Gregory As A Model of Theological Interpretation: Keith Goad
Gregory As A Model of Theological Interpretation: Keith Goad
Theological Interpretation
                  Keith Goad
                                                                                                                39
     exhaustively. He gives the analogy of climbing a       believed Scripture was clear enough when reveal-
     mountain to see God and declares “when I looked        ing mysteries to separate orthodoxy from heresy.
     closer, I saw not the first and unmingled nature,      His confessions for the full deity of the Son and
     known to itself—to the Trinity I mean; not that        the Spirit are the strongest in the fourth century
     which abides within the first veil, and is hidden by   while he also recognized that the theologian will
     the cherubim; but only that nature, which at last      go “insane” trying to comprehend the eternal
     reaches us.”20 The nature of God or the immanent       generation and procession.27
     Trinity is beyond man, but God has made him-               Thus far the theologian’s work is limited by
     self known in his activities of creating, saving,      who God is and how he has revealed himself. This
     and revealing. The beginning point of theology is      is important in relation to TIS because God must
     the economy of God and from the economy one            be the central focus of theology so that the church
     makes assertions about the immanent, but the           is called to worship him who is greater than their
     immanent is beyond the reach of man’s cognitive        greatest thought. The two must be kept in proper
     capacity.                                              tension because the theologian must be bold to
        God’s Triune nature can be known because he         proclaim difficult truths such as the Trinity and
     has revealed himself through his relationship with     yet humble enough to be content simply to defend
     creation. His actions reveal him truly, but do not     the mystery revealed in Scripture rather than try
     give a complete knowledge of his nature. Much          to describe God in himself. 28 Many have char-
     of Gregory’s arguments for the deity of the Son        acterized the last century as one dominated by
     and Spirit derive from the titles they have been       science, and this emphasis has influenced theol-
     given in Scripture and their inseparable actions.21    ogy as contemporary theology values the ability
     These particular arguments are seen at the end of      to explain the mystery so that the church can
     Oration 30 and Oration 31. In arguing for the deity    understand.29 This is in contrast with the premod-
     of the Holy Spirit, Gregory makes his claim clear,     ern faith exemplified by Gregory that valued the
     “All that God actively performs, he performs.” 22      ability to protect the mystery so that the church
     The activities that only God can perform include       can worship.
     creating, revealing God, and saving man. The
     Son and Spirit are clearly divine because they co-     Man is Bound in His Speech
     operate with the Father in these activities.              Gregory insists that theological claims must
        Limiting what can be said about God is impor-       be limited because the human mind is incapable
     tant because Gregory’s opponents, the Neo-             of comprehending God and human language is
     Arians, approach God rationally believing they         inadequate to explain God. 30 Knowing God is
     have comprehended the totality of God. Gregory         not a rational discipline nor can the Scriptures
     responded by limiting the theologian’s claims          be understood by reason alone. 31 Gregory’s argu-
     because the best he can do is to collect a fragmen-    ment against Eunomius focuses upon how their
     tary perception of God’s nature from his images.23     different theories of language lead to two differing
     The limited revelation should promote a humility       visions of God. Eunomius believed that when he
     concerning what kind of statements can be made         knew the name of an object in nature, he could
     about God.24 This does not mean all confessions        comprehend the nature. When Eunomius knew
     should be held loosely because the revelation pro-     the name for God, unbegotten, he had compre-
     vided is clear enough for Gregory to claim to be       hended the divine essence and defined in such a
     on the “Royal Road.”25 The Royal Road is the way       way that the begotten one could not be confessed
     of godliness that avoids the extreme positions of      as God. 32
     heresies in a proper pursuit of God. 26 Gregory           Gregory must guard against Eunomius’s claim
40
to have a perfect knowledge of God while also         church to have a clear grammar for articulating
affirming that God has revealed himself for the       the mysteries of God. Gregory criticizes Euno-
church to confess the mysterious paradox of the       mius for beginning with a concept that is not
Trinity. In Oration 37.2, Gregory explains that the   biblical, the name “unbegotten,” and making this
problem Eunomius finds in his doctrine is largely     the rule for what is known about God. Gregory
due to the weakness of language.                      begins with the revealed names, Father and Son,
                                                      and what Scripture says about each person in his
  I have fallen into human language. For how can      doctrine of the Trinity. The terms do not give
  so great be said of the absolute, and how can       the church an absolute knowledge of God, but
  that which is without quantity be called such?      a proper way of confessing him according to his
  But pardon the word, for I am speaking of the       revelation. This beginning point exemplifies start-
  greatest things with a limited instrument. And      ing with God’s revelation. Confessions can use
  that great and long-suffering and formless and      terms such as nature and person in a limited way
  bodiless nature will endure this, namely, my        to provide clarity, but their purpose is limited to
  words as if of a body, and weaker than truth. For   affirming and guarding what is revealed. Gregory
  if he condescended to flesh, he will also endure    follows the traditional method of “faith seeking
  such language. 33                                   understanding” and “thinking God’s thoughts
                                                      after him.”
   Another example shows that Gregory believes
language is capable of communicating truths           God Must be Known according to How
about God if the confessions follow God’s rev-        He Revealed Himself
elation of himself. He evaluates the confusion           Gregory’s understanding of God’s revelation
over the East and West using different terms and      is also regulated by an eschatological progres-
concludes that both traditions articulate the same    sion. His doctrine of how man sees God is based
orthodox confession. 34 His conclusion is that the    upon how God has revealed himself progressively
language of the West is impoverished and their        through redemptive-history. The Father was man-
confession would be laughable if not pious. The       ifested as God clearly in the Old Testament, the
terms each tradition used are different, but the      Son obscurely. The New Testament manifests the
meaning of and orthodox doctrine are the same.        Son’s deity and suggests the Spirit’s, and now the
This conclusion is only possible if one believes      experience of true believers indwelt by the Spirit
God has provided a reliable revelation of his Tri-    should clearly demonstrate the Spirit’s deity. 38 A
une nature. The referential theory allows for vari-   more perfect knowledge of the Triune God is the
ous models or formulas as long as the necessary       future hope of all believers: “we have the prom-
Trinitarian convictions are protected. Nothing        ise that one day we shall know to the degree we
can express the mystery of the Trinity perfectly,     are known.”39 The dim vision man possesses will
but each grammar must set up proper boundaries        become a perfect vision when he sees the Triune
that protect and articulate what is known about       God face to face.40
God. 35 God has revealed himself enough to be            In his explanation of how the church sees God
praised properly, but God is too great and man        from Psalm 36, “In your light we see light,” he
too limited for man to describe him completely. 36    argues from each divine person being described
   Gregory’s theory of language was referential or    as light and revealing the other persons. 41 The
what is today considered analogical. 37 The terms     conclusion is that it is only in and through the
the church uses (such as person and essence) can-     persons of the Trinity that we can ever know the
not fully describe God, but it is necessary for the   Triune God. The process of the economic Trinity
                                                                                                            41
     determines how believers will ascend in know-              perfectly. This is why Gregory limits the conver-
     ing the three persons, “knowing the Father in              sation about theology to include only those who
     the Son, the Son in the Holy Spirit.”42 Gregory            have purified themselves and are seeking a pure
     confesses, referring to the Holy Trinity, “which           vision of God. 48
     we worship, which we glorify, whose existence is               The call to purity began with rightly under-
     intimately bound up with our own through our               standing God according to his revelation and
     worship of the Father in the Son and of the Son in         was complete when one casts off his carnal think-
     the Spirit.”43 The Spirit must renew and adopt the         ing and living. McGuckin argues that Gregory
     believer to begin what Gregory calls “the golden           “defines the nature of theology as an invitation
     chain of salvation” that then leads the believer to        to ascent given by God only to the purified and
     the Son and then to the Father. Gregory insists            elected souls.”49 God is pure and holy, and only
     that a full confession of the Trinity was necessary        the pure in heart will see him (Mt 5:8). 50 Greg-
     for salvation and spirituality. He exemplified the         ory speaks of approaching God like Moses
     emphasis on how each person has a specific role in         approached the holy mountain. 51 The more pure
     revealing the entirety of the Godhead in a prayer          the theologian, the closer he is drawn to God, “his
     opening his Theological Orations, “that the Father         place matching his purity.”52 This is important
     may approve, the Son aid, and the Holy Spirit              for the pastor because he must be close to God
     inspire it—or rather that the single Godhead’s             in order to lead others closer to God with him.
     single radiance, by mysterious paradox one in its          Before he can teach others about God, he must
     distinctions and distinct in its connectedness,            first purify himself so that he might see the light
     may enlighten it.”44                                       of God. This means anyone seeking to know God
                                                                must be “molded and molding others by Holy
     God is Only Known by the Pure in                           Scripture.”53
     Heart                                                          Purification is essential to spirituality because
        Similar to TIS promoting a virtue ethic as              one cannot see God because God is pure, “where
     essential to reading Scripture, Gregory made a             there is purification, there is illumination; and
     Trinitarian spirituality a prerequisite for reading        illumination is the fulfillment of desire for those
     Scripture and discussing God properly.45 Gregory           eager to share in the greatest things—or in the
     regulates who should discuss theology because of           Greatest Thing, or in that which is beyond the
     man’s fallen nature.46                                     Great.”54 He further explains the importance of
                                                                illumination as it relates to the theologian need-
       Discussion of theology is not for everyone …             ing to purify himself before taking on the task of
       nor is it for every occasion, or every audience.…        theology,
       It must be reserved for certain occasions, for
       certain audiences, and certain limits must be               Illumination is the splendor of souls, the conver-
       observed. It is not for all people, but only for            sion of the life, the question put to the Godward
       those who have been tested and have found a                 conscience. It is the aid of our weakness, the
       sound footing in study, and, more importantly,              renunciation of the flesh, the following of the
       have undergone, or at least are undergoing, puri-           Spirit, the fellowship of the Word, the improve-
       fication of body and soul, just as it is for weak eyes      ment of the creature, the overwhelming of sin,
       to look at the sun’s brightness.47                          the participation of light, the dissolution of
                                                                   darkness. It is the carriage to God, the dying with
       Man’s eyes have been darkened by sin and cor-               Christ, the perfecting of the mind, the bulwark of
     ruption so that they cannot see the light of God              the Faith, the key of the Kingdom of heaven, the
42
   change of life, the removal of slavery, the loosing     Virtue is a conduct learned from discipline and
   of chains, the remodeling of the whole man. 55        duty, which not only leads to a pious life, but more
                                                         importantly, true worship and love for God.
Theology has an experiential aspect because the
believer “ascends” closer to God as he casts off         Ruled Reading of Scripture
sin which then allows him to have better vision              In the words of Gregory, “Now that we have
of God.                                                  purified the theologian, come, let us talk a little
    Gregory serves as an extreme example of              about God too.”63 Knowing God from his revela-
emphasizing purity by taking a vow of silence            tion is now possible because the theologian has
until he could first purify himself. 56 The need         been prepared. Gregory’s contention with Euno-
for purity is seen throughout his sermons on the         mius is that his interpretation “robs the written
pastoral ministry and summed up well in the fol-         words of their sense.”64 Gregory states that it his
lowing: “But before we rise above [the world of          vice that keeps Eunomius from seeing what the
matter that drags me down] as far as possible and        literal text of Scripture contains.65 The contention
sufficiently purify our ears and minds, I think          is not simply a difference of how to read Scripture,
it is dangerous either to accept the responsibil-        but is tied to the hope of salvation. In response to
ity for other souls or to take up theology.”57 The       Eunomius’s interpretation of texts in which he
theologian’s purpose is to see God as he is and the      claim the Son is not fully divine, Gregory argues,
more one is purified of false images, the more he is     “one could easily go through each of these expres-
able to see “light with light and the more brighter      sions in detail and give a truly religious interpreta-
through the more dim.”58                                 tion.”66 This reference to a religious interpretation
    Gregory’s spirituality includes the concept of       is Gregory’s method of interpreting all of Scrip-
virtue that TIS emphasizes. He argues that the           ture together as a whole with the purpose of arriv-
pastor “must not only wipe out the traces of vice        ing at a purified vision of God. Gregory must
from his soul, but also inscribe better [virtues].”59    protect both natures of Christ “in order that I
Gregory exhorts his church, “Seek to keep the            might be made God to the same extent that he was
commandments, walk in his statutes. Conduct is           made man.”67 Examples from Gregory’s Fourth
the stepping stone of contemplation.”60 In contrast      Theological Oration, On The Son, will demonstrate
with vice which is “easily accessible and the road       how Gregory interpreted Scripture with Scripture
to corruption wide,” virtue is what makes some-          and employed a ruled reading of Scripture.
one a true theologian.61 He explains the necessity
of a virtuous life in relation to worshipping the        Reading the Words of Scripture
true God:                                                   In Oration 30.4 Gregory shows the impor-
                                                         tance of allowing the proper sense of a word to
   If one has nurtured some good qualities that has      be derived from the text itself. Eunomius argues
   molded his character, transgression becomes           from 1 Cor 15:25, “He must reign until,” and Ps
   more difficult than becoming good in the first        110:1, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your
   place, for every virtue that is firmly rooted by      enemies your footstool,” to prove that the Son has
   time and reason becomes second nature, as does        a temporal reign and that it will end in contrast to
   the love within us too, with which we worship the     the reign of the true God. Eunomius’s argument is
   true love and which we have folded to our hearts      based upon the term “until” having the same sense
   in love and adopted as the guiding principle for      regardless of context. This interpretation follows
   all our existence.62                                  from his theory of language whereas Gregory sees
                                                         that Eunomius’s interpretation misses the differ-
                                                                                                                  43
     ent contexts and usages of the term. Eunomius’s         one of the key distinguishing marks between the
     interpretation is based upon the word, “God,”           orthodox theologians and the heretical is that the
     being a reference to the Father alone in contrast to    former “showed a far profounder sense of the need
     the Son in 1 Cor 15:24. The Son is reigning only        to interpret the Scriptures as a whole by compar-
     until he hands the kingdom over to God, which is        ing one passage with another.” 70 He argues that
     the Father alone.                                       the orthodox demonstrated an ability to reason
         Gregory responds by explaining that 1 Corin-        how Scripture interprets Scripture as the hereti-
     thians 15 states that he will reign until God is all    cal theologians tended toward equivocating on
     in all—God being a reference to the Trinity as a        technical terms and a “parrot repetition of biblical
     whole in contrast to the Father alone. 68 Gregory       texts.” 71 First Corinthians 15:25-28 is a difficult
     recognizes that “until” could have reference to an      text for theologians still today, but Gregory is able
     event or have a temporal sense, and opts for the        to reason through its difficulties with simple rules
     former interpretation. The reign is eternal and         such as how the word “God” can be a reference to
     does not contradict Psalm 110 because the event         the entire Trinity or to the Father alone given the
     that ends that reign is the submission of his ene-      context of the passage.72
     mies, at which point he would no longer reign over
     them in the same way. He also introduces into the       Reading Scripture with Theological
     argument Luke 1:33 that provides clarity on the         Convictions
     reign of Christ, “there is no end of his royal rule.”      One of the key emphases in Gregory’s Fourth
     When all of these texts on Christ’s reign are taken     Theological Oration is arguing how Scripture
     into consideration, the conclusion is that “until” is   should be read according to the rule that guides
     referring to the Son’s reign here on earth that will    the reader to, “allocate the more elevated, the
     change in the eschaton. The reign is not temporal,      more distinctly divine expressions of Scripture
     but eternal. The “until” simply refers to the event     to the Godhead, the humbler and more human to
     of the Triune God putting the world back into           the New Adam, God passible for our sake.” 73 The
     perfect order and thus a different reign begins.        rule is meant to protect the church’s confession
         In this argument, Gregory models how to             of Jesus’ divine and human natures.74 It simulta-
     read Scripture properly via both Scripture and          neously determines the content of theology and
     the rule of faith. The reference to God cannot be       how Scripture should be interpreted. The rule is
     God the Father because this would deny the Son’s        a necessary solution to the variety of teachings
     inclusion into the divine community and eter-           from Scripture because Eunomius is emphasizing
     nal reign.69 He safeguards what has been handed         certain texts out of context to argue that Jesus was
     down, but it is not merely repeating a creed. His       not fully divine.
     vision of God is from all of Scripture, and his            Gregory begins explaining how this rule works
     hermeneutic protects him from losing sight of the       from one of the most controversial texts for the
     forest for the trees, or a pure vision of the Triune    Trinity during the fourth century, Prov 8:22, “The
     God from a single text. Gregory appears to take         Lord created me at the beginning of his ways for
     more care in reading the texts in context and reads     his work.” 75 Gregory applies a further qualifica-
     all of Scripture as the work of one author. His abil-   tion in order to apply the rule above to this pas-
     ity to read all of Scripture together gives him his     sage, “Whatever we come across with a causal
     Archimedean point to defeat the Eunomian read-          implication we will attribute to the humanity;
     ing by taking clearer texts and demanding that all      what is absolute and free of cause we will reckon
     of the passages that speak of Christ’s rule must be     to the Godhead.” 76 Gregory proposes that Prov
     understood together. G. L. Prestige points out that     8:25, “Before the mountains were settled in place,
44
before the hills, I was given birth,” presents the      tionships. Gregory provides another rule con-
divine nature of the Son. The Son’s being begot-        cerning causal relations within the Trinitarian
ten refers to his personal existence which simul-       relations to protect the distinction of the Father
taneously distinguishes him from the Father and         and Son, “The superiority belongs to the cause
establishes his full deity. He thus concludes that      and the equality to the nature.” 79 Causation here
the Son’s human generation is being spoken of in        is referring to the persons within the Godhead
verse 22 and his “primal and less comprehensible”       where Gregory is taking the “greater” statement
generation in verse 25.77 The section explaining        literally, but not according to the nature or God-
this interpretation elucidates its importance.          head. Rather it would be an explanation of the
Speaking of the Son he states, “He was actually         relationship between the Father and Son that is
subject as a slave to f lesh, to birth, and to our      based upon the latter being eternally begotten.
human experiences, held captive as we are by            The Father is the first and the cause within the
sin, he was subject to all he saved.” 78 The text was   persons, but this language is limited to the per-
without question Christological. What Gregory           sonal existence of each, not their divinity.
supplies is an interpretation that takes into con-          In both cases Gregory protects the divine
sideration the two natures of Christ and the sal-       nature from having any causal notions. The
vific importance of these two natures being united      human nature of Christ certainly has an origin,
in the Son.                                             and thus any reference to the Son’s nature that
    This interpretation demonstrates Gregory’s          implies causation is attributed to the human
ability to interpret this controversial text in light   nature. The Trinitarian relations have distinguish-
of numerous doctrines. He keeps salvation at the        ing characteristics that are unique to each person.
forefront of the debate while constantly think-         One of Gregory’s primary ways of distinguishing
ing through the Trinitarian and Christological          the Father and Son is the Father’s Monarchia and
doctrines in this interpretation. He is careful in      begetting of the Son which gives him preeminence
his confession of the Son’s deity not to make the       among the persons with reference to relationship,
divinity of the Son dependent on another because        not nature. The language of Scripture is compli-
the divine nature must be simple and uncaused.          cated, yet clear, concerning the Son because he
The begetting language is left within the realm of      is spoken of in so many ways. He is the Father’s
mystery as it is a unique begetting (without pas-       Son, truly God, truly man, and God incarnate.
sion, time, or material). The creating language is      Each of these must be placed within their proper
easily applied to the humanity of Christ so that        place. A series of rules regulates how the different
Solomon now speaks of both natures in Christ.           proclamations describe Christ accurately while
He does not read the text in isolation, but reads it    defending his true identity in each case. This is a
in light of other texts and doctrines that are more     religious reading as Scripture is interpreted with
clearly revealed later in redemptive history.           Scripture with the end result of purifying the
    A final example of Gregory applying a ruled         mind and drawing the heart closer to God.
reading concerns Eunomius wrongly interpret-
ing the Son calling the Father “greater,” and the       Conclusion
expression “my God and your God.” Gregory                  TIS has presented principles that can poten-
argues that the greater cannot simply refer to          tially help evangelicals have a richer interpretation
Christ’s human nature declaring God greater             of Scripture that better serves the church. Empha-
because this would be trivial and obvious. Rather,      sizing a theocentric interpretation and exercising
the Son’s confession that the Father is greater         a robust hermeneutic that takes all of Scripture
must be understood within the Trinitarian rela-         and every doctrine into consideration will be an
                                                                                                                45
     improvement over the typical modernistic herme-        have been handed down through the tradition,
     neutic that tended to be myopic in scope. One of       particularly the tradition associated with Trini-
     the concerns with TIS is how its principles will be    tarian and Christological confession. Gregory
     defined and exercised. I fear that there is a poten-   declares that he must “guard the truth that he has
     tial danger in the principles remaining vague and      received from his fathers.”80 There were certain
     loosely defined which, in the end, leads to a cor-     doctrines that were being challenged in his day
     responding vague theology, which will ultimately       that he understood to be essential for Christian
     not help the church. I have presented Gregory of       belief and practice. The foremost being the doc-
     Nazianzus as a model for what TIS has proposed         trine of the Trinity being tied to the practice of
     because he models a clarity in his interpretation      baptism. When arguing for these doctrines that
     and doctrine that focuses upon leading the church      had been handed down, Gregory never appeals
     into worship. His theology and interpretation          to tradition or creeds. His arguments are always
     avoids overly simplistic approaches by wrestling       from Scripture and he primarily emphasizes scrip-
     with God’s revelation and man’s limited capac-         tural language only using other grammatical safe-
     ity. The objective of this article is modest in that   guards when necessary.81 Interpretation cannot be
     I have only demonstrated Gregory’s method of           an exercise in isolation so that the wheel is always
     “religious interpretation” with regard to what can     reinvented. He exercises a clear restraint in being
     be said about God and how he interprets Scrip-         clever and novel in his doctrine while also provid-
     ture with Scripture in light of all other doctrines    ing a fresh interpretation of the primary texts of
     understood from Scripture. His ability to reason       Scripture.
     through Scripture and doctrine together makes             Gregory recognizes that doctrine functions
     him a model for TIS.                                   grammatically so that the confessions do not
         Gregory models how Scripture must be inter-        become primary sources. Gregory is clear that
     preted in light of Scripture. Gregory recognizes       human minds and language are incapable of com-
     that the study and confession of God must be           prehending God. Man is too finite, sinful, and
     based upon how God has revealed himself. Greg-         weak to ever grasp the infinite power and majesty
     ory has confidence in God and his ability to speak     of God. This restrained his confessions from mov-
     in Scripture. Scripture was the primary source for     ing farther than what was revealed in Scripture.
     doctrine and had to be considered as a whole. His      He employed extra-biblical terms, but made their
     ability to interpret the numerous parts of Scrip-      function clear. They were there to safeguard what
     ture together led to his ability to lead the church    was revealed. They were necessary because of
     in confessing the most important and contro-           heresy but did not add anything to the doctrine
     versial doctrines of the Trinity, Christology, and     itself. Man must strive to confess and communi-
     salvation. These three doctrines were interrelated     cate God according to his revelation as closely as
     within Scripture and had to be confessed in light      possible, but the grammars, metaphors, and analo-
     of one another. His doctrine and grammar was           gies were always limited. This is why kataphatic
     careful, precise, and only added clarifying terms      and apophatic theology must go hand-in-hand.
     to help the church boldly confess the God of their     What is revealed must be positively affirmed, and
     salvation.                                             what cannot be said about God based upon what is
         TIS has adopted the rule of faith as a herme-      revealed must be denied so that the infinite, spiri-
     neutical principle. No doubt, the rule of faith has    tual nature of God is protected and not treated
     been defined and functioned differently over its       like hard science.
     long history, but at its most basic level it means        A particular example of separating the gram-
     reading Scripture in light of the doctrines that       mar of doctrine from the content of doctrine is
46
found in Gregory’s argument against Eunomius             8, and many others. All three persons of the Trin-
where he does not allow the term “unbegotten” to         ity are mentioned together working toward the
become a primary source in forming the doctrine          same end. Reciting the confession in the service
of God. A similar problem is becoming more prev-         will help them think about the Triune God they
alent among evangelicals where the grammatical           are worshipping, but seeing the text reveal the
term “person” is sometimes treated as a primary          three will give them confidence in God and his
source. “Person” is a grammar established by the         Word. A confession that these doctrines are mys-
church and is only a term used to keep the three         terious while clear will help the church worship
persons of the Godhead distinct. The definition          with more clarity, honesty, and humility. Gregory
of “person” does not inform doctrine; it only safe-      is just one of many men that could be used to help
guards what is revealed. Theologians must be             lead a church to worship the Triune God more
careful not to let the organizers and safeguards         intentionally.
of doctrine become primary over the content of               Another aspect of the study that I hope will
Scripture. When forming confessions of the one           challenge pastors is Gregory being a model of
“person” and two “natures” of the Son or the three       emphasizing spirituality. Pastors should read his
“persons” and one “nature” of the Trinity, scrip-        Oration 2, A Defense for his Flight from the Pas-
tural terminology must define what “person” and          torate. It is a challenging portrait of spirituality
“nature” mean rather than the modern use of the          and pastoral ministry. Pastors should lead the
terms defining the Godhead and the incarnate             church by modeling virtue and godliness and
God.                                                     making God great, so the church is drawn closer
    Gregory’s sermons focused upon God for the           to him. Knowing God is not a purely intellectual
benefit of the church. His arguments for the deity       discipline. Doctrines must be tied to a change in
of the Son and Spirit are based upon what they           desires, beliefs, and actions. The two natures of
have done for believers and how believers can            Christ are necessary in the confession because
experience their work. He continually reminds            they must be combined in the Son in order to
his church that a denial of their deity is a denial of   accomplish our salvation. It is necessary for hope,
hope and salvation. Since the persons of the God-        perseverance, and loving other believers with
head work inseparably, the believer must depend          grace and humility. The three persons are nec-
upon them together. His theology started with            essary in the confession because the Father has
the economy and attempted to say what must               sent his Son to die for us and the Spirit to convict
be said about the immanent Trinity based upon            and lead us. An emphasis on spirituality that is
what the “persons” do in creating, revealing, and        grounded in the Holy Spirit being the indwelling
saving. This approach provides appropriate humil-        power of the Triune God protects discipleship
ity and generosity in theology while also giving         from being moralism and self-righteousness. A
the church clear, definite doctrine that must be         better vision of God leads to a desire for more
believed for salvation.                                  purity, and more purity should lead to a better
    A practical way this study could help pastors        vision of God.
lead their churches is to help them value the clar-
ity of Scripture on the most importance doctrines.       Endnotes
The doctrines of the Trinity and Christology are          1
                                                              Found in Dan Treier, Introducing Theological Inter-
often assumed and not taught well in the church.              pretation of Scripture (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008)
If doing expositional preaching, pastors should               and Kevin Vanhoozer, “Introduction: What is Theo-
highlight these doctrines when in passages such as            logical Interpretation of the Bible?” in Dictionary
Matthew 4, Galatians 4, Romans 8, 1 Corinthians               for Theological Interpretation of the Bible (ed. Kevin
                                                                                                                       47
        Vanhoozer; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005).                        grammatical rules constitute a model when they
      2
        Gregory’s father was the bishop at Nazianzus and              collaborate and are consistent with one another. A
        was sent away to receive rhetorical education In Ath-         model, therefore, is judged by how well its grammar
        ens and Alexandria. He tried to escape the call to            or rules avoid heresy and present a unified doctrine
        ministry numerous times because he was afraid of              of the Trinity.
        its high demands. He replaced his father as bishop          5
                                                                      Other titles include virtuous ascetic, exalted contem-
        in Nazianzus but spent considerable time pursuing             plative, brilliant orator, mystic poet, fierce apologist,
        the monastic life of meditation. It appears he was            holy bishop, divine theologian. These come from
        most happy at a monastery in Seleucia and served as           the Menaion. Rufinus described Gregory as “a man
        bishop only out of duty to God, family, and friends.          incomparable in all things … who offered to the
        The most significant works of Gregory for our con-            church the most radiant light of the knowledge of
        cern are his theological orations given while bishop          Christ.” See J. A. McGuckin, “The Vision of God in St
        in Constantinople. Here he oversaw the preceding              Gregory of Nazianzus,” Studia Patristica 33 (1996):
        of the Constantinople Counsel and set the standard            145. Rogich provides a helpful look into the nature
        for Orthodoxy. He shares the title “the theologian”           of theology that Gregory exemplified. It was one of
        only with the apostle John for his contributions to           experience, humility, contemplation and service.
        the orthodox faith. Christopher Beeley declares,              He provides a rich study of why Gregory has been
        “Gregory of Nazianzus stands out among Christian              exalted as “the Theologian.” Daniel Rogich, “The
        theologians of every generation for the clarity, the          Development of a Theologian according to Saint
        power, and the spiritual depth of his teaching on the         Gregory the Theologian,” Greek Orthodox Theological
        Trinity. More than any theologian before him, he              Review 39 (1994): 63-81.
        understands the Trinity to be the content, the struc-       6
                                                                      John A. McGuckin points out that his richest theol-
        ture, and standard of the Christian faith.” Christo-          ogy is found in his confessions and hymns of praise
        pher Beeley, Gregory of Nazianzus on the Trinity and          (“‘Perceiving Light from Light in Light’ [Oration
        the Knowledge of God (New York: Oxford Univer-                31.3]: The Trinitarian Theology of Saint Gregory
        sity, 2008). He states that “for Gregory the doctrine         the Theologian” GOTR 39 [1994]: 17). He goes on to
        of the Trinity is not only the essential expression of        describe Gregory’s theology as “wholly confessional,
        the Christian life; in an important sense it is that          that is, doxological, in character and soteriological
        life” (187).                                                  in its import” (Ibid., 18). “For Gregory, the Trin-
      3
        He uses the example of how the imago dei has been             ity is a dynamic and soteriological experience, the
        interpreted by Augustine, Calvin, and Barth to dem-           beauty of God experienced in the liturgy of prayer
        onstrate the practice of TIS.                                 and expressed in the church’s confession of praise”
      4
        Ayres defines grammatical doctrine as the “matrix             (ibid.). Norris comments that his orations are all
        of principles and rules for theological discourse …           liturgical, “He breathes in worship and breathes out
        so that one runs the least amount of risk of speaking         theology.” Frederick Norris, “Gregory the Theolo-
        unworthily of God” (Lewis Ayres, Nicaea and Its               gian,” Pro Ecclessia 4 (1993): 474. Norris comments
        Legacy [New York: Oxford University, 2004], 52).              on his theology being “for and from the church.”
        Ayres argues that grammar “does not function as a             “Wonder, Worship, and Writ: Christological Exege-
        sufficient description, but rather as a tool for articu-      sis,” Ex Audit 7 (1991): 64. His autobiographical
        lating the basic statements of Trinitarian belief that        poem, On His Own Life, is a unique contribution as
        Augustine takes to be a matter of revelation” (69). For       he contemplates his life in view of God. It is similar
        a contemporary proposal of how doctrine functions             to Augustine’s Confessions in this way.
        grammatically see George Lindbeck, The Nature of            7
                                                                      Beyond having a contribution to the contemporary
        Doctrine (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984). The               debate over the nature of language, esp. theological
48
   language, Gregory serves as a mediator in many of        14
                                                               Or. 29.13.
   the early church’s debates. McGuckin calls Gregory       15
                                                               Or. 2.1.
   a “synthesizing theological midwife” that reconciles     16
                                                               Or. 27.4.
   the church in the times of some of its deepest need.     17
                                                               Or. 27.3-5.
   See John A. McGuckin, Gregory of Nazianzus: An           18
                                                               The point of this is that comprehension of the object
   Intellectual Biography (Yonkers, NY: St. Vladimir’s         of knowledge should be effected both by negation of
   Seminary, 2001), 111.                                       what the thing is not and also by positive assertion
 8
   Frederick Norris says his main concern is “what             of what it is (Or. 28.9). There is a great difference in
   Scripture itself says and what the church in its wor-       being able to know something exists and knowing
   ship has been doing.” Norris has also called Gregory        what something is (Or. 28.5). Frederick Norris rec-
   a model of how to meditate on variety of scripture          ognizes this balance between God being ineffable
   and bring it together (“Wonder, Worship, and Writ:          while truly revealing himself, “because God in his
   Patristic Christology,”59, 65). Hanson calls Gregory        nature is incomprehensible and yet is revealed suf-
   a common sense exegete and Norris comments that             ficiently, theology will never be amenable to tight syl-
   his exegesis is “grammatical and theological.” See R.       logistic systems. Its subject is not open to that kind
   P. C. Hanson, The Search for the Christian Doctrine of      of investigation,” (“Gregory the Theologian,” 478).
   God: The Arian Controversy 318-381 (Edinburgh: T            McGuckin explains that the apophatic and kata-
   & T Clark, 1988): 846.                                      phatic are leftover from Athanasius’ doctrine, “a fun-
 9
   Orations 27.1-5. All translations of the Theological        damental legacy of Christianity, and widely apparent
   Orations (27-31) are from On God and Christ (trans.         in the Scripture themselves (“The Vision of God in
   Frederick Willism and Lionel Wickham; Crestwood,            St Gregory of Nazianzus” 146).” “Gregory is insist-
   NY: St. Vladimir’s, 2002). Orations 6, 19, 20, 23, 24       ing that the Unknowable can be known by creatures
   are from The Father of the Early Church: A New Trans-       without thereby ceasing to the Unknowable”—this
   lation (trans. Martha Vinson in Fathers of The Church       supposed “Cappadocian achievement” is really an
   107; Washington: Catholic University of America,            “otherwise unremarkable re-statement of the basic
   2003). Orations 38, 39, and 42 are from Brian Daley,        axiom of the Alexandrian theological tradition”
   Gregory of Nazianzus (New York: Routledge, 2006).           (ibid., 148).
   Orations 2, 21, 34, and 40 are from S. Gregory of        19
                                                               Donald Winslow explains this distinction well and
   Nazianzus, Archbishop of Constantinople (Select             applies it to Gregory’s Christology in “Christology
   Orations and Select Letters, A Select Library of the        and Exegesis in the Cappadocians” Church History
   Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian             40 (1971): 394ff.
   Church, Second Series [NPNF2], vol. 7; Peabody,          20
                                                               Or. 28.3. This type of knowledge is distinguished
   MA: Hendrickson, 1999).                                     today by the terms immanent and economic. There
10
   Or. 27.5.                                                   is a clear difference between the two that guards
11
   Daley, Gregory of Nazianzus, 41.                            against the second half of Rahner’s Rule, but a clear
12
   Or. 38.7.                                                   affirmation of the first, “the economic is the imma-
13
   “No one has yet discovered or ever shall discover           nent.” The economic accurately reveals the imma-
   what God is in his nature and essence” (Or. 28.17),         nent, but only partially. Gregory explains that when
   and “Meaning by this that even a vision of God is too       we try to look at the Deity absolutely we must pro-
   much for men let alone God’s nature” (Or. 28.19).           cede, “as best we can collecting fragmentary percep-
   McGuckin states that Gregory “begins the theo-              tion of it from its images?” In Or. 28.21, Gregory cites
   logical task quite decidedly from the perspective that      David proclaiming God’s judgments too wonderful
   God is unknowable; that is inconceivable and incom-         for him, too excellent for him to grasp, and Paul when
   prehensible in his nature” (Gregory of Nazianzus, 12).      he claims, “We know in part what we prophecy in
                                                                                                                          49
        part” (Or. 28.20).                                              ogies” (St. Gregory of Nazianzus, 305). Frederick
     21
        Or. 31. 29-30 and 29.19. For a full treatment of the            Norris argues that, for Gregory, “Faith is what leads
        significance of inseparable actions as a key to a               us, faith gives fullness to our reasoning…Human
        Trinitarian reading of Scripture, see Lewis Ayers,              minds are too small to ferret our the inner recesses
        “Remember That You are Catholic” (serm. 52.2):                  of God.” “Theological argument is enthymematic. It
        Augustine on the Unity of the Triune God,” Journal              takes claims and knows that they can be organized
        of Early Christian Studies 8.1 (2000): 39-82.                   to make compelling appeals” (“Gregory the Theolo-
     22
        Or. 31.29.                                                      gian,” 474).
     23
        Or. 28.13. He also argues this from Paul’s declara-          32
                                                                        Eunomius, “Since the names are different, the
        tion, “We know in part what we prophecy in part,”               essences are different as well” (Apol. 1.12, 24). See
        (Or. 28.20).                                                    R. A. Norris Jr., Father Gives Fullness to Reasoning
     24
        A complete revelation is compared to looking at the             (Leiden: Ball, 1991), 149. See also Or. 28.4 where
        sun. Our eyes are too weak and sinful to look directly          Gregory argues “for language may show the known
        into the sun. The rays are even more than we can ever           if not adequately, at least faintly, to a person not total
        hope to apprehend.                                              deaf and dull of mind.” Eunomius has a Platonic
     25
        Or. 42.16, “But we walk the middle, royal road, where           theory of language “that names determine essence”
        the experts tell us the pursuit of virtue is to be found.”      so that when Eunomius knows the name of God,
     26
        The heresies were Eunomianism or Neo-Arianism                   unbegotten and simple, anything that does not share
        and Sabellianism.                                               this name does not belong to the community. See
     27
        His confession was eventually adopted, but he                   also Socrates Scholasticus, The Ecclesiastical History
        argued that Constantinople should declare the Spirit            of Socrates (London: S. Bagster, 1844, IV.7).
        homoousios, but they threw him out as the head of the        33
                                                                        Or. 37.2.
        council for this strong position.                            34
                                                                        “For we use in a godly manner the terms one ousia
     28
        Or. 2.38. Daley states, “The reason for this title [The         and three hypostases, the one to denote the nature
        Theologian] is clearly Gregory’s urgent championing             of the Godhead, the other the unique characteristics
        of a Trinitarian conception of God and his insistent            of the three; the Italians mean the same, but owing
        care to articulate a theological terminology—indeed             to the scantiness of their vocabulary, and its poverty
        a theological grammar—for speaking of God in a                  of terms, they are unable to distinguish between
        way consistent with Scripture and the Church’s tradi-           Essence and hypostasis, and therefore introduce the
        tion of faith” (Daley, Gregory of Nazianzus, 41).               term Persons, to avoid being understood to assert
     29
        Bertrand Russell observes that Modernity is marked              three Essences. The result, were it not pious, would
        by “the diminishing authority of the church, and the            be laughable” (Or. 21.35).
        increasing authority of science” (Bertrand Russell,          35
                                                                        McGuckin observes that this insistence on silence for
        A History of Western Philosophy [Touchstone, 1967],             what cannot be spoken of is even stronger than Wig-
        491).                                                           genstein. The most important difference is that for
     30
        Or. 28.3. See Norris “Wonder, Worship and Writ:                 Gregory is not caused by ignorance or inarticulation,
        Patristic Exegesis,” 64.                                        but it is rooted in “religious wonder” and the mystery
     31
        Or. 28.11, “that the divine nature cannot be appre-             of God (St Gregory of Nazianzus, 305).
        hended by human reason, and that we cannot even              36
                                                                        See Or. 28.17 where Gregory states “no one has yet
        represent to ourselves all its greatness.” McGuckin             discovered or even shall discover what God is in his
        observes that the first principle of the Theological            nature and essence” One cannot define the undefin-
        Orations is, “theology proper is radically restricted           able, but the church knows enough from his revela-
        as far as human beings are concerned, and cannot                tion to continually have his praise on their lips.
        be accessed by logic or illumined by material anal-          37
                                                                        Gregory follows the Aristotelian theory of language
50
   that affirms that “reality is prior and language fol-            we long for in Christ himself, our Lord, to whom be
   lows” (Norris, Father Gives Fullness to Reasoning,               glory forever and ever. Amen.”
   149). G. L. Prestige recognizes that for Gregory “the         46
                                                                    “For language may show the known if not adequately,
   transcendence of the Godhead surpasses the pow-                  at least faintly, to a person not totally deaf and dull of
   ers of ordinary discourse” (God in Patristic Thought             mind” (Or. 28.4).
   [Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2008], 237). Gregory               47
                                                                    Or. 27.3.
   also tightens up the way language can be used so that         48
                                                                    Or. 27.3. The crowds in Constantinople had been dis-
   it can not be used in theological discourse outside of           cussing the controversy over the Trinity as casually
   how it is used in the secular world.                             as amusement and entertaining small-talk.
38
   Or. 31.26. An interesting aspect of this progression          49
                                                                    McGuckin, “In Your Light,” 13. See McGuckin on
   is the experiential as a basis for proof of the Spirit’s         how this ascent demands man overcoming his “mate-
   deity. The perfect Trinity is seen in this dispensation          rially based consciousness” in order to “transcend
   of God’s progressive revelation because the church               material limitations, when the soul is invited back to
   experiences its power.                                           God to its true spiritual nature and destiny in com-
39
   “But of God himself the knowledge we shall have in               munion with God.” This is in contrast with Horton
   this life will be little, though soon after it will perhaps      who dismisses the idea of ascent as a modernistic
   be more perfect, in the same Jesus Christ our Lord,              concept (Michael Horton, Lord and Servant [Lou-
   to whom be glory forever and ever amen.” Gregory                 isville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2002], 11-13).
   explains this progression from 1 Corinthians, “[Paul]         50
                                                                    Or. 28.2-3.
   says that he sees in a mirror dimly, but that there is a      51
                                                                    “It was truly a great thing for them simply to hear
   time when he will see face to face” (Or. 20.12).                 God’s voice, and this only after they had been thor-
40
   Or. 29.21. See also Or. 31.25. There is another aspect           oughly purified” (Or. 20.2).
   of his eschatological progression where the theo-             52
                                                                    Or. 28.2.
   logian must be able to distinguish the difference             53
                                                                    Or. 2.1.
   between the two covenants of salvation history, the           54
                                                                    Or. 39.8. Daley’s translation has “cleansing” and I
   law and grace. The believer who lives in the covenant            have replaced it with “purification.” See also Or. 23.
   of grace is waiting for the unshakeable kingdom                  11, “Our minds and our human condition are such
   where he will see God face to face. See McGuckin,                that a knowledge of the relationship and disposi-
   St. Gregory of Nazianzus, 308-09.                                tion of these members with regard to one another is
41
   “This is the meaning of David’s prophetic vision: “In            reserved for the Holy Trinity itself alone and those
   your light we shall see light.” We receive the Son’s             purified souls to whom the Trinity may make revela-
   light from the Father’s light in the light of the Spirit.        tion either now or in the future.”
   That is what we ourselves have seen and what we now           55
                                                                    Or. 40. 2.
   proclaim—it is the plain and simple explanation of            56
                                                                    Or. 6.1: “It was then I set a bridle on my lips , which
   the Trinity” (Or. 31.3).                                         were not in any case inclined to speak , because I
42
   Or. 6.22.                                                        thought that the priorities of the Sprit were first to
43
   Or. 24.19.                                                       purify myself through the philosophy that resides
44
   Or. 28.1.                                                        in action; next, to open the mouth of my mind and
45
   Gregory makes a clear connection for seeing God                  draw in the Spirit; then to utter a godly theme and to
   rightly and attaining the final vision with being pure           speak of God’s perfect wisdom among them that are
   in Or. 29.12. He prays that Eunomius will be inspired            perfect.” See also Or. 19.1-3. “When I realized that
   by the Spirit to see Christ rightly and that the Nicene          nothing I said was able to curb popular talk or the
   party will be saved by the Trinity, “abiding pure and            current all-pervasive passion to speak and lecture on
   blameless until the more complete revelation of what             the things of the Spirit without the inspiration of the
                                                                                                                                 51
        Spirit, I embarked on another course—a better one.”          language) was “made man.’”
        Gregory says that theology properly done spurs the        74
                                                                     There is similarity between what Gregory is accom-
        theologian to listen more than speak (Or. 32.21).            plishing with this rule and what the earliest creeds
     57
        Or. 20.1. His desire was “to block out his senses,           were seeking to accomplish. The Nicene and Apos-
        severing all ties with the flesh and the world … to          tle’s Creeds stated what the church believes con-
        live the life that transcends visible nature … and be        cerning Jesus’ historic birth and death while also
        and ever come to be a spotless mirror, as it were, of        protecting his divine nature. There is no direct con-
        God and the divine, capturing light with light … and         nection to the wording of these creeds, but Gregory
        finally attain the blessed goal, our mirrors shattered       was an adamant defender of the Nicene Creed, and
        by the reality of the truth.” Gregory goes on to state,      it is probable that the Creed helped inform this rule.
        “In fact, this is why one must purify oneself and then    75
                                                                     Or. 30.2. “The LORD brought me forth as the first of
        enter into converse with the pure if we are not to           his works, before his deeds of old” (ESV).
        share the same fate as Monoah” (Or. 6.4).                 76
                                                                     Or. 30.2.
     58
        Or. 20.1.                                                 77
                                                                     This particular passage is an excellent test case for
     59
        Or. 2.14.                                                    theological interpretation. The modernistic herme-
     60
        Or. 20.12.                                                   neutic would have denied any Christological impli-
     61
        Or. 23.1.                                                    cations because it would not have been the author’s
     62
        Ibid.                                                        intent and the genre does not lend itself to a theologi-
     63
        Or. 20.5.                                                    cal reading. There should be some question concern-
     64
        Or. 30.1.                                                    ing if Gregory is creating rules to read Scripture
     65
        Or. 29.18.                                                   according to his paradigm or if this is a ruled reading
     66
        Or. 29.18.                                                   derived from a broader Christological reading of all
     67
        Or. 29.19.                                                   of Scripture. The justification for Gregory’s reading
     68
        Or. 30.6.                                                    would be the unity of Scripture and Paul declaring
     69
        Or. 30.6.                                                    Christ to be the wisdom of God (1 Cor 1:24). Origen
     70
        Prestige, God in Patristic Thought, 147. See also            explained that Christ is the Creator and source of all
        Thomas Kopecek, A History of Neo-Arianism (Cam-              existence in virtue of his being Wisdom. As Wisdom
        bridge, MA: Philadelphia Patristic Foundation,               Jesus is the Logos and “constructive system of knowl-
        1979), 434.                                                  edge and ideas concerning the universe” (On St John
     71
        Prestige, God in Patristic Thought, 153. According           1.19). See Prestige, God in Patristic Thought, 118.
        to Prestige, the Orthodox “showed a far profounder        78
                                                                     Or. 30.3.
        sense of the need to interpret the Scriptures as a        79
                                                                     Or. 30.7.
        whole by comparing one passage with another”              80
                                                                     Or. 6.22.
        (ibid., 147).                                             81
                                                                    This differs from Basil who argued for the deity of
     72
        See Paul Russell, “St. Gregory’s Exegeses Against the        the Spirit from tradition because he did not think
        Arians, Still a Viable Christian Tool” Greek Orthodox        Scripture was abundantly clear on the position. Basil
        Theological Review 39 (1994): 123-30, for a more             was more of a political leader, Gregory more of a dog-
        thorough explanation of how Gregory interprets               matic leader. Thankfully, for the tradition, Gregory’s
        this text.                                                   practice and doctrine became the norm.
     73
        Or. 30.1. See also 29.18, “You must predicate the
        more sublime expressions of the Godhead, of the
        nature which transcends bodily experiences, and the
        lower ones of the compound, of him who because of
        you was emptied, became incarnate and (to use valid
52