Total Pageviews

Search This Blog

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

St. Gregory of Nyssa Differences with Origen



Gregory's Differences with Origen.

These conceptions are clearly influenced by Origen, and yet in many respects Gregory's thought is very different. Gregory denies the pre-existence and transmigration of souls and he rejects the idea that "there is some tribe or citizenry of souls which exists before life in the body." Gregory admits that there is a mode of increase in the angelic world. He conceives of time as a process of development during which the complete number of human hypostases will be realized and have existence. He emphasizes that a soul does not have existence without a body, or a body without a soul, but that both have a single source for their being. Man is not composed from two separate elements but he is generated as a body and as a soul simultaneously. The development of the human embryo is a single organic process which takes place by virtue of a "hidden element in the seed." "The soul is also present in the seed but it is not yet discernible." That which is animate generates that which is animate, flesh which is living, not dead. In conclusion Gregory writes: "We consider that it is impossible for the soul to adapt itself to other dwelling places."

Gregory does not share Origen's distrust of physical matter. Everything created by God is, in the words of the Bible, "very good." Therefore, "we should discern good in every thing." "Every element by itself is filled with goodness in a way that is suited to its nature." "Whether it is a myriapod, or a green frog, or an animal born from some filth, it is all very good." For Gregory matter itself is not impure, especially since it was created first. That which is proper to animals is not impure by itself but only as it appears in man because "that which irrational life has been given as a means of self-protection becomes a passion in man." Furthermore, Gregory agrees with Basil that the lower motions of the irrational soul in man should "each be transformed into a virtue" by the power of reason. Finally, in Gregory's conception the "second operation" in the creation of man, the distinction of the sexes, is also the work of God. "The ordering of nature has been established by God's will and law. It should not be considered a flaw." "All of man's members have been designed for one goal: that mankind may continue to have life." Even man's animal and passionate mode of increase is not to be despised because it "ensures the succession of mankind." It is the way that "nature fights with death." "The sex organs assure mankind of immortality so that death, which is always striving against us, be comes ineffectual and powerless. Nature is always renewing itself and compensating for the limitations of those who are born." This idea is foreign to Origen.

Gregory never specifies the exact moment at which this "second operation," the actual differentiation of the sexes, occurs. Since in his conception the "fleshly robe of the body" refers to the physical status of man after the fall, it may seem that he considers that man in his pure state of equality with the angels did not share the corporeality of animal natures and was not actually distinguished by sex. Divine providence only foresaw the coming coarsening of human nature and its division by sex and allowed this to take place. However, it is unlikely that Gregory considered that man was fully incorporeal before the fall because this would contradict his doctrines of man's intermediate status in creation as the link between immaterial and earthly beings, and of man's calling to be sovereign in nature. Gregory probably agreed with the idea introduced by Methodius of Olympus and later supported by Gregory the Theologian that man's "fleshly robe" is an indication of the coarsening of human nature and the subjection of the body to death which took place after the fall and in which respect man is similar to the animals. This is not just corporeality but mortality and the "subjection to death." This mortality is a "robe which has been imposed on us from outside. It temporarily serves the body and is not a part of our nature." It is a robe, a shell, a "deathly mantle." Thus Gregory departs from Origen by insisting on the integrity of man's being even in this life, and on the absolute simultaneity of the development of the body and the soul.

Gregory's view that there was no marriage before the fall, that the "conjugal state" is a result of sin, and that no marriage can be entirely pure, was also shared by a number of earlier theologians, especially those who were not influenced by the school of Alexandria. This conclusion was later supported by John Chrysostom (although he ultimately altered his position), Theodoret of Cyrus, Maximus the Confessor, John of Damascus, and later by Byzantine theologians, until the statement of Patriarch Jeremiah to the theologians of Tübingen in 1576.

thanks to:


No comments:

Post a Comment