Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:44:39.324Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remarks on Christopher Beeley, Gregory of Nazianzus on the Trinity and the Knowledge of God. In Your light we shall see light1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2011

Volker Henning Drecoll
Volker Henning Drecoll*
Affiliation:
University of Tubingen, Liebermeisterstrasse 18, 72076 Tubingen, Germanyvolker.drecoll@uni-tuebingen.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The trinitarian theology of Gregory of Nazianzus is an important topic in patristic studies which is too often ignored by modern scholars. The aim of Beeley's book (like that of John McGuckin) is to deepen the study of this theologian who became very important for the later Orthodox tradition. Beeley wants to view Gregory not simply as one of the three Cappadocians or to make a short systematisation of the Theological Orations (or. 27–31), but rather to see his theology as a whole in its historical context. This makes the work an important contribution to historical studies in patristics, and I have learnt much from reading this book. The following remarks, even when critical, are intended to raise new topics for discussion, though controversial in some aspects.

Type
Article Review
Information
Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 64 , Issue 4 , November 2011 , pp. 456 - 473
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 McGuckin, John, St Cyril of Alexandria, the Christological Controversy: Its History, Theology, and Texts (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae, 23, Leiden, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, St Gregory of Nazianzus: An Intellectual Biography (New York: Crestwood, 2001).

3 This article arose from ‘Books under discussion’ at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in New Orleans. I am grateful to Mark Weedman and Christopher Beeley for the openness of discussion.

4 Stde Nazianze, Grégoire, Œuvres poétiques: Poèmes personnels, ed. Tuilier, André and Bady, Guillaume, tr. and notes by Bernardi, Jean (Paris: Collection des Universités de France, 2004), 2.1.1–11Google Scholar.

5 Alcinoos, , Enseignement des doctrines de Platon, introd., ed. and commentary by Whittaker, John, tr. Louis, Pierre (Paris: Collection des Universités de France, 1990)Google Scholar.

6 Athanasius, Werke, 1/1, Die Dogmatischen Schriften, ed. Martin Tetz, 1. Lieferung, Epistula ad episcopos Aegypti et Libyae, ed. Karin Metzler, Dirk Hansen and Kyriakos Savvidis (Berlin and New York, 1996); 2. Lieferung, Orationes I et II contra Arianos, ed. Karin Metzler, rev. Kyriakos Savvidis (Berlin and New York, 1998); 3. Lieferung, Oratio III contra Arianos, ed. Karin Metzler, rev. Kyriakos Savvidis (Berlin and New York, 2000; vol. 2, Die ‘Apologien’, ed. Hanns Christof Brennecke, Uta Heil and Annette von Stockhausen, 8. Lieferung (Berlin and New York, 2006); vol. 3/1. Dokumente zur Geschichte des Arianischen Streites, ed. Hanns Christof Brennecke, Uta Heil, Annette von Stockhausen and Angelika Wintjes, 3. Lieferung, Bis zur Ekthesis Makrostichos (Berlin and New York, 2007).

7 di Cesarea, Basilio, Le lettere, ed. and tr. Patrucco, Marcella Forlin, vol. 1 (Corona Patrum 11; Turin, 1983)Google Scholar; di Cesarea, Basilio, Discorso ai Giovani: Oratio ad adolescentes, ed. Bruni, Leonardo and Naldini, Mario (Biblioteca Patristica 3, 2nd edition; Florence, 1990)Google Scholar.

8 It should be: De deitate filii et spiritus sancti et in Abraham, ed. Ernestus Rhein, in Gregorii Nysseni Sermones Pars III, ed. Friedhelm Mann (Opera 10/2; Leiden and New York, 1996), pp. 1–144; In sanctam Pentecosten (vulgo De spiritu sancto sive In Pentecosten), ed. Dörte Teske, in Gregorii Nysseni Sermones Pars III, ed. Friedhelm Mann (Opera 10/2; Leiden and New York, 1996), pp. 271–92; Nysseni, GregoriiDe vita Moysis, ed. Musurillo, Herbertus (Opera 7/1; Leiden, 1964; repr. Leiden and New York, 1991)Google Scholar. Gregory did not write Against Macedonius (sic Beeley, p. 336), but Against the Macedonians, and De opificio hominis is not yet edited in the GNO (sic Beeley, p. 335), but the Forbes edition should be used: Τοῦ ἐν ἁγίοις πατρὸς ἡμῶν Γρηγορίου ἐπισκόπου Νύσσης ἀδɛλφοῦ τοῦ μɛγάλου βασιλɛίου τὰ ɛὑρισκόμɛνα πάντα, ed. George H. Forbes (Burntisland, 1855), vol. 1, pp. 103–319.

9 It should be the revised text of SUC 1 (Die apostolischen Väter, ed. Joseph Anton Fischer, Schriften des Urchristentums 1/10, Darmstadt, 1993) instead of SC 10bis.

10 Plotini Opera, ed. Paul Henry and Hans-Rudolf Schwyzer, vol. 1, Porphyrii Vita Plotini: Enneades I–III (Scriptorum Classicorum Bibliotheca Oxoniensis; Oxford: OUP, 1964; repr. 1978); vol. 2, Enneades IV–V (Oxford: OUP, 1977); vol. 3, Enneas VI (Oxford: OUP, 1982).

11 Sokrates. Kirchengeschichte, ed. Günther Christian Hansen, with studies by Manja Širinjan (GCS nf 1; Berlin, 1995).

12 Cf. Evstathii Antiocheni, Patris Nicaeni, Opera qvae svpersvunt omnia, ed. José H. Declerck (Corpus Christianorum. Series Graeca 51; Turnhout, 2002); Seibt, Klaus, Die Theologie des Markell von Ankyra (Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 59; Berlin and New York, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Vinzent, Markus, Markell von Ankyra. Die Fragmente. Der Brief an Julius von Rom (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 39; Leiden and New York, 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Martin, Annick, Athanase d'Alexandrie et l'église d'Égypte au IVe siècle (328–373) (Collection de l'École Française de Rome 216; Rome, 1996)Google Scholar; Morales, Xavier, La théologie trinitaire d'Athanase d'Alexandrie (Collection des Études Augustiniennes: Série Antiquité 180; Paris, 2006)Google Scholar; Heil, Uta, Athanasius von Alexandrien: De sententia Dionysii (Patristische Texte und Studien 52; Berlin and New York, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; von Stockhausen, Annette, Athanasius von Alexandrien: Epistula ad Afros (Patristische Texte und Studien 56; Berlin and New York, 2002)Google Scholar; Kösters, Oliver, Die Trinitätslehre des Epiphanius von Salamis: Ein Kommentar zum ‘Ancoratus’ (Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte 86; Göttingen, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Lexicon Gregorianum: Wörterbuch zu den Schriften Gregors von Nyssa, vols 1–7, compiled Friedhelm Mann, ed. Wolf-Dieter Hauschild (Leiden and Boston, 1999–2009): this hits the lemmata up to pi. Lilla, Salvatore R.C., Neuplatonisches Gedankengut in den ‘Homilien über die Seligpreisungen’ Gregors von Nyssa (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 68; Leiden and Boston, 2004)Google Scholar; Ludlow, Morwenna, Gregory of Nyssa: Ancient and (Post)modern (Oxford: OUP, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Peroli, Enrico, Il Platonismo e l'antropologia filosofica di Gregorio di Nissa: Con particolare riferimento agli influssi di Platone, Plotino e Porfirio (Pubblicazioni del Centro di Ricerche di Metafisica: Studi e testi 5; Mailand, 1993)Google Scholar; Drobner, Hubertus R. and Viciano, Alberto (eds), Gregory of Nyssa: Homilies on the Beatitudes (Proceedings of the Eighth International Colloquium on Gregory of Nyssa, Paderborn, 14–18 Sept. 1998)Google Scholar (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 52; Leiden and Boston, 2000); Karfiková, Lenka, Douglass, Scot, and Zachhuber, Johannes (eds), Gregory of Nyssa: Contra Eunomium II (Proceedings of the 10th International Colloquium on Gregory of Nyssa (Olomouc, 15–18 Sept. 2004) (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 82; Leiden and Boston, 2007)Google Scholar.

15 Koschorke, Klaus, Spuren der alten Liebe: Studien zum Kirchenbegriff des Basilius von Caesarea (Paradosis 32; Freiburg (Switzerland), 1991)Google Scholar; Girardi, Mario, Basilio di Cesarea interprete della Scrittura: Lessico, principi eremeneutici, prassi (Quaderni di Vetera Christianorum 26; Bari, 1998)Google Scholar; Gain, Benoît, L’ Église de Cappadoce au IVe siècle d'après la correspondence de Basile de Césarée (330–379) (Orientalia Christiana analecta 225; Rome, 1985)Google Scholar; Robert Pouchet, Basile le Grand et son univers d'amis d'après sa correspondance: Une stratégie de communion (Studia Ephemeridis ‘Augustinianum’ 36; Rome, 1992); Drecoll, Volker Henning, Die Entwicklung der Trinitätslehre des Basilius von Cäsarea: Sein Weg vom Homöusianer zum Neonizäner (Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte 66; Göttingen, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the discussion about the Creed of 381, cf. Volker Henning Drecoll, ‘Nicaeno-Constantinopolitanum’, in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart (Tübingen, 2003), vol. 6, pp. 281–3 (with bibliographical references).

16 Cf. Brennecke, Hanns Christof, Studien zur Geschichte der Homöer: Der Osten bis zum Ende der homöischen Reichskirche (Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 73; Tübingen, 1988)Google Scholar, 53, for their support of Aetius cf. ibid., p. 44, n. 21, and pp. 109–14.

17 Cf. Philostorgius, h.e. 4.12 (GCS Philostorgius p. 64, ll. 5–7) who mentions only another Basil without further identification (so Philostorgius is not affirming that Basil of Caesarea is present at Constaninople). Even Eunomius, Apology 1 (p. 34, ll. 1–2 Vaggione) and Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius 1.78–82 (GNO 1, p. 49, l. 9–p. 50, l. 23) give no clear evidence for such a debate between Basil and Aetius. I am not convinced that Against Eunomius 1.82 (GNO 1, p. 50, ll. 22–3) implies a ‘vorzeitige Abreise’ of Basil, as argued by Röder, Jürgen-André, Gregor von Nyssa: Contra Eunomium I, 1–146 (Patrologia 2; Frankfurt am Main, 1993)Google Scholar, 52.223.

18 Cf. Drecoll, Volker Henning, art. ‘Agennesia/ἀγɛννησία’, in Mateo-Seco, Lucas Francisco and Maspero, Giulio (eds), The Brill Dictionary of Gregory of Nyssa (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 99; Leiden and Boston, 2010), pp. 9–11Google Scholar.

19 It should be Meletius, not Melitius as Holl conjectured (cf. Epiphanius, Panarion haeresium 73.28.1–4; 29.1; 33.5; 34.3; GCS Epiphanius III; pp. 302–3, 308–9); Meletius is the regular form also in the letters of Basil and his On the Holy Spirit 29.74 (SC 17bis, p. 512, l. 40).

20 Cf. for the homean character of the sermon Brennecke, Hanns Christof, ‘Erwägungen zu den Anfängen des Neunizänismus’, in Papandreou, Damaskios, Bienert, Wolfgang A. and Schäferdiek, Knut (eds), Oecumenica et Patristica. Festschrift für Wilhelm Schneemelcher zum 75. Geburtstag (Stuttgart, 1989), pp. 241–57Google Scholar; quoted according to Brennecke, Hanns Christof, Ecclesia est in re publica. Studien zur Kirchen- und Theologiegeschichte im Kontext des Imperium Romanum (Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 100; Berlin and New York, 2007), pp. 49–68Google Scholar, esp. 57; Drecoll, Trinitätslehre, pp. 10–15; Dünzl, Franz, ‘Die Absetzung des Bischofs Meletius von Antiochien 361 n.Chr.’, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 43 (2000), pp. 71–93Google Scholar. The arguments of Spoerl, Kelly McCarthy, ‘The Schism at Antioch since Cavallera’, in Barnes, Michel and Williams, Daniel H. (eds), Arianism after Arius: Essays on the Development of the Fourth Century Trinitarian Conflict (Edinburgh, 1993), pp. 101–26Google Scholar, who favours a ‘homoiousian character’ of the homily, are not convincing.

21 Cf. Brennecke, ‘Neunizänismus’, pp. 62, 66–7.

22 Cf. Drecoll, Trinitätslehre, pp. 140, 145–6.

23 It is crucial that in his On the Holy Spirit, Basil does not refer to the problems of ep. 125: neither to the Creed of Nicaea, nor to the difference between οὐσία and ὑπόστασις. Since ep. 125 is the central witness for the discussions directly before the break between Basil and Eustathius, I doubt if the arguments mentioned in On the Holy Spirit belong to the same context whose result is ep. 125. That is why I am not convinced by the so-called ‘Protokoll-Hypothese’ of Dörries, Hermann, De Spiritu Sancto: Der Beitrag des Basilius zum Abschluß des trinitarischen Dogmas (Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-historische Klasse 3/39; Göttingen, 1956)Google Scholar; Drecoll, Trinitätslehre, pp. 183–95.

24 Cf. Drecoll, Trinitätslehre, p. 272.

25 The tradition of the Kata meros Pistis under the name of Gregory Thaumaturgus (cf. Lietzmann, Hans, Apollinaris von Laodicea und seine Schule (Texte und Untersuchungen; Tübingen, 1904), 129–67Google Scholar) is not datable to the years before 380, say.

26 Cf. Basil of Caesarea, On the Holy Spirit 29.74 (SC 17bis; p. 510, l. 1–p. 512, l. 38).

27 Cf. Heil, Athanasius; Luise Abramowski, ‘Dionys von Rom († 268) und Dionys von Alexandrien († 264/5) in den arianischen Streitigkeiten des 4. Jahrhunderts, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 93 (1982), pp. 240–72.

28 Cf. Drecoll, Trinitätslehre, pp. 118–29, 138–40; my observations about the link between Basil, Against Eunomius III and Athanasius’ Letters to Serapion are discussed by Troiano, Marina, ‘Il Contra Eunomium III di Basiio di Cesarea e le Epistole ad Serapionem I–IV di Atanasio di Alexandria: Nota comparativa’, Augustinianum 41 (2001), pp. 59–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. Ayres, Lewis, Nicaea and its Legacy: An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology (Oxford: OUP, 2004), p. 221CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 Even if Athanasius refused to react to and to accomplish Basil's proposals, these letters show that Basil accepted the impact of Athanasius and his position, cf. for this Heil, Uta, ‘Athanasius und Basilius’, Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum 10 (2006), pp. 103–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 It may be noted in this context that even Western bishops accepted the Tomus to the Antiochenes (Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari). Gregory of Nazianzus, or. 21.35 (SC 270; p. 186, ll. 32–6) does not refer to the synod of Antiochia 362, but to events after the beginning of the reign of Jovian (mentioned in or. 21.33; SC 270, p. 180, ll. 6–7), so perhaps Gregory has in mind here some contacts of Athanasius pursuing his strategy of 362 in the later 360s (and perhaps Basil in his letters was reacting to these reconciling activities of Athanasius).

31 The second ‘l’ in the name is perhaps only introduced in the texts of the fifth century, so I would prefer Apolinarius with only one ‘l’ (if not using the German ‘Apollinaris’ or the French ‘Apollinaire’).

32 I am skipping here all Beeley's references to modern views, textbook views etc.; normally Beeley gives no references for these, so the reader can only guess which textbooks are meant.

33 Only the late witness of Justinian and the Doctrina Patrum suggest that the writing normally called To Jovian is indeed a creed sent to the Emperor in 362, but this remains uncertain, cf. Lietzmann, Apollinaris von Laodicea, pp. 119–20. (Lietzmann seems to be quite optimistic in that, cf. ibid., p. 146.) This text is interesting for the denial of two natures in the incarnate, but the exact christological profile (how the divine Logos and the human nature with soul and flesh come together) remains obscure.

34 Of course, fragm. 89 Lietzmann should not be isolated, but interpreted in the context of the Antirrheticus; the idea of the νοῦς ἔνσαρκος shows clearly the fundamental structure of Apolinarius’ anthropology, but of course: οὐκ ἄψυχος ἡ σάρξ (fragm. 22 Lietzmann), that's why even Apolinarius can use bipartite (spirit or mind and flesh) and tripartite patterns (spirit/mind–soul–flesh), cf. Mühlenberg, Ekkehard, ‘Apollinaris von Laodicea’, Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte 23 (Göttingen, 1969), 150–1, 179–80Google Scholar.

35 Cf. Basil, Against Eunomius 2.3 (SC 305, 16.6–16). Beeley's tr. of τοὺς τῆς οἰκονομίας λόγους as ‘the principles of the economy’ (p. 296) is misleading, οἱ λόγοι refers to the apostolic manner of using words, parallel to λέξις, and therefore Basil underlines the relative clause in Acts 2:36.

36 This can be seen in Against Eunomius 3, where Basil clearly concedes a strong subordinationism, cf. Against Eunomius 3.1 (SC 305, 146.24–8); 3.2 (SC 305, 150.1–152.17).

37 Basil, On the Hexaemeron 1.3–4 is only one approach. More important to me seems the attempt to reconstruct the holiness of the angels in On the Holy Spirit 16.38 (SC 17bis, 380.38–384.113).

38 Cf. Hübner, Reinhard, ‘Gregor von Nyssa als Verfasser der sog. Ep. 38 des Basilius: Zum unterschiedlichen Verständnis der ou1si3a bei den kappadozischen Brüdern’, in Fontaine, Jacques and Kannengiesser, Charles (eds), Epektasis: Mélanges patristiques offerts au Cardinal Jean Daniélou (Beauchesne, 1972), pp. 463–90Google Scholar; Drecoll, Trinitätslehre, pp. 63–7, 319–24.

39 Cf. Drecoll, Trinitätslehre, pp. 284–5, for the development of Basil's use of ὑπόστασις; ibid., pp. 75–84, 256–8, for Basil's biblical approach.

40 Ep. 38 is sometimes mentioned as ‘Ep. Pet.’ with chapters, but also as ep. 38 and with Migne-columns.

41 The most important analysis of this thought is: Mühlenberg, Ekkehard, ‘Die Unendlichkeit Gottes bei Gregor von Nyssa: Gregors Kritik am Gottesbegriff der klassischen Metaphysik’, Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte 16 (Göttingen, 1966)Google Scholar.

42 Cf. e.g. Dünzl, Franz, ‘Braut und Bräutigam: Die Auslegung des Canticum durch Gregor von Nyssa’, Beiträge zur Geschichte der biblischen Exegese 32 (Tübingen 1993), pp. 291–321Google Scholar.

43 Cf. Simonetti, Manlio, La crisi Ariana nel IV secolo (Studi Ephemeridis Augustiniana 11; Rome, 1975)Google Scholar. Cf. Adolf von Harnack, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, vol. 2, Die Entwicklung des kirchlichen Dogmas 1/5 (Tübingen, 1931), pp. 260–75, esp. pp. 260–1: ‘Das “Homousios” hat schließlich nicht gesiegt, sondern die homöusianische Lehre, welche mit dem “Homousios” capitulirt hat.’ Cf. Holl, Karl, Amphilochius von Ikonium in seinem Verhältnis zu den großen Kappadoziern (Tübingen and Leipzig, 1904)Google Scholar, e.g. pp. 128–37.

44 Cf. Strutwolf, Holger, Die Trinitätstheologie und Christologie des Euseb von Caesarea: Eine dogmengeschichtliche Untersuchung seiner Platonismusrezeption und Wirkungsgeschichte (Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte 72; Göttingen, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, though I am not sure if Strutwolf is right on the impact of the pneumatology in the thought of Eusebius; in my view the uncertainties about the position of the Holy Spirit can be traced back to the Origenistic tradition as it can be found in Eusebius’ On the Ecclesiastical Theology, esp. 3.5–6. GCS Eusebius 4.159.34–164.36.

45 I wonder why this clear diheretic section is only briefly mentioned in Beeley's book.

46 Cf. Hippolytus, Refutation 9.10.11 (PTS 25.348.59–61).

47 Cf. Basil, Against Eunomius 1.24–5 (SC 299, 256.8–262.44); Drecoll, Trinitätslehre, pp. 96–9.