Anda di halaman 1dari 21

CAPPADOCIAN LEGACY

ACriticalAppraisal
Editedby
DoruCostacheandPhilipKariatlis
StAndrewsOrthodoxPress
Sydney,2013
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 1 5/09/13 12:10 AM
Textcopyright2013remainswiththeauthors
Allrightsreserved.ExceptforanyfairdealingpermittedundertheCopyrightAct,
nopartofthisbookmaybereproducedbyanymeanswithoutpriorpermission.
Inquiriesshouldbemadetothepublisher.
NationalLibraryofAustraliaCataloguing-in-Publicationentry
Title: Cappadocianlegacy/DoruCostacheandPhilipKariatlis(eds).
ISBN: 978-0-9775974-9-9(paperback)
Notes: Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
Subjects: Gregory,ofNazianzus,Saint.
Basil,Saint,BishopofCaesarea,
approximately329-379.
Gregory,ofNyssa,Saint,
approximately335-approximately394
Theology--Earlyworksto1800
Christiansaints--Biography--Earlyworksto1800.
OtherAuthors/Contributors:
Costache,Doru,editor.
Kariatlis,Philip,editor.
DeweyNumber:230
StAndrewsOrthodoxPress
242ClevelandStreet,Redfern,NSW,2016
www.standrewsorthodoxpress.com.au
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 2 5/09/13 12:10 AM
Contents
PREFACE..................................................................................................................................................5
1.THECAPPADOCIANSWITHINTRADITION
TheCappadocianFathersasFoundersofByzantineThought
DavidBradshaw.....................................................................................................................................11
WeretheFathersProponentsofaFamilialImagoTrinitatis?
AdamG.Cooper.................................................................................................................................. 23
2.THELEGACYOFSTBASILTHEGREAT
StBasiltheGreatsExpositionofNiceneOrthodoxy
JohnAnthonyMcGuckin......................................................................................................................47
WhyDidntStBasilWriteinNewTestamentGreek?
JohnA.L.Lee............................................................................................................................................61
Light(/)anditsLiturgicalFoundationintheTeaching
ofStBasiltheGreat
AdrianMarinescu..................................................................................................................................77
ChristianWorldview:UnderstandingsfromStBasiltheGreat
DoruCostache.........................................................................................................................................97
StBasilsTrinitarianDoctrine:AHarmoniousSynthesisof
GreekPaideiaandtheScripturalWorldview
PhilipKariatlis..................................................................................................................................... 127
TheRecapitulationofHistoryandtheEighthDay:
AspectsofStBasiltheGreatsEschatologicalVision
MarioBaghos........................................................................................................................................ 151
StBasiltheGreatasEducator:ImplicationsfromtheAddresstoYouth
DimitriKepreotes................................................................................................................................ 169
3.THELEGACYOFSTGREGORYTHETHEOLOGIAN
TheTeachingsofGregoryofNazianzusontheTrinity
ArchbishopStylianosofAustralia................................................................................................ 187
Self-KnowledgeandKnowledgeofGod
accordingtoStGregorytheTheologian
GeorgiosMantzarides....................................................................................................................... 203
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 3 5/09/13 12:10 AM
GregorytheTheologianASpiritualPortrait
ArchbishopStylianosofAustralia................................................................................................ 215
SeekingOuttheAntecedentsoftheMaximian
TheoryofEverything:StGregorytheTheologiansOration28.
DoruCostache...................................................................................................................................... 225
Whatthen?IstheSpiritGod?Certainly!StGregorysTeaching
ontheHolySpiritastheBasisoftheWorldsSalvation
PhilipKariatlis..................................................................................................................................... 243
ScriptureintheWorksofStGregorytheTheologian
MargaretBeirne.................................................................................................................................. 261
StGregorytheTheologiansExistentialMetanarrativeofHistory
MarioBaghos........................................................................................................................................ 275
FeaturesoftheTheandricMysteryofChristin
theChristologyofStGregorytheTheologian
AnthonyPapantoniou....................................................................................................................... 299
4.THELEGACYOFSTGREGORYOFNYSSA
DivineProvidenceandFreeWillinGregoryofNyssa
andhisTheologicalMilieu
BronwenNeil........................................................................................................................................ 315
DazzlingDarknessTheMysticalorTheophanic
TheologyofStGregoryofNyssa
PhilipKariatlis..................................................................................................................................... 329
ApproachingAnApologyfortheHexaemeron:
ItsAims,MethodandDiscourse
DoruCostache...................................................................................................................................... 349
SpiritualEnrichmentthroughExegesis:StGregoryofNyssa
andtheScriptures
MargaretBeirne.................................................................................................................................. 373
ReconsideringApokatastasisinStGregoryofNyssas
OnTheSoulandResurrectionandtheCatecheticalOration
MarioBaghos........................................................................................................................................ 387
INFORMATIONABOUTTHECONTRIBUTORS.................................................................. 417
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 4 5/09/13 12:10 AM
225
SeekingOuttheAntecedentsoftheMaximianTheory
ofEverything:
StGregorytheTheologiansOration38
DoruCostache
Abstract: The papei begins by biiely uesciibing the famous theoiy
of everything expounded by St Maximus the Confessor in Bificulty
41. This fascinating Maximian narrative endeavours to give an ac-
countofthewholeofreality,initscomplexmulti-levelstructure.Al-
thoughStMaximusmaintains,bywayofintroduction,thatthisteach-
ingdrawsonthetraditionofthesaints,nothingsimilarcanbefound
in the writings of previous Church fathers. Contemporary scholars
haveattimesattemptedtosearchfortherootsofthistradition,with-
outmuchsuccess.Notclaimingtobeexhaustive,thispaperexplores
apossibletrajectory,ignoredbyscholarship,withintwopassages(11
and17)inStGregorytheTheologiansOration38,consideredinthe
contextofhiscelebratedTheophanysermons.
The prologue of Bificulty 41
1
claims that St Naximus theoiy of eveiy-
thing,
2
presentedwithinasoteriologicalframework
3
anu uealing with ive
divisions and syntheses of reality, draws on the mystical tradition of the
saints. The subsequent depiction has, however, no equivalent in the re-
corded patristic tradition. This is quite an intriguing aspect. Looking for
This is a reworked and expanded version of the article with the same title, published in
Phronema 26:2 (2011): 27-45. I am grateful to Fr Bogdan Bucur, Adam Cooper, Philip
Kariatlis,MarioBaghosandthePhronema reviewers for tbeir potient rectiicotion of my
stylisticshortcomingsandtheirconstructivesuggestions.
1
PG91,1304D.ForanEnglishversion,seeAndrewLouth,MaximustheConfessor(London
andNewYork:Routledge,1996),156.
2
The designation of St Maximus vision of reality in Bificulty 41 and parallels, like To
Thalassius, 48 (PG 90, 436AB) as a theory of everything belongs to me. I consistently
useu this label thioughout my unpublisheu uoctoial thesis Logos anu Cieation Fiom
theAnthropicCosmologicalPrincipletotheTheanthropocosmicPerspective(Universi-
ty of Buchaiest in Romanian anu in the aiticle uoing 0pwaius with Eveiything
You Are: The Unifying Ladder of St Maximus the Confessor, in Basarab Nicolescu and
MagdaStavinschi(eds.),ScienceandOrthodoxy:ANecessaryDialogue(Bucuie,ti:Curtea
Veche,2006):135-144.
3
PG91,1304D-1313B.Cf.

Louth,MaximustheConfessor,156-62.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 225 5/09/13 12:11 AM
226
the souices of the theoiy ones iist ieaction woulu then be to asciibe it to
theunwrittenlore,whichincidentallymightbecorrect.Icannottreatthis
aspecthere.Nevertheless,inrecenttimestherehavebeenattemptstotrace
theliteraryantecedentsofthisworldview;below,Ishalladdressanumber
ofsuchendeavours.
Mypurposeinthefollowingistoexpoundonthesourcesofthetheory,
focusingontheinputofStGregorytheTheologian.Insodoing,Ichallenge
thesurprisinglackofinterestmanifestedbycontemporaryscholarshipin
St Gregory when seeking out the antecedents of the Confessors elabora-
tions.BysheddingnewlightontheTheologiansOration38.11and38.17
(consideredinthecontextoftheTheophanysermons,38-40)anditscon-
tributiontotheprocessthatledtotheMaximianconstruct,thispaperin-
tendstoofferamodesttributetoStGregoryandhislegacy.
StMaximusTheoryofEverything
The opening section of constitutes a signiicant contiibution
totheChristianworldview,whichshouldbeconsideredalbeitinabroad
senseascognatewiththecurrentquestforatheoryofeverything.
4
Indeed,
St Maximus attempted to map the ultimate elements of reality, as known
toByzantinecosmography,andtogatherthemintoacomprehensivesyn-
thesis. This effort emerges for instance in his strenuous contemplation of
the divine thoughts, or ,
5
which both traverse and bridge all realms:
theuncreated,theangelicnoospheretoparaphraseTeilharddeChardins
coinage,thecosmos,thebiosphereandhumankind.Withoutbeingartic-
4
Perhapsexotictosomereaders,thenotionofatheoryofeverythingiscommonincon-
temporarycosmology.Itreferstothecurrenteffortsofreachinganalgorithmicformula
abletoaccountforallofreality.ForPaulDavies,itisthequestforacompletedescrip-
tion of the woilu which stems fiom the iuea that all physical laws coulu be uniieu into
asinglemathematicalscheme.Cf.PaulDavies,TheMindofGod:ScienceandtheSearch
forUltimateMeaning(PenguinBooks,1992),21,33,136.SeealsoJohnD.Barrow,The
ConstantsofNature:FromAlphatoOmegatheNumbersThatEncodetheDeepestSecrets
oftheUniverse(NewYork:PantheonBooks,2002),53-76.Basedontheconvictionthat
theuniverseisamanifestationofrationalorder(Davies,TheMindofGod,22,165),the
concept iepiesents a scientiic alteinative to what the humanities uesciibe as a meta-
narrative,ortheunderlyingreasonforsomeparticulardevelopmentsandevents.Davies
arguesconvincinglythatalthoughinitselfaprovokingthoughtasingle,bothconsistent
and complete theory of everything is impossible (cf. Davies, The Mind of God, 167-68;
seealsoBarrow,TheConstantsofNature,285,291).Inthefollowing,Ishallutilisethe
concept with this relative connotation, as a depiction of reality that does not claim to
encompassallofitsstrands.
5
Seee.g.7(PG91,1077C-1080B,1081AB).
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 226 5/09/13 12:11 AM
227
ulatedinthecomplexlanguageofcontemporarymathematics,thisconcept
is no less a theoiy of eveiything In fact anu keeping the piopoitions the
Confessorsnumerologicaldigressions
6
mightsuggestanintentiontogive
theChristianworldviewanalternatemathematicalshape,perhapsevoca-
tiveofthePythagoreansystem.ThisaspectbringstheMaximianconstruct
evenclosertothecurrentnotionofatheoryofeverything.
That said, we move to the analysis of this enticing expression of St
Maximus worldview. As presented in 41,
7
the whole of reality
encompasses ive iiieuucible uivisions oi polaiities In my tianslation the
textreadsasfollows.
The iist polaiity sepaiates the entiie cieateu natuie
)[]fromtheuncreatednature(
).[]Thesecondisthataccordingtowhichtheentirebeing
thathasreceivedexistencefromGodbycreationisdifferentiatedinto
theintelligibleandthesensible(

).Thethirdisthat
by which the sensible being is divided into sky and earth (
).Thefourthisthatbywhichtheearthisdividedintoparadise
andtheinhabitedworld( Anu the ifth
isthatbywhichthehumanbeing,likeacomprehensiveworkshopof
everything and which mediates physically between the edges of all
polarities,[]isdividedintomaleandfemale( ).
The ive polaiities constitute an encompassing uesciiption of ieality which
evokesbothculturalandscripturalfeatures,andwhichpresentstheseele-
mentsintheformofastructuredhierarchythePorphyriantree,accord-
ingtoTorsteinTheodorTollefsen.
8
Initssequenceoflayers,thishierarchy
beginswiththemostgeneralaspecttoendwiththemostparticularone,as
uepicteu by the Chiistian woiluview Thus the iist polaiity coiiesponuing
tothefundamentalChristiandivisionofbeingasseenbyStAthanasiusand
theCappadocians,considerstheultimateontologicalriftattheheartofre-
ality,whichdividestheuncreatedandcreatedrealms;thesecond,evoking
thegreatPlatonicdivision,addressesthediversitypertainingtothewhole
ofcreation,consistingoftheintelligibleandthesensible;thethird,theAr-
istotelian division, refers to the sensible domain, subdivided into sky and
6
See Bespina B Piassas Intiouuction to StMaximustheConfessorsQuestionsandDoubts
(DeKalb:NorthernIllinoisUniversityPress,2010),24-25.
7
PG91,1304D-1305B.
8
Toistein Theouoi Tollefsen The Ethical Consequences of the Chiistian Conception of
NatureasCreatedbyGod,StVladimirsTheologicalQuarterly45:4(2001):395-408,at
398.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 227 5/09/13 12:11 AM
228
eaith the fouith ieiteiating uenesis iuentiies on eaith the inhabiteu
zone oi the woilu of civilisation anu the paiauise anu the ifth evoking
Genesis1,highlightsthegenderdivisionasthebasicpolarityofhumankind.
St Naximus piesents the ive uivisions as existential challenges The
humanbeingappearstobeappointedbythecreatorLogoswiththetaskof
overcomingthesechallengesbytappingintothedivinerationalitythatper-
meatescreation.Theaccomplishmentofthistaskispossibleonlyforthose
thatlivevirtuously,
9
sincevirtuecorrespondstotheubiquitousgroundof
divinerationality.Theunifyingprocessadvancesinthereverseorderofthe
ive uivisions as follows
10
iist the human synthesis by way of oveicoming
the gender division; second, the union between the inhabited world and
paradise; third, the union of earth and sky, as the two main zones of the
visiblerealm;fourth,thesynthesisofthevisibleandinvisibledomains;and
ifth the communion of the cieateu anu the uncieateu Textually anu again
inmytranslation,StMaximusstatedasfollows.
the human being was intiouuceu among the othei beings as a inal
graceandanaturallinkofsorts()thatingen-
eralmediatesbyitsownpartsbetweenextremities,bringingtounity
()initselfthemany[things]thatarephysicallyseparated[].
BytheunionthatbringstogetherallthingstoGod,theircause,begin-
ning with its own uivision ie the ifth anu auvancing sequentially
and orderly through the intermediate [polarities], [the human be-
ing] reaches the end of the ascension accomplished through all the
realmsbyunionwithGod,inwhomthereisnodivision.
11
Nevertheless,humanityrelinquisheditstaskandbyabandoningthevirtu-
ouslifestylebecametheoriginofwhatcanbedepictedasnegativewaves.
12

Thesecatastrophicaftershockscausedthepolaritiestosharpen,threaten-
ingtodisruptthefabricoftheuniverseaphenomenonrepressedbythe
pioviuential inteivention of uou The piocess of giauual uniication was
boosteu anew by the incaination anu salviic economy of the Logos oui
Loiu Chiist thiough which all ive syntheses weie accomplisheu
13
Else-
where,inToThalassius,48,StMaximusponderedChristsmediatingaction
9
Pu C Cf Tollefsen The Ethical Consequences at Tollefsen ieheaises
thesameideayetseeminglynotallowingforthevirtuetobeinterpretedasanecosys-
temicfactor.
10
PG91,1305B-1308C.
11
41(PG91,1305BC).
12
SeeforinstanceToThalassius,64(PG90,696C).
13
Cf.41(PG91,1308CD).
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 228 5/09/13 12:11 AM
229
between the ive uivisions as an outcome of the hypostatic union by iepeat-
edlyusingtheverb heunited).
14
Although worthwhile for the Christian worldview in general, here is
neithei the place foi a uetaileu analysis of this magniicent constiuct with
its theocentric anthropology evaluated cosmologically) nor an investiga-
tion of its cultuial anu theological iamiications I must tuin now to the vai-
iousopinionsonthesourcesofStMaximustheory.
SeekingOuttheAntecedentsoftheMaximianTheory
Looking for the sources of the theory, many scholars assumed that there
musthavebeenadevelopmentoftheideafromsimplerformstothema-
tureelaborationbytheConfessor.Inspiteofthefactthat,alreadyin1941,
HansUrsvonBalthasarhighlightedtheoriginalityoftheMaximiansynthe-
sisandwarnedagainstreducingittothenumeroussourcesitreworked,
15

laterscholarsexhibitedapersistentinterestinidentifyingtheoriginofthe
Confessois theoiy Thus only a few yeais aftei the iist euition of the Cos-
micLiturgy,in1944VladimirLosskyimpliedthatthetheorystemsfromthe
patristicconsensusregardingthediversityofcreationbroughttounityinto
thehumanbeing.
16
However,hisallusionstoStBasiltheGreat,StGregory
ofNyssaandStIsaactheSyrian,failedtodemonstrateadirectconnection.
ThesamegoesforGeorgesFlorovskysloosereferencestoPhilo,StGregory
ofNyssaandNemesiusofEmessa.
17
Foity yeais aftei the iist euition of Losskys woik Lais Thunbeig uis-
cussedmorethoroughlythesourcesofStMaximusconstruct.Hesurveyed
aseriesofclassicalandChristianthinkers,focusingontheircontributions
to the concept of the miciocosm as an impoitant stage in the ielective pio-
cess that led to the Maximian theory.
18
The inclusion in this survey of St
GregorytheTheologiansuseofmicroscosmosinOration28.22isnote-
14
Cf.PG90,436AB.IamgratefultoAdamCooperforpointingouttometheconnection
between the ive syntheses anu the hypostatic union in ielation to this Naximian text
15
Cf.CosmicLiturgy:TheUniverseAccordingtoMaximustheConfessor,trans.byBrianE.
Daley,SJ(SanFrancisco:IgnatiusPress,2003),56-63.
16
Cf.TheMysticalTheologyoftheEasternChurch(Crestwood,NY:StVladimirsSeminary
Press,2002),106-108.
17
Cf. The Byzantine Fathers of the Sixth to Eight Century, trans. R. Miller and A. M. Doll-
inger-Labriolle(Vaduz:Bchervertriebsanstalt,1987),225-26.
18
Cf.MicrocosmandMediator:TheTheologicalAnthropologyofMaximustheConfessor,sec-
ondedition(ChicagoandLaSalle:OpenCourt,1995),132-35.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 229 5/09/13 12:11 AM
230
worthy
19
yetThunbergmanifestednointerestinOration38.11,wherethe
sameconceptisusedunderadifferentguiseasakindofsecondworld,
great within the small one as we shall see below. The Swedish scholar
concentrated much of his attention however on St Gregory of Nyssas On
theMakingofMan,16andTheGreatCatecheticalOration,6,
20
togetherwith
Nemesius of Emesas On the Nature of Man, 1.
21
He considered these pas-
sagestohavehadacrucialimpactuponStMaximusthought,andprovid-
edbriefdescriptionsoftherespectivecontexts.Thus,thetextsintheNys-
senexalthumandignity,whichconsistsinthefactofbeinginGodsimage,
within an attempt to give a Christian spin to the philosophical concept of
themicrocosm.Inturn,ThunbergbelievedthatthechapterfromNemesius
went beyonu the Nyssens musings by ielecting philosophically upon the
unifying task ascribed to humankind by God. However, this last aspect is
notsupportedbythetext,whichconsistsinagoodsummaryoftheoverall
Cappadocian teaching whilst being deprived of originality and philosoph-
ical virtues.
22
In turn, drawing on Thunbergs work, which he cited, John
MeyendorffintroducedhisverysuccinctdescriptionoftheMaximianthe-
ory by emphasising that the Cappadocians already addressed the topic of
humankindstaskwiththeircopioususeoftheconceptofthemicrocosm.
23
More recently, the quest for antecedents continued with Andrew
Louth,whoprefacedhistranslationof41bypointingtoStGrego-
ryofNyssaasitsprimarysource.
24
HereferredtotwopassagesintheNys-
sens Against Eunomius (I.270-72 and III.6.62-67), adding their supposed
correspondentsinthecriticaleditionofJaeger
25
yetwithoutprovidingde-
19
Cf.Ibidem,135.
20
Cf.Ibidem,135-36.
21
Cf. Ibidem, 136-37. See also idem, Man and the Cosmos: The Vision of St Maximus the
Confessor(Crestwood,NY:StVladimirsSeminaryPress,1985),80.Forsomereason,in
hispresentationofThunbergsanalysisoftheantecedents,AidanNichols,O.P.,Byzantine
Gospel:MaximustheConfessorinModernScholarship(Edinburgh:T&TClark,1993),165,
chosetoreferonlytoNemesiusasasourceoftheMaximiantheory.Thisreductiondoes
aninjusticetoThunberg.
22
SeeNemesiusATreatiseontheNatureofManI.1-10,inCyrilofJerusalemandNemesius
ofEmesa,editedbyWilliamTelfer,TheLibraryofChristianClassics(LouisvilleandLon-
don:WestminsterJohnKnoxPress,2006),224-56.
23
Cf.ByzantineTheology:HistoricalTrendsandDoctrinalThemes,revisedsecondedition
(NewYork:FordhamUniversityPress,1983),142.
24
Cf.MaximustheConfessor,155,and212,n.3.Louthvoicedthesameconvictionearlier,at
72,howeverprovidingnodirectreferencetoStGregoryofNyssa.
25
Quoteu as anu Wheieas the iist iefeience to }aegeis euition is accu-
rate,thesecondisinexact;indeed,thetextcanbefoundatpage245,andnotat66-67.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 230 5/09/13 12:11 AM
231
tails.Readingthetwopassagesinthecriticaledition,
26
onediscoversthat
the iist tieats the Platonic uivision of being which iefeis to the uomains of
theintelligible()andthesensible( ).Thetextassoci-
atesthetwoclassicaltermsandtheirpresumedscripturalequivalents,the
sensible being iuentiieu with the visible )
andtheintelligiblewiththeinvisible().Thepassagefurtherad-
dressesthecomplexityoftheintelligible,ascribingtothePlatonicconcepta
Christianmeaningbyhighlightingamoreprofounddualityingrainedwith-
in it, i.e. the ontological rift between the uncreated () realm and
that of created () nature. The second passage points out the igno-
iance oi lack of insight ),ofcreationregardingGodsessence.
ThetopicsdiscussedbyStGregoryinthetwopassagesareundeniablyre-
hearsedbytheMaximiantheoryofeverything.
WhenproposingtheparagraphsfromtheNyssenasexclusivesources
oftheMaximiantheory,Louthseemstohavebeenunawareofaconundrum
emergingfromhisownassertions.Thus,whenintroducinghistranslation
of41,hecasuallynotedthatthechapterisinspiredbyafamous
anu inluential passage in St uiegoiy the Theologians Oration 39.13. In
histranslation,thetextreadsasfollows:andnaturesareinstitutedafresh,
andGodbecomesman.
27
Onewouldhaveexpectedadevelopmentofthis
statement yet Louth chose to address the reception of the phrase in the
ByzantinetraditionanditsWesternparallels.Onlyafewlinesbelowthere-
markconcerningtheinspirationofStMaximuschapterintheTheologians
thought, he went on to point to the two passages in St Gregory of Nyssa,
whichIsummarisedabove,asthesourceofthetheory.Giventhissudden
shift one might wonuei about the signiicance of the Theologians phiase
within 41, a chapter supposedly drawing on the Nyssen. Louth
notedthatthephrasereappearsonlyattheendofthechapter,
28
bywhich
heimplied,Ipresume,thattheTheologiansthoughtwasnotatitscentre.
Louths information, however, is erroneous. St Maximus already returned
totheGregoriantextlongbeforetheendofthechapter.
29
Evenintheevent
ofthisremarkbeingsound,whichisnotthecase,thisbynomeanswould
solvetheconundrum.
26
Contra Eunomium Libri, iteratis curis edidit Wernerus Jaeger, Pars Prior, Liber I et II
(vulgoIetXIIB)(Leiden:E.J.Brill,1960),105-106,245.
27
Cf.Louth,MaximustheConfessor,155,and212,n.2.IntheoriginalGreek(PG36,348D)
the text ieaus which in English
wouldtranslateas:thenaturesrenew,andGodbecomesman.
28
Cf.Louth,MaximustheConfessor,156.
29
Cf.PG91,1308CD.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 231 5/09/13 12:11 AM
232
More recently, and again attempting to trace the antecedents of the
Maximiantheory,AdamCoopermentionedoncemoreNemesiusofEmesas
On the Human Nature, 1, whilst referring to another work by St Gregory
ofNyssa,theDialogueonSoulandResurrection(PG46,28B).
30
Withinthe
same context and to his credit, he discussed St Gregory the Theologians
Oration38.11,yetonlyinregardstoBificulty7wheretherelevantpassage
is quoted verbatim. Despite this restriction, of all the scholars reviewed
aboveCooperstandsapartinhisintuitionofOration38asasourceforthe
Confessorsworldview.
In the following I shall address the current claims regarding the an-
tecedents of the Maximian theory in St Gregory of Nyssa and Nemesius,
whilst pointing to Oration 38 as a forgotten written source for Bificulty
41. This does by no means imply that I intend to reduce the Confessors
contributiontoanotherandsupposedlymoreplausiblesource;Ijustwish
tohighlightafewreasonswhytheTheologianslegacyshouldnotbeover-
looked.Afterall,touseThunbergswords,StMaximuswasadeepadmirer
ofGregoryofNazianzus,thegreatRhetoramongtheFathers.
31

I will begin by consiueiing the iepeateu afiimations iefeiiing to Nem-


esiusTreatiseontheNatureofManasamainsourceoftheMaximiancon-
struct. One does not need an exhaustive analysis to realise how, in their
enthusiasm for Nemesius, the above scholars failed to notice the striking
similaritiesbetweentheoften-evokedchapter1ofhistreatiseandpassages
fromStGregoryofNyssa.Forinstance,Nemesius
32
renderedalmostverba-
timtheevolutionarydepictionoflifeintheNyssensOntheMakingofMan,
8.3-7.
33
ButhisinterestintheCappadociansdidnotstopthere.Nemesius
seemstohavealsoborrowedfromStBasiltheGreatthevisionofcreations
usefulness for humankind,
34
as discussed in Homilies on the Hexaemeron,
5.4 and 5.9.
35
Likewise, and very relevant to our topic, he paraphrased
36

30
Cf. Tbe BoJy in St Hoximus tbe Confessor Eoly Ilesb Wbolly BeiieJ, The Oxford Early
ChristianStudies(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2005),103-104.
31
Cf.ManandtheCosmos,28.
32
Cf.TreatiseontheNatureofMan,1.3(Telfer,232-34).
33
Cf.GregoryofNyssa:DogmaticTreatises,NiceneandPost-NiceneFathers,2
nd
series,vol.
5,52-53.
34
Cf.Nemesius,TreatiseontheNatureofMan,1.8-9(Telfer,248-50,251-54).
35
Cf.BasiltheGreat:LettersandSelectWorks,NiceneandPost-NiceneFathers,2
nd
series,
vol.8,77-78,81.
36
Cf.TreatiseontheNatureofMan,1.2(Telfer,228-30)and1.4(Telfer,235-37).
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 232 5/09/13 12:11 AM
233
St Gregory the Theologians Oration 38.10-11,
37
which depicts creation as
brought to unity within the human microcosm. These similarities lead to
onlyoneconclusion;that,byallaccountssurvivingtheCappadocians
38
and
being theii iist ieviewei Nemesius offeieu a veiy skilful summaiy of theii
contributions without adding much to their legacy. Therefore, the impact
of his synthesis upon St Maximus notwithstanding, given the latters ex-
tensivefamiliaritywiththeCappadocians
39
we can coniuently asseit that
Nemesiusworkcannotrepresenttheprimarysourceofthetheoryunder
consideration.Beforemovinganyfurther,onemorepointisinorder,which
emergesfromthepreviousdiscussion.InotedearlierthatThunbergsbe-
lief in a ministiy of uniication exeiciseu by humankinu upon which Nem-
esius woulu have supposeuly philosophiseu inus no textual coniimation
Inueeu what we see at the enu of the iist chaptei of his woik
40
doesnot
match either the amplitude or the vigour of the Confessors elaborations.
Althoughhereiteratedtheontologicalconvergenceoftherealmsinthehu-
manmicrocosmasponderedbythetwoGregoriesNemesiussynthesis
uiu not auu to theii contiibutions anu cannot be taken as a signiicant au-
vancementoftheidea.
I turn now to the scholarly opinion regarding the dependence of the
theory of everything on St Gregory of Nyssa as its major inspiration. It
should be noted from the outset that the Confessors profuse drawing on
StBasilsyoungerbrotherisdoubtless.Thatsaid,whendealingwithBifi-
culty41andthetheoryofeverythingfoundtherein,theideaofStMaximus
relying on St Gregory of Nyssa instead of the Theologian does not make
much sense. This observation emerges from basic hermeneutical princi-
ples requiring any given paragraph to be considered above all within its
immediateliterarycontext.Asamatteroffact,theearlierBookofBificul-
ties(writtenaround630inNorthAfricaanddedicatedtoJohnofCyzicus)
41

mainly addresses aporetic passages from St Gregory the Theologian and


37
Cf. St Gregory of Nazianzus, Festal Orations, Popular Patristics, trans. with introd. by
NonnaVernaHarrison(Crestwood,NY:StVladimirsSeminaryPress,2008),67-68.
38
Cf. Telfer, General Introduction to Cyril of Jerusalem and Nemesius of Emesa (quoted
above),206.
39
Cf ueoige C Beitholu The Cappauocian Roots of Naximus the Confessoi in Felix
HeinzerandChristophSchnborn(eds.),MaximusConfessor(Fribourg:ditionsUniver-
sitairesFribourgSuisse,1982):51-59.
40
Cf.Nemesius,TreatiseontheNatureofMan,1.10(Telfer,254-56).
41
Cf.BookofBificulties,prologue(PG91,1064B).ForachronologyoftheMaximiancor-
pus, see Angelo Di Berardino (ed.), Patrology: The Eastern Fathers from the Council of
Chalcedon(451)toJohnofDamascus(750)(Cambridge:JamesClarke&Co,2006),137-
48,esp.139and142.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 233 5/09/13 12:11 AM
234
is obviously meant as an interpretive framework for the latters thought.
FlorovskypointedoutaptlythattheBook of Bificulties is the iist patiistic
attempt to consistently interpret the Gregorian legacy.
42
Speaking from a
methodologicalviewpoint,thisinterpretiveframeworkshowstheTheolo-
gianasamainsourceforStMaximustheory,nottheNyssenoranyother
author, for that matter. True, the Book of Bificulties is enriched by a few
explicitreferencestootherauthors(althoughnotStGregoryofNyssa)yet
this by no means changes its focus. Therefore, even though the relevant
worksofthetwoChurchfathers,i.e.theNyssenandtheTheologian,were
publishedwithinthesametimeframeoftheyears379and380,
43
theher-
meneutical signiicance of the context shoulu take pieceuence
Now,letusverifywhetherornottheevokedhermeneuticalprinciples
havebeenobservedbyStMaximus.Togivejustanexample,inthelaterDif-
iculties(dedicatedtoapresbyterThomasandpublishedonlyafewyears
after the original Book of Bificulties the Confessoi ponueieu the thean-
dric Christ in chapters 2-4,
44
without mentioning the technical term. The
cause of his avoiding the term is straightforward and very relevant here:
byallaccounts,StGregorytheTheologianwhoseChristologicalthinking
was consiueieu theie nevei employeu the teim theanuiic oi its ueiiva-
tives insteau piefeiiing the synonymous composite Neveitheless when
St Maximus explored in chapter 5
45
a passage from the Dionysian corpus,
he maue abunuant use of the teim theanuiic which peitaineu to it We
cansurmisefromthisexamplethat,similarly,theConfessorinterpretedthe
Gregorianphrasementionedabove,whichservedasapretextforBificul-
ty 41, within the context where it belonged, namely the Theophany ser-
monsofStGregorytheTheologian.Thisconclusionstandseventhoughthe
phrase of interest (a poetic metaphor of the incarnation) has no explicit
cosmologicalbearing;indeed,therewouldhavebeennoreasonforStMax-
imustorelyontheNyssenoranyotherauthorinordertoclarifywhatthe
Theologianmeant.Infact,anydirectuseinBificulty41ofideasfromoth-
erauthors,likeStGregoryofNyssa,remainsimprobable.Myconvictionis
42
SeehisTheEasternFathersoftheFourthCentury(Vaduz:Bchervertriebsanstalt,1987),
116.
43
Cf.AnnaM.Silvas,GregoryofNyssa:TheLettersIntroduction,TranslationandCommen-
tary (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 40; Brian E. Daley, SJ, Gregory of Nazianzus (London & New
York:Routledge,2006),117.
44
Cf. PG 91, 1036D-1045C; CCSG 48, 8-18. See also Maximus the Confessor, Ambigua to
Thomas,SecondLettertoThomas,intro.,trans.andnotesbyJoshuaLollar,CorpusChris-
tianoruminTranslation2(Turnhout:Brepols,2009),52-61.
45
Cf.PG91,1045D-1060D;CCSG48,19-34.Cf.MaximustheConfessor,AmbiguatoThom-
as,SecondLettertoThomas(quotedabove),5-74.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 234 5/09/13 12:11 AM
235
basedonthefactthattowardtheendofthechapterStMaximusdidreferto
anothersource,i.e.theDionysianOntheDivineNames,mentioningtheau-
thorbyname.
46
Thus,intheeventofhisdrawingontheNyssensideas,the
Confessor should have also named the author, which he did not. All these
observationsleadtotheconclusionthatforhiselaborationsin41
StMaximuswasprimarilyindebtedtoStGregorytheTheologian.True,Ora-
tion conveys almost the same message as the iist passage iefeiieu
to by Louth in Nyssas Against Eunomius (see above). There is however a
notable difference between the two texts; whereas Oration 38.11 mainly
dealswiththePlatonicdivisionofbeing,StGregoryofNyssadistinguished
withintheintelligibletheultimateriftbetweencreatedanduncreated.That
saiu when tieating the iealm of theology the innei life of uou anu the
angelicbeingsinthebroadercontextofOration38.7-10,
47
theTheologian
madethesamesharpdistinctionbetweenthedivineandthecreated.
RegardingthesecondtextevokedbyLouth,pointingouttheignorance
ofcreationasperceivedbytheNyssen,indeedafeaturereiteratedby-
culty41,
48
itshouldbenotedthatthisteachingwassharedbyallCappado-
cianfathers.Itrecurrentlyemergedwithintheirrespectiveanti-Eunomian
discourses
49
anu we also inu it in Oration38.7,intheverycontextofinter-
esthere.Onewayortheother,theTheologianslegacycannotbeignored
inourquestforthesourcesoftheMaximiantheoryofeverything,andtoit
Inowturn.
AntecedentsoftheMaximianTheoryinStGregorytheTheologian
Befoie moving to the analysis of the ielevant passages anothei signiicant
element should be taken into consideration. We have already noted that
the Theologians sentence which forms the pretext for 41 (the
naturesrenewandGodbecomesman)istakenfromOration39.13,deliv-
ered by St Gregory in Constantinople in the northern winter of 380/381,
justafewdaysafterOration38,ofimmediateinteresthere.Thisdetailhas
greathermeneuticalimport.Indeed,byexploringawiderangeofaspects
46
PG91,1312D-1313A.
47
PG 36, 317B-321C. See also Rosemary Radford Ruether, Gregory of Nazianzus: Rhetor
and Philosopher (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969), 132. I am indebted to Mario Baghos
forthisreference.
48
PG91,1305A.
49
SeeJohnBehr,TheFormationofChristianTheology,Vol.2:TheNiceneFaith pait 0ne
oftheHolyTrinity(Crestwood,NY:StVladimirsSeminaryPress,2004),265,271,282-
90,334-42etc.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 235 5/09/13 12:11 AM
236
pertaining to the Lords Theophany, Orations 38-40 constitute a themati-
cally and methodologically consistent, indissoluble whole.
50
For example,
Oration 38.2
51
elaborates on the same idea as the famous sentence from
Oration39.13,anditseemsthatthelatterrepresentsasummaryofthefor-
mer.WecannotignorethisconnectionwhentracingthesourcesoftheMax-
imianconstructbacktoStGregory,asitisimpossibletoimaginethatthe
Confessor,ameticulousresearcheroftheGregorianworks,wasunawareof
thislink.Forthisreasoneventhough41doesnotexplicitlyrefer
toOration its inluence can be uisceineu in the subtext of the chaptei
Tobesure,asnotedbyCooper(seeabove),StMaximuswasveryfa-
miliarwiththeGregorianwritinginquestion,andactuallyincludedalarge
passage from Oration 38.11 in his 7.
52
The passage rendered by
theConfessorreadsasfollows(mytranslation).
53
At iist minu )andperception )
54
weredistinctfrom
oneanother( ,eachremainingwithintheir
speciic bounuaiies ) and bearing in themselves
themajestyofthedemiurgeLogosassilentworshippersandstrong
preachersofthegreatwork.
55
Sofar,therewasneitherafusionofthe
two( )noramixingoftheopposites(
), so as to make known a superior and generous wisdom
concerning [created] beings. [Likewise, there was] no knowledge of
thewholerichnessof[divine]goodness.Such[goodness]needingto
be made obvious, the craftsman Logos willed to make the man as a
single living being which consists of both ( ),
namelytheinvisibleandvisiblenatures.
56
Taking,therefore,thebody
50
PG 36, 312A-425D. Cf. Daley, Gregory of Nazianzus, 117, 127; John A. McGuckin, Saint
GregoryofNazianzus:AnIntellectualBiography(Crestwood,NY:StVladimirsSeminary
Press,2001),336-48.
51
PG36,313A-C.
52
PG91,1093D-1096A.
53
IamindebtedtoFrBogdanBucurforthesuggestionsthatledtotheimprovementofmy
initialversionofthispassage.
54
ThetwotermsrefertotheclassicalPlatonicstanceregardingthetwolevelsofreality,
thespiritualone,accessiblethroughcontemplation,andthematerialone,accessibleto
thesensorialperception.
55
TheideaofthissentenceisrehearsedinOration39.13(PG36,348D),intermsofthe
additionofthehumanchoirtotheheavenlyone,sothatallcreationjoinsindoxology.
56
Regarding this paradoxical aspect, it is true that St Gregory of Nyssa brought further
claiiication by speaking of the human being as an inteimeuiaiy )betweenthe
divine and bodiless nature and the irrational and animal life (On the Making of Man
16.9; PG 44, 181BC). This phrase, to my knowledge not considered by those seeking
in the Nyssen the antecedents of the Maximian theory, stirred the interest of Peter C.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 236 5/09/13 12:11 AM
237
fromthealreadystructuredmatter( )
andblowingoutfromhimselfthebreath(whichaccording
to Scripture is the conscious soul and the image of God he placed
onearththehumanbeingasakindofsecondworld,greatwithinthe
smallone( ,,anotherangel,a
compositeworshipper.
Thepassagepresentsthehumanbeingasaconnectionbetweenthevisible
and the invisible sides of creation, both sides converging within the com-
positearchitectureofournature.Initsoriginalsetting,thetextcontinues
withaseriesofparadoxicalstatementsaboutthehumanconditionandvo-
cation like the challenging asseition iefeiiing to oui call to ueiication in
spite of our humble makeup.
57
These statements represent the peak of a
complexandholisticworldview,whichincorporatesorratherisincorpo-
ratedintoatheologicalandmysticalanthropologythatinturnfunctions
like an interpretive tool. Indeed, when considered from the zenith of this
symbolicorcumulativeanthropology(humannaturebeingthesecondand
greatworldwhichrecapitulatesorencompassestheuniverse),thecreated
cosmos unfolds in layers of unions and distinctions. For instance, just as
theonehumanbeingismadeofbodyandsoul,similarlytheoneuniverse
comprises the visible and the invisible. The theme of an anthropocosmic
convergencefromthecitedpassagereappearsinOration40.5,
58
deprived
of paradoxical nuances, in a context that anticipates the Maximian theory
even further. There, St Gregory enumerated a series of lights, from the
supreme,unapproachableandineffableradianceoftheHolyTrinitytoits
cieateu ielections in the angelic oiueis the humankinu anu its elite the
saints(whoaremoreGodlike,,thantherestofus),andinthe
iist cieateu light which peivaues the univeise This inventoiy of the iang-
es of light echoes the basic elements of the Maximian theory, although
thetensionscontemplatedbytheConfessorandthequotedpassagefrom
Oration inu no ieal coiiesponuent in the last seimon on Theophany
ReturningtoOration38.11,whichpresentsthehumanbeingwithina
cosmicsettingandasbridgingthetwosidesofreality,theintelligibleand
the sensible, we discover a familiar topic. We already encountered these
aspects in the analysis of the Maximian theory. The similarities between
thetwoaccountsdonotendhere.Likethesoteriologicalframeworkofthe
theoiy of eveiything as iepiesenteu by Bificulty 41, the context of the
Bouteneff, Beginnings: Ancient Christian Readings of the Biblical Creation Narratives
(GrandRapids:BakerAcademic,2008),160.
57
SeethewholeparagraphinPG36,322C-324B.
58
Cf.PG36,364BC.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 237 5/09/13 12:11 AM
238
paragraph of interest here constitutes a comprehensive narrative of cre-
ation and salvation.
59
Thus, Oration 38.9-10
60
describes the making of the
angelicandvisibledomains;chapter11introducesthehumanbeingasan
inteiface foi the two iealms also pointing to its vocation to ueiication
61

chapter12
62
narratestheparadisalexperienceandtheexistentialfailureof
humankinu anu inally chaptei
63
presentstheantidoteofthisfailureas
administeredbythedivinepedagogyinhistory,culminatingintheincarna-
tionofGodtheLogos.
Lookingcloselytoourtext,Oration evokes two of the ive Nax-
imian polaiities the seconu anu the ifth which iefei to the intelligible
and the sensible, and the human being (the latter, however, without the
gender connotations of the Confessors theory). The Gregorian passage
ends with the paradox of the human being as a second and greater cos-
mos, which in its complex architecture contains and transcends
64
the
perfectlyarticulatedwholenessoftheuniverse.Thisveryaspectissimilar
to the Confessois vision that uepicts the uniieu anu peifecteu univeise as
like another human being ( ).
65
Nevertheless,
thetwoaccountsdonotcoincideinallrespects.Themaindifferencecon-
sistsinthatwhereasthesynthesisoftheintelligibleandthesensibleinSt
Gregoryoccurswithinthepsychosomaticmakeupofthehumannature,in
StMaximusthisdetailisimpliedbutnotstated.
66
Besidethisvariance,the
59
Forasummaryoftheoration,seeMcGuckin,SaintGregoryofNazianzus,338-39.Foran
analysisofthecontextpertainingtoOration38(andrelatedworks),inacomplextheo-
logical, anthropological and cosmological perspective, see Radford Ruether, Gregory of
Nazianzus,130-36.
60
PG 36, 320C-321C. See a few remarks on this group of chapters, extended to 7-11, in
ChristopherA.Beeley,GregoryofNazianzusontheTrinityandtheKnowledgeofGod:In
YourLightWeShallSeeLight(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2008),117-18.
61
Forthehumanbeingasaconnectorofthevisibleandinvisible,andascalledtounion
with uou see Kenneth Paul Wesche The 0nion of uou anu Nan in }esus Chiist in the
Thought of Gregory of Nazianzus, St Vladimirs Theological Quarterly 28:2 (1984): 83-
esp 0n the uiegoiian concept of ueiication see Toistein Theouoi Tollefsen
TheosisaccordingtoGregory,inJosteinBrtnesandTomasHgg(eds.),GregoryofNa-
zionzus lmoqes onJ Relections(Copenhagen:MuseumTusculanumPressandUniversi-
tyofCopenhagen,2006):257-70.Cf.Beeley,GregoryofNazianzus,116-22.
62
PG36,324B-D.
63
PG36,325A-D.
64
AnideaclearlystatedinOration39.8(PG36,341D):wearecalledtopassovercreation
(
65
Bificulty41(PG91,1312A).
66
St Maximus reiterates more clearly the Gregorian approach in Mystagogy, 7 (PG 91,
684D-685A).
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 238 5/09/13 12:11 AM
239
twofathersconveyacommonmessage:thereisacloseconnectionbetween
human existence and the cohesion of the cosmos. This conclusion allows
forafertilereadingoftheirideasindialoguewiththemodernnotionofthe
anthiopic cosmological piinciple which speciically points to this connec-
tionasaconditionfortheverylifeoftheuniverse.
Movingtothesecondparagraphofinterest,inOration38.17,
67
ween-
counter a very different, yet not unrelated, approach. The whole chapter
continues the line of thought set by chaptei which sums up the signii-
canceofChristsincarnationasarecapitulationofGodspeopleinthemain
acts of salvation.
68
The signiicant uiffeience between chapteis anu
consistsinthatwhilsttheformeraddressestheanthropologicalaspectof
salvation,thelatterelaborateswithinthebroaderframeworkofcosmology,
thusreiteratingtheapproachoftheanalysedpassagefromchapter11.In-
deed,chapter17consistsofadoxologicalsummaryoftheeventsrecounted
by the Nativity naiiatives inteipieting the salviic ueeus as means by which
Christachievedtheunionofheavenandearth,andofeverythingelse.This
approach, which gives substance to Wesches note that communion with
GodistheheartofGregorystheologicalintuitionconcerningthemystery
ofChrist
69
correspondstotheMaximianmusingsonChristasmediator.
70

The same interpretation receives further endorsement in Oration 39.16,


where Christ appears as lifting up () the cosmos together
with him.
71
Again, the Gregorian passage should be considered in its im-
mediatesetting,ofchapters13(secondhalf)to16,
72
forwhichitservesas
a conclusion. The passages explore the mystery of Christ as the Godman,
whobyhiskenosisbroughttheuncreatedandthecreatedtotheirutmost
pioximity foi the beneit of the lattei The kenosis of the Logos incainate is
renderedinpowerfultones,throughaseriesofantinomiessuchasthe
uncreatedoneiscreated,thelimitlessoneisbounded
73
etc.meanttopre-
ventanyunilateralmisinterpretation.Chapters14and15
74
infactdefend
themysterybyarticulatingtheunityofGodheadandhumankindintheone
67
PG36,329D-332B.
68
Cf.Oration38.4(PG36,316AB).
69
Cf Wesche The 0nion of uou anu Nan in }esus Chiist
70
PG91,1308D-1312B.
71
PG36,353A.
72
PG 36, 325B-329C. For a few remarks on these chapters, see Beeley, Gregory of Na-
zianzus,123-24.
73
Literally, in the original: ; Oration 38.13
(PG36,325C).SeealsoOration39.13(PG36,349A).
74
PG36,328A-329B.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 239 5/09/13 12:11 AM
240
personofthetwofold()Christ.
75
Closertothetextofinterest,in
chapter16StGregorymadeacrucialpoint,highlightingthemeaningofthe
festalseasonasarevelationofthemainandsinglereason()
behindthemysteryofincarnation:toachievemyperfection,myreshaping
anu my ietuin to the iist Auam ).
76
With
thislaststatement,which,inlightofOration39.2,
77
Ireadasreferringtoa
returntoAdams(unifying)vocation,weareledtothetheoryofeverything.
Verylikely,despiteStGregorynotreferringtoanymacrocosmicechoes
ofthedeteriorationofthehumansphere(anaspectfarbetteremphasised
by the Confessor),
78
the understanding of the liturgical festival as both a
reminderandrestorationofhumanitysvocationindicatessuchconnection
with the theoiy This nuance is coniimeu by Oration40,whichpresentsthe
festalseasonofTheophanyasreachingaclimaxinthebaptismalmystery
ofourrebirthinChrist,thebaptismalwatersappearinginturnasrestoring
theupwardorientationofcreation( ).
79
Moreover,
thefeastprovidesGodspeoplewithanopportunitytofostersolidarityand
thusstrengthenhumankindscommunion.
80
FurtherdevelopedbyStMax-
imus,
81
traces of this understanding can be discerned in the depiction of
Christasbringingabouttheunionofthecreatedandtheuncreated,andof
all the iealms within the conines of cieation This has been fiom the outset
thetaskappointedtohumankind,althoughtheTheologiandidnotsaythis
explicitly insteau St Naximus illeu this gap as we have seen by stating
that humanitys fall is tantamount to our failure to unite the realms, and
thatinChristwearegivenanewchancetoaccomplishthistask.StGregory
showedhoweverasimilargraspwhenpointingoutthatinliturgising,
82
in
celebrating the salvation wrought by Christ we truly join together all the
realms.Hethusexhorted,
75
Cf.Oration38.15(PG36,328C).
76
Oration38.16(PG36,329C).
77
Cf.Oration39.2(PG36,336B).Thetextreads(mytranslation):Itisthetimeofrebirth;
let us be boin fiom above It is the time of iemaking let us put on the iist Auam
).Letusnotremainthewaywearebutletusbecomewhat
wewere.
78
Cf.41(PG91,1308C).
79
Cf.Oration40.3(PG36,361B).Theascendingdimensionisreinforcedin40.45(PG36,
424B),whichspeaksofChristastakingupthebelieverstoheaven.
80
Cf.Oration40.31(PG36,401D-404C).
81
Cf.41(PG91,1308C-1312B).
82
TheideaisreiteratedinOration39.13(cf.myn.55above).Ontheliturgicaldimension,
biiely Tollefsen TheosisaccordingtoGregory,265.
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 240 5/09/13 12:11 AM
241
Glorify [Christ] with the shepherds; sing hymns with angels; dance
withthearchangels!Letthisfestivalbecommontotheheavenlyand
earthlypowers( ).
ForIbelievethattheytogetherrejoiceandcelebratetoday.
83
Inspiredbytheworshipingmilieu,takenasameetingplacefortheangelic
andhumanchoirs,StGregorysvision(precedingbyacenturytheDiony-
sian liturgical mysticism) reveals the Christian background of the theory
of everything. Centuries after the Theologian, St Maximus reiterated this
holisticworldview,byincludingtheunionoftheangelicandcosmicrealms
asthefourthstageoftheunifyingprocess,
84
andbyrepresentingtheliturgy
asaunionofangelicandhumandoxologies.
85
ClosingRemarks
Thisarticlehascriticallyreviewedthemainscholarlyargumentsreferringto
thepatristicantecedentsoftheMaximiantheoryofeverything,asdepictedin
41.Wediscoveredthatdespitetheestablishedscholarlyconsensus,
theConfessordidnotprimarilybuilduponStGregoryofNyssaandNemesius
of Emesas iespective wiitings even though theii inluence cannot be ignoieu
Instead,wediscernedthatStGregorytheTheologiansthoughtplayedamore
signiicant iole than pieviously aumitteu by scholais both fiom the viewpoint
oftheideaoftherealmsasunitedaroundthehumanbeingandtheliturgical
frameworkofthewholetheory.IthaslikewisebecomeclearthatStMaximus
wasnotaservileimitatoroftheTheologian.Whilsttherelevantpassagesfrom
St Gregory, beyond their daring turns, depict a static and ontological icon of
realityinspiredbytheclassicalconceptofmanasmicrocosmandthetheory
ofrecapitulationtheConfessorofferedadynamicperspective,existentialin
natuie In light of this uevelopment the human being uoes not simply ielect
thestructureoftheuniverse,asStGregoryheld,butrepresentsinsteadastruc-
turingforceatworkintheworld.Apartfromthesedifferences,thetimehas
cometogiveduecredittoStGregorytheTheologianasanantecedentofthe
Maximiantheoryofeverything.
83
Oration38.17(PG36,332AB).Cf.Oration39.14(PG36,349C).
84
Cf.41(PG91,1308A).
85
Cf.Mystagogy,24(PG91,709BC).
StAndrewsBook2013_R.indd 241 5/09/13 12:11 AM

Anda mungkin juga menyukai