuris sententiarum et elocutionis III ; Charisius , Ars grammatica 284-5 (373,1-7 Barwick). 7 See Cicero, De oratore II 312,332 ; III 205-6. 8 See Aelius Theon, Progymnasmata 117 ; Hermogenes, Progymnasmata 9 (21,10-18 Rabe), and Ulpian, Comm. in Demosthenem (quoted in Volkmann, 281 n . 1) ; compare Quintilian, Institutio oratoria VI 1.25-6. Discussions of prosopopoeia as a rhetorical device often mention that it was valued for lending vividness, animation and forcefulness to one's presentation; see Demetrius Phalereus, De elocutione 265-6, and Hermeias, In Platonis Phaedrum 260D (221,28 Couvreur) and compare Quintilian , Institutio oratoria IX 2.29. Prosopopoeia was often introduced in the epilogue, since this was the most natural place to reflect back on points previously made and was also held to be the most appropriate place to arouse pathos . ? See Aelius Theon, Progymnasmata 115-6, and Hermogenes, Progymnasmata 9 (21,6-9 Rabe) ; compare Quintilian , Institutio oratoria III 8.50-2. 10 See Aelius Theon, Progymnasmata 60 ; 115-6.

176

B. BENNETT

Didymus, being familiar with the Greek rhetorical tradition , noted the apparent contradiction in Romans 7, where Paul seems to attribute to himself qualities which do not befit his dignity and status as an apostle and also conflict with assertions Paul makes concerning himself elsewhere in the Pauline corpus . Didymus begins by noting that in his epistles Paul repeatedly urges his readers to imitate him just as he imitates Christ and in this lies the dignity of Paul's apostolate . Statements which conflict with this dignity should be taken as clues that Paul is using prosopopoeia, speaking in another persona for the edification of his audience. Didymus comments, By doing good , the holy Apostle became a spotless image for those whom he instructed. For this reason, he cried out: ' Be imitators of me, just as I am of Christ.' Therefore what he said of himself is not to be taken literally [when he says] : ' I know that the good does not dwell in my flesh', or 'Wretched man that I am, who will set me free from this body of death? ' Instead , these and all passages that are of the same kind he utters, delivering a speech in an assumed persona, so that he may convict those who are prone to sin. 11 Didymus argues that in the verses which immediately precede this prosopopoeia (Rom. 7: 5-6), Paul has already given clues which prepare the reader for this transition to another persona by reminding the reader that he or she is no longer in the position that will subsequently be described by the person speaking in vv. 7-24. Didymus states : For this reason, he [sc. Paul] says ' when we were in the flesh', showing that now they were no longer ‘ in the flesh' ... it is the latter [i.e. the unconverted person's subjection to sin] from which we were set free, since we died in Christ by being buried with him in baptism. We have truly been freed from this ' flesh ', for he [sc. Paul] goes on to say: 'But now we have been released from the law of sin, having died to that by which we were held fast ... 12 The reader should therefore perceive the subsequent speech given in an assumed persona as being dissonant with the dignity and status that properly belongs to Paul and all other Christians in view of their conversion and baptism . Didymus argues that the speech given in an assumed persona concludes in v. 24 ofthe chapter, noting that in the next verse (v. 25) , Paul reverts to his own authorial voice and gives thanks for his conversion , saying 'I give thanks to God through Jesus Christ our Lord' (v. 25a). Didymus then punctuates the second half of the verse (v. 25b) not as an affirmation but as a rhetorical question, challenging the reader to recognize that the preceding words about subjection to sin in vv. 7-24 had been spoken in another persona and do not describe the state of Paul or others who have experienced conversion and baptism. Didymus contends:

11 K. Staab, Pauluskommentare (1933), 1,1-8. 12 K. Staab, Pauluskommentare ( 1933), 1,14-21 .

Prosopopoeia in Didymus the Blind's Interpretation of Romans 7

177

... he [sc. Paul] asks rhetorically: ' So then, do I myself obey the Law of God with my mind, while with my flesh I obey the law of sin?' Am I Paul, thus divided , with one part of me obeying the Law of God, while the other part serves the law of sin? Do I therefore have within myself both Christ and Beliar, both at the same time and in the same respect? ... I who proclaimed to others: ' Do you not know that your bodies are a temple of the Holy Spirit who is within you? Therefore glorify God in your members', do I myself have nothing good in my body? But he is not like that ; he is not! ('God forbid ! ') For he who was formerly ‘ a child of wrath' became an honorable ' elect vessel' ... Thus the things spoken in another persona befit neither the divinely inspired Paul nor anyone who has been buried with Christ in baptism ... For such persons shall no longer be condemned because of Adam's disobedience ; sin no longer reigns over them, nor does the death which came about through sin.13 Now if one grants that in Rom. 7:7-24 Paul is not speaking in his own voice but rather in an assumed persona, who then is the person speaking in that passage? Didymus has already affirmed that those who have experienced conversion and baptism are no longer in Adam and will no longer be condemned because of Adam's disobedience, but instead with Paul give thanks for their conversion, saying 'Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord'. It therefore occurs to Didymus that in the prosopopoeia in Rom. 7:7-24 Paul may be continuing the Adam-Christ typology he had previously developed in the fifth chapter of Romans, driving home the significance of the argument he had made there by subsequently calling upon fallen Adam in Rom. 7 to give a vivid and dramatic speech depicting the subjection to sin that ensued after Adam had violated God's commandment. If one accepts that in Rom. 7:7-24 Paul is speaking in the person of Adam after the fall, Didymus argues, this will resolve the dissonance which readers experience between Paul's dignity as an apostle and the speaker's admission of utter defeat and subjection to sin in Rom . 7:18: 'I know that the good does not dwell in me, i.e. in my flesh .' While these words are not fitting for Paul, Didymus contends , they are perfectly fitting for fallen Adam and accurately depict the abject status to which Adam had descended at the time of his speech. In conclusion, by using concepts drawn from Greek literary criticism and rhetoric, Didymus was able to analyze and resolve difficult questions relating to the interpretation of Romans 7, allowing him to offer a reasoned response to his Manichaean opponents and present a compelling new interpretation of this theologically significant yet perplexing chapter of Scripture.

13 K. Staab, Pauluskommentare ( 1933), 2,9-25.

Evagrios on Anger

Andrew LOUTH, Durham

Perhaps about a quarter of a century ago, there took place an interdisciplinary seminar, organized in Oxford by Michael Carrithers, now my colleague in Durham , on monasticism in the world religions. At one point, after a series of seminars on Christian monasticism , an Indian, or maybe Sinhalese, gentleman, who had hitherto been quietly attentive, suddenly interjected with some passion that he could not understand the enormous attention paid to sex and sexual temptation in Christian monasticism; in Buddhism, he continued , sex is scarcely an issue rejection of sex is taken for granted in the monastic life - the real problem the monk has to struggle with is anger. The passionate indignation with which he made this point curiously mirrored the point that he was making. I remember thinking at the time that Evagrios would have understood the point that being made about Buddhism, and indeed would largely have agreed with it, for while Evagrios does have things to say about sexual temptation and the demon of fornication , he has much more to say about anger. Evagrios ' concern with anger has been noticed by others, notably by Fr Gabriel Bunge in his fairly recent book, Drachenwein und Engelsbrot,' and also, in a very different vein, by Philip Rousseau in his contribution to the Australian ' Prayer and Spirituality' Conference, held in Melbourne in 2005.2 Nevertheless , there is perhaps still something to say, though I shan't match up to the comprehensiveness and elegance of Fr Bunge's presentation in his book. We might, however, start with one of Fr Gabriel's remarks . If anyone had asked Evagrios, what in his opinion, is the worst of all the vices , which has the most far-reaching consequences for the spiritual life, he would most likely have unhesitatingly answered : anger. And certainly for a single reason: 'No other evil so turns one into a demon as anger' (Ep. 56.4).³ That, at least, confirms my suspicion of a quarter-of- a-century ago. What I would like to do in this paper is to explore why this is so, why anger is the worst of the vices , or passions, for Evagrios . I shall stick mostly to the Greek ¹ Gabriel Bunge, Drachenwein und Engelsbrot: Die Lehre des Evagrios Pontikos von Zorn und Sanftmut, Der Christliche Osten (Würzburg, 1999). 2 Philip Rousseau, Ancient Ascetics and Modern Virtue: the case of Anger, in: Prayer and Spirituality in the Early Church, vol . 4, Spiritual Life, ed . Wendy Mayer, Pauline Allen, and Lawrence Cross (Strathfield NSW, 2006), 213-31. 3 Gabriel Bunge, Drachenwein und Engelsbrot (1999), 19.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 179-185. O Peeters Publishers , 2010.

180

A. LOUTH

corpus of Evagrios, because this preserves most of Evagrios ' ascetic wisdom , which is what we are concerned with. Let us start with Evagrios' presentation of the eight logismoi in his treatise, Praktikos or "The Monk' . As we all know, Evagrios lists what he calls the vices, or temptations, or, most usually, ' thoughts ', logismoi under eight headings : gluttony, fornication , avarice, anger, grief, listlessness, vainglory and pride. The way in which he presents them in Praktikos makes clear why he calls them 'thoughts ', for he seems to be concerned, for the most part, not with the actual vices themselves, as with trains of thought sparked off by what these vices are concerned with. This is what he says about gluttony, the first in the list: The thought of gluttony suggests to the monk the rapid demise of his asceticism. It describes for him his stomach, his liver and spleen, dropsy and lengthy illness, the scarcity of necessities and the absence of doctors. Frequently it brings him to recall certain of his brethren who have fallen prey to these sufferings . Sometimes it even persuades those who have suffered such maladies to visit those who are practising abstinence and to tell them of their misfortunes and how they came about as a result of the asceticism (P 7).4 The logismos of gluttony is not at all gluttonous thoughts (though elsewhere Evagrios does consider such thoughts); it is rather a train of thoughts (often, I think, a good way of translating logismos) that play on diet and health. The ascetic starts to think that he is ruining his health with his meagre diet, and is led, on the one hand, to consider giving up his ascetic regime altogether and, on the other, to get obsessed about his health, and that of others , and effectively to abandon his life of prayer by wandering around talking to others about his health and theirs. The same goes for the logismos of fornication : the logismos itself is not so much thought of sexual desire and fulfilment , as the thought it leads to that if living an ascetic life does not mean the extinction of such thoughts, then they [ should] give it up, convinced that they are accomplishing nothing' (P 8). So, too, with avarice - not thoughts of wealth and luxury, but rather of the reality of poverty, and the inability to see how one will cope with 'lengthy old age, inability to perform manual labour, famines that will come along, diseases that will arise' (P 9), without depending on others, and the shame that that entails and with acedia/listlessness and vainglory: all of these are concerned with trains of thought that lead to despair about the monastic life, or, in the case of vainglory, to day-dreaming about the good one could do

4 Translations taken from Robert E. Sinkewicz , Evagrius ofPontus: The Greek Ascetic Corpus, Oxford Early Christian Studies (Oxford, 2003). The following abbreviations have been used in references: F = Foundations ofthe Monastic Life [pp. 1-11] ; Eul. = To Eulogios [pp. 12-59]; V = On Vices opposed to the Virtues [pp. 60-5 ] ; 8Th = On the Eight Thoughts [ pp. 66-90] ; P = Praktikos or The Monk: A Treatise on the Practical Life (pp. 91-114] ; Monks = To Monks in Monasteries and Communities and Exhortation to a Virgin ( pp. 115-35 ] ; Th = On Thoughts [ pp. 136-182] ; O = Chapters on Prayer [ pp. 183-209] ; Exhort. = Exhortations 1-2 to Monks [ pp. 217-23] .

Evagrios on Anger

181

by sharing one's undoubted spiritual gifts with others (see Th 28). With the logismoi of anger and pride, Evagrios' approach seems to be different. Pride is essentially the refusal ‘ to acknowledge that God is [one's] helper' and to ascribe one's virtue and ascetic prowess to oneself and despise one's brothers who do not share one's high opinion of oneself. Anger he describes like this: Anger is a passion that arises very quickly. Indeed , it is referred to as a boiling over of the irascible part and a movement directed against one who has done injury or is thought to have done so. It renders the soul furious all day long, but especially during prayers it seizes the mind and represents to it the face of the one who has hurt it. Sometimes when this goes on for a while and turns into resentment, it provokes disturbances at night accompanied by wasting and pallor of the body, as well as the attacks of venomous wild beasts . One could find these four signs that follow upon resentment accompanying numerous thoughts (P 11). In this case, the logismos is somehow much more direct: we have a picture of how anger takes over, becomes obsessive, blocks out any other kind of thought, even prayer, how it can even drain the body of its strength, and reduce one to a state of haunted madness . Elsewhere, we find the same kind of account of anger : Anger is a plundering of prudence, a destruction of one's state, a confusion of nature, a form turned savage, a furnace for the heart, an eruption of flames, a law of irascibility, a wrath of insults , a mother of wild beasts, a silent battle, an impediment to prayer (V 5). It is a kind of state of inner insurgency, so that one can no longer exercise control over oneself. The irascible or ‘ incensive ' part of the soul, the thumos, in Plato's tripartite analysis of the soul which Evagrios adopts, is ungovernably aroused when one is angry. Evagrios , to be sure, allows for a proper exercise of anger, a proper use of the thumos : it is to be directed against the demons , to be directed against passions that have established themselves in the desiring part of the soul - 'the usage of irascibility lies in this, namely, in fighting against the serpent with enmity... Do not turn the usage of irascibility instead to one that is contrary to nature, so as to become irascible with your brother...' (Eul. 11.10) ; "The nature of the irascible part is to fight against the demons..." (P 24). Evagrios emphasizes here, and elsewhere, that it is only against the demons that one should direct one's anger, not against ‘ one of your own race'. And even in this case, such anger is to be deployed ' gently': one is ' to be gentle and also a fighter' (Eul. 11.10) . This kind of anger does not stir up oneself, as in the case of anger directed against other people. So anger is different from most of the other logismoi, less a train of thought, than the impossibility of thinking at all . It is, crucially, an ' impediment to prayer', as we have just heard. That is true of all the logismoi, but for Evagrios anger is worse. It is not difficult to see why: trains of thought can be pushed aside, at least temporarily, but the kind of inner confusion that Evagrios depicts in the case of anger is something before which the monk is powerless , at least immediately.

182

A. LOUTH

When Evagrios talks about the effect of anger, he talks about darkening, thickening, rattling (as a lion in a cage), troubling (as in troubled waters), smoke from chaff irritating the eyes (8 Th 4.5 , 6, 7, 15 , 16). These are a bit different from the way he thinks of distraction in prayer, where the mind is distracted by images presented to the mind or noises (see F 3 , 6; Eul. 12.11 ; and esp. P 63, which seems to associate distraction with the desiring part of the soul), which diminish the soul's attentiveness. Metaphors of darkening, thickening, rattling, troubling and smoke rather suggest that the soul or intellect is blinded rather than distracted . Particularly interesting is the imagery of thickening or darkening : The forming of a mist thickens the air; the movement of irascibility thickens the intellect of the angry person. A passing cloud darkens the sun; a thought of resentment darkens the mind. (8Th 4.5-6). 'Leave your gift before the altar', scripture says, ' and go; first be reconciled with your brother, then come' (Matth. 5:24) and pray without disturbance. For resentment darkens the ruling faculty of the one who prays and leaves his prayer in obscurity (O 21 ). This 'thickening ' is also ascribed to excessive sleep (Monks 48 ; Exhort. 1. 8); sometimes it is not just anger, but all the passions that thicken the soul : Why do the demons want to produce in us gluttony, fornication, avarice, anger, and resentment, and the other passions? So that the mind becomes thickened by them and unable to pray as it ought; for when the passions of the irrational part have arisen, they do not allow it to be moved in a rational manner and to seek the Word of God (0 50). There are two aspects to this metaphor of thickening or darkening. The first, and most important, I've already indicated : such darkening of the intellect, or thickening, does not just hinder the intellect's natural state, which is prayer (O 47), it prevents it altogether by blinding it. This metaphor expresses the conviction that anger does not just distract the intellect from prayer, but occludes the intellect itself. But thickening - лαуúνεɩν - is a peculiarly significant word in this context. Origen envisaged rational beings, logikoi, existing in different states in accordance with the depth of their sin in turning away from God; to that depth of sin corresponded the density of their substance - humans are denser than angels, demons than humans. If this lies in the background of Evagrios ' metaphor here, then the implication of its use is that anger thickens the human intellect and makes it demonic. To repeat the quotation adduced by Fr Bunge at the beginning of this paper: ' no other evil so turns one into a demon than anger'. That may be rather a shaky bridge - the passage on which one depends for this account of Origen's demonology is one of the more daring insertions by Koetschau into the text of Origen's De principiis – but it leads us to a fairly secure bank on the other side, for Evagrios ' picture of the demons is very much of beings possessed by an undying hatred of those who are drawn to God and

5 Origen, De principiis I 8.4 (ed . Koetschau, GCS 22 [ 1913] , 101-5) .

Evagrios on Anger

183

anger towards them ; he speaks of them as being ' very jealous of the person at prayer' (0 46), or ' taking revenge' on him (O 47), and being far worse than any human could be: ' For there is not to be found on earth any human beings more embittered than the demons or who could undertake all at once the totality of their malevolence' (P 5). If anger is so bad, what is the monk to do about it? I used to think, and even now think this is not wholly false, that Evagrios ' treatment of the passions was characterized by seeing them as essentially ailments of the individual monk. He is mostly concerned about the effect they have on the monk himself, rather than on anyone else. This may well be because he is mostly giving instructions to solitaries. So when he thinks about anger, he talks almost entirely about the effect on the monk himself - as we have seen ----- rather than, say, the effect such anger might have on others , the damage that one can do to others by giving in to anger. So far that seems to be the case. But Evagrios' remedies for anger often involve accepting and taking part in the disciplines of a communal life. He even sees how the call to solitude can be a ruse on the part of the demons to prevent our taking steps to heal our anger: When, having seized on a pretext, the irascible part of our soul is troubled , then at the same moment the demons suggest to us that anachoresis is a fine thing, lest we resolve the causes of our sadness and free ourselves from the disturbance (O 22). If at all possible, the first way to lance our anger is to encounter the one who has disturbed us and ask forgiveness. ' Let not the sun go down upon your wrath': Evagrios invokes this apostolic injunction not only in On Prayer, just before the passage we have cited , but also in the Antirrhetikos: Against the thoughts of anger that do not permit us to be reconciled to the brothers because they depict before our eyes pretexts that are ' suitable' yet actually are shame, fear, and pride – 'Did he not fall into the very same offences as earlier, he who transgressed in this matter?' - this is an indication of the craftiness of the demon, which does not want to let the intellect become free of resentment... [and there follows Eph. 4:26-7 ] (Antirr. V 49).6 This letting-go of our memory of offences done to us is fundamental. It is, in passing, striking how often Evagrios moves from talking about anger to mention of resentment, µñviç, a dwelling on wrong done to one, or imagined so : the very opposite of lancing the anger by encounter with the one who has aroused it. I don't know whether Evagrios made the link St Maximos does between µñvis and µvnµý , memory, but he does seem to see memory as a source of danger in prayer.8

6 Translation from the Syriac version of the Antirrhetikos, from an electronic version that I believe is by David Brakke. 7 See Maximos, Ambiguum 10.44 (PG 91 , 1197C). 8 See my Origins ofthe Christian Mystical Tradition: from Plato to Denys (Oxford, 1981), 127.

184

A. LOUTH

Other remedies that Evagrios suggests are the offering of gifts : Gifts extinguish resentment: let the example of Jacob convince you of this , for he beguiled Esau with gifts when he was coming out to meet him with four hundred men (Gen. 32 :7). But since we are poor, let us make up for our poverty by the hospitality of the table (P 26). The example of Jacob is the first given in chapter 5 of the Antirrhetikos, which deals with anger. More generally Evagrios recommends ' psalmody, patience and mercy' to calm the inflamed incensive part of the soul . The place of psalmody in Evagrian asceticism has recently been illuminated - along with much else Evagrian - by Fr Luke Dysinger, but let us remind ourselves how Evagrios sees the singing, or quiet recitation , of the psalms as ' putting the passions to sleep and working to calm the incontinence of the body ', while prayer prepares the intellect for its own proper activity (O 83) , and regards psalmody as introducing us to the 'manifold wisdom of God', πολυποίκιλος σοφία τοῦ Θεοῦ, while prayer introduces us to a single and imageless wisdom (O 85) . A further remedy, mentioned in To Monks in Monasteries and Communities, is to pray for those who regard themselves as our enemies: 'The person who prays for his enemies will be free of resentment ; one who is sparing with his tongue will do his neighbour no injury' (Monks 14). The latter half of that proverb introduces our final consideration . Mostly, Evagrios is concerned not to deal with anger once it has done its damage, but prevent anger. It is all perhaps rather obvious , though not for that reason at all easy. To anger Evagrios opposes various other dispositions : love, gentleness, guarding one's tongue, and indeed guarding one's intellect or heart, patience , freedom from resentment , almsgiving. Despite what Evagrios says about the natural use of the incensive part of the soul in combatting the demons, what we find in Evagrios is a much greater stress on avoidance of anger altogether. It is only in the context of an abiding gentleness that anger can be exercised at all. Evagrios' great exemplars of gentleness are Moses and David (the latter depending on the LXX text of Psalm 131 : 1): If someone has mastered irascibility, he has mastered the demons, but if someone is a slave to this passion , he is a complete foreigner to the monastic life and a stranger to the ways of our Saviour, since the Lord himself is said to teach the gentle his ways (see Ps. 24:9). Thus, the mind of anchorites becomes difficult to capture when it flees to the plain of gentleness . For hardly any of the virtues do the demons fear as they fear gentleness. The great Moses possessed this virtue, for he was called ' gentle beyond all men' (Num. 12 :3); and the holy David claimed that it is worthy of the memory of God, saying: ' Remember David and all his gentleness' (Ps. 131 : 1) ; moreover the Saviour himself commanded us to be imitators of his gentleness, saying : ‘Learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls' (Matth. 11:29).

In his Psalmody and Prayer in the Writings ofEvagrius Ponticus (Oxford , 2005).

Evagrios on Anger

185

And if someone abstains from food and drink but rouses his irascible part to anger by means of evil thoughts, he is like a ship sailing the high seas with a demon for a pilot (Th 13). It is warning Evagrios often repeats, for instance in another passage from Thoughts: Thus it is necessary not to provoke [the irascible part] over either just or unjust things, nor to give an evil sword to the authors of suggestions . I know many people who often do so, and more than is necessary, when they get inflamed with anger over trivial pretexts. Over what, pray tell me, 'do you fall to fighting so quickly' (see Prov. 25: 8) , if indeed you have scorned food, riches and esteem? And why do you feed this dog , if you claim to own nothing? If it barks and attacks people, it is obvious that it has possessions inside and wants to guard them. But I am convinced that such a person is far from pure prayer, for I know that irascibility is the destroyer of such prayer... And why can they not learn from the mysterious and ancient custom that people have of chasing the dogs out of houses during the time of prayer? This is a veiled allusion to the fact that there must be no irascibility present in those who practise prayer. And again, ‘ Their wine is the wrath of dragons' (Deut. 32:33) ; and the Nazirites abstained from wine (see Num. 6: 3). One of the pagan sages declared that ' the gall-bladder and the loin are inedible to the gods' - not knowing, I think, what he was saying : I take the former to be a symbol of anger and the latter to be a symbol of irrational desire (Th 5).

The Health of the Soul : 'Anά0ɛια in Evagrius Ponticus

Monica TOBON, Canterbury

Evagrius Ponticus, as is well known, attaches great importance to åñáßɛia , equating it with the health of the soul and regarding it as a prerequisite for the practice of pure prayer. This paper examines some key components of his understanding of it. Consideration is given to πάθος, μετριοπάθεια , ἐμπάθεια , temptation and άлá¤ɛια itself. The paper concludes with a definition of åñá¤ɛiα as understood by Evagrius.

1. The meaning of πάθος and ἀπάθεια In classical Greek the word лά0оç has a range of meanings which eludes capture by any single English translation . Aristotle defines it as ‘ a quality in respect of which a thing can be altered' or ' an already actualised alteration', noting that it refers in particular to ‘ injurious alterations and movements' and to ' painful injuries'.¹ Sihvola and Engberg-Pederson note that it ' stands for a general notion which covers all accidental and contingent changes that happen to somebody in contrast to what he or she actively does'.2 Konstan points out that it can refer to ‘ a mental activity or phenomenon such as remembering ,' recalls its derivation from the verb лάσуш, meaning ' to suffer' or ' to experience', and adds that both it and the Latin patior derive from a prehistoric stem *pa-, with the basic sense of ' suffer'.4 He also notes that ' insofar as a pathos is a reaction to an impinging event or circumstance, it looks to the outside stimulus to which it responds '. The themes of negatively- construed passivity and changeability in respect of an external influence and directedness to a causative external stimulus are, as we shall see, central to Evagrius ' understanding of лáоç.

1 See Aristotle, Metaphysics 1022b 15-21 , ed . W. Jaeger, Aristotelis Metaphysica (Oxford, 1957), in the following abbreviated to Met., transl. W.D. Ross in: J. Barnes (ed .), The Complete Works ofAristotle II (Princeton, 1974), 1552-1728. 2 J. Sihvola and T. Engberg-Pederson (eds.), The Emotions in Hellenistic Philosophy (Dordrecht, 1998) , viii. 3 D. Konstan, The Emotions ofthe Ancient Greeks: Studies in Aristotle and Classical Literature (Toronto, 2006), 3; see Aristotle, De memoria et reminiscentia 449b 4-7, 24-5 , ed . W.D. Ross , Aristotle. Parva naturalia (Oxford , 1955 ). 4 D. Konstan, Emotions (2006), 3 . 5 D. Konstan, Emotions (2006), 4.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 187-201 . O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

188

M. TOBON

'Алά0ɛια therefore has a basic meaning of immunity to affection , which can acquire different nuances depending on context. Thus Herodotus describes the man favoured by fortune as free of evils (ȧлα¤ǹ≤ кκαк@ν) and the Massagetes as ignorant of the great goods (åлaléɛç kaλãν µɛɣáλæv) of the Persians.8 But in Plato and Aristotle a more technical usage starts to appear. In the Philebus Plato speaks of certain affections (лα0ńμata ) of the body leaving the soul unaffected (aлα0ńs), 10 and denotes ȧ뤤ý a life with no part in either pleasure or pain . " In the Metaphysics Aristotle speaks of a state of åлά0ɛια as one of insusceptibility to change for the worse or to destruction by another thing,¹2 in the Physics he endorses Anaxagoras ' description of voυç as άлα¤ýç,¹³ and in the Topics he affirms that to be àлa0ηs is to be absolutely immune to лάon such as fear and anger.¹4 He does not, however, believe that man should aim for such immunity but rather for μεtpιолά0ɛiα , the moderation of the лά0η under the controlling and refining influence of reason.15 This position, underpinned by the view ‘ that at least some of the лά0η , some of the affections of the soul , are natural and appropriate, even for the wise man',16 was adopted not only by the Peripatetics but by some Middle Platonists.¹ Opposition to it is associated primarily with the Stoics, for whom ȧлá¤ɛια, understood in terms of freedom from the four generic лάoη of pleasure, sadness, desire and fear,18 is the proper goal of man and characterises the sage.

6 Herodotus, Histories 1 : 32.34-5 , ed . P.E. Legrand (Paris , 1932) , in the following abbreviated to Hist. 7 Hist. 1:207.26-7. 8 See M. Spanneut, Apatheia ancienne: Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt (ANRW) II 36.7 (1994), 4641-4717, 4644. ⁹ See Spanneut, Apatheia (1994), 4645. 10 See Plato, Philebus 33d 2-4, ed . J. Burnet, Platonis opera II (Oxford, 1901) , in the following abbreviated to Phil. 11 Phil. 21e 11-12. 12 See Met. 1046a 13-14. See also Met. 1019a 27, Aristotle, Physics 217b 26, ed . W.D. Ross , Aristotelis physica (Oxford, 1950), in the following abbreviated to Phy. 13 See Phy. 256b 25 ; also Aristotle , De Anima 408b 29, 430a 18, ed . W.D. Ross , Aristotle, De anima (Oxford , 1961). 14 See Aristotle , Topics 125b 20-27, ed . W.D. Ross, Aristotelis topica et sophistici elenchi (Oxford, 1958), transl . W.A. Pickard- Cambridge in : J. Barnes (ed .) , The Complete Works ofAristotle I (1974), 167-277. 15 See Aristotle , Nicomachean Ethics 2.6-7, ed. I. Bywater, Aristotelis ethica Nicomachea (Oxford, 1894), in the following abbreviated to NE; Aristotle , Eudemian Ethics 2.3 ; 2.5; 2.10; ed. F. Susemihl , Aristotelis ethica Eudemia (Leipzig, 1884). 16 See M. Frede, The Stoic Doctrine of the Affections of the Soul, in : M. Schofield and G. Striker (eds .) , The Norms ofNature (Cambridge 1996), 93-110, 93. 17 E.g. , Plutarch, Taurus , Albinus ; see J. Dillon, The Middle Platonists (London, 1996), 193, 241 , 302. 18 See, e.g. , Stobaeus 2.88 , 8ff. , H. von Arnim (ed .), Stoicorum veterum fragmenta (Leipzig, 1903-5 ) , III 378 , in the following abbreviated to SVF.

The Health of the Soul : 'Алά0ɛia in Evagrius Ponticus

189

Of course to advocate either ἀπάθεια or μετριοπάθεια is to move away from the idea of лálоç as something that just happens to someone as opposed to something that she does, and in essence the philosophical view is that the лάoη are in principle, if not always in practice, under our control . The bridge from what is actually possible to what is possible in theory is formed by the training of the soul. But while µɛtρionálɛia might appear a realistic enough goal, the Stoics seem to have regarded åлά0ɛia as an ideal rather than a readily attainable state, considering the sage to be rarer than the phoenix of the Ethiopians.19 Evagrius is more optimistic ; for him the question is not whether άлά0ɛια can be achieved , but when, to what extent and for how long.

2. Πάθος

Evagrius does not offer a definition of лάoç, but one can nonetheless be gleaned from his writings. All rational beings,20 according to him, were originally created as rational minds, vóɛç, united to God in contemplation. Due to what he characterises variously as inattentiveness,21 negligence22 or carelessness23 they fell away from the Unity, becoming in the process souls.24 Пάoç reflects this primal movement since it too turns the soul away from God and results from inattentiveness , negligence and carelessness . Because it turns the soul away from God it is contrary to nature and intrinsically vicious , and because the vóɛs were created to contemplate God , to turn away from Him is irrational, not in the sense that it is not an action of reason, but in the sense that it is unnatural to it. Consequently лάoç as understood by Evagrius can be defined as the turning of the soul, contrary to nature, away from God, and as such vicious and irrational.225

19 See Alexander of Aphrodisias , De Fato 199 : 14-22 , SVF III 658. Seneca considers Cato to have been a sage; see Seneca, De Constantia 1 : 2ff. , ed . E. Hermes, Dialogi XII (Leipzig, 1905); Seneca, De Ira 2:32, 3:38 , ed . E. Hermes, Dialogi XII (Leipzig, 1905). 20 I.e. humans, angels and demons. 21 See Evagrius Ponticus, Kephalaia Gnostica 1.49, (CPG 2432), ed. and transl. A. Guillaumont, Les six centuries des 'Kephalaia Gnostica' d'Évagre le Pontique (PO 28.1.134 , Paris, 1958), in the following abbreviated to KG. 22 See KG 3.28. 23 Ibid. 24 As David E. Linge, Leading the Life of Angels : Ascetic Practice and Reflection in the Writings of Evagrius of Pontus: JAAR 68 (2000) 537-68 , 539, notes, Guillaumont's discovery and publication of the unexpurgated version of the Kephalaia Gnostica ‘made it clear that Evagrius was indeed a kind of hyper-Origenist who had advocated every one of the fifteen theological propositions anathematized by the [ Fifth Ecumenical] Council .' See Guillaumont, Kephalaia Gnostica. 25 The idea that лά0оç is an unnatural and irrational motion of the soul had long been a philosophical commonplace. Galen, On the Doctrines of Plato and Hippocrates, 5.2.2, refers to it as ' acknowledged not only by the ancients but also by Chrysippus' ; See P. de Lacy (ed. and

190

M. TOBON

As the primordial fall of the vóɛç suggests, a turning away from God is not the sole prerogative of the лα0ηTIкóv part of the soul . Just as the vous in its primal condition turned away from Him, so too can the ensouled and incarnate vous and consequently the rational part of the soul. Hence Evagrius attributes лάoη to it as well as to the ла0ηtɩкóv part.26 But this raises the question of why the latter, if it is not the only source of лálоç, should be singled out as лаОητɩкóν at all.27 He does not tell us, but a twofold answer presents itself. First, it is the primary source of лá¤оç, as indicated by the fact that it is more closely associated with the body and the external world than is the rational part. Second, the capacity to resist лά0оç is intrinsic to, and resides in, the rational part alone. Consequently the лаОητɩкóν рart depends upon something other than, and outside of, itself to free it from лáðоç and so enable it to act accord28 ing to nature.2

3. Μετριοπάθεια Evagrius speaks occasionally of µɛтρioлά0ɛiɑ ,29 but for him there can be no such thing as a лά0оç which is natural and appropriate and so this cannot be a matter of bringing the лά0η into line with reason. What then is it? trans.), Galen. De placitis Hippocratis et Platonis (Corpus Medicorum Graecorum V 4.2.1-4, Berlin, 1978) . See also, e.g., Andronicus, Peri pathôn 1 , SVF III 391 ; Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 2: 460 , ed . L. Früchtel , O. Stählin, and U. Treu , Clemens Alexandrinus (Berlin, 1960), in the following abbreviated to Strom. 26 For Evagrius the παθητικόν part of the soul comprises the ἐπιθυμητικόν and θύμος. For his attribution of лάoη to the rational part, see Evagrius Ponticus, On Thoughts 18 (CPG 2450), ed . and transl . P. Géhin, C. Guillaumont, and A. Guillaumont, Évagre le Pontique: Sur les pensées (SC 438, Paris, 1998), in the following abbreviated to Th. , and Evagrius Ponticus, Reflections 40, (CPG 2433), ed. J. Muyldermans, Note additionelle à Evagriana : Le Muséon 44 ( 1931) 369-83, in the following abbreviated to Rfl. In the former he says that vainglory, pride, envy and censoriousness 'do not touch any irrational beings' (Th. 18.4-5 ) , and in the latter he distinguishes between thoughts which, deriving from the έл10vµntikóv and Oúµoç , ‘ come to us as animals', those which, deriving from sadness , vainglory and pride ' appear as human beings ' and those which, deriving from acedia , come to us ' both as animals and as human beings ' (Rfl. 40). Thus although as Antoine and Claire Guillaumont, Évagre le Pontique: Traité pratique ou le moine, SC 170 (Paris, 1971), 93f. , n. 3 , speaking of vainglory and pride, note, ' nulle part Evagrius ne les rattache au λoyɩσtikóv', it seems plain that certain ñáðŋ relate to the rational part of the soul, although it is equally plain that Evagrius does not want to say so directly. But as the Guillaumonts also point out in the same place, nor does he explicitly link the other nά0η to the parts of the soul, although for example gluttony and fornication undoubtedly derive from the έñi0vµnTIKÓV. Therefore I see no reason to infer from his silence that the rational part does not have its лάoη . So also D. Brakke, Demons and the Making of the Monk: Spiritual Combat in Early Christianity, (Cambridge, Mass . , 2006) , 53. 27 See, e.g. , Prakt. 49. 74. 78. 84. 28 See Prakt. 86. 29 It occurs only five times in his writings: four in the Scholia on Psalms (Sch. 4 on Ps. 2:12; 8 on Ps. 49:17; 5 on Ps . 93:12 ; 29 on Ps. 118 : 65-6 ) and one in the Scholia on Proverbs (Sch. 3

The Health of the Soul : 'Алά0ɛta in Evagrius Ponticus

191

Since he says so little about it there is not much to go on in answering this question. However, such evidence as there is suggests that he associates it with the process of training the soul to become ȧ뤤ýs. To begin with, in each of his uses of the term µɛτρioлáðɛta it is modified by лаОшν and the resulting expression, μετριοπάθεια παθῶν, equated with instruction, παιδεία , or to instruct, лaidɛúɛiv.30 This formula is also implied by his sole use of the verb μετριοπαθεῖν, where it is associated with παιδεύειν.31 The modification of μετριοπάθεια by παθῶν implies its co-existence with πάθος; it would make no sense to speak of ἀπάθεια παθῶν. Therefore to be μετριοπαθής must be still to have лάon . Second , the process of training the soul to become ȧлα¤ýs consists, as we shall see, in the gradual acquisition of control over the лáη. This means that it is a process of modifying them under the influence of reason: in other words, of acquiring µɛτριoлálɛια лаОãν. There are, therefore, a priori grounds for supposing that for Evagrius μɛτριoлά0εια is the incomplete 32 mastery of the лά0η³2 that constitutes an interim stage on the way to attaining ἀπάθεια. But do the texts support this conclusion? That Evagrius regards μɛτρioлáðɛiɑ and άлά0ɛ¹α as distinct concepts is clear from the fact that in two places he refers to them both.33 One of these references is most naturally read as indicating that μɛтрιолάɛια ла¤ãν relates to the process that leads to ȧлáðɛιɑ : ‘If whoever He instructs He blesses, each of the instructed ones becomes ἀπαθής through Him [...] for παιδεύειν is μετριοπάθεια παθῶν.34 The other situates лаιdɛíα in apposition to knowledge (yvõσiç) 35 which, given the dependence of knowledge upon åñá¤ɛɩɑ , implies that лαιdɛíα and so μɛτριoлá¤ɛiα together pertain to a different stage of the spiritual path than do ȧлάɛια and knowledge. A similar construction and therefore a similar implication appear in a third text.36 The fourth simply states the formula in order to

on Prov. 1 : 2). See Evagrius Ponticus, Scholia on the Psalms (CPG 2455 ) (PG 12 , 1053A-1686A); Evagrius Ponticus, Scholia on Proverbs (CPG 2456), ed. and transl. P. Géhin, Évagre le Pontique: Scholies aux Proverbes (Paris, 1987 ). 30 See P. Géhin, Proverbes (1987), 93, supposes the association of µɛtpɩoñáßɛia with raidɛia, which is also found at Strom . II 8.39.4-5, to have been traditional. 31 See Sch. 3 on Ps. 22:4. 32 See P. Géhin, Proverbes (1987), 93. 33 Sch. 5 on Ps. 93:12; 29 on Ps. 118 :65-6. 34 See Sch. 5 on Ps. 93:12 : Ὃν ἀγαπᾷ, Κύριος παιδεύει, φησὶν ὁ ἀπόστολος. Εἰ δὲ ὅν παιδεύει , μακαρίζει , πᾶς 8 ὁ παιδευόμενος ὑπ ' αὐτοῦ ἀπαθὴς γίνηται, τοῦτον γὰρ καὶ ἀγαπᾷ Κύριος παιδεύειν γάρ ἐστι μετριοπάθεια παθῶν. 35 Sch. 29 on Ps. 118 : 65-6: Γεῦσις δέ ἐστιν ἡ ἀπάθεια ψυχῆς λογικῆς, διὰ τοῦ πνευματικοῦ νόμου προσγινομένη χρηστότης δέ ἐστιν γεῦσις ἀληθὴς τῶν γεγονότων ὑπὸ Θεοῦ· παιδεία δὲ μετριοπάθεια παθῶν· γνῶσις δέ ἐστιν ἡ θεωρία τῆς Τριάδος. 36 Sch. 3 on Prov. 1 : 2 : Καὶ σοφία μέν ἐστιν γνῶσις σωμάτων καὶ ἀσωμάτων καὶ τῆς ἐν τούτοις θεωρουμένης κρίσεως καὶ προνοίας· παιδεία ἐστιν μετριοπάθεια παθῶν περὶ τὸ παθητικὸν ἢ ἄλογον τῆς ψυχῆς μέρος θεωρουμένη .

192

M. TOBON

define παιδείαν,37 while the fifth is ambiguous: Παιδεία is μετριοπάθεια, which tends naturally to result from the лракτιкη . For the лрактɩкη is spiritual teaching purifying the лα0ητɩкóν part of the soul.'38 Since άñá¤ɛiɑ is, for Evagrius, the goal of πρακτική , this could be read as making μετριοπάθεια synonymous with it; however, it can just as easily be taken as supporting the two-stage picture. In total then , out of five texts one gives no information at all, three unequivocally support the two-stage picture and one can be read as supporting it. Therefore the most plausible interpretation of the evidence is that for Evagrius as for Philo, and also Plotinus , μɛτpioлá¤ɛɩɑ is an interim stage on the way to ȧлά¤ɛɩα, a stage wherein the tendency to лáоç is being brought under control but has yet to be fully overcome.39

4. Ἐμπάθεια The idea that vice is to the soul as sickness is to the body and that virtue as the good state of the soul is analogous to bodily health goes back at least to Plato's Gorgias ,40 and is stated in the Republic as follows : 'The work of justice in the soul [is] to set the parts of the soul in their natural relation of governing and being governed by one another, and that of injustice to make them rule or be ruled contrary to nature [...] And so virtue , as it seems , would be a kind of health and beauty and good state of the soul , and vice sickness , deformity and weakness. Evagrius' equation of άлáɛια with the health of the soul42 places him firmly within this tradition and is a Stoic commonplace,43 although there are deep differences between Stoic and Evagrian άлά0ɛια.44 The equation

37 Sch. 8 on Ps. 49:17: Σὺ δὲ ἐμίσησας παιδείαν, κ. τ. ε. Παιδεία ἐστι μετριοπάθεια παθῶν . 38 Sch. 4 on Ps. 2:12 : Παιδεία ἐστι μετριοπάθεια παθῶν· ὅπερ συμβαίνειν πέφυκεν ἐκ τῆς πρακτικῆς· ἥ γε πρακτική ἐστι διδασκαλία πνευματική , τὸ παθητικόν μέρος τῆς ψυχῆς ἐκκαθαίρουσα. 39 This is also the position of Philo, Clement and Plotinus. See See Philo of Alexandria, Allegorical Interpretation 3.129-44, ed. L. Cohn, Philonis Alexandrini opera quae supersunt, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1896) ; Strom. II 8.39.4-5 ; VI 9.74.2-5 ; Plotinus, Enn . I 2.2-6, ed . P. Henry and H.-R. Schwyzer, Plotini opera, vol. 1 (Leiden, 1951 ). 40 See Plato, Gorgias 477a ff. , ed. J. Burnet, Platonis opera, vol. 3 (Oxford , 1903). 41 Plato, Republic 444d 6 -– e 2, ed. J. Burnet, Platonis opera , vol . 4 (Oxford, 1902). D.E. Linge, Life (2000), 563, notes the similarity between the role that Evagrius assigns to άлά0ɛiɑ and the role that Plato assigns to justice at Rep. 433ab. 42 See Evagrius Ponticus, The Monk: A Treatise on the Practical Life 56 (CPG 2430), ed. and transl . A. and C. Guillaumont, Évagre le Pontique: Traité pratique ou le moine (1971) , in the following abbreviated to Prakt. 43 See, e.g. , Galen, PHP 5.2.3-12 ; Stobaeus 2.93.1-13, SVF III 421 . 44 To name but three: whereas Stoic àлáðɛiα, as a concomitant of virtue, is an all- or-nothing affair (See Diogenes Laertius, Lives ofPhilosophers, ed . H.S. Long, Diogenis Laertii vitae philosophorum, Oxford , 1964 , VII 127, in the following abbreviated to Diogenes Laertius), Evagrian άлά0ɛια admits of degrees (See Prakt. 60) . For the Stoics anά0ɛiα, as a property of the sage,

The Health of the Soul : 'Алά0ɛta in Evagrius Ponticus

193

emerges as a consequence of his anthropology. Пά0oç is the turning of the soul away from God and as such vicious and contrary to nature. 'Алά0ɛια as the absence of such movement,45 represents the good state of the soul and so its health. But how does this health, and the sickness which is έµлά0ɛια , manifest in a person's life? Пάoç is naturally aroused by the senses.46 This takes place through the medium of evil thoughts , λoytoμoi.47 Such thoughts fall into eight genera - gluttony, fornication, avarice, sadness, anger, acedia, vainglory and pride48 – and always include as part of their content mental representations of sensible objects.49 The лάoη to which they give rise are the diverse affective states desire, fear, anxiety, terror, sadness, grief, despair, anger, resentment, impatience, irascibility, listlessness and so forth - that characterise ordinary human life.50 A thought will only arouse лάoç if allowed to linger in the vous , but once лάoоç is aroused it binds the vous to sensible objects51 by suffusing our mental representations and in turn our memories of those objects, giving rise to έμ뤤ηç mental representations52 and έµл¤¤ýç memories53 and so to the raw represents the highest possible human attainment, whereas for Evagrius it is merely a stage on the path to salvation. The Evagrian άлα0ηç experiences love (åɣáлη), which is not among the Stoic εiñá0ɛiai (See Prakt. Prol. 49-50, Diogenes Laertius 7.116) . 45 The relationship between åлά0ɛtα and immovability is discussed by M.S.B. Rasmussen, Like a Rock or like God ? The Concept of apatheia in the Monastic Theology of Evagrius of Pontus: ST 59 (2005 ) 147-62 , 153-5. 46 See Prakt. 38. 47 Evagrius follows Origen in assigning this role to the evil thoughts referred to at Matth. 15:19 and Mark 7:21 ; see Origen , Commentary on Matthew 11.15, ed R. Girod , Origène. Commentaire sur l'évangile selon Matthieu , vol. 1 (SC 162 , Paris, 1970); De principiis 3.2.4 , ed. and transl. H. Görgemanns and H. Karpp, Origenes. Vier Bücher von den Prinzipien (Darmstadt, 1985) . See also R. Sorabji, Emotion and Peace of Mind: From Stoic Agitation to Christian Temptation (Oxford, 2000), 346. 48 See Prakt. 6. The eightfold classification is not the only system employed by Evagrius, nor is it fully comprehensive, omitting as it does self-love which at Rfl. 53 he declares to be ' first of all [the thoughts] after which come the eight' ; wandering and insensitivity, both of which have chapters devoted to them in Th., and jealousy, which has a chapter devoted to it in Evagrius Ponticus, On the Vices opposed to the Virtues (CPG 2448) , complete text Lavra г93, fols. 295v298r; (PG 79, 1140B - 1144D). It is, however, the principal one and the most familiar, as well as that which provides the structure for several of his treatises . 49 See Th. 2.1-2. 50 Evagrius offers pithy descriptions of the лάη associated with the eight thoughts at Prakt. 7-14. More detail can be found in Evagrius Ponticus, Antirrhêtikos against the Eight Thoughts. Syriac: W. Frankenberg, Euagrios Ponticus, Abhandlungen der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse, new series, 13.2 (Berlin , 1912), 554-6. I am grateful to R. Sinkewicz and D. Brakke for making their working translations of this text available to me. 51 See Th. 40.4. 52 See Evagrius Ponticus, Chapters on Prayer 4, 53 , 54, 71 (CPG 2452) (PG 79, 1165-1200), in the following abbreviated to Pry.; Rfl. 7; Sch. 93 on Prov. 7:12 ; 166 on Prov. 17:23 ; 344 on Prov. 28:7. 53 See Prakt. 34.

194

M. TOBON

material for more evil thoughts. In this way the sensible world, the senses and лáðоç effectively work together to entangle the vouc with material things.54 At the same time the soul is susceptible to the arousal of лáðоç because of that tendency of the vous to inattentiveness which led to its primordial fall. The vouc which is entangled with the sensible world is infected thereby with its turbulence. ' Еµлα◊йç mental representations drag it and spin it around, 56 preventing it from achieving a stable state. " It is liable to be seized by anger, dragged about by thoughts of worry,57 strangled by the noonday demon58 or carried away into blasphemy,59 and has a strong tendency to be plundered by memory at the time of prayer.60 It is subject to wandering,61 easily moved , and has difficulty checking forbidden fantasies.62 Пάoç thickens,63 darkens64 and defiles65 it . Thus Evagrius' descriptions of έµлά0ɛiα graphically capture the way in which лáоç involves the directedness of the vous towards a causative external stimulus in respect of which it is passive and changeable , and the deleterious consequences of this for it.

5. Temptation Whether or not the evil thoughts , which are almost invariably suggested by 66 demons, trouble the soul is not up to us (έ ' ǹµìv).67 But it is up to us whether or not we allow them to linger and arouse лάon.68 Consequently at the heart of the quest for åлά¤¤¹α is the struggle against the thoughts. Suppose, for example, the face of a person who has injured the monk should arise in his awareness . This would be proof of the approach of the thought of

See Pry. 70. Pry. 71. Prakt. 11. Th . 6. Prakt. 36. Prakt. 43, 46. Pry. 44. Prakt. 15 . Prakt. 48. See, e.g., Pry. 50. See, e.g. , Prakt. 23; 74. See, e.g., Prakt. 23. 66 Evil thoughts can however enter the vouc independently of the demons; See, e.g., Prakt. 30. 67 This expression , used by Aristotle in NE 3.3 and 5, became a standard term in later Stoic philosophy (e.g. Epictetus Discourses 1.1 ; Epictetus, Enchiridion 1.2 , both ed. H. Schenkl , Epicteti dissertationes ab Arriano digestae, Leipzig, 1916). See S. Bobzien, Stoic Conceptions of Freedom and their relation to Ethics , in : R. Sorabji (ed.), Aristotle and After (Bulletin ofthe Institute ofClassical Studies suppl . 68 , 1997 ) , 71-89, 72 , n . 5 , 6 and 9 ; A. and C. Guillaumont, Évagre le Pontique: Traité pratique ou le moine ( 1971) , 508 . 68 See Prakt. 6. 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

The Health of the Soul: 'Алά0ɛia in Evagrius Ponticus

195

resentment.69 If he is sufficiently vigilant he will immediately dismiss it, but if not if, that is, he is inattentive, negligent or careless - he will unwittingly allow it to linger and thereby gain purchase on his emotions. This will result in a reawakening of the лά0оç associated with it; before he knows what is happening he will be brooding once more upon the injury and reaffirming his hostile feelings toward its perpetrator. At first sight Evagrius' aetiology of лά0оç is noteworthy for its cognitive bias: first there is an evil thought, then if that thought is allowed to linger it arouses лάoоç. However, closer examination reveals that things are not this simple, and that in fact the capacity of the thoughts to arouse лά0оç derives from their association with mental representations and memories already imbued with it. These may at first simply herald the thought, but they will also be at least partly constitutive of it. So the thought in the above example is heralded by the mental image – that is, the the έµл¤¤йç memory constituted by the έμлαoη mental representation of the face, and will then include this image as part of its content, along with the memory of the injury and whatever further images and propositional content these evoke. Accordingly, it derives its power to arouse resentment from the fact that resentment is already associated with its content. And this is just what we would expect: should the face of someone whom I love arise in my vous then I will feel stirrings of love , while the face of someone towards whom I feel neutral will leave me unmoved. So thoughts can be charged with лά0оç in virtue of the memories or images that can partly constitute them. But there are other ways too in which they can carry an affective charge. For example, thoughts of fornication are intrinsically pleasurable ,70 nor need we suppose Evagrius immune to anger's ability to be, as Homer says, sweeter than the dripping of honey.71 Thus in reality the line between thought and лά0оç is far from clear, as Evagrius acknowledges when he advises that one should pay attention to whether the mental representation sets the лάoη in motion or vice versa.72 The thoughts, then, come already charged with лά0оç and in fact depend upon this to kindle it anew. But how can this be reconciled with Evagrius' claim that it is only if we allow them to linger that they arouse лά0оç ? Is it not the case that to experience an evil thought is already to experience its associated лάoоç ? The answer is that Evagrius does not regard лά¤оç as an all- or-nothing affair. He distinguishes between the resentment that attaches to the memory of a face when first it arises into consciousness , or the pleasure that attaches to

69 See Th. 2.5-7. 70 See Evagrius Ponticus, To Eulogius: On the Confession of Thoughts and Counsel in their Regard (CPG 2447), 21.22. Long recension Lavra F 93, in: R. Sinkewicz, Evagrius of Pontus: The Greek Ascetic Corpus (Oxford, 2003), 310-33; short recension PG 79, 1093D- 1140A. 71 Homer, Iliad 18.109-10, ed . M.L. West, Homerus Ilias (Leipzig, 2000). 72 See Prakt. 37.

196

M. TOBON

the first stirrings of thoughts of fornication , and the лά0оç that will result if either is allowed to develop. But this distinction reflects not a metaphysical discontinuity between two states so much as the practical possibility of arresting the progress of one into the other.73 That thoughts are charged with лáоç , and to such an extent that it can be hard to tell which of the two comes first, makes life far more difficult for the person trying to resist them. Temptation is not a purely intellectual matter wherein from a vantage point of detached neutrality a thought can be observed and the decision made whether or not to entertain it. Rather, to be tempted is already to be inclined toward the content of the temptation : no inclination, no temptation. But there are three reasons why Evagrius would want to emphasise the priority of the cognitive aspect of the thoughts . First, he thereby emphasises the possibility of overcoming them. For him the vouç is in principle capable of vanquishing any temptation so long as it exercises sufficient vigilance to recognise when it is being tempted and sufficient self-discipline to deny hospitality to the tempting thought. This is why he says that it is up to us whether or not we allow an evil thought to linger and arousе лά0оç. Second, the exercise of reason in the form of discernment is a powerful means not only of identifying a particular demon but of disarming it.74 As Linge notes, for Evagrius ‘ [d] etached observation of one's mental processes enables one to remain tranquil and focused, so that the passions are no longer aroused and one is no longer "drawn into" one's thoughts as they arise. The ascetic who cultivates the art of discern975 ment is thus learning to break the affective power of his mental content.' Third, by emphasising the cognitive aspect of the thoughts Evagrius teaches the monk to identify himself with his vouc and so assume his natural ascendancy over the лаητikóv part of his soul.76 The intimate relationship which , in our fallen state, obtains between cognition and лά0оç is not the only reason why resisting temptation is less straightforward than Praktikos 6 might at first sight make it seem . Also at issue is the monk's disposition to лά0оç. Аs Evagrius well knows, a person's ability to recognise that he is being tempted and to take appropriate countermeasures

73 In this sense R. Sorabji, Emotions (2000), 359ff., is correct to say that Evagrius blurs the Stoic distinction between thoughts and first movements. Constraints of space preclude discussion of this topic here, but in brief, Evagrius would presumably respond that in doing so he adheres more closely to the phenomena in that rigorous introspection reveals such involuntary arousals to be not something other than лάog but rather the thin end of the wedge. In any case there is no doubt that he attributes as great a role to assent in preventing the escalation into pathos as do the Stoics. 74 See Antony D. Rich, Discernment in the Desert Fathers : Atáкpiors in the Life and Thought ofEarly Egyptian Monasticism ( Milton Keynes, 2007 ), 41 : ' Evagrius rarely uses the diάkpiois word group, but the discernment of spirits , λoytoμoi and of spiritual and practical matters is at the centre of his teaching, particularly in such works as the Praktikos.' 75 D.E. Linge, Life (2000), 556. 76 See D.E. Linge, Life (2000), 545.

The Health of the Soul : 'Алά0ɛiα in Evagrius Ponticus

197

depends, as indeed does his resolve to resist that particular temptation, largely upon his psychological state, or as Evagrius would say the state of his soul, at the time. This in turn will depend partly upon present circumstances and recent antecedents, so for example he warns that the Oúμoç is very rapidly tempted when it has been troubled the night before and that the έл10νμητikóv readily welcomes thoughts of fornication when it has been agitated in the fantasies of sleep." But it will be influenced too by his general habits. So for example he must never take his fill of bread and water lest he render himself vulnerable to shameful fantasies,78 nor abandon his cell during times of temptation, since fleeing and circumventing such struggles teaches the vous to be unskilled, cowardly and evasive.79 These examples show the necessity of the virtues to the struggle against temptation. By cultivating, among others, patience, mercy, compassion and gentleness as proof against anger;80 abstinence against gluttony and fornication³¹ and perseverance against acedia,82 the monk trains the лаÐηtiкóν part of his soul to act according to nature, thereby improving its health and reducing his disposition to лáloç. The more he establishes the virtues within himself,83 the less susceptible he will be to temptation, but also the more capable of recognising and resisting it when it does occur. Thus the virtues purify the soul. But they also remain with her, constitutive of άлά0ɛia, once she has 84 been purified.8

6. Απάθεια

When the monk reaches the harbour of åлά0ɛιɑ85 what does it mean for him? Evagrius likens the effect upon the vouç of its attainment to the establishment of domestic order which frees a householder to travel away from home : once order is established in the лаoητɩкóν part of the soul the vouc becomes free to make ‘ that noble emigration and arrive in the land of the incorporeals '.86 This liberation of the vouc results from the loosening of its bonds to the sensible world and finds expression in a new-found immunity to temptation, an

77 See Th. 27. 78 Ibid . 79 See Prakt. 28. 80 See, e.g., Prakt. 15, 20. 81 See, e.g., Prakt. 15. Also Evagrius Ponticus, On the Eight Thoughts (CPG 2451), long recension Lavra I 93, fols. 308r-315v ; short recension PG 79, 1145D - 1164D, 1.4, 6, 33 ; 2.1 , in the following abbreviated to 8Th. 82 See, e.g., Prakt. 28. 83 See Prakt. 70. 84 See Prakt. 85; Sch. 293 on Prov. 24:31 . 85 See Prakt. 91. 86 See Prakt. 61.

198

M. TOBON

immunity which leads Evagrius to liken åлά0ɛia to a protective wall.87 As a consequence, where previously it was tossed around and dragged hither and thither by лά0оç, it now becomes tranquil88 and joyful89 and ceases to fear the thoughts.90 Turbulence is replaced by a stability underwritten by increasing loss of awareness of the ла0ητɩкóv part of the soul.91 Emancipated from the distracting and destabilising effects of лά0о the vous, which is naturally constituted for contemplation and prayer⁹2 and is in its essence knowledge- seeking,93 can start to realise its own powers.94 Where previously the monk's view of the world was filtered through the distorting lens of έμлά0ɛiα, he can now ' experience things as they are and not simply as they affect [him] by advancing or thwarting [ his] desires and interests.95 For this reason ȧñá¤ɛiα is a prerequisite for the capacity for disinterested love, hence 96 Evagrius ' declaration that love (ayάлŋ ) is the daughter of åñá¤ɛia .” And love is in turn the doorway to natural contemplation, from which follow theology and ultimate blessedness.97 Thus we come to the central reason for the importance Evagrius attaches to άлά0ɛιά; its relationship to pure prayer, which he equates with theology⁹8 and describes as an ἕξις ἀπαθής, which by means of a supreme love (ἔρως) carries off to the intelligible height the spiritual vous beloved of wisdom.'99 'Алά0ɛια is not a sufficient condition for the correct practice of prayer; he warns that the monk who has attained it has not therefore found true prayer as well since it is possible to be distracted by simple intellections100 and so be far from God.101 But it is a necessary condition ; just as a child cannot be fed with102 out milk, " so without åлά0ɛiα the heart cannot be raised to the heights.103

87 See Sch. 12 on Prov. 1:20 ; 293 on Prov. 24:31 ; 343 on Prov. 28 :4; KG 5.82; 8Th . 5.13. 88 See, e.g. , Prakt. 64; Rfl. 3. 89 I agree with M.S.B. Rasmussen, Apatheia (2005) , 150 , that it is άлά0ɛtα that Evagrius describes at Prakt. 12.24-5. 90 See Sch. 17 on Prov. 1:33. 91 Prakt. 66. 92 See Prakt. 49; 86. 93 See KG 1.3. 94 See Prakt. 82. 95 See D.E. Linge, Life (2000) , 564. 96 See Prakt. Prol . 49-50 ; Prakt. 81 . 97 See Prakt. Prol . 49-51. 98 See Pry. 60. 99 See Pry. 52. 100 That is, intellections concerned with the λóyou of created beings and so pertaining to natural contemplation ; See R. Sinkewicz , Evagrius (2003), 280, n.39. 101 See Pry. 55. 102 See Heb. 5: 12-4; 1Cor. 3 : 1-3. 103 See Evagrius Ponticus, To Monks in Monasteries and Communities 66 (CPG 2435), ed. H. Gressmann, Nonnenspiegel und Mönchsspiegel des Euagrios Pontikos : Texte und Untersuchungen 39 ( 1913) 152-65.

The Health of the Soul: 'Алά0ɛia in Evagrius Ponticus

199

It is άлá¤ɛiα that forms the basis upon which the vous can ascend towards God , 104 and so taste once again the knowledge of Him in which it was created and to which it will ultimately return. That attainment of άлά0ɛια is a gradual process is evident from the distinction Evagrius makes between perfect and imperfect åлά0ɛiα.105 But what exactly do these comprise? Imperfect ȧлά0ɛia, he tells us in the Praktikos,106 refers to the relative strength of the demon still fighting against the soul . So it evidently results from victory over some, but not all, of the demons, and can be understood as loosening of the bonds of the vouç to the objects of one or more of the thoughts . Perfect åлά¤ɛɩα, he says in the same place, results from victory over all the demons that oppose the practical life.107 So since åлáðɛiα is the blossom of the practical life,108 which in turn is the spiritual method for purifying the лaðητɩкóν part of the soul , 109 it seems clear that it is in victory over the demons associated with the latter that perfect àлά0ɛia consists. However, in the second chapter of the Gnostikos Evagrius defines the лрактιкóс as he who has only acquired åлá¤ɛια of the лаðητɩкóν part of the soul, 110 111 implying that άлά0ɛια of the rational part must now be acquired,¹¹¹ and this is what we would expect from the inclusion, in Praktikos 6, of vainglory and pride among the thoughts that can arouse лά0оç. So what is going on? What he is doing, I suggest, is defining perfect άлά0ɛiα in the Praktikos relative to the practical life, the subject of that treatise, such that from its standpoint perfect ȧлά0ɛια results from victory over all the demons that attack the лаðηɩɩкóν part of the soul. That this is the whole story is hinted at by the definition, in the same chapter, of imperfect aлά0ɛια, and hints are also to be found in the warnings elsewhere in the Praktikos that the demons of vainglory

See Pry. 35. See Prakt. 60. Ibid. Ibid . See Prakt. 81. See Prakt. 78 ; Sch . 4 on Ps. 2:12. To See Evagrius Ponticus , Gnostikos 2: Πρακτικός μέν ἐστιν ὁ τὸ παθητικὸν μέρος τῆς ψυχῆς μόνον ἀπαθὲς κεκτημένος. 111 A. and C. Guillaumont, Évagre le Pontique: Le gnostique, SC 356 (Paris, 1989) , 76 and 90, note that μóvov is present only in the Greek text and not in any of the other versions, but argue that it should be retained ' car il exprime une nuance importante: la pratique vise seulement à acquérir l'impassibilité , que l'entrée dans la vie gnostique suppose acquise.' Thus they do not draw the implication that I do. Neither does J. Driscoll, Steps to Spiritual Perfection (Mahwah, New Jersey, 2005) , 28 , who reads this chapter as indicating just that άñáßɛɩɑ is ‘only a partial accomplishment in the path of spiritual progress'. But to me this reading which, while not depending upon the inclusion of µóvov derives emphasis from it, is the most obvious interpretation of the evidence adduced in the present paper, and also of the fact that Gnostikos 2 specifies that it is åñá¤ɛɩɑ of the лaðηtiкóv part of the soul which the лрактikóg has achieved ; if this were the only sort of åлá¤ɛiɑ why would this need specifying? 104 105 106 107 108 109

200

M. TOBON

and pride come with the destruction of the other demons.112 But it is all that the monk whose focus is upon the practical life needs to know. When, however, having purified the лаОητɩкóν part of his soul he progresses to the Gnostikos, he immediately finds that he must now achieve åлά0ɛiα of the rational part too. Lest he wonder why he was told one thing before and another now, the first chapter informs him that the лрактιкоί understand practical λóyou but the gnostics see gnostic things.113 And as all this sinks in, he might find himself experiencing a blow to feelings, hitherto unacknowledged, of vainglory and/or pride; he has not, after all, achieved perfect àлáðɛiα yet ! Imperfect άлά0ɛia is clearly available during earthly life. But what about perfect ȧлá¤ɛia ? I see no reason to suppose that it cannot be attained during earthly life, 114 nor, pace Rasmussen, that in earthly life it can only be attained during the practice of undisturbed prayer and therefore cannot be permanent during that life.115 However, its permanence can never be proved and so can never be assumed , and Evagrius warns that ' those who have been deemed worthy of åлá¤ɛιa ' remain vulnerable to the ' spite of the devil'116 whereby they can fall back into έµлά0ɛια . Ultimately though perfect άлά0ɛia will be permanent, whether in earthly life or not, because for the лά0η there will one day be complete destruction,118 which in turn means that imperfect άлά0εια must necessarily be impermanent.119

7. Conclusion

We have seen that for Evagrius лά0оç is the soul's movement contrary to nature, a movement which reflects the primordial turning of the vous away from contemplation of God. As such it is irrational and vicious . Each of the three parts of the soul has its πάθη. He regards μετριοπάθεια as an interim stage on the way to ἀπάθεια, wherein the soul's tendency to лά0оç is being brought under the control of reason but has yet to be fully overcome. For this reason he equates it with лaidɛia.

112 See Prakt. 31, 57. 113 See Evagrius Ponticus, Gnostikos 1 , ed. and transl. A. and C. Guillaumont, Le gnostique (1989). 114 Hence I am in agreement with G. Bunge, Evagrios Pontikos: Briefe aus der Wüste (Trier, 1985), 125; D.E. Linge, Life (2000), 563, and M.S.B. Rasmussen , Apatheia (2005) , 159, pace Guillaumont, Gnostique (1989), 27. 115 See M.S.B. Rasmussen , Apatheia (2005) , 160 . 116 See The Wisdom of Solomon 2:24. 117 Evagrius Ponticus, Sch. 46 on Eccl. 6: 1-6 (CPG 2458), ed. and transl . P. Géhin, Évagre le Pontique: Scholies a L'Ecclésiaste, SC 397 (Paris, 1993) . 118 See Prakt. 87. 119 Pace M.S.B. Rasmussen, Apatheia (2005 ) , 159.

The Health of the Soul : 'Алά0ɛta in Evagrius Ponticus

201

His understanding of έµñá¤ɛɩa incorporates the themes, traditionally associated with лάos, of negatively- construed directedness to a causative external influence and passivity and changeability in respect of it. The έµла¤ǹs võõs bound to, and so entangled with, the sensible world by лáоç. 'Алά0ɛια loosens these bonds and stabilises the vouc, enabling it to engage

in the contemplation and prayer for which it was created. It can be either imperfect or perfect, reflecting the gradual nature of its attainment, and both can be attained during earthly life. Whereas imperfect àлά0ɛiα is necessarily temporary, perfect ȧлά0ɛia eventually becomes permanent. 'Алά0ɛια as understood by Evagrius can now be defined. It is a disposition of the soul to be free of лά0оç in all of her three parts, which both results from and constitutes the action according to the nature of each. As such it is her health. It is characterised by lack of attachment to the sensible world, whether experienced through thoughts, memories, dreams or objects. The ȧлαoηç soul is stable, tranquil and joyous. Imperfect àлá0ɛia is necessarily temporary; perfect ȧлáðɛια can be either temporary or permanent.

Discerning Evagrius Ponticus Discerning: Διάκρισις in the Works of Evagrius

Antony D. RICH, London

In his fourth letter Evagrius says that with diάкpiσię (discernment) the monk is able to judge thoughts, distinguishing between the holy and profane, pure and impure; he stresses that every effort, using the practical disciplines, should be made to gain this essential gift. ' One might wonder, then, why he so rarely uses the word diáкpioiç or its cognates when he clearly regards the gift and skill of diákρioiç as so important. The high value Evagrius places upon diákpiσis is reflected in the Apophthegmata Patrum, in which the centrality of diáкpiσię to monastic life and thought can be demonstrated.2 Five sayings in the Greek Systematic Collection's diákρious section are attributed to Evagrius in their Latin parallels ,³ three of them drawn from his Praktikos.4 These support the claims made elsewhere for his considerable understanding of the gift. Yet even in these the diάkpiσis word group does not appear; they are examples rather than descriptions of Stákpioig. These five apophthegms do, however, refer to a number of the key Evagrian themes. The first emphasises that the virtues should be acquired by working hard at the practical disciplines rather than through intellectual endeavour. The humility implicit in this apophthegm is reflected in the next, which stresses the value of silence and respect before one's teacher and a willingness to learn and obey. The redactor paired this saying with another which lists some of the practical disciplines Evagrius discusses elsewhere (e.g. prayer, work and psalmody) and stresses the need to use them at the appropriate time and in proper measure if they are to be effective in overcoming the passions ; e.g. anger. Although this indicates that the proper use of the practical disciplines requires diákpioic and suggests diáкpioiç of thoughts , there is no explicit reference to the latter. The final pair of sayings are the last apophthegms in the Greek Systematic Collection's section on diάкplots and so arguably represent

Letter 4.4-5; C. Guillaumont , Fragments grecs inédits d'Evagre le Pontique, in: J. Dummer (ed.), Texte und Textkritik, TU 133 (Berlin, 1987), 219-20. 2 A.D. Rich, Discernment in the Desert Fathers: Aiákpiσis in the Life and Thought ofEarly Egyptian Monasticism (Milton Keynes, 2007). 3 Greek Systematic Collection (GSC) 10.7; 10.24; 10.25 ; 10.193 ; 10.194 (SC 474, 18, 28-30, 134) . 4 GSC 10.25 = Praktikos 15 ; GSC 10.193 = Praktikos 91 ; GSC 10.194 = Praktikos 95.

Studia Patristica XLVII , 203-208. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

204

A.D. RICH

its climax or summary. The importance of the first of these is further indicated 5 by its appearance three times in this collection , introducing the section on the process towards perfection and concluding those on diάêpiσic and love, suggesting that monastic progression , measured discipline and love could only be achieved using diákpiσiç. It concerns regulation of the practical disciplines (specifically diet), this time in combination with love, which together bring the monk to ȧлά0ɛta (impassibility) . The final apophthegm emphasises dispossession and abandonment in that the only father Evagrius would acknowledge is his immortal God. Thus, far from being a skill and gift that only has implications for the outward and practical life , diáкpioiç enables the monk to assimilate doctrinal truth at the deepest level . That this final pair of sayings appears also at the start of both the Latin and Greek Systematic Collections suggests that the redactors considered Evagrius' understanding of Stáкpiσiç to represent well how this foundational skill in the monastic life was to be regarded. Although these apophthegms do not mention Evagrius' skill in the diákpiσis of thoughts or spirits, the early histories praise his ability in this . Palladius says he was πνευματοφόρος καὶ διακριτικός adding that he was granted κατηξιώθη χαρίσματος γνώσεως καὶ σοφίας καὶ διακρίσεως πνευμάτων by purifying his vouc (mind) .7 Rufinus, in his Latin version of the Historia Monachorum, expands on the Greek version's praise of Evagrius' skill in diάкptσts of thoughts, commenting that tanta concessa est gratia discernendorum spirituum , et purgandarum ... cogitationum .? Sozomen similarly extols his ability diakρivaι τοὺς πρὸς ἀρετὴν καὶ κακίαν ἄγοντας λογισμούς.10 Thus the later assessment of Evagrius was that he had acquired great skill in diάкptois, which one would expect to be reflected in his written works, yet this is rarely explicitly stated. Although Evagrius only uses the diάкpiσic word group rarely, these references do indicate that he placed a high value on diáкpiois. In On Thoughts he relates the pursuit of yvooiç diαкpiσɛoç (' knowledge of discernment ' ) to the acquisition of wisdom in James 1 : 5f. , replacing the word ' wisdom ' with ' knowledge' in the reference . " Given that elsewhere he equates wisdom with the Holy Spirit¹² and that here the pursuit of yvõσiç diakρiσɛwg relates to achieving 5 GSC 1.4; 10.193 ; 17.35 (SC 387, 102 ; SC 474, 134; SC 498 , 36). 6 'Inspired and discerning'; Palladius, Historia Lausiaca (HL) 11.5 ; G.J.M. Bartelink (ed.), Palladio: La storia Lausiaca (Verona, 2001 ), 54. 7 'He was counted worthy of the gift of knowledge, wisdom and discernment of spirits' ; HL 38.10 (Bartelink, Palladio, 200). 8 Historia monachorum (HM) 20.15 ; A.-J. Festugière (ed .) , Historia Monachorum in Aegypto (Brussels, 1971), 123. 9 'He had been given such grace in the discerning of spirits and purging of thoughts'; HM 27 (PL 21 , 449A). 10 To discern thoughts relating to virtue and vice'; Sozomen, HE VI 30.6 (GCS 50, 285) . 11 On Thoughts 26 (SC 438 , 244-46). 12 Letter to Melania 7; W. Frankenberg, Euagrius Ponticus (Berlin, 1912), 613.

Discerning Evagrius Ponticus Discerning: Atáкplots in the Works of Evagrius

205

the goals of ȧлά0ɛια and knowledge of God, diáкpiσiç emerges as a spiritual gift integral to the process and aims of the monastic life. This impression is supported by two scholia on Job 12:11 , recently identified by Casiday, in which Stáκplot is said to be required for discerning knowledge of God as well as intellectual and perceptible things.13 Evagrius reflects this in the Kephalaia Gnostica¹4 where he also says that the vous requires a spiritual sense to distinguish spiritual things ! 5 and to perceive the meaning hidden behind objects.16 For Evagrius, then, diáкpiσis operating in the vous facilitates progression towards knowledge of God. An important aspect of this progression is the discernment and examination

of thoughts so that they can be purified. " In To Eulogios, Evagrius explains that this requires the gift of diákplog18 which, in On Prayer, he says needs to be exercised with watchfulness; 19 this suggests that diάkpiσic needs to be exercised constantly. Commenting on Proverbs 31 : 9 (LXX) concerning the discernment of the poor and weak, Evagrius equates poverty with lack of knowledge and weakness with impurity,20 suggesting that he understands that this watchful use of diákpioic helps the monk towards knowledge and purity. Furthermore, this ability to discern thoughts and the activity of demons is identified , in a central and pivotal chapter of the Praktikos, to be a skill gained from Christ.21 Thus for Evagrius progression towards inward purity and knowledge of God require the gift of diákρiσiç given by Christ. However, Evagrius does not concentrate solely on the interior life as, for example, the apophthegms discussed above demonstrate. He explains that God's love of mercy and judgment in Psalm 32: 5 (LXX) refers to someone who is merciful and diaкρiτiкóç (discerning) .22 In To Eulogios he says that words heard and spoken need also to be weighed with diάкpioι5,23 not least because God discerns human speech and one must give account for one's words on the day ofjudgment, as he explains in his comments on Ecclesiastes 3:18 (LXX) .24 This use of measured speech is also evident in his warning not to disclose the mysteries of Scripture indiscriminately (adiaкpitwg).25 The Antirrhetikos provides

13 Scholia 16-17 on Job 12:11 ; A. M. Casiday, Evagrius Ponticus (Abingdon , 2006), 126. 14 Kephalaia Gnostica (KG) 5.58 ; 5.59 ; 6.54 ( PO 28.1 , 161,239). 15 KG 1.33 (PO 28.1, 33). 16 KG 2.36 ( PO 28.1 , 75-77). 17 To Eulogios 12 (PG 79, 1108D). 18 Ibid. 24 (PG 79, 1125B). 19 On Prayer 147 (PG 79, 1197D). 20 Scholion 298 on Prov. 31 :9 (SC 340, 390). 21 Praktikos 50 (SC 171 , 614-616). 22 Scholion 4 on Ps. 32 : 5 (PG 12, 1304D) . 23 To Eulogios 21 (PG 79, 1120D). 24 Scholion 20 on Eccles. 3:18 (SC 397, 90). 25 Scholion 4 on Ps. 111 : 5 ( PG 12 , 1572A) ; see Gnostikos 24 (SC 356, 126).

206

A.D. RICH

ample evidence of Evagrius' discerning use of scriptural passages to counter evil thoughts. It is significant, therefore, that his fourth letter, stressing that it is essential to acquire diáкplots, is a covering letter introducing the Antirrhetikos and its purpose.26 The use of diákpiσiç for interpreting Scripture is also evident in his notes on Psalm 15: 9 (LXX) concerning the vous discerning (Siakρivεi) the passages he has cited from Job (Job 2:10 ; 10:11 ) .27 These passages and the associated remarks suggest that not only does he believe dtákρiois is necessary for understanding the deeper meaning of Scripture, but also that it is associated with the virtues, knowledge and the activity of the Holy Spirit.28 Thus Evagrius would appear to understand that diάкpiσiç is required for the interpretation, application and teaching of Scripture, the weighing of words and speaking them, and having a manner of life approved by God. In other words , diάkpiσic is an essential skill in the maintenance of both the interior and exterior life. Reading Evagrius' works with diάkpɩɩ in mind, it becomes evident that its use underlies much if not all he says about the practical disciplines, overcoming evil thoughts and achieving the goals of άлά0ɛia and knowledge of God. However, despite his stress in his fourth letter on diάkpiσiç being essential , developed through using the practical disciplines and used for discerning good and bad thoughts , the question as to why he does not discuss diákpioi remains. An answer may lie in his concern for his readers to discover or discern hidden matters . For example, at the start of his trilogy, in the prologue to the Praktikos, he says that he has deliberately made some things obscure ,29 but that as his readers progress through the three books and become more experienced monks, his teaching will become clear. At the end of the Kephalaia Gnostica he then reminds them to scrutinise his words . Such a progression is also found in the structure of other works , such as To Monks and On Prayer, and this is consistent with his understanding that as ascetics become more experienced they are increasingly able to discern deeper spiritual matters. A similar sense of progression and reluctance to express his ideas openly is found in his Great Letter, often identified as the Letter to Melania.30 Here he makes the act of writing and reading a letter a metaphor for reading of creation and discerning the meaning behind it . Through a discerning reading of creation one becomes more aware both of God's love , power and wisdom, and of what lies hidden behind creation.31 However, some move beyond this, no longer needing creation

26 Letter 4.1 (Frankenberg, Euagrius, 569). 27 Scholion 4 on Ps. 15 : 9 (PG 12 , 1216A). 28 Scholion 1 on Ps. 15 : 1-2 (PG 12 , 1209D) and scholia 5-6 on Ps. 15 : 9 (PG 12 , 1216A-B). 29 Praktikos, prol. 9 (SC 171 , 492-94) . 30 Letter to Melania 17 (Frankenberg, Euagrius, 617 ); G. Vitestam, Seconde partie du traité qui passe sous le nom de 'La grande lettre d'Évagre le Pontique à Mélanie l'Ancienne' (Lund, 1964), 6. 31 Ibid. 6; 14 (Frankenberg, Euagrius, 613, 615).

Discerning Evagrius Ponticus Discerning : Atáкpiσis in the Works of Evagrius

207

as an intermediary but hearing more directly from God.32 For Evagrius Siάκpiσis develops with advancement in the ascetic life and facilitates understanding of meanings hidden behind both his writings and creation. Evagrius' vision of gaining a unified knowledge of all things, expressed at the end of his Great Letter,33 reflects his ultimate goal of knowledge of and union with God. The closeness of that relationship is seen in his description of pure, constant, wordless and imageless prayer in which one becomes more fully aware of God and one's truest self. One might suppose that diákρiσic cannot be used here, since it appears to be a skill that requires thought. However, for Evagrius Ἡ προσευχή , ὁμιλία ἐστὶ νοῦ πρὸς Θεόν34 and since διάκρισις operates within the vous, the intuitive aspect of human beings, it is probable that diάkplois is intended to become an increasingly intuitive ability. This impression is supported by the Kephalaia Gnostica where Evagrius says that a seeing rather than a debating soul is required for knowledge of God.35 Thus the awareness of God and self gained in pure prayer can be said to be more fully realised by using diάкpiσiç intuitively. Nevertheless, diáкpiσiç is also a skill that can be and needs to be learned through example, experience and practice. Indeed , in the Historia Monachorum it is noted that Evagrius himself gained his skill in diάkpiσis of thoughts through experience.36 He probably learned about diάkpiσiç as a disciple from the example provided by the two Macarii ; certainly Palladius notes Macarius the Egyptian's skill in diάêpiσ15.37 In the Apophthegmata Patrum the emphasis is on teaching and learning diάkpiσiç through example, observation and practice rather than on defining it or theorising about it. Similarly, Evagrius' works can be seen as focussing on exercising and developing the gift and skill of diákρiois rather than on discussing it. Socrates Scholasticus' remark that when Evagrius became a disciple of the two Macarii he moved from studying words to deeds 38 is reflected in the exchange between Arsenius and Evagrius about gaining the virtues not through formal education (words) but through work (deeds).39 Evagrius appears to reflect this in his writings; he is more concerned to demonstrate the use of diάкpois and its acquisition than exploring it theoretically. Thus he explores, for example, how diάкpiσię can be used to examine and overcome evil thoughts, discern the meaning and best use of Scripture, determine how to think, speak and act, and how to regulate and use

32 Ibid. 8-9 (Frankenberg, Euagrius, 613, 615). 33 Ibid. 65-66 (Vitestam, Seconde partie, 27-28). 34 'Prayer is a conversation of the mind with God' ; On Prayer 3 (PG 79, 1168C). 35 KG 4.90 (PO 28.1, 175). 36 HM 20.15 (Festugière, Historia, 123). 37 Socrates Scholasticus, HE IV 23 ( PG 67, 516A) ; HM 27 (PL 21 , 449A); HL 17.2 (Bartelink, Palladio, 70). 38 Socrates, HE IV 23 (PG 67, 516A). 39 GSC 10.7 (SC 474, 18).

208

A.D. RICH

wisely the practical disciplines. A close study of Evagrius' works suggests that diákρiots underlies his understanding of monastic life and thought.40 If it is accepted that, as in the Apophthegmata Patrum, diákpiσig is at the centre of monastic as well as Evagrian spirituality, then why does he so rarely use the word or its cognates, particularly given his frequent emphasis on the examination of thoughts and the emphasis of others on his skill in diάkpiσic? His fourth letter declares it essential, yet he fails to discuss it in detail. This suggests, perhaps, that he regarded skill in diάkpiσiç as so fundamental to the monastic life that it was in some sense presupposed; diάкpiσic was part of the fabric of that life and how it was conducted and so did not need frequently to be named or defined , but rather learned and used . Furthermore, he appears to have sought, like a good educator drawing out the skill from his disciples, to teach not only by example but also by allowing them to discover and develop it for themselves as they read his works .

40 A.D. Rich, Discernment in the Desert Fathers (2007 ) , 39-74.

Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus

Luke DYSINGER , Valyermo, California

1. Introduction: The Gnostikos as spiritual guide

In exploring the interrelationship between biblical exegesis and spiritual guidance in the writings of Evagrius Ponticus it is appropriate to focus on Evagrius ' concept of the gnostikos, the mature Christian contemplative and teacher. However, it is important to acknowledge at the outset that Evagrius did not expect that what would today be called ' spiritual directors' be recruited exclusively from adepts in that great craft of contemplation he calls 0ɛwpηtiêń and YvwoτikŃ . Indeed , Evagrius frequently cites the example and teaching of great abbas who were certainly not gnostikoi, but whose insights he treasured and whom he regarded as his spiritual teachers . This is well-illustrated in an apophthegm which the Latin Systematic Collection depicts as a dialogue between Evagrius and Arsenius: Once Abba Evagrius said to Abba Arsenius: ' How is it that we who are stimulated by education and learning have attained no virtue [thereby] , while these rustic Egyptians possess these very virtues? ' Abba Arsenius answered: 'We who are intent on worldly education have [achieved] nothing; while these rustic Egyptians have acquired virtues by their own hard work. ' 'These rustic Copts' include such famous monks as Macarius the Great, whom Evagrius revered as a teacher and spiritual master. They were able to serve as spiritual guides and experts in ascetical virtue and the art of diákpiσic (discernment) through what Arsenius broadly characterizes as ' their own hard work', (propriis laboribus , ñóνоç) and which Evagrius more specifically describes as 'attentiveness' and ' careful observation'. In Evagrius' schema of spiritual progress such abbas could be effective guides in the лрактɩкη , the struggle to expel vice and acquire virtue. But the spiritually-mature Christian contemplative whom Evagrius designates as gnostikos would bring more extensive insights and skills to the task of spiritual guidance . The term gnostikos, which Evagrius inherits principally from Clement of Alexandria, is notoriously difficult to translate. ' Teacher', ' sage', 'elder', and perhaps least satisfying of all the overly-literal ' knower', have all been tried; and

1 In the Latin Systematic Collection (Verba Seniorum) this is found in ' Discretion' 5. In the Greek Alphabetical Collection it is found (without Evagrius' name) as ‘Arsenius' 5.

Studia Patristica XLVII, 209-221. Peeters Publishers, 2010.

210

L. DYSINGER

each hints at part of what Evagrius means. For the purposes of this paper the attainments of Evagrius' gnostikos can be best appreciated in light of an observations made by Peter Brown in his study of early Christian asceticism , The Body and Society: [...] The desert became the powerhouse of a new culture. For all his interest in such matters, Origen's spirituality had remained the spirituality of an urban study-group. The greatest powers of spiritual discernment were not directed to the heart: they were deployed in the long labor with which Origen and his disciples searched out the meaning of the sacred text. It was the precise meaning of Scripture, pondered by highly literate men and women, that caused the heart of the Christian ' to burn .' The discipline of meditation on the holy text often assumed philological resources that could be found only in upper-class circles, in close proximity to great cities. In the Life of Anthony, and in successive layers of monastic spiritual guidance, we can detect the emergence of an alternative. The monk's own heart was the new book. What required infinitely skilled exegesis and long spiritual experience were the ' movements of the heart,' and the strategies and snares that the Devil laid within it. [...] The shift from a culture of the book to a cultura Dei, based largely on the nonliterate, verbal interchange of a monastic ' art of thought,' was rightly hailed as the greatest and the most peculiar achievement of the Old Men of Egypt : it amounted to nothing less than the discovery of a new alphabet of the heart.² Here Brown describes a shift from one spiritual pole to another: on the one hand, the urban practice of Origenist biblical exegesis by the learned ; and on the other an exegesis of the soul , or ' alphabet of the human heart', that represents the unique contribution of the desert fathers and mothers . However, what Brown portrays as a shift from biblical exegesis to exegesis of the heart is held together as a unity by Evagrius' gnostikos. For Evagrius the ' spiritual director' who is also gnostikos is an accomplished exegete of both the biblical text and the human vouç (‘ mind' or ' intellect', the innermost self and the image of God), as well as a contemplative who can perceive the hidden óyo , (purposes and meanings of God) within human experiences and in the ‘ ages of creation'.

2. Evagrius ' model of spiritual progress

Although Evagrius often emphasizes the distinction between the roles of praktikos and gnostikos, between ascetic practitioner and contemplative teacher, a clearer understanding of his schema of spiritual progress emerges when note is taken of the mutually- enhancing interrelationship between these two roles . Jeremy Driscoll has succinctly summarized Evagrius' understanding of the

2 Peter Brown. The Body and Society: Men , Women , and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity (Columbia, 1988), Chapter 11 : The Desert Fathers: Anthony to John Climacus', 229.

Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus

211

spiritual life as ' the mind's long journey to the Holy Trinity';3 and it may be helpful to imagine this journey as a as a helix, a geometrical form which combines both linear direction and circular movement. The linear motion consists of 'progress ' (лроколη) or ‘ascent' (ȧváẞaσiç) towards God which is at the same time characterized by a ' circular' movement between the poles of лракtiký and Оεwρητikη : that is , between the ethical, ' practical' work of asceticism and the enjoyment of spiritual vision, contemplation. Following Plato and the later Aristotelian tradition,4 Evagrius considers the soul to be tripartite, ruled (when all goes well) by the λoyιotikóv or reasoning faculty, which is chiefly responsible for developing the virtues of prudence, understanding and wisdom." It rules over the ла0ηtiкóν, the portion of the soul subject to passion and source of the powers of έлɩ0vµía (desire) and Ovµóç (indignation). These powers or energies, ‘ yoked to [the soul] as helpmates', are intended by God to be used according to nature ' ; but they will overwhelm the soul as passions if they are misused or present in excess . When exercised according to nature the έл10υμητɩкóν contributes the virtues of temperance, 8 love, and continence , while the Ouμкóν provides courage and patient endurance . Through the practice of diάкpiσiç (discernment) the praktikos learns to employ these ' helpmates' as they are experienced in interpersonal relationships, in dreams, and above all in thoughts . The praktikos learns the nature of the different vońμaτa (concepts, ideas) with which the mind is filled , and is able to distinguish between 20yoμoí , demonic tempting-thoughts , of gluttony, lust, avarice, sadness , anger, acedia, vainglory, and pride ; 10 as well as to appreciate the beneficial noemata which come from angels or from neutral senseperception.¹¹ Evagrius holds out the hope and even describes to some extent the process by which a Christian praktikos can mature into a gnostikos, a contemplative

3 This is the title of Jeremy Driscoll's English translation of Evagrius ' Ad monachos : The mind's longjourney to the Holy Trinity (Collegeville, 1994). 4 The beginning of chapter 89 of Evagrius' Praktikos is modeled closely on an anonymous first-century peripatetic treatise, On Virtues and Vices, ed. Bekker, Aristotelis opera, v. 2 (Berlin, 1891), 1249a 26-1251b 37. 5 Evagrius, Praktikos 89 ; SC 171 (Paris, 1971), 680-4. 6 Evagrius, scholion 2 On Psalm 107: 3(1). 7 Evagrius, Peri Logismon 17; SC 438 (Paris, 1998), 210. 8 Evagrius, Praktikos 89 ; SC 171 , 680. 9 Ibid. 682. 10 These roughly correspond to the divisions of the Platonic tripartite soul , beginning with the έлiovμηtiкóv, moving through the Ovμiкóν and concluding with intellectual temptations. 11 Evagrius most commonly uses the term λoyioμoí to designate the tempting thoughts inspired by demons, and vonμata to describe thoughts which are benign or angelic in origin . However, this distinction does not always apply; and the terms are occasionally used in the opposite sense: i.e. , malignant vońμata (Praktikos 42 ; SC 171 , 596) and neutral or beneficial λoyιoμoi (Praktikos 30; SC 171 , 570. Eulogios 8 , R.E Sinkewicz , Evagrius ofPontus . The Greek Ascetic Corpus, [ Oxford , 2003] , 5 , 314f.).

212

L. DYSINGER

and teacher who has learned to perceive the divine logoi, the inner meanings and purposes of God within creation and history. The gnostikos learns to appreciate and to make use of an inner, oscillating movement between the poles of quoιkη , the perception of God's presence and purpose within creation, and Оεwλoуikη , contemplation of the divine nature, which ultimately transcends all words and concepts. Although Evagrius thus describes what has often been interpreted as sequential levels or stages of spiritual progress, it is important to note that he does not thereby imply that it is ever possible to completely rise above the praktike and somehow ' graduate ' from the quest for virtue. On the contrary: as the praktikos makes spiritual progress he learns to perceive the ongoing (and indeed, neverending) work of asceticism yvwσTIKÓTɛpos , that is, from an increasingly contemplative perspective.12 And since the struggle against certain passions continues until the moment of death, the mature gnostikos must always advance in virtue, continuously practicing ascetical vigilance.13 Thus the journey towards God is not a simply a movement beyond praktike into 0ɛ @pητɩký : rather, spiritual progress entails a gentle oscillation between these two poles in such a way that continuing attention to the changing demands of praktike yields evergreater contemplative refreshment.¹4

3. Biblical exegesis

The principal textbook of the gnostikos is the Bible. Chief among his skills is expertise in biblical exegesis enabling him to search the Scriptures for insights that will benefit both himself and those who seek his counsel. He must be able to ' give a word to each, according to his worth.'15 In other words, the constant request made of the desert abba, ‘give me a word ! ' should be answered according to the unique circumstances and specific needs of the questioner. This necessitates both a large store of biblical wisdom and familiarity with the different levels of meaning contained in sacred scripture. For Evagrius these include spiritual ' definitions'16 and the ' customary expressions of scripture'17, as well as rules for allegorical exegesis.18 Evagrius' underlying exegetical

12 Evagrius, Praktikos 50, 79, 83 ; SC 171 , 614 , 666 , 672 . 13 Evagrius, Praktikos 36 ; SC 171 , 582. On the persistence of anger in those who have made considerable spiritual progress : Gnostikos 10, 31 , and 32; SC 356 (Paris , 1989), 102 , 146, 148. 14 A vivid depiction of the mutually- enhancing interrelationship betwееn лрактɩкη and 0ɛpηtikη is found in Evagrius, Peri Logismon 17; SC 438 , 208-14. 15 Evagrius, Gnostikos 44 ; SC 356, 174. 16 Evagrius, Gnostikos 17; SC 356, 114f. 17 Evagrius, Gnostikos 19 ; SC 356, 118f. 18 Evagrius, Gnostikos 20-1 ; SC 356, 118-21 .

Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus

213

method, which he describes in Gnostikos 18, is based on his schema of spiritual progress : 19 It is necessary to search for allegorical and literal passages pertaining to the praktike, physike, and theologike. If the passage concerns the praktike it is necessary to determine whether it concerns thumos and its effects, or epithumia and its consequences, or whether it concerns the movements of the nous. If the passage pertains to the physike, it is necessary to note whether it reveals a doctrine concerning nature, and which one. Or if it is an allegorical passage concerning theologike it should be determined as far as possible whether it reveals the doctrine of the Trinity [… ]. Thus Evagrius employs the same methodology in interpreting the scriptures as he does in analyzing the spiritual life. Furthermore, the gnostikos ' study of the Bible is strongly oriented towards the discovery of texts that may be used in spiritual guidance. Evagrius extensive biblical scholia and his Antirrhetikos (which, taken together comprise the bulk of his literary output) clearly exemplify this. These works provide biblical glossaries and sourcebooks in which texts are explicated and recommended for use according to: (1) their usefulness in the battle against temptation and the acquisition of virtue (praktike); (2) what they reveal of the inner purposes of God in history and creation (physike); and (3) whether they hint at the ineffable mystery of the divine nature (theologike).

4. Exegesis of the heart 4.1. Diakrisis Corresponding to his three-fold schemata of biblical exegesis and spiritual progress is Evagrius' approach to exegesis of the heart, or nous. The foundation of this inward-directed contemplation is the art of diakrisis (discernment) the ability to determine the origin and significance of thoughts and dreams . This skill must be practiced throughout life, since temptation endures until the moment of death.20 The ascetic develoрs лроσоxń (attentiveness) to the inner world of thoughts , desires, and fantasies, and learns through лapaτýpηois (careful observation)21 to distinguish the origins of these experiences. Here , too, Evagrius employs a threefold approach, distinguishing between: (1) angelic noemata that educate and console the nous, leading it to God ; (2) neutral thoughts that arise from memory and sense-perception; and (3) demonic logismoí, tempting

19 Evagrius ' approach is clearly based on the exegetical methods of Clement of Alexandria , (Stromateis I 28.179, 3-4 , Stählin, GCS 15, v. 2 [ Berlin , 1960 ], 108) and Origen , Com. in Cant. Prol. 3.6; SC 375 [Paris, 1970] , 132). 20 Evagrius, Praktikos 36; SC 171 , 582. 21 Evagrius often employs as ларatńpnoic as a synonym for diάkpots. Evagrius' flexible use of this terminology as contrasted with his successors is discussed by Antony Rich, Discernment in the Desert Fathers (Bletchley, Milton Keynes , 2007), 39-68 .

214

L. DYSINGER

thoughts and fantasies that pervert the natural powers of the nous and lead it into error.22 Thus angelic noemata are characterized by feelings of peace23 and 'are concerned with the inner nature of things and with searching out their spiritual principles .' Human thoughts are characterized by simple images, unclouded by passion.24 Demonic logismoi, on the other hand, are disturbing or terrifying25 and incline the soul towards passion and vice.26

4.2. Antirrhesis In the case of demonic logismoi Evagrius recommends a second , more probing interior exegesis according to which the tempting-thoughts are classified : first, according to the eight principal logismoi ; and , second , according to the specific characteristics of the temptation . This ' second -level ' interior exegesis reflects the structure of the Antirrhetikos , Evagrius' great sourcebook for use in the struggle against tempting-thoughts. The Antirrhetikos is unique among Evagrius' writings and was of particular interest to his biographers.27 It bears a superficial resemblance to his biblical scholia insofar as it cites and to some extent interprets successive biblical texts ; but the purpose of this sourcebook is very different from the scholia . The Antirrhetikos is a collection of bible verses intended for use by those undergoing specific temptations . It contains 486 brief texts from the scriptures , usually consisting of only one or two verses, intended to serve as ȧvtippησig (response) to the experience of temptation by the logismoi of gluttony, lust, avarice, sadness, anger, acedia, vainglory, and pride. The Antirrhetikos consists of eight books , each concerned with a different temptation: each book begins anew at Genesis and offers verses from successive books of the bible. Evagrius' painstaking and systematic correlation of successive biblical texts with specific logismoi affords a unique example of his understanding of the interrelationship between exegesis of the biblical text and the tempted heart. Evagrius' art of antirrhesis enables the offending thought to be transformed and healed through the application of a specific biblical word or phrase, intended to be memorized, recited , and prayerfully pondered. The word antirrhesis is often translated as ' contradiction', but for Evagrius this spiritual practice is more than a method of simply counteracting or contradicting the demons . Evagrius does, indeed , describe such ' contradiction' of demons and their operations

22 Evagrius, Peri Logismon 8; SC 438, 176-9. 23 Evagrius, Praktikos 80; SC 171 , 668. 24 Evagrius, Peri Logismon 8 ; SC 438 , 176. 25 Evagrius, Praktikos 80; SC 171 , 668 . 26 Evagrius, Praktikos 51 and 80 ; SC 171 , 616 and 668 ; Peri Logismon 8; SC 438, 176. 27 Palladius (Lausiac History 38.10), Gennadius (On Illustrious Men 11 ) and Socrates (Ecclesiastical History IV 23) all mention it; and Gennadius translated the Antirrhetikos into Latin.

Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus

215

in his definitions of antirrhesis in the Prologue to the Antirrhetikos and in Letter 4; however, careful examination of the Antirrhetikos and of Evagrius' antirrhetic scholia reveals a wide array of different uses. The range of different spiritual functions these verses are meant to serve may be conceived as a spectrum, consisting at one end of what might be termed ' direct antirrhesis ', a kind of exorcism which specifically negates or repels the offending demon or logismos.28 At the other end of this spectrum are brief prayers which are not directed against the demons , but are offered , rather, to God.29 Evagrius believed that temptation and physical affliction have a unique power to galvanize the soul into a type of prayer characterized by ларрηnoía, frankness or ' freedom of speech'.30 However, the struggling soul often finds itself mute; thus these antirrhetic prayers provide the stunned soul with words which may be addressed to God.31 Between these two extremes, antirrhetic exorcism-verses on the one hand and antirrhetic prayers on the other, lie the majority of texts in the Antirrhetikos which are neither directed against the demons nor offered to God, but are rather intended for the tempted soul.32 These verses serve a variety of functions: to exhort ; to evoke compunction and repentance; to console; to inform ; and often to encourage practice of the virtue opposed to the temptation being endured.333

4.3. Replacement A second method of dealing with both logismoi and more elevated noemata is the technique of ' replacement' in which inferior thoughts are replaced with better ones. At its lowest (and most controversial34) level this consists of replacing particularly vicious temptations with less malignant ones, as Evagrius puts

28 Evagrius often alerts the reader that a verse is of this type by introducing it with the phrase: ' For the demon [...] .' Thirty-two verses of the Antirrhetikos are of this type. He evidently regards these ejaculatory prayers as ' indirectly' antirrhetic in the sense that they invite the soul to turn towards God and away from the demons, thus ' contradicting' not so much the temptation itself as the demonic goal of preventing prayer. 29 Most ofthese are introduced with the phrase: ' For the Lord [...] .' Forty-four verses of the Antirrhetikos are of this type. 30 Evagrius, Letter 1.2, W. Frankenberg Evagrius Ponticus, Abhandlungen der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen , Phil. -hist. Klasse, Neue Folge, v. 13, o. 2 (Berlin, 1912), 564-7, ( 160 ba) . Gabriel Bunge, Briefe aus der Wüste (Trier, 1986), 211 31 Evagrius, Antirrhetikos, VIII 28 (540f. Frankenberg). 32 The majority of verses (301 of 492) begin with the phrase: 'For the tempting-thought of [… ].' Less than a quarter (116 verses) begin: ' For a soul [… ] ', or ‘ For a mind [… ]'. 33 Evagrius alternately describes these different categories of verses as intended : ' For the soul (or ‘mind') [ … ]' ( 116 verses), or : ' For the tempting thought [… ] ' (301 verses). These two introductory phrases appear to serve a stylistic rather than a taxonomic purpose ; their alternate use avoids an endlessly-repetitive introductory formula rather than signaling a change in content. 34 Later spiritual authors, such as Barsanuphius of Gaza , strongly disapproved of this technique.

216

L. DYSINGER

it 'driving out a nail with a nail'.35 He particularly recommends this as a means of replacing lustful fantasies with vainglorious contempt for lust.36 A more elevated application of this method holds the potential for transforming demonic logismoi into noemata of the human or even angelic type. In Peri Logismon 19 Evagrius recommends beginning with another ' second-level' exegesis: 'Within yourself distinguish (8ɩέλɛ) the hurled tempting-thought into its parts: what it is; of what [external] concerns (лрáyμata) is it composed; and what in it especially afflicts the intellect.' Thus , for example, when one is tempted by desire for gold one learns to 'distinguish between: the intellect which has received the thought; the noema of gold; the gold itself; and the passion of avarice.' Turning its spiritual gaze upwards from the experience and exegesis of temptation, the soul now asks wherein the sin consists: it concludes that sin lies neither in the nous, which is God's image, nor in the noema of physical gold, but rather in ‘ a pleasure which hates humankind, born of free will, forcing the intellect to misuse God's creatures. It is this pleasure that the law of God commands us to cut off'.37 By asking questions concerning the nature and inner purpose of gold it becomes possible for the contemplative to rise still higher, ascending by means of ' replacement' from the realm of temptation and praktike into angelic theoria physike. Why was gold created? Why is it granular and cast into the deepest parts of the earth, to be discovered only with great labor and toil? How is it that when found [ gold] is committed to the fire, then washed and placed the hands of artisans who make the lampstand of the tabernacle, the incense -altar, the censers, and the vessels (Ex. 25 : 29.31 ; 27 : 1-3) from which, by the Savior's grace the King of Babylon no longer drinks? (Daniel 5 : 1-30) One like Cleopas can bring a heart burning with these mysteries (Luke 24:32). Here Evagrius demonstrates how to ascend from temptation to contemplation of the natural world, then to discover in allegorical interpretation of biblical images the inner meanings of both temptation and one's spiritual striving. His analysis of temptations, exegesis of the heart, leads to contemplation of creation and to allegorical meditation on Exodus 25 , Daniel 5, and Luke 24. The hidden gold, purified , washed, and transformed, represents the nous striving to free itself from the demonic ' King of Babylon' and to discover with Cleopas the presence of Christ, companion and guide on the spiritual journey.

4.4. The Landscape of temptation and vision The technique of 'replacement' is based on Evagrius' conviction that the nous is capable of contemplating (or being afflicted by) only one logismos or noema

35 Evagrius, Praktikos 58; SC 171 , 636. 36 Evagrius, Eulogios 21 ; R.E Sinkewicz, Evagrius ofPontus. The Greek Ascetic Corpus (Oxford, 2003) 48f. , 324f. 37 Evagrius, Peri Logismon 8 ; SC 438 , 216-22 .

Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus

217

at a time.38While extremely useful, this method, focusing as it does on a single thought or concept at a time, is insufficient to cope with the dynamic, everchanging landscape of the nous on which the battles of the praktike are waged. Evagrius believed that with time and experience the Christian ascetic can develop the capacity for a third approach to thoughts and dreams , by which it becomes possible to contemplate the whole interior battlefield of the soul.39 Evagrius particularly associates this dynamic, complex contemplation with the virtues of opóvηoic (prudence) and σúvɛσiç (understanding) .40 It requires redoubled attentiveness and a willingness to reflect carefully on the inner meaning of what is contemplated in the arena of the heart. The monk must: [ … ] observe his tempting-thoughts and note down their intensification and diminution, and their interconnectedness , and their timing, and which demons produce what, and which demon comes after another, and which does not follow after which; and he should seek from Christ the logoi (inner meanings) of these things. It is not only the landscape of battle that opens up to the dedicated contemplative: the succession and interrelationship between human and angelic noemata is experienced in a vista of ‘ ages and worlds ' that renews and heartens the gnostikos. Evagrius employs the metaphor of the soul as shepherd to depict the refreshment and relief such contemplation can provide: The concepts of this present age - these the Lord gave to human beings , like sheep to a good shepherd: for it is written, He has placed the world in his heart (Eccl. 3:11) . [...] And if, weary from our toil, a certain acedia overtakes us we should climb up a little onto the rock of knowledge and converse with the psalter (see Ps. 48:5), plucking with the virtues the strings of knowledge: let us again tend our sheep as they pasture below Mount Sinai , so that the God of our fathers may also call to us out of the bush (see Ex. 3 : 1-6) and grant us the logoi of the signs and the wonders (see Ex. 7:9; 11 :9-10).41 Here Evagrius depicts the landscape on which the succession of human and angelic noemata appears. The nous contains within itself a miniature reflection of ' the concepts of the present age ' , the complex tapestry of human history in which, just as in the scriptures , the gnostikos can learn to behold the ‘logoi of signs and wonders ', the inner meanings and purposes of God. Throughout his writings Evagrius particularly emphasizes two logoi, providence and judgment , in his hierarchy of contemplative objects which the gnostikos must learn to perceive. He believed that they offer a key to perceiving the purposes of God in creation, and it is to these two logoi that we now turn .

38 Evagrius, Peri Logismon 24-5 ; SC 438 , 236-44. 39 Evagrius, Praktikos 36, 83 ; SC 171 , 582 , 672. 40 Evagrius, Praktikos 89 ; SC 171 , 680-8. 41 Evagrius, Peri Logismon 17; SC 438 , 212-4.

218

L. DYSINGER

5. Exegesis of the spiritual journey 5.1. The Logoi ofprovidence and judgment Evagrius intends that the gnostikos ultimately perceives himself, his own and others' spiritual journeys, and the whole of the cosmos from the perspective of a divine origin and destiny. The rich tapestry of creation , the whole of salvation history as revealed in the scriptures, and the unique stories of each pilgrim or disciple to whom the gnostikos ministers mutually illuminate a ' richly diverse wisdom' that has its meaning in God. As spiritual guide the gnostikos discovers that each soul's journey towards God is a miniature reflection of the cosmic journey towards reunion . All multiplicity may be comprehended as pointing either back in time to the primordial unity from which it fell, or ahead into that restored union towards which all things are moving. Thus the drama of each soul's struggle is illuminated by the sweeping movements of (allegoricallyinterpreted) biblical salvation history. His conviction that all human experience reflects an ultimate, eschatological meaning underlies two fundamental ' hermeneutic principles' of Evagrius' exegesis of both nous and scripture : the logoi of providence and judgment . Evagrius urges the gnostikos to ' meditate continuously' on these logoi,42 and he refers to them throughout his writings.43 The reason for this emphasis is that for Evagrius, meditation on these two principles forces the gnostikos to keep constantly in mind both the movement of each human being towards God and the ultimate purpose and end of the cosmos. These logoi are a means of probing beneath the often-bewildering diversity of creation so as to perceive all created things as active participants in the ongoing spectacle of creation, fall, and restoration.

5.2. The logos ofprovidence Evagrius uses the term ' providence ' to describe God's ongoing provision of what each reasoning being requires in order to return to divine union.44 God's providential care is always mediated , transmitted to the different ranks of the logikoi chiefly by other (usually higher-ranking) logikoi. Every order of intelligence, especially those above the human level is entrusted with responsibility for mediating divine providence to those beneath them . Angels are thus entrusted with responsibility for human beings; archangels are responsible for

42 Evagrius, Gnostikos 48 ; SC 356, 186. 43 The phrase ' the logoi of providence and judgment' occurs in the following: Gnostikos 48, where he urges continuous meditation on these logoi, in ten passages of the Kephalaia Gnostica (I 27; II 59; V 4; V 7; V 16 ; V 23 ; V 24 ; VI 43; VI 59 ; VI 75 ) , in his first, sixth, and seventh Letters, and in all the collections of his scholia which have been edited to date (On Psalms, On Proverbs, and On Ecclesiastes). 44 Evagrius, Kephalaia Gnostica IV 89 ; Guillaumont , PO 28/1 , n. 134 ( Paris , 1958) , 175.

Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus

219

angels;45 and so on into ‘ ages and worlds' of which human beings know nothing. At the summit of this great cascade of divine compassion is Christ ' who keeps watch over all'.46 The gnostikos ' capacity for contemplation enables him to share in the ‘angelic practice of praying for others,48 aiding them in their spiritual struggle,49 and curing50 by teaching them how to increase in virtue and knowledge. This knowledge he communicates carries with it, in turn , an impulse, almost a compulsion, to assist others.51 The logos of providence also teaches the gnostikos to retain trust in God even when all awareness of providential assistance vanishes. Evagrius explains that God sometimes appears to abandon a soul, not in condemnation but rather out of mercy. The apparent withdrawal of providence should be interpreted as an act of God intended to lead the soul to repentance . 52 Evagrius' most radical illustration of providential abandonment is his own admittedly-unique exegesis of the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in chapter sixteen of St. Luke's gospel. Evagrius maintains that even in the ' place of torment' where the rich man laments it is still possible to learn about mercy and even to grow in previously-unknown compassion for others.53 Thus Evagrius suggests that it is possible for the sufferings of hell to bring to fruition the imperishable ' seeds of virtue ' which were originally implanted within the soul at its creation.54 Thus the logos of providence enables the gnostikos both to bear in mind God's constant ministering presence in all human circumstances and to recall that grace is mediated , often by friends, acquaintances , abbas and ammas and even angels who facilitate those acts of free choices that

45 Evagrius, Kephalaia Gnostica V 4 and V 24. 46 Evagrius, scholion 38 on Ecclesiastes 5:7-11 , SC 397 (Paris, 1993), 128 . 47 Evagrius, De oratione 142; Simon Tugwell, Evagrius Ponticus: De oratione (Oxford, 1981), 26 (= PG 79, 1197). 48 Evagrius, De oratione 40 (9 Tugwell = PG 79, 1176). 49 Evagrius , Kephalaia Gnostica VI 90 (249 Guillaumont). 50 Evagrius, Praktikos 100 ; SC 171 , 710. De oratione 117-25. 51 Evagrius, Kephalaia Gnostica VI 76; scholion 5 and 5b on Psalm 134.7(3). 52 Evagrius, scholion 8 on Psalm 93:18 (= PG 12 , 1553) . Palladius writes that he and 'the blessed Evagrius' received this and other teachings concerning God's providential abandonment from the reclusive Abba Paphnutius. Palladius, Lausiac History 47. J. Driscoll provides a detailed discussion of Evagrius' teaching on providential abandonment in: Evagrius and Paphnutius on the Causes for Abandonment by God : Studia Monastica 39 (1997) 259-86. 53 Evagrius, Scholion 62 on Proverbs 5:14; SC 340 (Paris, 1987) , 152-4. 54 Although aware that this optimistic interpretation would be regarded with suspicion, Evagrius was deeply committed to this view, which he repeats with only minor variations in five different places in his writings: Evagrius, Scholion 62 on Proverbs 5:14, Kephalaia Gnostica I 40, Malignis Cogitationibus 31 , Letters 43.3 and 59.3 . As regards the apokatastasis, the doctrine that all fallen beings will ultimately accept the salvation offered by Christ and thus be restored to union with God , Evagrius appears to have avoided ever stating openly that ‘all will be saved'. Instead, this teaching is implicit in his eschatological vision of the logikoi returning to their ‘ original state': Evagrius , Kephalaia Gnostica II 4; Letter to Melania 29-30, 6 (618f. Frankenberg; G. Bunge, Briefe, 313f., 326).

220

L. DYSINGER

enable reasoning beings to make spiritual progress . In serving as a spiritual guide the gnostikos always proceeds from the conviction that God's providential guidance is somehow perceptible, however obscurely, in all human circumstances, even in what is perceived as abandonment by God.

5.3. The Logos ofjudgment For Evagrius the logos of judgment does not refer to punishment or condemnation: it describes, instead, God's gift to all reasoning beings of the bodies and environments (“worlds') they require in order to make spiritual progress. " ‘Judgment' describes a series of progressive transformations. The first 'judgment' was God's original, providential creation of the material universe in response to the kinesis or fall of the reasoning beings he had brought into being. Subsequent to this first judgment all reasoning beings undergo a series of transformations at which each receives a new body and environment suited to its changed spiritual state. The final judgment' designates that complete transformation which will restore all things to union with God . Evagrius' use of the term judgment, krisis, may reflect ancient medical vocabulary, where Hippocrates and Galen used it as a technical term to describe a 'critical period' which precedes or accompanies a significant turning point in an illness . The krisis heralds a change leading either to improvement or deterioration in the patient's condition.56 Evagrius similarly employs the term krisis to describe a fundamental transformation which facilitates movement either upwards towards virtue and knowledge or downwards into vice and ignorance. Meditation on the logos of judgment thus enables the gnostikos to interpret the rich diversity of the cosmos, including the unique qualities and circumstances of each person, as God's gracious gift of a specific environment and body that will best facilitate the return of each reasoning being to that divine unity from which all have fallen . The complexity and variety of creation and of human experience thus should serve as a constant reminder to the gnostikos of the diverse paths and circumstances that lead to God.

6. Spiritual guidance in the light of eternity In this paper similarities have been described between Evagrius ' method of biblical exegesis and his approach to spiritual guidance, or as Brown calls it,

55 Evagrius, scholion 275 on Proverbs 24:22 ; SC 340, 370. 56 This doctrine was based in part on the theory of лéлavσɩç, ‘coction' or digestion (literally 'ripening' ) of ingested substances, which when incomplete or unsuccessful was believed to be responsible for many diseases. The successful calculation and prediction of critical days seems to have depended on the time thought to be required for лéñɑvσiç as well as classical numerology, including musical theories of harmonic intervals: Volker Langholf, Medical Theories in Hippocrates: Early Texts and the Epidemics (New York , 1990), 79-103 .

Exegesis and Spiritual Guidance in Evagrius Ponticus

221

the ' alphabet of the heart'. Evagrius' overall approach to both biblical exegesis and spiritual guidance may be summarized as an attempt to perceive and to describe everything sub specie aeternitatis, in the light of a divine origin and an eternal destiny. As biblical exegete Evagrius' gnostikos discovers in the scriptures symbols and allegories of the great cosmic drama of fall, Incarnation, and the eschatological reunion of all reasoning beings with God. As spiritual guide the gnostikos looks up, as it were, from the Bible and perceives in the movements and experiences of each soul a miniature reflection of that cosmic journey towards reunion. Thus the drama of each soul's struggle is illuminated by the sweeping movements of salvation history : both the methods and the findings of biblical exegesis inform spiritual guidance, often providing specific remedies for spiritual ailments. But the ' other' who seeks spiritual counsel is not only a reflection, a microcosm, of salvation history; Evagrius believed that the ' other' can and should be contemplated as ' God-bearer', one in whom the image of God shines . One of Evagrius' most advanced spiritual texts is also one of his best-known, the De oratione. Near the end of this work he summarizes his teaching in a series of beatitudes and definitions that include the following: ( 122) Blessed is the monk 57 who regards every human being ôç Оɛòv µɛtà Oɛóv (as God, after God) '. 5 The ' others' whom the gnostikos tries to help are themselves worthy objects of contemplation: Evagrius expects that the advanced contemplative will be able to see in them something of the presence of God. The next three verses in this chain highlight the interconnectedness of all who make spiritual progress: 123. Blessed is the monk who sees the salvation and progress of all with perfect joy, as if it were his own. 124. A monk is one who is both separated from all and yet united with all. 125. A monk is one who thinks of himself as one with all, because he unceasingly thinks he sees himself in everyone. Contemplation of God in the ' other' is not static . The contemplative rejoices in the spiritual progress of others because he knows that he is both unique (' separated') and yet in union with all . His own spiritual progress illuminates the experience of others , and as gnostikos he learns to share with others from the rich treasury of biblical and personal wisdom he has acquired. Thus for Evagrius the ' contemplative life' is by its nature ordered towards an oscillation between biblical exegesis and the provision of spiritual guidance , between the discovery of God in the sacred text and the perception of God in the unique spiritual journey of the other. To use later terminology from the Western monastic tradition , Evagrius encourages a biblical lectio divina which teaches the contemplative how to practice lectio divina on his own inner life and on the life and experiences of his neighbor.

57 Evagrius, De oratione 122 (6 Tugwell = PG 79, 1171).

Universal Restoration in Evagrius Ponticus' ' Great Letter'

Augustine CASIDAY, Lampeter

Eschatology has long been recognised as a major theme in the writings of Evagrius Ponticus and, of those writings, his ' Great Letter' is frequently cited for its particular significance. Numbered 64 in the Syriac corpus,' that letter presents an extended account of the restoration of creation to God, which is the subject of this communication. Although some modern commentators adduce this letter as proof of Evagrius' so-called ' isochristic ' Christology, about which more anon, the relevant passage itself admits of a better interpretation. I will query the conventional twinning of the ' Great Letter' with Origenist eschatology as condemned in the era of Justinian, then propose an alternative interpretation that corrects the problem of the standard reading, that corresponds more satisfactorily to the evidence which we possess, and that perhaps identifies lines for further enquiry. In the ' Great Letter,' Evagrius writes: 28. In the mingling of rivers with the sea, no addition to its nature or change to its colour or taste is found ; likewise there is, in the mingling of minds with the Father, no generation of doubled natures or quadrupled persons. The sea is one thing in nature, taste and colour before and after the rivers mingle with it; so, too, the divine nature is one in the three persons of Father, Son and Spirit before and after the minds mingle with it. 29. We also see that, before the waters of the sea were gathered into one place and dry ground became visible , the rivers were one in it but afterwards they were separated from it [see Gen. 1 : 9] , being many and different because each and every one of them was differentiated by the taste of the earth in which it happened to be. Likewise, before sin made a separation between the minds and God (in the same way that the land did between the sea and the rivers), they were one with him and undifferentiated. But when their sin became apparent, they separated themselves from him and estranged themselves from him in taste and colour, each and every one of them taking the taste of the body bound to it. Now when the land is removed from their midst, the rivers and sea will be one and undifferentiated . Likewise, when the sin between the minds and God is expunged , they will be one and not many. 30. But although I said the rivers were formerly in the sea, do not therefore think that the rational beings were in the Father, as it were, eternally with him in their nature.

1 Eds . W. Frankenberg, Euagrius Ponticus (Berlin, 1912), 610-9 and G. Vitestam, Seconde partie du traité qui passe sous le nom de ‘La grande lettre d'Evagre le Pontique à Mélanie l'Ancienne' (Lund, 1964).

Studia Patristica XLVII , 223-228. O Peeters Publishers, 2010.

224

A. CASIDAY

Even if in his wisdom and creative power they were eternally with him, their creation was temporal. Yet there is no end to them because of their union with him who has neither beginning nor ending.2 This passage indicates that Evagrius was familiar with Origen's and with Gregory Nazianzen's theology. Some examples: sin is the catalyst for differentiation ; creation was eternal in the wisdom and power of the Father; creatures can derivatively participate in divine endlessness.³ It may also indicate that Evagrius ' recourse to Origen was critical, if in fact Origen taught cycles of falling 4 and reconciliation, which is precluded by Evagrius' reference to the endless and inseparable unity of God. Many scholars hold that Evagrius' recourse to Origen culminated in a precise system of speculative claims that coalesces around Evagrian Christology.5 Some alleged that our passage from the ' Great Letter' illustrates an important feature of Evagrian Origenism in that its description of 'the mingling of minds with the Father' and the loss of differentiating qualities can be read, first, as affirming that all minds will be restored to unity with God and, second, as implying that all minds will thus become equals-to - Christ (isochristoi). The tendency of Evagrius' thinking, on this line, is broadly pantheistic: the elimination of quantitative differences between created minds and God the Father ultimately results in their absorption into the infinity of the Father, in much the same way that water flowing down rivers is absorbed into the sea. Elsewhere, I have noted that such an interpretation of Evagrius' thinking relies upon problematically intercalating Evagrius' text and the condemnations from the Second Origenist Controversy (c. 525-63). Consider the example of Evagrius ' alleged affirmation of the equality of all created minds with Christ: the stem isochrist- is never found in any of Evagrius' surviving writings and none of his contemporaries ever accused him of using it ; instead, it is taken from Cyril of Scythopolis ' Life of Cyriacus 12-3 and used to organise hints from Evagrius' writings into a system that necessitates the inference of isochristic Christology. By contrast, the claim that Evagrius was a universalist has

2 Transl. A. Casiday, Evagrius Ponticus (London, 2006), 69f. 3 See Origen, On first principles I 4.4 (SC 252 , 1710-71); Gregory Nazianzen, Oration 29.13 (PG 36, 92). 4 Thus, Jerome, Letter 124.5, 14 (ed . J. Labourt, Saint Jérôme. Lettres [Paris , 1949-54] , vol. 7, 100f. , 112f.) . 5 Thus, A. Guillaumont, Les "Kephalaia Gnostica” d'Évagre le Pontique (Paris, 1962), 102-23 and id., Un philosophe au désért (Paris, 2004) , 143-5 ; A. Grillmeier, Christ in the Christian Tradition, vol. 1 (London , 19752) , 377-84 ; R. Sinkewicz, Evagrius of Pontus (Oxford , 2003), xxxvii-xl ; N. Russell , The Doctrine of Deification in the Greek Patristic Tradition (Oxford, 2004), 238-41 ; W. Harmless, Desert Christians (New York, 2004), 354-8. 6 See A. Casiday, Evagrius Ponticus (2006), 28-30 and id., Gabriel Bunge and the study of Evagrius Ponticus: Review Article : St Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 48 (2004) 249-97, 277-93. 7 Thus, F. Refoulé, La Christologie d'Evagre et l'Origénisme: OCP 27 ( 1961) 221-66 , 248f.

Universal Restoration in Evagrius Ponticus' 'Great Letter'

225

its foundation in his writings, as when he writes without qualification that, 'when the sin between the minds and God is expunged , they will be one and not many'. But in default of compelling reason to attribute to Evagrius the particular Christology which implies that the salvation of all rational beings entails their attaining equality to Christ, we need to be very careful when researching Evagrius' universalism lest force of habit predispose us to assume that, for him, universal restoration necessarily meant isochristic universal restoration. This interpretation is relevant to the study of the ' Great Letter', because the 8 'Great Letter' is taken as the key to interpreting Evagrius' Gnostic Chapters, and because the Second Origenist Controversy is taken as revealing the meaning of Evagrius' Gnostic Chapters; but then some principle of transitivity is invoked so that the Second Origenist Controversy is taken to be identical to the inner structure and significance of Evagrius' ' Great Letter'. Now all of this presupposes that the systematic account of Origenism extrapolated from the condemnations of the Second Origenist Controversy accurately describe of the beliefs, not merely of those condemned , but even of Evagrius himself, whose theological, philosophical and doctrinal thinking they putatively disclose.⁹ The interpretation of Evagrius' eschatology that results from this method may be cohesive, but it is far from obvious that its basic assumptions should be granted. It is more sensible to expect that the intervening century and a half separating Evagrius ' death from the age of Justinian witnessed cultural and intellectual transformations that modified the Evagrian tradition, than to suppose that those transformations preserved and revealed the inner meaning always latent in Evagrius' thought. Instead of looking to subsequent events to expose Evagrius ' meaning, we do well to consider evidence from his other writings, or at least evidence from his own time. Evagrius' metaphor of rivers flowing to the sea describes the conditions. under which minds return to and are united with God . This unification can be compared to the unification that Evagrius had described many years earlier in his 'On the faith' (Letter 63 in the Syriac collection, preserved also as Basil's Letter 8).10 Recourse to this letter for purposes of interpreting the ' Great Letter' is justified and profitable. It is justified because, in ‘ On the faith', Evagrius

8 A. Guillaumont, Les "Kephalaia Gnostica ” ( 1962), 37 n. 67: ‘Evagre a cependant exposé une fois clairement les grandes lignes de sa pensée, dans sa grande Lettre à Mélanie: ce texte peut servir de clé pour les Képhalaia gnostica …..' 9 See A. Guillaumont, Les "Kephalaia Gnostica " (1962), 156 (emp. added) : ' La christologie d'Evagre est donc absolument identique à celle des moines isochristes et à celle qui forme la partie essentielle de l'origénisme résumé dans les quinze anathématismes de 553. Il y a non seulement identité doctrinale, mais, sur certains points, comme nous l'avons vu , des rencontres littérales.' 10 Ed. J. Gribomont, Epistula 8 , in: M. Forlin-Patrucco (ed.), Basilio di Cesarea, Le Lettere, 1 (Torino, 1983), 84-112.

226

A. CASIDAY

adumbrates important topics to which he returns in the ' Great Letter'.¹¹ And it is profitable because ‘ On the faith' features some sustained theological consideration by Evagrius about numbers. According to Evagrius, number is a function of quantity, which is bodily and appropriate to ' material and circumscribed' beings. As such, number is not applicable to God , whose being is immaterial and uncircumscribed.¹2 The human person, by contrast, is ‘one in number', but not 'simple' because he is 'a composite of body and soul'.13 The body is incapable of immaterial contemplation and can only behold the truth of things through mirrors' - an allusion by Evagrius to 1Cor. 13: 12.14 But when Evagrius next alludes to that verse, it is to contrast the ' earthly body' which sees through mirrors' to the ' immortal and incorrupt body' (see 2Cor. 5:2), when we are clothed with which we will be able to behold the ' archetypes of those things whose shadows we now see'.15 This suggests that the immortal and incorrupt body, which as such is no longer numbered, retains important functions that are already familiar from the ' earthly body'; merely its attributes have changed. Could it be that, by concord with God who is ' immaterial and uncircumscribed ', humans acquire divine attributes so that they may be called 'gods by grace' ?16 This would seem to be the implication of Evagrius ' gloss on the 'Great High Priestly Prayer', where he writes: ' For that prayer of Our Master's must be brought to pass, since it was Jesus who prayed , “ Grant them that they may be one in Us, even as I and You are one , Father' (John 17:21). For as God is one, he unifies all when he comes into each ; and number is done away with by the presence of Unity'. "7 The 'Great Letter' similarly implies that redeemed humans will in their attributes resemble God who has redeemed them. Before the passage that we have been considering, Evagrius had already drawn a parallel between the tripartite human (mind, soul and body) and the Trinitarian God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit): the mind corresponds to the Father, the soul to the Son and the body to the Holy Spirit - and in each case, the former ' will be united' to the latter.18 Although there is number in body and soul and mind because of the variation of wills' , it will be the case that ' the names and numbers that came upon the mind because of the movement' will pass away, along with the names by which the Trinity is known in virtue of the economy of salvation. And yet

11 E.g. at ‘ On the faith' 7.23 (100 Gribomont) and at the ' Great Letter' 13 (614 Frankenberg), Evagrius comments on the character of the body and its perception. 12 Evagrius, 'On the faith' 2.7-8 (88-90 Gribomont). 13 Evagrius, ' On the faith' 2.6 (88 Gribomont) . 14 Evagrius, ' On the faith' 7.23 ( 100 Gribomont) . 15 Evagrius, ' On the faith' 12.37 ( 110 Gribomont). 16 Evagrius, ' On the faith' 3.9 (90 Gribomont). 17 Evagrius, ' On the faith' 7.25 ( 102 Gribomont) . 18 See Evagrius , ' Great Letter' 17-23 (616 Frankenberg) .

Universal Restoration in Evagrius Ponticus' ' Great Letter'

227

the names and persons of the Trinity (specifically, ' Son ' and ' Spirit ') will by no means pass away, ' because there is no beginning and no ending to them : since they have not received them from an impermanent cause , they will not pass away. But when (and so long as) their Cause exists, they exist ?.19 Evagrius does not speak directly to the point, but the sustained parallel between tripartite anthropology and Trinitarian theology invites us to infer that the three parts of the human will similarly exist, purified and in a condition in which the economy of salvation is no longer relevant and all of this without end. After all, in much the same way that the Son and the Spirit are permanent because of the existence of the Father, humans will participate in the stable existence of the Father. As Evagrius puts it in the passage under consideration , 'there is no end to them because of their union with him who has neither beginning nor ending'. Evagrius never hints that he is describing the elimination of personal difference (e.g. through pantheistic unification). Unity with the divine, it would appear, functions to stabilize, not to eliminate, the discrete elements of creation. An anonymous second-century Pythagorean, who was interested in the theological application of mathematics, provides a model that may help us understand how this could be so. The monad, he writes , ' resembles God , and especially because it has the power of making things cohere and combine, even when they are composed of many ingredients and are very different from one another'.20 Elsewhere, in language that recalls Evagrius' description of the 'mingling of minds with the Father', we read that ' it is the property of 1 , as source , to make something more by addition than by the blending power ofmultiplication (and that is why 1 + 1 21 is more than 1 × 1) ... By exercising its ' blending power of multiplication', the number 1 does not change the quantity of that with which it blends. The unity of the monad comprehends different things without eradicating their differences . Unity envisaged in this way does not add another thing to the sum total of things, so to speak. Rather, it combines that sum total into a coherent whole. In so doing, it secures the meaningful existence of the particulars (hence , its importance: it is not some dispensable adjunct). This model describes a kind of unity - even blending – that unites particulars without doing violence to their characteristics . Evagrius ' account of unity is predicated upon the re - establishment of a 'concord of wills' between humans and God, which in turn is based on the

19 Evagrius, ' Great Letter' 24-25 (616-18 Frankenberg; 6 Vitestam). 20 (Ps .-)Iamblichus, Theologumena arithmeticae 1 (ed . V. de Falco, [Iamblichus] Theolugmena arithmeticae [ Stuttgart, 1975] , 3 ; transl. R. Waterfield, The Theology ofArithmetic [Grand Rapids, MI, 1988 ] , 37) ; on this work, see further Dominic J. O'Meara, Pythagoras revived (Oxford, 1989), 14-23. 21 (Ps.-)Iamblichus, Theologumena arithmeticae 2 (10 de Falco; transl. R. Waterfield , 1988 , 43).

228

A. CASIDAY

Incarnation ; 22 it is not based on the abolition of the constituent elements of the human. Even when he talks about the ' passing away' of the ' names and numbers of "body", "soul" and "mind", he adds this explanatory note: ' they will be raised to the order of the mind'.23 There is no compelling reason to think that this elevation destroys rather than, say, consummates or fulfils the body and the soul . And Evagrius has provided no reason to suppose that the differentiating features themselves are either evil or were caused by evil, which would justify the supposition that the reconciliation of creatures to God entails the abolition of those features . History clearly demonstrates that Evagrius' writings can be taken to support isochristism and pantheism . Such interpretations are an undeniable part of the broad tradition that bears Evagrius' writings down to us. However, there is nothing in the ' Great Letter' that compels us to carry this interpretation forward. An equally plausible - and less methodologically fraught - interpretation of divine and human union in Evagrian theology would not be prejudiced by subsequent events in the history of Origenism. It would instead focus on the text at hand. The resulting interpretation , as I have outlined it, cannot be firmly established in the scope of an exploratory note. But, even so , the evidence already available justifies some hope that a better evaluation of Evagrius is not out of reach.

22 See Evagrius, ' Great Letter' 23 (616 Frankenberg). 23 Evagrius, ' Great Letter' 22 (616 Frankenberg).

La personne du Christ dans l'histoire selon Saint Jean Chrysostome

Elias MOUTSOULAS , Athens

La personne de Jésus Christ se trouve au centre de la théologie du grand Père. Par conséquent l'étude de sa Christologie ne peut pas être épuisée dans une courte étude. Malgré celà les deux événements, les deux millénaires du moment de l'incarnation du Seigneur et les mille et six cents ans de la mort de saint Jean que nous fêtons cette année nous permettent de l'approcher dans ses points principaux. Nous savons que Jean Chrysostome appartient à l'école d'Antioche qui insistait sur la nature humaine du Seigneur par antithèse à l'école d'Alexandrie qui exaltait sa nature divine. Saint Jean fut un des plus grand Pères de l'Église et le plus authentique interprète de la théologie de saint Paul. Par conséquent la personne du Christ qui est au centre de la théologie de l'apôtre des nations est naturellement au centre de la théologie de Jean. Sain Jean écrit dans son commentaire sur la première lettre à Timothée de Saint Paul: < « L'homme est devenu Dieu et Dieu l'homme ... celui qui est aux cieux est descendu par condescendance et celui qui est sur la terre est monté par philanthropie ... Dieu est arrivé à la terre et l'homme est monté au ciel (1Tim. 11 : 1 ; PG 62,555). On a justement remarqué que tout le mystère de la foi se trouve inclu dans l'expression > .> En donnant la définition de la condescendance il dit. « Qu'est ce qu'est la condescendance? Quand Dieu se présente non comme il est mais comme on peu le voir en adoptant sa manifestation à l'impuissance à la maladie des voyants>> .10 Et il conclut: « Lorsque tu écoutes le prophète qui dit. J'ai vu le Seigneur. Ne pense pas qu'il a vu son essence mais sa condescendance et cette pas si bien que les puissances célestes . Il n'a pas pu voir si bien que les chérubins » .11 Saint Jean distingue nettement les trois personnes de la Trinité de toute la création. À sa 4e homélie « Sur l'incompréhensibilité de Dieu » il remarque : » et « impliquent l'idée de temps ; impossible de les concevoir en dehors d'un temps . Dieu par sa nature surpasse les siècles.16 À sa 6º homélie au même Évangile il remarque: Je n'ai besoin l'aucun témoignage que je suis Dieu et Fils authentique de Dieu et de la même essence pure et honorée... car mon intérêt est la salut des hommes, à cause de cela je suis descendu à cet état d'humilité pour faire mon témoignage à l'humanité.¹7 En revenant sur le même sujet à la 11º homélie il remarque : « Celui qui était vrai Fils de Dieu est devenu vrai Fils de l'homme afin qu'il fasse les fils des hommes enfants de Dieu . Lorsque ce qui se trouve en haut parle avec ce qui se trouve en bas d'aucune façon ne perd pas sa gloire. Au contraire il hausse ceci de son état d'humilité. C'est ce que le Christ a fait. Sa descendance d'aucune façon n'a minimisé sa nature propre, mais nous qui vivons toujours dans l'ignominie et l'obscurité nous a conduits à une gloire inexprimable » .18 Un peu plus bas il remarque: « Quand tu écoutes que le Logos est devenu sarx ne trouble pas et ne t'abatte pas. Ce n'est pas son essence (divine) qui est devenu corps (qui a assumé un corps). Ceci est vraiment impie même de penser, mais restant ce qu'elle est a assumé la forme du servant».19 Et il ajoute: « Je n'ai pas parlé d'un changement de cette nature inchangeable mais d'une habitation . Et ce qui habite n'est pas le même de la tente mais différent ... différent selon l'essence . Quand à l'union et à la cohérence le Dieu - Logos et la chair sont un, mais il n'y a pas une confusion ou dévastation des essences mais union indicible et inexprimable. Quand au >20

16 17 18 19 20

Hom. 4,2 (PG 52 , 48). Ibid. 65 . PG 59, 79. Ibid. PG 59, 80.

La personne du Christ dans l'histoire selon Saint Jean Chrysostome

233

Bien que, comme nous avons vu, Chrysostome n'a pas écrit aucune œuvre systématique il exprime vraiment la tradition. Le fait qu'il était disciple de Diodore de Tarse ne l'a pas influencé. Nous ne pouvons pas prétendre qu'il exprime la christologie antiochienne. Il préfère au lieu du terme >> d'utiliser d'autres expressions semblables et fait nettement distinction entre «> .44 À son 56° homélie en interprétant le «C'est lui mon Fils aimé auquel j'ai donné tout mon aspiration» il remarque : « Il ne l'aime pas seulement car il l'a né mais car il est égale à lui et a la même volonté».45 Et il continue :