The Spirit as creator in Gregory Nazianzen’s Or. 41.14
<p>Previous discussions of Gregory Nazianzen’s Pneumatology have portrayed Gregory’s sharing Basil’s understanding of the Spirit’s creative role as limited to that of ‘perfecting cause’ (Ayres, 2004; Alfeyev, 2006). This article will challenge this characterisation of Gregory’s Pneumatology by...
| Glavni autor: | |
|---|---|
| Daljnji autori: | |
| Format: | Book section |
| Jezik: | English |
| Izdano: |
Peeters Publishers
2021
|
| _version_ | 1826315263599968256 |
|---|---|
| author | Harris, BA |
| author2 | Vinzent, M |
| author_facet | Vinzent, M Harris, BA |
| author_sort | Harris, BA |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | <p>Previous discussions of Gregory Nazianzen’s Pneumatology have portrayed Gregory’s sharing Basil’s understanding of the Spirit’s creative role as limited to that of ‘perfecting cause’ (Ayres, 2004; Alfeyev, 2006). This article will challenge this characterisation of Gregory’s Pneumatology by showing that, first, Gregory also holds a broader understanding of the Spirit’s creative activity, viewing the Spirit as co-operating with the Father and the Son in the original creation of all things and, second, Gregory diverges from Basil on this point due to his engagement with other pro-Nicene Pneumatological traditions of which Basil was either unaware or chose not to use when developing his account of the Spirit’s creative function. </p>
<p>I will establish these two contentions through a close reading of Gregory’s discussion of the Spirit’s creative activity in Or. 41.14. There, Gregory cites Psalm 32:6 and Job 33:4 in support of his contention that the Spirit is active in the creation of all things. In so doing, he departs from Basil’s interpretation of these passages, according to which Psalm 32:6 indicates the Spirit’s sanctification of the angels, while Job 33:4 refers to the moral perfection of human beings. Gregory’s divergent interpretation of these passages, I contend, reflects his engagement with broader currents in pro-Nicene Pneumatology. Specifically, I will show that Gregory learns his interpretation of Psalm 32:6 from Epiphanius’ exegesis of the same passage in the Ancoratus, while his interpretation of Job 33:4 follows that found in PseudoBasil’s Against Eunomius IV-V, which may stem from the hand of Didymus the Blind.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T08:26:35Z |
| format | Book section |
| id | oxford-uuid:a861f388-156c-472b-9d1c-5c39c34f3d08 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-09T03:22:45Z |
| publishDate | 2021 |
| publisher | Peeters Publishers |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:a861f388-156c-472b-9d1c-5c39c34f3d082024-11-19T12:05:36ZThe Spirit as creator in Gregory Nazianzen’s Or. 41.14Book sectionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_3248uuid:a861f388-156c-472b-9d1c-5c39c34f3d08EnglishSymplectic ElementsPeeters Publishers2021Harris, BAVinzent, M<p>Previous discussions of Gregory Nazianzen’s Pneumatology have portrayed Gregory’s sharing Basil’s understanding of the Spirit’s creative role as limited to that of ‘perfecting cause’ (Ayres, 2004; Alfeyev, 2006). This article will challenge this characterisation of Gregory’s Pneumatology by showing that, first, Gregory also holds a broader understanding of the Spirit’s creative activity, viewing the Spirit as co-operating with the Father and the Son in the original creation of all things and, second, Gregory diverges from Basil on this point due to his engagement with other pro-Nicene Pneumatological traditions of which Basil was either unaware or chose not to use when developing his account of the Spirit’s creative function. </p> <p>I will establish these two contentions through a close reading of Gregory’s discussion of the Spirit’s creative activity in Or. 41.14. There, Gregory cites Psalm 32:6 and Job 33:4 in support of his contention that the Spirit is active in the creation of all things. In so doing, he departs from Basil’s interpretation of these passages, according to which Psalm 32:6 indicates the Spirit’s sanctification of the angels, while Job 33:4 refers to the moral perfection of human beings. Gregory’s divergent interpretation of these passages, I contend, reflects his engagement with broader currents in pro-Nicene Pneumatology. Specifically, I will show that Gregory learns his interpretation of Psalm 32:6 from Epiphanius’ exegesis of the same passage in the Ancoratus, while his interpretation of Job 33:4 follows that found in PseudoBasil’s Against Eunomius IV-V, which may stem from the hand of Didymus the Blind.</p> |
| spellingShingle | Harris, BA The Spirit as creator in Gregory Nazianzen’s Or. 41.14 |
| title | The Spirit as creator in Gregory Nazianzen’s Or. 41.14 |
| title_full | The Spirit as creator in Gregory Nazianzen’s Or. 41.14 |
| title_fullStr | The Spirit as creator in Gregory Nazianzen’s Or. 41.14 |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Spirit as creator in Gregory Nazianzen’s Or. 41.14 |
| title_short | The Spirit as creator in Gregory Nazianzen’s Or. 41.14 |
| title_sort | spirit as creator in gregory nazianzen s or 41 14 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT harrisba thespiritascreatoringregorynazianzensor4114 AT harrisba spiritascreatoringregorynazianzensor4114 |