Anthropology of St. Gregory of Nyssa: overcoming Origenism

Contents Literature review Man as the highest part of God’s creation, as a combination of the earthly and the heavenly The original “goodness” of the bodily nature of man The origin of evil and its action in human nature The tree of the knowledge of good and evil The concept of “leather vestments” The deification of the flesh and its resurrection Conclusions The article shows that a full analysis of the ideas of St. Gregory of Nyssa on the purpose of the material nature of man has not yet been carried out. This analysis is especially relevant in view of the extreme spiritualization of the saint’s views on the resurrected human body in the works of modern researchers. Even among Orthodox authors we find the opinion that the appearance of the sensuous in space and in human nature in St. Gregory has the character of an exclusively forced action of God's Providence in anticipation of the Fall of Adam. Such assessments of the theological heritage of the saint represent him as a consistent Origenist. In fact, if Origen can be called a theologian of renewal, understood as the overcoming of flesh and matter, then the church teaching to which St. remained faithful. Gregory, preaches the deification of the whole person. Unlike Origen, the saint recognized the material nature of man as originally conceived by God as the “icon of the icon.” It is emphasized that it is incorrect to talk about the ontologically negative quality of a person’s bodily composition in the worldview of the saint. The saint's loyalty to biblical holistic anthropology is shown through the use of such anthropological formulas as “earthly cast” and “verbal animal”. pointed to the thought of St. Gregory about the purpose of man as the unity of the “spiritual essence of the soul” with the “earthy part” of the body for the glorification of God and his creation. The saint’s concept of “leather vestments” also clearly reflects his departure from Origenism. If for Origen “leather tunics” (Gen. 3.21) are the material body of man itself, then for the saint this concept reflects the acquisition of negative qualities by the matter of the body. This is also a passionate state of the soul, prone to vices. This concept includes everything negative and difficult for a person in his body and in the world around him and is the action of the creator who “assisted” Adam’s desire to enjoy only material things. Through the providential retreat of grace, the ontological properties of the disorder of matter were revealed, so that man turned to God as the source of harmony and beauty. However, human flesh is called to participate in deification and resurrection and retains its basic nature in a spiritualized state. To the study of the anthropology of St. Many scientists turned to Gregory of Nyssa, but an analysis of his ideas about the state and purpose of the material nature of man was not fully carried out. If in the writings of the archbishop. Philaret (Gumilevsky) and N.I. Sagarda, we find no information at all on the issues that interest us in the heritage of St. Gregory of Nyssa, then the new martyr I.V. Popov has brief instructions on maintaining both fidelity to church teaching and elements of Origenism in the saint’s ideas about resurrected bodies 1. The author nowhere indicates the teaching of St. Gregory on the preservation of spiritualized flesh in the resurrection as a qualitative sign of overcoming Origenism. The indication of dependence on Philo in the concept of the two acts of creation of the first man is not supplemented by a remark about the fidelity of St. Gregory of biblical anthropology in his teaching about the original unity of soul and body. In the study of A.V. Martynov, dedicated to the anthropology of St. Gregory, the problems of the bodily component of human nature are covered in sufficient detail, 2 however, even here the main aspects of the saint’s system are very poorly noted, where he contradicts Origenism and Platonism. The only point at which St. Gregory disagrees with Origen and his followers; here he admits that the soul and body begin to exist simultaneously, and man is initially called upon to unite matter and spirit into one whole 3. The fact that “St. Gregory did not allow legends about paradise to be an allegory or a parable,” noted Archpriest. George Florovsky, emphasizing that the saint “did not deny nature (physical - Hierom. K.Z.), but singled out from it, liberated man, called by his very composition to stand not in it, but above it” 4. In his essay on the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, Fr. G. Florovsky, revealing the innovation of the Gospel as a new and good news “and about the body as much” as about the human soul, points out that St. Gregory of Nyssa on the issue of resurrected bodies joins Origen’s main opponent - St. Methodius. “In his eschatological synthesis” St. Gregory “is trying to combine both views, to combine the “truth” of Origen with the “truth” of Methodius” 5. Prot. G. Florovsky summarized the saint’s ideas in statements that the resurrection of man, having its basis in the Resurrection of Christ, is a “renewed body”, “fulfillment”, “a certain new way of existence”, “recapitulation”, and also that, along with the identity of the material composition of bodies, in them “fluidity and variability are abolished” and “not everything in the human composition is restored” 6. However, even here the doctrine of the preservation of the nature of the flesh, the deification of which does not mean the physical elimination of the earthly matter that composes it, is not voiced in any way. The fact that, on the one hand, “St. Gregory adhered to the biblical understanding of man,” and on the other, “issues of gender are discussed” with him “in the context of Origen’s doctrine of the two creations,” is also noted by Protopr. I. Meyendorff. Thus, only “in anticipation of sin did God create man as bisexual,” and “before the Fall, the distinction between man and woman was not realized” 7 . But we do not find a more detailed disclosure of this antinomy in the anthropology of the saint here. The most detailed analysis of the saint's original anthropological texts for the purpose of analyzing the teaching about the state and purpose of the material nature of man is given in the study of Met. Makaria (Oksiyuka) 8. However, in this study, despite the instructions on the recognition of St. Gregory of the corporeality of primordial people and its preservation in the resurrection, as well as important observations about the removal of irrational and vegetative movements and forces from human nature 9, did not provide evidence of the presence of an eschatological purpose of the flesh in the saint’s system. In a recently published translation of the work of the Czech patrolologist L. Karfikova, this trend is reflected in the opinion of the “disguise” or even “opportunism of Gregory”, manifested in the “addition of Christian ideas about the resurrection to the Platonizing dialogue” 10. Some even dared to talk about the saint’s adherence to the church teaching on the resurrection as his “characteristic error” 11, not characteristic of his integral system of theology. While not completely agreeing with this approach, L. Karfikova believes, however, that the teaching of St. Gregory on the “spiritual body” of the resurrection “expresses the complete spiritualization of the resurrected body, which clearly has no other meaning than the preservation of personal individuality.” She even thinks about the analogy of such a “body” with “intelligible qualities of matter that have not yet “come together” in order to create temporal-spatial matter” 12. This opinion is supported by the judgment that everything sensory in human nature belongs to St. Gregory to the “second creation” and has the character of an exclusively forced action of God’s Providence in anticipation of the Fall of Adam 13. The results of a detailed analysis of his use of the concept of “nature” (φύσις) conducted by D. Balás and G. Maspero 14 testify against such an extreme spiritualization of the saint’s teaching. These authors showed that, arguing about the universal nature of man, St. Gregory transformed Neoplatonic logic and ontology in a unique and authentically Christian way 15 . The general nature of the human race determines the very mode of being of the nature of human individuals 16. Most clearly, as researchers note, the “historicity” of human nature is revealed in the Christology of the saint 17. Striving to weaken the dependence on spatio-temporal characteristics, created nature, however, is fundamentally connected with them at the ontological level. In Origen, who denied the resurrection of human flesh, 18 the tendency to neglect the matter of the modern cosmos was especially evident in the doctrine of ethereal bodies. According to the word of Rev. Georgiy Florovsky, “in Origenism, in essence, there is no anthropology, but only pneumatology, the doctrine of eternal spirits” 19. If Origen can be called a theologian of renewal, understood rather as the overcoming of flesh and matter, then church teaching preaches renewal as the deification of the whole person and the entire creation 20 . We will try to prove that in the system of St. Gregory, according to God’s plan for human nature, material (earthly) flesh should be its organic part, both initially and in eschatology. We can agree with S.L. Epifanovich, who claimed that, according to the teachings of the saint, “the composition of the flesh of the first man was special, imperishable, passionless, man was not intended to reproduce through marriage; its division into male and female was allowed only due to the foreknowledge of sin” 21. however, the flesh itself, as such, according to the speculation of St. Gregory, was given to him not because of the foreknowledge of sin, but for a different reason. Man as the highest part of God's creation, as a combination of earthly and heavenly St. Gregory views man as a part of creation, but at the same time as its highest part. Thus, in Chapter 3 of the essay On the Dispensation of Man, the saint speaks of divine advice before the creation of man: “The Creator of the Universe approaches the dispensation of man alone, as if with deliberation, in order to prepare the substance for its composition, and to liken its image to some kind of primitive beauty, and to designate the purpose for which it will exist, and to create a nature appropriate to it, suitable for its activity, suitable for the proposed purpose.” 22. Human nature is a special nature, “dissolved from something foreign,” while “the Divine and spiritual essence has entered into unity with the share of each element allocated to it” 23. The saint's faithfulness to biblical anthropology is well revealed by the example of the use of such anthropological formulas as "τ ό ζῷον λογικὸν" 24, "τὸ γὰρ γήιπλάσμα" 25, "τὸ ἑαυτοῦ πλάσμα " 26, " σύνθετος ὁ ἄνθρωπος " 27. The doctrine common to the Cappadocians about the creation of the first man “by the hands of God” from the primordial earth was reflected in the text of St. Gregory from the Refutation of Eunomius. It says that for Christians who have “put on Christ” it is true that He creates “us by the work of His hands (ἔργα τῶν ἑαυτοῦ χειρῶν), from the evil creation of sin (ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ πλάσματος τῆς ἁ μαρτίας) transforming again into His own image (τὴν ἰδίαν εἰκόνα πάλιν μετεργασάμενος )" 28. The purpose of the creation of man is described in different ways in the heritage of the saint, but, from the point of view of the doctrine of matter, the text from On Babies Prematurely Snatched by Death is especially important. It says here that, according to the Creator’s plan, so that “the earth does not remain completely without a part and share in the existence of spiritual and incorporeal natures, for this purpose human nature was brought into existence by the best providence” 29 . Since human flesh is created from the earth, “close and homogeneous” with it in its essence, then through the unity of the “spiritual and divine essence of the soul” with the “earthly part ... in all creation, the spiritual nature is glorified” 30 by a higher Power, i.e. God Himself. In other words, according to St. Gregory, the Creator wished that the coarsest matter of the cosmos would participate in the spiritual service of the angelic higher powers. For this purpose, man was created, so that “heavenly and earthly things by the same action” could be united “with each other towards the same goal.” This “action”—turning one’s gaze to God—is life “proper and consistent with spiritual nature” 31 . Here we see that, in antithesis with Origenist ideas, the material component of human nature is recognized by St. Gregory, called into existence directly by the good will of God the Creator. Moreover, the saint even affirms the “equality” (ἡὁμοτιμία) of the distribution of grace throughout all creation, spiritual and material, in the original harmony of the world. Thus, “one certain grace passed equally (κατὰ τὸ ὁμότιμον) during the dissolution of the earthly nature with the premium nature” 32. In view of the above, it becomes clear that some researchers have incorrectly interpreted the somewhat careless, in our opinion, presentation of St. Gregory of the creation of Adam from On the Constitution of Man 22. At the very beginning of this text (De opifcio hominis 204. 36–205. 41, TLG) the ontological and economic aspects of anthropology are mixed beyond recognition. The general context of the passage De opifcio hominis 204. 36–51 inclines the reader even, rather, to understand the ideal human nature in the tradition of Philo as purely immaterial. This occurs due to the saint’s identification of the concepts “γήιπλάσμα” (cf. Gen. 2:7) and “ἄνθρωπος ἐκ γῆς χοϊκ ό ς “(1 Cor. 15:47), the first of which refers to the ontology of man, and the second was used by the Apostle Paul in the context of the economy of salvation. Talking about the “first man from the earth” and the “second man from heaven”, “those of earthly” (οἱ χοϊκο ί) and “heavenly” (οἱ ἐπουράνιοι), about “bearing the image of earthly and heavenly” ( εἰκ ό να τοῦ χοϊκοῦ φορέσομεν καὶ τὴν εἰκ ό να τοῦ ἐπουραν ί ου ), the apostle refers to the internal change in the direction of the forces of the human soul, but does not in any way contrast the presence and absence of the flesh. The further exposition of St. Gregory explains that he did not mean the acceptance of the flesh by Adam as exclusively necessary, due to the foresight of the Fall. What is “mixed” with the originally conceived nature of man is not the flesh, but the difference between the sexes and the image of reproduction. This position will be revealed even more clearly when analyzing the concept of “leather vestments.” at St. Gregory's. Here we will only add that at the end of On the Dispensation of Man the saint directly rejects the doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul, and also states that it is “communion of the passionate and bestial birth” ) prevents the image of God from shining “directly” in the image created by God (ἐν τῷ πλάσματι) 33, that is, in the material body of man. The original “goodness” of human bodily nature Initially, man, “strengthened by God’s blessing, was great in dignity, because he was appointed to reign over the earth and over everything that is on it; had a beautiful appearance, because he became an image of primitive beauty; he was dispassionate by nature, because he was in the likeness of the Dispassionate; filled with boldness, enjoying the very manifestation of God face to face” 34. Our entire human nature “was originally good and abounded in blessings” 35. A person is called a saint by “God’s wonderful work” 36 . According to the best providence (προμηθεί ᾳ δὲ κρείττονι), man is brought into being in such a way that “there is a certain fusion of the mental with the sensory nature, so that in the creation, as the apostle says, “nothing” is “marked out” (1 Tim. 4:4) and deprived of Divine communication" 37. The Creator's goal was to arrange the world in such a way that not a single creature would be left without an inheritance in the best nature 38 . All negative qualities came into human nature and life either due to God’s foreknowledge of the Fall of Adam, or as a result of the Fall itself. Initially, the entire human nature, including the physical one, was in harmony and purity and was completely filled with goodness 39 . And, of course, there was no death in human nature. It is important to note that, reflecting on what is “unlike” God in human nature, St. Gregory attributes the most striking sign of this “dissimilarity” not to the actual material-corporeal nature, but to the bodily state of dividing humanity into male and female sexes. The latter, according to the saint, “has no relation to the divine Prototype,” but is characteristic of the “wordless nature,” 40 and appeared in human nature due to the foreknowledge of the Fall and the Providence of God for the salvation of man. After the creation of man in the image of God, “God invents for creation a difference in the male and female sex” 41 . The origin of evil and its action in human nature If for Plotinus evil “originates on the outer boundaries of being and is, thus, a necessary consequence of the spread of being” 42, then St. Gregory, continuing the early Christian tradition of the teaching that evil is a product of free will, makes a particularly noticeable contribution with his teaching about evil as not having its own existence 43. This understanding of evil is most fully revealed by the saint in Discourse 7 on Ecclesiastes, where he says that “outside God there is evil, the property of which is not that it is in being, but that it is not in good. According to our position, the word “evil” is the name of that which is outside the concept of good. Evil seems to be as much the opposite of good as the non-existent is the opposite of the existing.”44 At the same time, here is St. Gregory connects discussions about evil with the free fall of man from good, after which in human nature “the unrealized nature of evil was then realized, and will remain until then as long as we are outside of good.” Extremely important is his statement that “evil, taken outside of will, does not exist in itself” 45. Moving away from the ideas of the Neoplatonists and separating the concept and origin of evil not only from matter, but also from creation as a whole, St. Gregory separates the concepts of “non-existence”, as pure “nothing”, devoid of any qualities, from “non-existence”, called evil and actually becoming evil as a result of moving away from good 46. This position is especially revealed in chapter b of the Catechetical Word: “The difference between virtue and vice is not presented as a difference between any two hypostatic phenomena” 47. In some way, according to the saint, man himself became the creator, originator and inventor (εὑρέτης) of evil. In the entire nature of creatures there is no evil, “independent of the will, having its own independent existence” 49, but “every creation of God is good and nothing is worthless,” “everything God has created is great” (Gen. 1.31). External objects and the body are only a kind of “reason” for sin. Thus, it is the feelings (τὰς αἰσθήσεις) that Scripture “called windows (θυρίδας) that pave the way for the entrance of death” 50. Sensuality in general and the sense of touch are especially recognized by St. Gregory akin to wordless life 51. And the fall of man itself is recognized as having occurred through the senses 52 . In Chapter 14 On the structure of man, St. Gregory once again clarifies that it is the soul, “united with material nature through the senses,” that is the source of the “animating force” that gives good order and growth to the bodily nature of man. The latter, if deprived of the “vital activity” received from God through the soul, will certainly “end the movement with decay” 53. Tree of the knowledge of good and evil The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is determined by St. Gregory in Chapter 19 About the structure of man as giving a certain “fused and mixed fruit, dissolved from opposite qualities” 54. Referring to Holy Scripture, the saint identifies the concepts of “lust” (ἐπιθυμία) and “knowledge” (γνῶσις) in relation to the tree of knowledge: “The existing desire for evil, as well as for good, is called in Scripture the knowledge of good and evil” 55. The concepts of “ἐπιθυμία”, as well as the tree of life and the tree of knowledge are closely related in the theological constructions of St. Gregory. Thus, “the desire for good” is at the same time “alienation of evil” 56, “to find coolness under the canopy of the tree of life (ὑπὸ τὴν σκιὰν τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς) is possible only when lust (ἐπιθυμία) leads the soul to that” 57 In the negative sense, “lust” (ἐπιθυμία) is identified with snakes, The saint also speaks of the bites of lust (τῆς ἐπιθυμίας τὰ δήγματα), drawing a parallel with the biblical serpent at the tree of knowledge. He also speaks of “the lust of the flesh for the spirit” 58. In a negative sense, understood lust is also identified with the concept of sensual sinful pleasure 59, which misleads a person in reasoning (knowing) the good 60. The combination of the terms "opposite" (ἐναντ ί ον), "opposite" (ἐναντ ί ον) and "quality" (ποι ό της) is also often found in the writings of St. Gregory to describe various objects of the material world. For example, in the Sermon on the Sixth Day the saint speaks of “a change in the substance of vapor into the opposite quality” 61 . In contrast to the simplicity of spiritual nature, material objects are maintained in harmony by the “equilibrium of the qualities of opposites” 62 . Here St. Gregory clearly continues the tradition of commentators on Aristotle. Aristotle himself constantly spoke about variability from one state to the opposite 63 as one of the basic properties of matter (as a subject for these changes) 64 . The above expression about the balance (ἰσοκρατ ί α) of opposites in the objects of the material world is found in the famous commentator of Aristotle - Alexander of Aphrodisias 65. The mixed fruit (σύμμικτον καρπὸς) of the tree of knowledge thus reflects, on the one hand, the properties of matter (duality), and on the other, the duality of the sensory knowledge of the world after the Fall of Adam. Truly good “is by its nature simple and one-personal,” and also “alien to any duality and combination with the opposite” 66. These definitions refer primarily to God and are used by St. Gregory in his discussions about Him in the essay Refutation of Eunomius in combination with another definition, namely “ἀσύνθετος" 67. Further discussing the diversity and hidden nature of evil (τὸ δὲ κακὸν ποικίλον τε καὶ κατεσχηματισμένον ἐστὶν), St. Gregory means moral evil acquired through human experience 68. The material world and the objects that fill it are not, therefore, a source of evil, but the state of this world, as a result of the Fall of man, has become a kind of personification of the wrong axiological choice and sin, which lies in the sphere of mental nature and morality. Man's fascination with the external beauty of the fruit of the forbidden tree and the “sensual pleasure of eating” 69 replaced spiritual admiration for the true beauty of the incorruptible God. The context of the saint's thoughts expressed here confirms the position of Fr. G. Florovsky that he did not deny the historical-literal interpretation of the biblical story of paradise. The text about eating the forbidden fruit also contains a completely materialistic plan, and therefore does not allow us to recognize the identification in the saint’s system of the primeval paradise with a purely ideal existence in heaven. This violation of the hierarchy of values ​​entailed a special action of God's Providence in relation to man, his body and the material world around him. In an abbreviated form, this action of Providence is described by the saint in the Word for the Dead as permission for “a person to remain with what he desired, so that, having tasted the evil that he desired, and having learned by experience what he exchanged for what, he again voluntarily, with a strong desire, ascended to his former bliss, throwing away from his nature everything passionate and unreasonable, like any burden, having been cleansed in the present life by prayer and wisdom” 70 . Thus, according to St. Gregory, the gift of freedom in human nature was respected, and evil was duly rebuffed. The negative change in matter is most clearly expressed by the saint in the concept of “leather vestments,” which he interprets in a symbolic way, but as a very real, even catastrophic distortion of the original world. “What we received from the skin of the dumb” (ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀλόγου δέρματος), this, according to the word of St. Gregory, everything related to the infirmities and diseases of the human body. This concept also includes the above-mentioned division into male and female sex, and the latter is especially highlighted by the saint and is placed in first place in the list of characteristic features of the new, impoverished state of man: “Carnal mixture, conception, birth, uncleanness, breasts, food, eruption, gradual coming of age, maturity of age, old age, illness, death” 71. In this excerpt from the Dialogue on the Soul and Resurrection of St. Gregory gives the most complete list of the characteristic properties of “leather vestments”. In Chapter 8 of the Catechetical Word it is indicated that the Creator imposes on the primordial “robes of leather” as “the opportunity to die, which was the difference of the dumb nature” 72. And in Discourse 2 on the Song of Songs it is said about the deprivation of purity and putting on a gloomy appearance (τὸ ζοφῶδεςε ἶ δος), “because such was the appearance of the leather robe” 73. In Discourse 5 on the Lord's Prayer, leather tunics are identified with “the quickly withering leaves of this material life,” with the passions and are contrasted with the lost divine garments 74 . In the essay On Virginity 13.1, the removal of leather garments is associated, first of all, with removal from marriage, although it is understood much more broadly as the removal of the “veils of the flesh” and “carnal wisdom” 75. We see that the concept of “leather vestments”, as a theological concept, includes in the saint, just like the “mixed fruit” discussed above, two groups of related, but qualitatively different concepts. Firstly, this is a passionate state of the human soul. It is associated with voluntary agreement with the advice of the serpent-tempter and results in such a change in mental disposition that, in the likeness of the serpent, which “eats the earth and crawls on the earth: walks on its toes and on its belly,” a person indulged in “earthly pleasures, occupying his heart with reptiles and dragging thoughts on the earth and walking on his belly, that is, taking care of the voluptuous life” 76 . This is a group of concepts that can be summarized by the term “passions”, or “propensity for the bestial and unreasonable” 77, and discussions about which are associated with the categories of asceticism, moral choice, purification of the soul in prayer, restoration of feelings in the correct order and structure. In the context of such ascetic reflections, St. Gregory there are discourses about the purification of the soul through the removal of “leather clothes” (δερματίνους χιτῶνας) 78, about “the detachment of the spiritual feet from leather and dead shoes” in contemplation 79. Often such a tendency to passions, the likening of a person to the life of dumb people is described by St. Gregory with the expression "ἡ ὑλικὴ ζωὴ" 80. The last expression serves as a kind of related term that brings us to the second group of concepts associated with changes in the actual matter of the world and the bodily composition of human nature. The changes in the bodily nature of man, listed above in the passage from the Dialogue on the Soul and Resurrection, occurred as a result of the fact that man “preferred material pleasure to spiritual joy,” and therefore “God, apparently, assisted him in this endeavor, through leather clothing” 81. This idea is not entirely clear, but is somewhat clarified by the saint once again when he says in the Word about the departed that if a person “inclines to the unreasonable attraction of the passions, using, as an aid to the passions, the skin of the dumb (τῷ τῶν ἀλόγων δέρματι συνεργῷ χρησάμενος πρὸς τὰπάθη), then in another way after this he will be taught better” 82. The aorist participle “χρησάμενος” used here from the verb “χράομαι”, which has the meaning “to borrow, borrow, lend, use” 83, emphasizes that human bodily nature, as if temporarily burdened with the skins of dumb animals, somehow serves to instruct carried away by the passions of the soul. The "clothing of skin" itself can be a "substance" (ὕ λη) 84 for both virtue and vice. In this place, “substance” is understood in the sense of a possible “subject”, “food” of virtue and vice, but at the same time it is a clear allusion to the gross materiality of the body obtained after touching the forbidden tree. In addition to the possibility of the final enlightenment of the soul after the departure from this life in some purifying fire 85, St. Gregory speaks of a “voluntary inclination for the better” “through a certain continuation of time” 86, which the material body serves even in this earthly life. “This is what made the body necessary and necessary for us,” 87 says St. Grigory. Taken out of the context of general reflections, this phrase describing the action of Providence would inevitably be understood in terms of the Origenist doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul. But here we are talking about something else, namely the education of the soul through the material difficulties of earthly existence and through the asceticism of abstinence. That is why the argument ends with the remark that in this way “freedom is preserved to its integrity, and the return path to good is not forbidden, but a voluntary inclination for the better arises in us” 88 . As a result, having collected the thoughts of St. Gregory about “leather tunics” together, we can say that this is the modern state of bodily nature, the illnesses and labors of this life, together with marriage, which, while serving the continuation of the human race, simultaneously brings “comfort” (παραμυθία) for mortals 89, and is fraught with death 90. The result of turning away his gaze from the Lord, when Adam stopped enjoying “only the Lord” and entrusted the judgment of true beauty to “sight and taste” 91 instead of the mind, became the “coarsening” and mortality of his body, the retreat of God’s grace from soul and body. Through the retreat of grace, the same unformedness and disorder of matter that we spoke about above began to emerge. The very passion of the soul is still not in itself “leather vestments”, given by God as a consequence and for the speediest aversion from sin. Everything negative and difficult for a person in his own body and the matter of the surrounding world is, according to the saint, the action of the Creator, who “contributed” (ἔδοξεν) to the unreasonable desire of Adam and his descendants to enjoy only material things. The “dissolution... of good unity” of the hierarchical order of being in the consciousness of man led to the fact that in his speculation “the highest became the lowest,” and the substance, “deviated from nature,” that is, from participation in God through the spirit of man, “revealed its ugliness” 92. Such was the Providence of the Creator for the salvation of man. The deification of the flesh and its resurrection The resurrection of the flesh and its deification was recognized by St. Gregory, thus, not at all “for the sake of generally accepted church dogmas,” but because of his fidelity to biblical anthropology. The saint’s ideas about the properties of the deified material body, although they sometimes seem too spiritualized, presuppose, when acquiring new spiritual properties, that matter retains its ontological nature. For example, St. Gregory taught that in Christ the flesh, “remaining flesh according to its nature (τῇἰδίᾳ φύσει), was transformed into the sea of ​​incorruptibility” 93. The Lord becomes “the firstborn from the dead,” having become “the firstfruits of those who sleep” (1 Cor 15:20) in order to open to all flesh “the way to resurrection” ἀνάστασιν) 94. The departure of St. Gregory from the Platonizing thought of Origen in the doctrine of the Eucharistic body of Christ, which becomes, according to the teachings of the saint, a kind of epicenter of the renewal of human nature, the beginning and source of its spiritualization, liberation from “leather garments,” death and corruption 95. A study of the anthropology of St. Gregory in the aspect of his ideas about the bodily nature of man allows us to conclude that, according to his teaching, conceived as an “icon of an icon” 96, the material nature of man has lost its original “iconicity” due to human sin. Both in primordial man and in the eschatological renewed state of humanity, matter has its important positive purpose. As a result of the analysis of the use of the concept “leather vestments”, it was established that it includes everything negative and difficult for a person in his own body and the matter of the surrounding world and is, according to the saint, a special action of the creator who “promoted” (ἔδοξεν) the unreasonable desire of Adam and his descendants to enjoy only material things. Despite the numerous negative epithets used by St. Gregory to describe the properties of the human body, it would be incorrect to talk about any initial ontological negative quality of bodily composition in the worldview of St. Gregory. The saint directly teaches about the participation of the flesh in the resurrection and the preservation of its basic qualities in its spiritualized state. The material nature of man is only in harmony and bears “a certain image of an image” when it is controlled by the mind, and, on the contrary, “it is destroyed again and disintegrates when it is separated from the prevailing and supporting one, and its unity with the beautiful is dissolved” 97 . The decomposition of matter is caused by “the reversal of nature to the reverse order 98, when desire is inclined not to the beautiful, but to that which itself has a need for decorating” 99. Through the providential retreat of grace, the ontological properties of the ugliness and disorder of matter began to emerge, so that man would return his gaze back to God as the Source of harmony and beauty. The teaching of St. Gregory about the eschatological deification of the flesh and its resurrection clearly emphasizes the non-involvement of the church hierarchy in Origenism, which retained the negative attitude towards matter characteristic of Platonism. Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia / ed. A. P. Lopukhina. In 12 volumes. Petrograd, 1903–1917. v. 4. p. 638, 641; Popov I.V. Lecture notes on patrolology. Tver: Bulat Publishing House, 2006. p. 306–307. Martynov A.V. teaching of St. Gregory of Nyssa on human nature. m., 1886. right there. With. 65–66, 135, 186, 195. Florovsky G., prot. Byzantine fathers of the 4th century. Paris, 1931. p. 163. Florovsky G., prot. Resurrection of the Dead // url: http://www.odinblago.ru/osnovnoe_ bogoslovie/voskresenie_mertvikh/ (access date: 03/21/2014). Meyendorff I., prot. Introduction to Patristic Theology / trans. from English L. Volkhonskaya. New York, 1985. P. 190. Macarius (Oksiyuk), Metropolitan. Eschatology of St. Gregory of Nyssa. M.: Publishing House Palomnik, 1999. p. 435–468. right there. With. 462, 464, 468. Karfikova L. about the soul and resurrection. chapter from the book: Gregory of Nyssa. God's and human infinity / trans. from Czech I. bey // website “bogoslov.ru”. url: http:// www.bogoslov.ru/text/753318.html (access date: 03/20/2014). Apostolopoulos ch. Phaedo christianus: Studien zur Verbindung und abwägung des Ver-hältnisses zwischen dem platonischen “Phaidon” und dem Dialog gregors von Nyssa “Über die Seele und die auferstehung” (European university studies; Ser. 20: Philosophy). Frank-furt-am-main; bern; New york: Peter lang, 1986. S. 129, 326, 337. Karfikova L. about the soul and resurrection... Verghese P., priest. The relationship between God, man and the world in the works of St. Gregory of Gis // Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. M., 1971. No. 7. p. 78–79, here: p. 79. Maspero G. trinity and man: gregory of Nyssa’s “ad ablabium”. leiden: brill, 2007 (Supplements to Vigilae christianae; 86). P. 4–27; Balás D. Te unity of human Nature in basil’s and gregory of Nyssa’s Polemics against Eunomius // Studia Patristica. 1976. Vol. 14:5. P. 275–281. Maspero G. trinity and man... P. 17. Balás D. Plenitudo humanitatis: Te unity of human Nature in the Theology of gregory of Nyssa // Disciplina Nostra. Essays in memory of Robert F. Evans / ed. by D. F. Winslow. Cambridge, 1979, pp. 115–131. Mateo-Seco L. F. cristologia e linguaggio in gregorio di Nissa // lingua e teologia nel cris-tianesimo greco. atti del convegno (Trento, 11–12 December 1997) / ed. by c. moreschini, g. menestrina. Brescia, 1999, pp. 227–249. St. Cyril of Alexandria, in a letter to the Egyptian monks, especially emphasizes the Church’s faith in the resurrection of the flesh, noting that the opposite unbelief is wickedness, stemming from “the corruption of the mind of Origen” (S. cyrillus Alexandrinus. Epistola lXXXI. ad monachos in Phua constitutos // Pg 77. col. 373a). Florovsky G., prot. Contradictions of Origenism // Path. Paris, 1929. No. 18. September. With. 107–115, here: p. 112. Kirill (Zinkovsky), priest. Origen’s ideas about the ethereal nature of resurrected bodies in the context of church teaching about the resurrection of the flesh // Church and Time. 2013. No. 4 (65). With. 184–214. Epifanovich S. L. Venerable Maxim the Confessor and Byzantine theology. M.: Publishing house. Martis, 2003. p. 23. Gregory of Nyssa, St. About the structure of man // He. Creations. At 8 o'clock M.: In type. V. Gautier, 1861–1872. Part 1. pp. 76–222, here: p. 87; S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis // PG 44. Col. 136A. Gregory of Nyssa, St. About babies snatched away prematurely by death. To Jerius // Same. Creations. Part 4. P. 338. S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis 145. 32; 148. 28 [ed. J.-P. Migne. TLG 2017/079]; Ad Graecos ex communibus notionibus 3, 1. 31. 6 [ed. E Mueller. TLG 2017/002]; Antirrheticus adversus Apollinarium 3, 1. 164. 9 [ed. E Mueller. TLG 2017/008]; In sanctum pascha (vulgo In Christi resurrectionem Oratio III) 9. 257. 27 [ed. E. Gebhardt TLG 2017/015]; De perfectione Christiana ad Olympium monachum 8, 1. 178. 7 [ed. W. Jaeger. TLG 2017/026]. S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis 204. 42; Oratio catechetica magna 6. 46 [ed. E. Muhlenberg. TLG 2017/088]. S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Refutatio confessionis Eunomii 143. 5 [ed. W. Jaeger. TLG 2017/031]. S. Gregorius Nyssenus. In diem luminum (vulgo In baptismum Christi oratio) 9. 225. 3 [ed. E. Gebhardt. TLG 2017/014]. S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Refutatio confessionis Eunomii 112. 9–11. The verb “tsetsruaˆotsi”, unique to ancient Greek writing, was used by St. Gregory once again when describing the transformation of a person’s mental and physical composition through death and resurrection (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De mortuis non esse dolendum 9. 60. 10 [ed. G. Heil. TLG 2017/009]). About babies... P. 339–340. "ὡ ς ἂ ν συνεπαρθείη τῷ θεί ῳ τὸ γήϊνον, καὶ μία τις κατὰ τὸ ὁμότιμον διὰ πάσης τῆς κτίσεως ἡ χάρις διήκοι, τῆς κάτω "(S. Gregorius Nys-senus. Oratio catechetica magna 6. 36–39 // PG 45. Col. 28A). S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis 256. 1–2. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Big catechetical word 6 // Same. Creations. In 8 hours. Part 4. P. 24; S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Oratio catechetica magna // PG 45. Col. 29B. “cbc, UYctGfjc, te ka! £v UYaGoIc, oiot s, Qatar ac, r\\uv tfjc, cpuascoc" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Oratio catechetica magna 5 // PG 45. Col. 24A). "Θεοῦ ἔργον ὁ ἄνθρωπος καλόν" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Oratio catechetica magna 8. 141); Gregory of Nyssa, St. Big catechetical word 8. P. 34. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Big catechetical word 6. P. 21. "ὡ ς ἂ ν πάντα τοῦ καλοῦ κατὰ τὸ ἴσον μετέχοι" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Oratio catechetica magna 6. 23–28). "λίαν καλῶν ἦ ν καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. In Canticum Canticorum 6. 347. 20 [ed. H. Langerbeck. TLG 2017/032]). Gregory of Nyssa, St. About the structure of man. Ch. 16. P. 143. Te Brill Dictionary of Gregory of Nyssa / ed. T. E Mateo-Seco, G. Maspero. Teiden, 2010. R. 329. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Accurate interpretation of Ecclesiastes Solomon // Sam. Creations. Part 2. P. 326. " Κακὸν γὰρ ἔξω προαιρέσεως ἐφ ’ ἑαυτοῦ κείμενον οὐκ ἔστιν " (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. In Ecclesiasten // PG 44. Col. 725B); Gregory of Nyssa, St. Accurate interpretation of Solomon's Ecclesiastes. P. 326. Te Brill Dictionary of Gregory of Nyssa. P. 327. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Large catechetical word 6. P. 22; › › ὑπόστασιν φαινομένων "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Oratio catechetica magna 6. 57–58 // PG 45. Col. 28C). "κτίστης καὶ δημιουργὸς τοῦ κακοῦ κατέστη ὁ ἄνθρωπος" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De vir-ginitate 12 // PG 46. Col. 369C). " Κακὸν γὰρ ἔξω προαιρέσεως κείμενον, καὶ κατ ’ ἰδίαν ὑπόστασιν "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De virginitate // PG 46. Col. 372A; About virginity 12 // Creations. S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De Oratione Dominica // PG 44. Col. 1185C-D. "" οἰκείωσις “(sensuality has great affinity with irrational life) (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. In Ecclesiasten 8 // PG44. Col. 736A). "" ποιούμενοι" (Ibid. Col. 733C). "" τὴν κίνησιν "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis // PG 44. Col. 176B). " συγκεκραμένον ποιότησιν "(Ibid. Col. 197B). "" "(Ibid. Col. 200B). "ἡ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἐπιθυμία, καὶ ἡ τοῦ κακοῦ ἀλλοτρίωσις" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. In Cantica Canticorum // PG 44. Col. 1060A). "μὴ τῆς ἐπιθυμίας πρὸς τοῦτο τὴν ψυχὴν ἀναγούσης" (Ibid. PG 44. Col. 844D). " τ ῇ σαρκὶ κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ἐπιθυμία " (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De vita Mosis // PG 44. Col. 416A). "ταῖς δι ’ αἰσθήσεως ἡδοναῖς" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis 20 // PG 44. Col. 197C). Thus, a person in another life is no longer misled by sensual pleasures when judging the good, "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De mortuis non esse dolendum 9. 36. 9). "" ποιότητα "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. In Hexaemeron explicatio apologetic // PG 44. Col. 104C). " τ ῇ ἰσοκρατεί ᾳ τῆς τῶν ἐναντίων ποιότητος " (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis 30 // PG 44. Col. 241C). "ἐκ τοῦ ἐναντίου" (Aristoteles. Metaphysica 12. 1069b. 3 [ed. W. D. Ross. TLG 0086/025]). Thus, matter must change, being capable of both opposites, "ἀνάγκη δὴ μεταβάλλειν τὴν ὕ λην δυναμένην ἄμφω " (Ibid. 12.1069b.14). "τὸ ἐναντίωσιν ἔχειν ἰσοκρατῆ πρὸς ἄλληλα" (Alexander Aphrodisiensis. De mixtione 231. 3 [ed. I. Bruns. I. TLG 0732/001]). "" "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis 20 // PG 44. Col. 200C). S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Contra Eunomium 1. 1. 276. 5 [ed. W. Jaeger. TLG 2017/030]. "διὰ τῆς πείρας" (De opifcio hominis // PG 44. Col. 200C). "κατὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν ἡδονὴν ἐγγοητεύσας τῇ γεύσει" (ibid.). Gregory of Nyssa, St. A word to the mourners... P. 516. Gregory of Nyssa, St. About the soul and resurrection // He. Creations. Part 4. P. 316; "Ἔ στιδὲ ἃ προσέλαβεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀλόγου δέρματος, ἡ μίξις, ἡ , ἡ κατ ’ ὀλίγον ἐπὶ τὸ τέλειον α ὔ ξησις , ἡ ἀκμὴ , τὸ γῆρας , ἡ νόσος, ὁ θάνατος. Εἰ ο ὖ ν ἐκεῖνο περὶ ἡμ ᾶ ς οὐκ ἔσται , πῶς ἡμῖν τὰ ἐξ ἐκείνου ὑπολειφθήσεται "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De anima et resurrection // PG 46. Col. 148D-149A). Gregory of Nyssa, St. Big catechetical word 8. P. 29. "Τοιοῦτος γὰρ τῷ εἴδει ὁ χιτ ὼ ν ὁ δερμάτινος" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. In Cantica Cantico-rum // PG 44. Col. 800D). "ἀντὶ τῶν θείων περιβολῶν" (Ibid. Col. 1184B). "τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκὸς" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De virginitate // PG 46. Col. 376B). Gregory of Nyssa, St. About prayer. Sl. 5 // Same. Creations. Part 1. P. 459. "πρὸς τὸ κτηνῶδες καὶ ἄλογον" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De mortuis non esse dolendum 9. 53. 22). S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Oratio funebris in Meletium Episcopum 9. 454. 13 [ed. A. Spira. TLG 2017/021]; Gregory of Nyssa, St. Funeral homily for Meletius, Bishop of Antioch // Same. Creations. Part 8. P. 385. Gregory of Nyssa, St. On the inscription of Psalms 7. P. 28. S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis 13 // PG 44. Col. 165A. According to TLG, this combination is found in the writings of St. Gregory 13 times. "" ἀνθρώπου προελομένου συντρέχειν μέν πως ἔδοξεν αὐτῷ τ ῇ ὁρμ ῇ διὰ τοῦ δερματίνου χιτῶνος "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De mortuis non esse dolendum 9. 55. 11–14). Gregory of Nyssa, St. A word to the mourners... P. 518. Dvoretsky I. Kh. Greek-Russian dictionary. In 2 vols. M., 1958. T. 2. S. 1785, 1781. "" "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De mortuis non esse dolendum 9. 55. 21–23). “Unless the cleansing fire cleanses the filth mixed in with the soul” (Gregory of Nyssa, Holy Word to the Sorrowful... P. 518). "" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De mortuis non esse dolendum 9. 56. 7–8). Gregory of Nyssa, St. A word to the mourners... pp. 518–519. S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De virginitate 12. 4 // PG 46. Col. 376A. “The matter of carnal union is the appearance of mortal bodies” (Gregory of Nyssa, St. On Virginity 13. 3. P. 350). "" ᾳ δὲ τὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ πρόσωπον βλέπων , ο ὔ πω δὲ διὰ γεύσεως καὶ ὁράσεως τὸ καλὸν κρίνων "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De virginitate 12. 4 // PG 46. Col. 373C; Gregory of Nyssa, St. On Virginity. P. 346). Compare: S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis 12. "" "(S. Gregorius Nyssenus. Antirrheticus adversus Apollinarium 3, 1. 201. 16–17 [ed. E Mueller. TLG 2017/008]). Gregory of Nyssa, St. About perfection, and about what a Christian should be. To Olympius the monk // Same. Creations. Part 7. P. 250; S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De perfectione Christiana ad Olympium monachum 8, 1. 202. 2. Kirill (Zinkovsky), priest. Great Fathers of the Church about matter and the human body. Alexandrian and Cappadocian schools. St. Petersburg: Publishing house about. Abyshko, 2014. p. 341–342. "τις εἰκ ὼ ν εἰκόνος" (S. Gregorius Nyssenus. De opifcio hominis // Pg 44. col. 164A). Gregory of Nyssa, set. about the structure of man. Ch. 12. p. 119. "" (De opifcio hominis // Pg 44. col. 164V). about the structure of man. Ch. 12. p. 119.