Search Results

Chapter 4 examines the teaching on divine simplicity of Aetius and his disciple Eunomius of Cyzicus, the principal opponent of Basil and Gregory of Nyssa. An initial section looks at Aetius' claim that ingeneracy is God's essential attribute. It critically examines Raoul Mortley's thesis that Aetius is dependent on the fourth‐century Neoplatonist Dexippus. The bulk of the chapter focuses on Eunomius, arguing that his account of simplicity is based upon his epistemology, which is driven by the desire to ‘repay the debt’ humans owe to God of describing God exactly as God is. For Eunomius to know truly is to know what something is, that is, to know its essence‐a theory labelled the ‘priority of definition’. For Eunomius, divine simplicity implies that ingeneracy, if truly said of God, is neither a product of mere human conceptualization, nor a merely negative title, nor a ‘part’ of God. Rather it names the essence of God. According to Eunomius, simplicity also implies the ‘synonymy principle’: all titles used for God are semantically equivalent with ‘ingenerate’.

Considers the period between 350 and 360. It begins with a consideration of the Emperor Constantius II and his influence on this decade. Consideration of his support for the gradually emerging ‘Homoian’ movement and its direct critique of ousia language is followed by an account of Athanasius’s initial defence of Nicaea’s terminology in the 350s. Offers an account of Aetius and Eunomius, showing how their theology helped to define the theological conflict of this decade. Discussion of Basil of Ancyra and the Homoiousians is followed by an account of the theoogy of Cyril of Jerusalem. Cyril possibly stands as an example of the theology of many eastern bishops who found themselves caught between more polemic options.

Focuses on Basil of Caesarea as both a key figure in the developments of these years and as a key example of wider theological shifts. Shows how Basil slowly developed towards his mature theological position, distinguishing between God’s unity at the level of ousia and the distinctions between the persons at the level of idiomata. Also considers developing the use of hypostasis, his pneumatological reserve and the continuing presence of older terminologies in his thought. Also argues that Basil is not guilty of the subordinationism that has frequently been seen in his formulations.

The exchange between the Anomoean (Neoarian) theologian Eunomius and the Cappadocian Fathers constitutes one important feature of the fourth-century Trinitarian controversy. The label ‘anomoean’ stems from Eunomius’ idea that Christ is ‘unlike’ (anomoios) the Father. The Christian terminology of essence and activity went through a particular development in this controversy. One issue concerned the knowability of the divine essence. Basil the Great applied the essence–activities distinction to argue against the Eunomian doctrine that the essence of God may be known perfectly. The chapter contains a description of some features of Eunomius’ theology.

The chapter describes doctrines of Trinitarian generation in Gregory of Nyssa, Dionysius the Areopagite, and Maximus the Confessor. The treatment of Gregory of Nyssa dwells on his arguments against Eunomius. Trinitarian generation is described as an internal activity of the Godhead. It is stressed that the three thinkers clearly see that one ventures to create appropriate models to accommodate human understanding to what in itself transcends reason.

Chapter 6 examines Gregory’s doctrine of God as it developed in the context of the Eunomian controversy, focusing particularly on the way in which he resists the language of “activity” and “passivity” (and thus, by cultural association, male and female, respectively) from being applied to the Godhead. The full relevance of Gregory’s doctrine of God for the ascetic life is then discussed in depth. The author argues that for Gregory, the imitatio Dei summons the ascetic to a life beyond the fallen associations of male and female, because the persons of the Trinity cannot be described as either passive or active depending on their relationship to each other. Another area of originality in this study is chapter 6’s discussion of the male/female hierarchy in marriage, which Gregory appears to support on the basis of biblical authority. This insight stands in contradistinction to recent feminist readings of his work, which overlook these passages and privilege particular themes in Gregory’s mature thought, especially in relation to the soul’s labile identifications with male and female characteristics.

This chapter demonstrates previously overlooked connections between Against Eunomius 2 and To Ablabius. It begins with a new interpretation of the former, starting from two texts that Gregory mentions explicitly there: Plato’s Cratylus and his own Apologia in Hexaemeron. Scholars have long taken Gregory’s claim that Eunomius was following Plato’s Cratylus at face value, without noting the deeper influences of that Platonic dialogue on Gregory’s own view of theological language, as evidenced in both Against Eunomius 2 and the Apologia in Hexaemeron. Gregory’s etymological approach to the term “God” as naming a divine activity draws on the Cratylus. It forms the basis for Gregory’s account of the divine unity in To Ablabius, where he responds to the allegation of teaching three gods. Gregory correlates the single activity of Father, Son, and Spirit with the unity of will, power, and activity in an intentional act.

This chapter follows the developments in the way that Christian leaders read Scripture during the fourth century. After the involvement of Constantine and the Council of Nicaea, Christian theological writers more closely sourced their ideas from Scripture. While some Christians continued to read Scripture as a historical document, one whose passages were scenes in which Christ could be located in time, many Christians began to consider the way that individual words reflected on the nature of Christ. In this most central of intellectual issues from late antiquity, angels were integral to the way that Christians read Scripture for information about Christ. The chapter provides context to the discussion of Augustine from Chapter 1.

This is a short introduction to Gregory of Nyssa, his family, writings, and theological context. The background to his debates with Eunomius over the doctrine of the Trinity is explained, along with his role at the Council of Constantinople. A rough chronology of his works is laid out. The dating and genre of Life of Moses is discussed. Some see its allegorical exegesis as mystical, whereas others argue for the influence of polemical theology. The treatise is divided into two parts: Historia (historical narrative) and Theōria (interpretation). In the second part, Gregory seeks to draw out the spiritual understanding (dianoia) concealed within the historical narrative. The aim of his allegorical interpretation is to provide inspiration for a Christian life of virtue.

Gregory includes a short digression on divine names — a frequent theme of his, and key to his argument with Eunomius. Power was widely attributed to divine names in antiquity. Philosophical debates related the efficacy of magical formulae to the origin and nature of language. For Origen, Christ has many titles (epinoiai) because he mediates between divine unity and created multiplicity. For Gregory, names designate not God’s essence, but God’s energies. The variety in divine names reflects the inadequacy of human notions. Tabernacle imagery conveys how, despite this inadequacy, language provides an impenetrable space for the divine. Divine names feature prominently in the Hekhalot texts, where they are assumed to provide access to the innermost heavenly chambers. Yet the longer the lists of nonsensical letter combinations become, the remoter the goal appears. Paradoxically, the Hekhalot texts illustrate Gregory’s thesis: progress towards the divine is an ever-receding horizon.

This chapter argues that Gregory’s principal claim in his treatise To Ablabius—On Not Saying ‘Three Gods’ (one of the most widely cited works of patristic Trinitarian theology) is that it is the unity of activity—as opposed to the unity of nature—that defeats the idea that the three hypostases are three gods. Here it is maintained that Gregory is concerned in To Ablabius with the semantics of the term ‘deity’ (θεότης‎), and that his etymological exposition of this term as a name of activity is illuminated by attention to overlooked parallels between this work and Gregory’s second book Against Eunomius. The chapter shows that Gregory understands the unity of divine action by analogy with the unity of any intentional action—an account of Trintarian unity that is here called the ‘intentional action’ model.

This chapter offers a new reading of Against Eunomius 1, juxtaposing it with Refutation of Eunomius’ “Confession.” Structurally, Against Eunomius 1’s dogmatic section is shown to be organized around a refutation of the confession of faith in Eunomius’s Second Apology. Thematically, the chapter argues, Gregory’s book emphasizes what he takes to be Eunomius’ misunderstanding of baptismal grace in that confession. The famous metaphysical and epistemological arguments of Against Eunomius 1 are shown to be subordinate to the contrast Gregory draws between Eunomius’ creed, in which the persons are ranked in accordance with the ranking of their proper activities, and Christ’s creed. As in the anti-Pneumatomachian works, so too here Gregory’s central claim is that the giving of life in baptism (a work of the Spirit) must not be ranked as inferior to the creation of the universe (a work of the Son).

This chapter begins Part II of the book, which examines texts on the incarnate economy of Christ. After a brief glance at To Simplicius, the focus turns to select passages from Against Eunomius 3. The chapter argues that Gregory’s account of the saving economy, and in particular his exegesis of disputed verses, works by developing chains of images, models, and metaphors. One of the key models he uses for Christological union is that of mixture, which, in Against Eunomius 3, is explained in terms of a total absorption of humanity by the divinity. Moreover, the chapter shows that Gregory places the point of humanity’s transformation “after the passion.”