Chapter 3

St Gregory of Nyssa, an Outline of Christian Cosmology

Since my object in this book is to outline the cosmology of late antique and early
Byzantine Christianity, we now turn from the above short consideration of two
infuential cosmological models from antiquity, to late antiquity itself. This shift
is not to be interpreted as a negligence of the fact that thinkers in the long
interval of time in between made developments in cosmological thinking.
However, Plato and Aristotle are of major importance for philosophical
developments in late antiquity. For our purpose it is convenient to take up the
thread here, and to bring into the picture whatever might be of relevance from
earlier thought. In this period we will be able to make direct comparisons
between difering and competitive systems of thought, viz. that of the
philosophical schools, mainly of Neoplatonism, and of Christianity. Since we so
far have dwelt with the outline of two pagan systems, it could be of interest to
dive into a cosmological sketch given by St Gregory of Nyssa (335/40-394) in his
book De hominis opifcio (On the making of man).
Gregory wrote his book to supplement a work by his highly infuential
and respected brother, viz. St Basils book (given as homilies) on the six days of
creation, the In hexaemeron. Gregorys description is literally a sketch of two to
three pages. Even so, this condensed outline is full of interesting details that
make it possible for us to see some of the similarities as well as diferences
between a pagan and a Christian outlook on the world. Gregorys sketch,
therefore, will be useful for us when we in later chapters turn to details.
1
In the introduction to his book, Gregory puts forward some interesting
methodological considerations.
1
He says we shall try to ft together the
explanations of Scripture and those derived from reasoning that seem, by a kind
of necessary sequence, to be opposed. His hope is that it is possible to show, with
divine aid, that statements that seem contradictory in fact contribute to one and
the same end. There is plenty of witness in Gregorys writings that Holy
Scripture is the source and rule for correct reasoning, but even so he is open to
include into the picture whatever is of use to highlight the scriptural teaching. As
we shall see, basic ideas from Christian theological tradition have interesting
consequences for the development cosmological thought.
Let us turn to Gregorys exposition of his cosmological model.
2
He
introduces his treatment with a citation from Genesis 2, 4 (LXX): This is the book
of the generation of heaven and earth, which points back to the six days of
creation described in the frst chapter of Genesis. What Gregory now does, is to
give a scientifc description of Gods fnished work. The heavenly body
encompasses in a spherical way all things that are made. We immediately get the
same general world-view as we found in Plato and Aristotle: an outer sphere
encompassing all beings. The next move is of the same nature: the heavy bodies
that turn downwards, viz. earth and water, occupy the middle place of the
cosmos. These, Gregory says, are maintaining one another or are holding one
another fast (en allelois diakratoumena). This, I suppose, means that earth and
water border to one another, and in doing so they tend, in accordance with each
ones physical nature, to keep the limit between them fast. This natural tendency
to keep ones place secure in confrontation with the other element is, however, a
1
De hom. op., PG 44: 128a-b, NPNF 5, 387.
2
If no other sources are gien, a!! "ateria! is ta#en fro" the re!atie!$ short se%uence of PG 44: 128c-132c,
NPNF 5, 388-3&'.
2
special instance of a general principle. The divine skill and power (techne kai
dynamis) are implanted into becoming things as a bond and stability (syndesmos
de tis kai bebaiotes). This guides all things by a double activity (diplais energeias) of
rest and motion. We shall have to explain the workings of rest and motion
further, but frst we should note that it is not the natures of the elements that by
themselves are responsible for cosmic order and preservation. One could, of
course, say that a basic feature of cosmic order is due to the fact that the natures
of earth and water are heavy, and those of air and fre are light. But the reason
why elements are heavy and light, that they maintain themselves in their proper
regions, and that they function harmoniously to the overall stability of the
universe, is that they were directed to these ends by a law implanted in nature
and a divine power that directs by the principles of motion and rest.
Gregory says things were brought into being and continuance by rest and
motion. At the centre the stability balances against the rapid motion of the sphere
that encircles the world, and both centre and periphery are preserved as
undissolved (adialyton, unbound) in this physical tension between rest and
motion: the rapid motion of the encircling being compresses (perisphingouses,
binds tightly all around, contracts) the compact (vaston) body of earth all
around, while the stable earth augments the circling of that which revolves
around it. In this way the two activities of rest and motion produce an equal
measure of hyperbole, maybe intensity, since the earth remains steadfast and the
heaven never slacks its motion.
In the Timaeus it is not rest and motion, but the Same and the Other that
are the basic principles of the cosmic building. In a sense these two sets of
principles largely seem to accommodate the same kind of efects, namely of
cosmic stability and diversity. The two Platonic principles, however, are more
3
abstract and, maybe, of a more basic and general nature. In a sense the two sets
also work in opposite directions: the Platonic principle of the Same is connected
with the stability of the higher natures, while the principle of the Other is more
closely basic for material diversity. In Gregory it is the earth that is stable, while
the heaven rotates. Therefore, the two sets are not identical even if something
similar results, viz. the general cosmic order.
According to Gregory, the two principles or, better, activities of rest and
motion, joined to earthly stability and heavenly motion, are made before all tings,
as the basic principle of the cosmic device (mechanema, engine). This is the sense
of Moses words when he says heaven and earth was made in the beginning
(arche). All things are the ofspring of rest and motion, brought about by the
divine will. Gregorys next move is to describe how the cosmic engine is
internally connected from periphery to centre by the four elements being made to
mediate between one another. The elements occur in a certain ordered sequence
from periphery to centre: fre, air, water, and earth. Now, air is a mean between
fre and water. Being light of nature and suitable for motion, it partakes of the
mobile nature of fre. Even so, it is not totally diferent from the opposite element,
water. Air also partakes in a kind of stability so that it keeps an afnity with both
opposites. It is likewise with water, being the mean between air and earth. At the
three borderlines between elemental being there occur, therefore, certain double
activities: (i) fre and air infuence one another the way that air receives a relative
degree of movement from fre, and fre receives a relative degree of rest from air.
(ii) Air and water infuence one another the way that water receives a relative
degree of movement from air, and air receives a relative degree of rest from
water. (iii) Finally, earth receives a relative degree of movement from water, and
water receives a relative degree of rest from earth. In such a way, Gregory says,
4
things most extremely opposite in nature combine with one another, and are
mutually joined by those which act as means between them. The constitution of
the cosmos between general changeableness and immovability is due to the
divine ordering of the universe. Within this elemental distribution between
opposites, all beings were brought forward by the divine will, each kind in its
proper place.
In his work In inscriptions psalmorum (1,3), Gregory makes an interesting
remark:
I once heard a wise man expound a theory about our nature. He said that man is a miniature
cosmos (mikros tis kosmos) and contains all the elements of the great cosmos. And the orderly
arrangement of the universe (he de tou pantos diakosmesis), he said, is a diverse and variegated
musical harmony which has been tuned in relation to itself and is in accord with itself and is
never distracted from this harmony even though a great distinction of essences is observed in the
individual parts.
3
This resounds of the Pythagorean idea that the cosmos is a musical harmony, a
theory commented on by Aristotle in the Metaphysics.
4
[It must be investigated if
this theory had any renaissance in late antiquity, in the philosophical schools.]
Gregorys universe is made by a benevolent God, who made all things in order to
bring forth man in its midst. The God of Gregory is a God who knows His
creatures and cares about them. The cosmos is made with such features,
therefore, that man may search for God from the traces He has left in what He
made. We should now turn to comment on the concept of God in late antiquity
and compare the God of the Platonists and the God of the Christians.
3
GN( 5, 3'-1.
4
)f. boo# 1,5: &8*a2-12.
5
*