2. Gregory's doctrine on the image of god in man
FROM GLORY TO GLORY
subject. We now see him completely in control of a solid spiritual doctrine, as we find it in the brilliant Commentary on the Canticle of Canticles, and the little treatise, The Life of Moses. Gregory's intention, as Werner Jaeger has shown,33 was to give a mystical orientation to the monastic movement organized by his brother Basil. Now he began to resume the thinking which had occupied him at the time of his first work, the Treatise on Virginity. In the De instituto christiano, a treatise on the goal of Christian asceticism, he sets forth in complete outline the fundamental spiritual doctrine of St. Basil. These works contain the essence of Gregory's spiritual message.
But in the Life of Moses there are clear allusions to his old age.34 And though there are a number of works which belong to this final period, we hear no more of Gregory after the Council of Constantinople which he attended in 394. He must have been already infirm at this time; and he probably did not have much longer to live.
2. Gregory's doctrine on the image of god in man Gregory's spiritual doctrine is intimately bound up with his concept of man's nature, and its fundamental direction consists in the restoration of the image of God in man. Hence for our present study we must begin with Gregory's teaching on the nature of man—one of the most difficult as well as one of the most interesting areas of his thought.
His doctrine can be found, substantially, in the Great Cate chetical Discourse and in the treatise On the Creation of Man. He begins, of course, with the biblical doctrine that man was created in God's image. But departing from an interpretation held by other Fathers of the Church, Gregory adheres more closely to the literal meaning of the Scriptural
INTRODUCTION
text (Gen. 1.26), recognizing no distinction between image and likeness. There is no opposition in his teaching between the natural and the supernatural man of modern terminology. For him the natural man is man as he was created in God's concrete plan—that is, man with all those gifts which we now call supernatural. This is clear from his treatise On the Creation of Man: for here the gifts of purity, charity and happiness are considered as belonging to human nature in the same way as intelligence and free will.35
But man as he is now is far from being an image of God in this sense. Where, he asks, "is the divine character in the soul? Where is that freedom from pain? Where is our immortality ?"36 How are we to explain this? Human nature, as it is now, cannot be as God intended it in the beginning, and as it will surely be in the end. What has been added to human nature, to this image of God in man, according to Gregory, is the garment of s\in (Gen. 3.21). This garment of skin in us is made up of all those things which we have in common with animals; it is: sexual union, conception, childbirth, dirt, nursing, food, excrement, the gradual growth of the body towards maturity, adulthood, old age, sickness and death.37
What is implied, therefore, in the garment of skin is not, as Origen thought, the body as such; for in Gregory's view both the soul and the body were part of human nature in the beginning. Rather, it comprises all that implies mortality and corruptibility; and man's true nature is to enjoy the in corruptibility of the risen body.38
How then did this new state arise which is so contrary to
FROM GLORY TO GLORY
our original condition ? The ultimate cause is man's freedom.
For freedom is a divine quality, and God could not create man in His image without giving him free will. And it may be noted here that Gregory, following Origen (and, indeed, anticipating St. Bernard), stresses free will more than intelli gence in his analysis of man's likeness to God.39 Now since all created things are by nature changeable,40 it follows that created freedom could separate itself from God. More proximately, however, man's sin was brought about by the jealousy of the angel to whom the universe had been entrusted, and who hated to see in his realm a man who was made in the image of God.41 This was a traditionally Jewish concept of the relation between angels and the universe; the angel of the earth is troubled at the appearance of the first man, just as the Prince of this world is vexed by the triumph of the new Adam.
As soon, then, as man turned away from God, the source of life, his body was deprived of immortality and was clad in the garment of shjn. And yet, though this was a con sequence of sin, it is intended to be more of a remedy than a punishment—an idea that is very important for an under standing of Gregory's thought. It is an idea that goes back to Origen's view of the medicinal character of suffering.
In Gregory there are two aspects to be considered. In his work On the Dead he explains that the garment of shin allows man to turn back again freely to God. since man had despised the life of the spirit for carnal pleasure, God did not wish man "to withdraw from sin unwillingly and be forced by necessity towards the good,"43 for this would have destroyed man's freedom and the image of God within him.
Hence He made use of man's very tendency by giving him
INTRODUCTION
the garment of shin. This would cause man to experience a disgust with the things of the world, and thus "he would willingly desire to return to his former blessedness."44
In the Great Catechetical Discourse Gregory puts forward the second reason for the garment of shin, which derives not from Origen but from St. Athanasius. The idea is that the garment of shin, our present state of mortality, permits the bodily part of man to be destroyed; but since evil is so closely bound up with the body, evil too is destroyed, and thus man can be restored to his original innocence. Man's body returns to earth like a vase of baked clay; thus the evil that was mingled with his body is now released, and the divine Potter can raise him up once more to his original beauty.45 Thus the garment of s\in, though really foreign to human nature, was only given to man by a sollicitous providence, as by a doctor giving us a medicine to cure our inclination to evil without its being intended to last forever.46
In answer to the question whether man was created with out the garment of shin (that is, without mortality and all the things that sex implies), Gregory gives one answer in his work On the Creation of Mam "The grace of the resurrec tion is the restoration of fallen man to his primitive state."47
But in another passage in On the Creation of Man he puts forward another hypothesis, "as a kind of exercise."48 Here he suggests that God in His foreknowledge knew that man would abuse his freedom and would fall; and hence seeing that man by his sin had fallen from his blessed angelic state, God established a way by which the human race could be propagated in ac cordance with our nature; thus the total number
i4 FROM GLORY TO GLORY
of human souls would not be deficient, even though man had now lost the method of propagation by which the angelic hosts had multiplied.49
On this view (which is the one most important for us), God would have created man from the beginning with a mortal body through His foreknowledge of man's sin.
It is against the background of this doctrine that Gregory explains the two accounts in Genesis of the creation of man.
Philo had already detected in Genesis two stages in man's creation: in the first account, man, the first-born, is created in God's image as the preexistent archetype of the intelligi ble world; in the second, man, created as male and female, is man as he actually appears on earth. Gregory also retains a distinction; but he will have no use for any theory of real preexistence along the lines followed by Origen in depend ence on Philo. But in man created in God's image he sees the preexistence of human nature in the perfection of the divine knowledge—such as it will be only at the end of time.50 Thus for Gregory, man created as male and female though first in the order of time is only second in the order of intention.61
In discussing the Fall Gregory emphasizes the same two aspects which characterize his doctrine of the Atonement: man's mortality and the role of the devil.52 The role of the devil is one of the least understood of Gregory's doctrines. It was traditional in the early Church to consider Christ's
Atonement as a victory over the devil. There are two stages in this account: after the Temptation, the devil has suspected that Jesus would be a formidable adversary in his dominion over the world; then, on the night of Good Friday he is
INTRODUCTION I5
convinced that Christ is definitely in his power. But on the morning of Easter Sunday, Christ breaks down the gates of death, releasing all whom the devil had held in his power.
In this way, Jesus, Who the devil thought would be the means of his victory, becomes the source of his utter defeat.
On this view, the devil was thought to be deceived ; and this is the theory that Gregory emphasizes:
The Godhead hid under the covering of our human nature so as to offer an easy bait to him who sought to exchange us for a more precious prize. And the aim was that just like a greedy fish he would swal low the hook of divinity together with the bait of the flesh. Thus life would come to dwell in death, light would appear in darkness, and thus light and life would achieve the destruction of all that stood against them.53
Gregory's imagery is clear. The trick consisted in letting the devil take the bait in hopes that he will gain a greater prize; but he is caught in the trap, and losing this he loses all. And Gregory concludes:
That the deceiver was deceived and got his deserts shows forth God's justice; the entire aim of the transaction bears witness to the goodness of its
Author.54
It is clear that there is no trace here of the theory of the devil s rights in the strict sense.5d In attempting to explain why God chose to become man and suffer death, when He could have broken the power of the devil by a simple decree,
Gregory suggests that this was in accord with divine justice—
l6 from glory to glory a justice which consisted in deceiving the deceiver according to his deserts. There is thus no question of any real right which the devil had over the souls of men. As Gregory pro foundly saw, the devil could not have exercised his tyranny over man if man had not deliberately sold himself to the devil.56 Hence, seeing that it was God's will that the Atone ment should bring about the restoration of all that had been lost in Adam, God's plan demanded that human nature should cooperate in its own liberation: what was lost through Adam would be restored through the new Adam.
Now the second aspect of man's Fall which we must con sider is its effects on the body, especially corruptibility and death. We have already seen that for Gregory this was not merely a punishment, but it was also to be a means of man s elevation, to his ultimate elimination of sin. But it remains true that this is still a purely negative consequence; it does not of itself restore man's original state. But Christ by His redemptive mission united Himself, by His death, to man in a state of dissolution:
He reunited all the separated elements as though by a glue, that is, by the divine power, and fitted together into an indissoluble union all that had been separated. This is the meaning of the resur rection: it is the restoration, of the elements that had been separated, to an indissoluble union, that the original grace that human nature possessed might be recovered, now that the evil that adhered to it has been dissipated by dissolution.57
It should here be remarked that for Gregory the Incarna tion and the Atonement would appear to be identical. The
INTRODUCTION I?
Incarnation is the union of the Word not merely with human nature as such but with fallen nature, the sarx. Now the state of fallen nature is chiefly characterized by death. Thus
Christ did not sutler death because He had been born; rather, it was because of death that He chose to be born. Eternal Life had no need of life, but He entered our bodily existence in order to restore us from death to life. Our entire nature had to be recalled from death; hence He stretched forth His hand, as it were, to the dead body, and came to see the place where we had fallen. Indeed He came so close to death as to touch mortality itself, that He might make of our own nature, in His body, a principle of resurrection.58
Thus the Incarnation-Atonement is the union of the Word with man in a state of death to bring about man's resurrec tion. Christ's resurrection is indeed "a principle of resur rection" for all humanity:
Just as death was transmitted to all men by a single act, so too, by the action of one Man the principle of resurrection is extended to all humanity.59
And this should be understood in a very real way: for no theologian has insisted more than Gregory upon the solidar ity of all mankind. Thus the image of God in man consists, for him, in the concrete totality of all mankind, united in one body, as foreseen in God's eternal knowledge and to be realized in fact at the end of time.
It follows that the Word could not be united with a specific
18 FROM GLORY TO GLORY
human nature without having an effect upon the whole of humanity. This is the doctrine of the treatise Against Apollinaris, and Gregory expresses it in some striking imagery.
Humanity is the lost sheep that has wandered from the ninety-nine angelic spirits, and Christ the Good Shepherd has come to find it. Referring to the Incarnation Gregory says: "He took upon His shoulders the whole sheep."61
Again, he compares fallen nature to a broken reed; Christ in fitting together the pieces at one point restores the whole.62
Some scholars have wrongly thought that Gregory is here teaching that the Word was hypostatically united with all humanity; but it is clear from a good number of texts that he is merely emphasizing, in a very real sense, the solidarity of all mankind.
Now Christ has won for all humanity the right to resur rection, but each individual must acquire it for himself by means of the sacraments. In Gregory's doctrine sacramental theology plays a very important role. In the treatise Against Eunomius he insists that the "strength of Christianity" con sists not in philosophical speculation but in the "power of regeneration by faith" and in the "participation in mystical symbols and rites."63 In accordance with ancient tradition,
Gregory's sacramental theology has three principal aspects.
The first is the explanation of the sacramental symbols found in the Old Testament; the most important text for this aspect is the sermon On the Baptism of Christ.64 The second is mystagogia, or mystical initiation properly so-called, which consists of an explanation of the symbolism involved in the sacramental rites; here the most interesting discussion is found in the sermon Against Those Who Put Off Baptism.65
The third and final aspect is the strict theological exposition
INTRODUCTION
such as we find it principally in the Great Cathechetical Dis course.
Baptism is primarily for Gregory a sacramental initiation into the mystery of Christ's death and resurrection, which at the same time accomplishes in us the effect of Christ's action.
Unfortunate humanity was imprisoned in the prison of this life. What then did the Author of our salvation do ? After three days of death He rose again. ... So too by plunging three times in water instead of earth, by entering and rising three times we imitate the grace of the resurrection on the third day.66
Gregory further clarifies this concept within the framework of his own Atonement theology. Just as Christ's death puri fied human nature of all that had modified it, and His resur rection restored humanity in its entirety, so too Baptism achieves the same effect, although, it is true, in an inchoate way. For sin to be destroyed completely, one would have to undergo complete death.67
Gregory's doctrine on Baptism makes use of the various Biblical types, especially the crossing of the Red Sea.68 In another image which he uses we find the River Jordan con sidered as one of the rivers of Paradise, and this symbolism stresses the idea of rebirth—Baptism is thus represented as a return to the Garden of Eden.69 The entrance into the baptistery means that "the Garden of Paradise and, indeed, heaven itself is once again accessible to man" and that "the sword of flame no longer prevents his approach."70 The
FROM GLORY TO GLORY
change of garments at Baptism signifies the removal of the garment of fig leaves which man wore after the Fall and the recovery of the "tunic of incorruptibility."71 Again, the Jordan is considered as a figure of Baptism in the traditional way, as for example, by reference to the cure of Naaman the leper,72 or to the entrance of the Jews into the Promised Land.
Cross the Jordan, [he says,] hasten towards the new life in Christ, to the land that bears fruit in happi ness, flowing with milk and honey according to the promise. Overthrow Jericho, your former way of life! . . . All these things are figures of the reality which is now made manifest.73
But what is original with Gregory is the linking of the Jordan with the Garden of Eden. Taking up an idea which seems to have been first developed by the Gnostics, Gregory contrasts the rivers that flow down from Paradise with the Jordan, which flows back to heaven and has its source in Christ.
Hurry to my Jordan, not at the call of John, but at the command of Christ. For the river of grace does not rise in Palestine and flow into the nearby sea, but flows everywhere, circling the entire world, and empties into Paradise. For it flows in a different di rection from those four streams which flow from Eden and bears a cargo much more precious than that which was borne out by them.... For it brings back those who have been reborn by the Spirit.74
The true Jordan that covers the entire world is the water of Baptism, consecrated by the Baptism of Christ, and it grows
into an immense stream which carries men back to Paradise.
Gregory considers the Eucharist primarily as the realiza tion of the eschatological meal foretold in the Old Testa ment. The three important texts in this connection are Prov.
9.5, Ps. 22.5, and Cant. 5.1 ;75 and all of these are explained by Gregory in a Eucharistic sense. Wisdom's cup, as we find it in Proverbs, frequently has in Gregory a Eucharistic mean ing.76 The sermon On the Ascension gives us an excellent commentary on Ps. 22,77 a text which is indeed most im portant in the ancient sacramental liturgy. There is a similar treatment of the invitation which the Spouse of the Canticle offers to his friends to attend the marriage banquet:
Eat, my friends, and drin\, and he inebriated, my brothers (Cant. 5.1). For one who is familiar with the mysteries of the Gospel there will appear no difference between this text and the words used in the mystic initiation of the Apostles. For there too does He say: Eat and drin\,78 Gregory's theological explanation of the Eucharist follows the same eschatological lines. If the soul is regenerated by Baptism, our corruptible bodies need a remedy which would make them immortal. And this remedy is the risen body of Christ, now become for us a source of Life:
Just as a little bit of leaven, as the Apostle says, changes all of the dough into itself, so too that body which was brought to death by God, once it enters into us transforms and changes all unto itself.79
In order to enter into our bodies, the glorious body of Christ takes on the appearances of bread and wine. Such a realistic
FROM GLORY TO GLORY
doctrine of the Eucharist is in the same direction as the teach ing of Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus, and Athanasius. Ig natius had already spoken of the Eucharist as the "medicine of immortality";80 and Irenaeus had written: "Our bodies, receiving the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible."81
But Gregory also discusses the Eucharist as a sacrifice as well as a sacrament. Here we should quote a rather striking passage, which was utilized by Pere de la Taille in his Mystenum Fidei. In wishing to point out the voluntary aspect of Christ s death, and hence its sacrificial character, Gregory shows that this death was already accomplished at the Last
Supper: for the Victim cannot be given to the Apostles to eat unless it is dead. Hence the offering of the Last Supper appears as a sacramental anticipation of the sacrifice of the Cross:
When He gave His disciples His body to eat and His blood to drink, His body was already immo lated according to the will of Him Who by His power accomplished this mystery in an invisible and ineffable manner.82
Now Gregory's spiritual doctrine, which is undoubtedly the most important part of his work, must be seen as an extension of His sacramental theology. The spiritual life of which he speaks is merely the flowering of the faculties of the soul, insofar as they have been raised to the supernatural level by the sacraments. In a favorite image, Gregory com pares the virtues of the soul that has been vivified by the sacraments to the trees that were planted in the Garden of Paradise.83 Gregory's spiritual teaching can be found scat-