THEODOR DAMIAN

Introduction

 

St. Gregory of Nazianzus was a personality of first rank in the complex world of the 4^th Christian century[1]. A. Benoit is certain that he was one of the greatest orators that ever existed[2].

So much, in fact, Gregory was part of the life of his century, albeit his ascetic withdrawals, that studying his biography one will be well introduced to the life of his time and vice versa[3].

On one hand, as Paul Gallay notices, the 4^th century was a century of fighting, both between Christianity and paganism and within Christianity between sects, heresies and orthodoxy[4].

On the other hand this century was characterized by a strong admiration and enthusiasm for the classic Hellenic culture. That was true for the entire Roman Empire. Subjects taught in the Greek classic educational system were in fashion now, students would strive to learn more and better the Greek letters and philosophy, they would even go from school to school looking for new and better programs and professors in order to obtain this type of instruction[5].

For all that excitement and lore of the old intellectual life and production the pagan writers of this century, in the Roman Empire were not able to generate anything comparable with the great works of the old Greek authors.

It was the advent and the growth of Christianity that changed the landscape. Whatever was missing in order to achieve that comparability was given by Christianity, still a new religion to many; that is why, Paul Galley writes, the greatest authors in this period of time were the Fathers of the Church[6].

In other words, the profound originality of the Christian spirit found in the cultural background of the fourth century[7] the most appropriate condition in order for it to shock its force and potential. This was like a kairotic encounter. This was the time of Gregory the Theologian.

The Christian poetical context of St. Gregory’s poetry in this time and part of the world is in particular and more precisely represented by the poetry of some heresiarchs who, in order to better spread their teaching to the public, put them in verses so that they can be easily memorized, recited, transmitted.

The most important of these heresiarchs are, chronologically and theologically speaking, the famous or infamous Arius and then the two Apollinaris: the Elder and the Young, and especially the last one.

Moving from theology to poetry, if we want to think of the most important poets of the above mentioned tradition in the fourth  century, then Apollinaris the Young will certainly have to be named, and next to him, and more precisely above him, Gregory of Nazianzus.

It would probably be very interesting for us to have a chance to compare the works of the two poets, both theologically and at the level of their ars poetica. Unfortunately, the works of Apollinaris, as many as they were, have been lost and we know of his poetical elaboration only from references to them in other people’s works.

In this very short paper I only intend to make the sitz im leben, in rather general terms, of Gregory’s poetical production, that is, to try to recreate its context by looking in particular at the goal and intention of his poetry and at the heretical teachings that he argued against, that means, more precisely at Apollinarism. This will give one a chance to think of poetry and theology, even though Gregory’s theological responses to heresy are not the subject of this paper.

Yet, before starting the presentation of the first of the two aspects named above, I will make some considerations on Gregory’s poetry in general.

 

 

 

Gregory’s poetry: General considerations.

Quantity

 

Apparently there is no total agreement as to how much poetry Gregory wrote. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, Jerome and Suidas wrote that Gregory produced 30.000 verses, which seems not to be an exaggeration since a lot of them have been lost.[8]  Louis Montaut mentions only 17.000 verses[9], Francesco Corsaro, 17.500[10], Vasile Ionescu and Nicolae Stefanescu, 18.000 (in 507 poems)[11], while Jean Bernardi raises the number to 20.000 (in 185 poems plus epitaphs)[12].

It seems to me that Jerome’s account has all the chances to be realistic. I am thinking first of Apollinaris. If he was able to write a vast amount of verses, why not Gregory as well? Gregory was as well extremely well educated, he had a passion for poetry since he was young, he had the same reasons at least as Apollinaris to write poetry, if not more, as I will mention later.

We are reported that when Julian the Apostate forbade Christian professors to teach Greek letters, arts and philosophy in their schools, both Apollinaris, the Elder and the Young, began to versify entire books of the Old Testament and to produce all sorts of poetry in order to counter in this way the Emperor’s order and to still teach to the students literature that was Greek in fashion, but Christian in context. We are also told that Gregory of Nazianzus not only encouraged the Apollinaris in their work but he

himself started to do the same[13].

In addition, Gregory and Apollinaris the Young were competitors and adversaries in the framework of the Christological doctrine. It is expected for Gregory to have written as much as the other in order to have countered his heretic propaganda.

The capacity and the intellectual brilliance of Gregory, his inner burning bush for poetry, his love for the ancient works in general and literature and poetry in particular, his talent confirmed by many, all become reasons to believe that he wrote much more than we have now from him.

 

 

 

Classification

 

If scholars do not have a unified idea concerning the amount of verses Gregory produced, they do not come together concerning the classification of the poetry, either.

The Catholic Encyclopedia on line for instance divides the Theologian’s poetry in autobiographical verses, epigrams, and epitaphs[14].

I believe that the versified epistles should have been included here as another category.

Another source divides them in Dogmatical, Moral, Personal, Epistolary, Epitaphs, Epigrams[15], while a simpler more classical analysis indicates two categories: theological (that includes 38 dogmatic and 40 moral poems) and historical (that includes autobiographical, lyrical and other poems)[16]. The name “historical” for the last category is considered by Jean Bernardi confusing and ambiguous[17] because that would indicate that the poems have a purely historical nature, which is not the case.

Both A. Benoit and M. Pellegrino believe that the classification of Gregory’s poetry is not a very rigorous one since poems that belong to one division can easily belong to the other one[18]; it depends on how one assesses the content which is many times multi-faceted.

 

 

 

Time

 

There is disagreement among scholars with respect to the time when Gregory wrote his poetry. Some authors believe that he wrote poetry only in the last five years of his life[19], others that he wrote it in general at the end of his life; and according to J. Planche, that proves the force of his genius[20].

I believe that one can argue that on the contrary, if Gregory was a genius in poetry, he did not have to wait until the end of his life to write his beautiful poems but wrote them throughout.

Genius is passion and inspiration – and effort as well – and we know how passionate for literature and how cultured, educated and outspoken he was; it is easy to imagine him writing poetry even at a very early age. That would justify Jerome’s affirmation that Gregory wrote 30.000 verses even if we don’t have them all. In fact A. Benoit mentions for his part that Gregory started to write poetry since his young age, otherwise one could not explain the vast amount of literary works he produced[21].

 

Gregory as poet

            Even though J. Bernardi writes that Gregory had two contradictory vocations, on the one hand he was an intellectual and an academic and on the other he was a Christian philosopher (and that he sacrificed the first one for the sake of the second)[22] looking closely at the life of the holy man, one can easily argue that these two aspects are not contradictory at all, on the contrary they wonderfully complement each other. 

First of all, everything in Gregory’s life was centered on Christ. When it comes to the world, Gregory tells that the one thing he clearly loved there was the glory of eloquence. When he obtained it he put it in Christ’s service[23]. If one thinks of the desert and the harsh ascetical life, the theologian testifies that there, his only richness and consolation is Christ[24]. Every passion he had in life, eloquence, literature, poetry in particular, philosophy, he brought before his Lord. That is why his Christocentric life is evident from every page of his writings[25].

When it comes to poetry it has to be mentioned that Gregory of Nazanzus admired and imitated several poets of ancient Greece such as Homer, Hesiod, Pindar and others, while having special preferences for Callimahus[26]; evidently the imitations are only in form and not in content. The autobiographical poem is not a novelty in Gregory’s time either. However, he is the first Christian writer who cultivates this genre[27], according to J. Bernardi.

The fact that in relation to the form Gregory continues older poetic styles does not diminish the value of his production.

His poetry is characterized by pure diction, elegant style, and is even more elevated than that of Homer in J. Planche’s view[28]; it is rich and harmonious in language, intimate in the type of information it discloses, very lyric and of an acute melancholy.

       This sentiment, according to M. Granier, is first introduced in poetry by Gregory[29]. In his writings it is authentic because it is in itself sincere, sober in expression and inspired by great causes[30]. He is considered to have been an extraordinary creator of words[31], just as his poems are highly elaborated and sophisticated.

What A. Benoit says about his epitaphs, that beyond the literary merit they are a treasury as far as religion, art and history are concerned, for the precious information in these fields there present[32], I believe one can say about Gregory’s entire poetical production or at least most of it.

Even though there is so much appreciation for this poetry, there are others who do not seem so enthusiastic about it. G. Florovsky believes that Gregory’s verses are rather exercises in rhetoric than true poetry, with the exception of the personal lyrics where genuine emotion is displayed[33].

When he talks about another great poet and theologian of the 4^th century, not in the Hellenistic world though, but in Syria, Ephraem the Syrien, Florovsky writes that St. Ephraem’s talent as a poet accounts for his exceptional influence and great popularity of his works[34].

If that is the case one can argue that Gregory also enjoyed great popularity and had a very significant influence in the Christian life of his time and after. Then, he can be considered a talented poet too.

In his remarks on St. Gregory’s poetry, M. Pellegrino goes beyond disputable definitions of whatever aspect of these works and insists that no matter what kind it is, no matter how one classifies it, it is poetry, in the real sense of the term, and its author is a poet.[35]

Another source summarizes Gregory’s poetic accomplishments as follows: He “was the first of the Greek Christian poets to approach even if at some distance, the poets of antiquity”; “no writer of verses ever surpassed Gregory in that elegant culture and that experience of the vicissitudes of life which are fitted to equip a poet”.

Gregory had a true poetic fire; he inherited the Alexandrian and Athenian cultures but his being a Christian helped him bring into poetry new emotions of which the old poets never dreamed; Gregory created a new order of poetry: one of religious meditation and of philosophic reverie[36].

 

 

 

The Goals of His Poetry

 

Even though it is said that Constantinople was the intended audience of Gregory’s major poetry[37], keeping in mind one thing, for instance, that the Apollinarians invaded Nazianzus and that their leader was in Loodicea, and that Gregory wrote a lot in order to counter this heresy, even though we may not have today all his poems, one can conclude that Nazianzus, Loodicea and maybe other places where the heresy predominated could have been part of the destination of Gregory’s major poetical works.

Several gools can be considered when it comes to the poetry of the holy man of Nazianzus and all of them help one to at least partially reconstruct the context in which he wrote at a personal, moral, theological, literary and even political level.

 

The personal purpose[38] are thus consistent with his ascetic tendencies.

            One might have the impression that this is only a pretext and since he had a real passion for poetry Gregory would have written it anyway, as a penance or as a hobby or as a need. However, one has to recognize that writing in prose on the topics that represented the content of his poetry would have been easier, and Gregory himself acknowledges that.

In fact, writing in verse in order to reduce the quantity of words, is in line with the vow of silence taken by the ascetic. Less words are intended to reduce the human word to its original role, that of being a humble auxiliary of the Word of God[39], A. Benoit observes.

So it could have been that Gregory wrote his poetry at the end of his life as a relaxation from the cares and troubles of life,[40] more than having been a serious pursuit, as one source indicates; however it is hard to speak for somebody else when it comes to how one writes his own poetry.

            For if writing poems was for Gregory a simple way of relaxation, then one cannot easily explain why Gregory himself says that he writes in verse in order to impose a hardship on him unless it was a hardship and a relaxation at the same time.

 

            b. It seems to me that due to the vocation and talent that Gregory had for literature in general and poetry in particular, due to the fire in him and love for letters and to his solid education, he wrote poetry for its own sake as well. I believe that to write poetry for the sake of poetry does not diminish the affirmation he made concerning poetry as an ascetic hardship.

 

            c. It is clear from his writing that the Theologian wrote poetry in order to praise God in a special way. “I am God’s organ”, he says; “I write praises to Him, yet not like the pagan poets but with a Christian heart”[41].

 

            d. Poetry is written as a way of personal consolation when the author is in physical pain, as he often used to be, according to his own testimony, but also when he is taken by sadness at the thought of leaving soon the earthly life, when he looks at himself as to an “old swan” and writes verses on his past as a way to dignify the exit from the life’s scene[42].

 

            e. Finally, J. Planche says that Gregory writes poetry in order to destroy calumnies published against him by his adversaries, in other words, to defend his reputation[43].

 

The moral purpose[44].

            Through his poems, he wants to produce spiritual delight in the soul and mind of those young people and, in fact, of all those who took delight in art and literature, but who also needed spiritual guidance. Poetry would be a way to make the moral teachings of the Christian Church more readily acceptable[45].

            J. Bernardi believes that through his poems Gregory also wanted to teach the youth the classic literary forms of poetical expression, while, of course, teaching them the new Christian values, and he does not exclude the possibility that some of Gregory’s poems may have been used as collective recitations in the classroom, and even destined to be accompanied by musical instruments.[46]

 

            b. It is known that St. Gregory also wrote poetry in order to criticize episcopal hypocrisy[47], or in general, inappropriate attitudes and behaviors from the part of the clergy.

 

Theological purposes[48].

            In some of his letters Gregory denounces the strategy used by Apollinaris whereby he tried to replace the Psalms with his own compositions in which he also used catchy slogans, in order to spread easier his teachings. McGuckin believes that this type of practice probably gave Gregory the idea for him to do the same thing[49].

            It is obvious that the practice of putting one’s teaching in verses was not invented by Apollinaris, it was used by Arius at the beginning of the century, by Ephraem in Syria and probably by others even before and after that.

            To put one’s teaching in verses, might have, among others, three advantages related to the following aspects:

                        The mnemotechnic aspect; verses can be learned and remembered, recited, repeated.

                        The aesthetic aspect; because of its special styles, language, imagery, poetry is endeared by many.

                        The psychological aspect; poetry reaches the mind and the heart of the reader because of its specific means of expressing ideas.

            Consequently, since the idea was around already and since he had used poetry already for other practical purposes, such as, for instance, teaching or spreading the moral values specific to Christianity, he decided to respond to the Apollinarian propagandistic poetry with his own poems, like fighting his adversaries with their own weapons[50].

 

Literary Purposes[51]. Thus, many poems were written by the Theologian with the clear intention to have the work of pagan writers superseded.

            Moreover, we are told that he even wanted to create a literary movement or school of Christian root and inspiration[52], a goal that he may have achieved without conscientizing its development.

 

Political Purposes[53].

 

 

 

The Apollinarian Heresy

 

            Before moving to a short presentation of the false teaching of Apollinaris I consider necessary to mention, at least, here a few other Christian names of people who wrote poetry in Greek in the 4^th century, who are integral part of the poetical context of St. Gregory’s poetical works.

 

                        Arius was the major Christian heresiarch of the 4^th century; among other ways, he defended his theological positions in verse. Beyond other poems he wrote, the most known poetical production of him is named Thalia[54].

 

                        According to J. Bernardi, Dorotheus writes Christian poetry at the end of the 3^rd or beginning of the 4^th century. It is known that in 343 he wrote a poem in hexameters[55].

 

                        Nicetas of Remessiana (today Bela Palanka, Serbia), was in the 4^th century the bishop of the Dacians (ancestors of Romanians). St. Jerome indicates that Nicetas wrote “sweet songs of the Cross”, and Paulims of Nola, a friend, praises Nicetas as a Hymn writer.

            Modern scholarship found out that the popular hymn Te Deum (Laudamus), attributed long time to Ambrose was Nicetas’ work[56].

 

                        Synesius of Cyrene, born in the 4^th century, died about 414. In 409 he was elected Metropolitan of Ptolemais; he was disciple and friend of Hypatia of Alexandria. We have from him about ten hymns that talk about his theological and philosophical convictions. In the last of the ten he entrusts himself to Christ and asks for the forgiveness of sins[57].

 

            St. Ehpraem the Syrian

Even though St. Ephraem did not write in Greek but in Syrian, because he is an extremely prolific 4^th century Christian writer, and because many of his poetical works were translated and circulated in Greek even during his life, I believe it is appropriate to include him here as well.

                        Ephraem was born in Nisibis, Syria (date unknown) and died in 373. he was a hermit renewed for his severe ascetical life[58] but also for his “outstanding gift for lyricism”[59]. He wrote sermons, hymns, and other works, mostly in the last ten years of his life while being in Edessa and fighting against heresies. G. Florovsky appreciates his theological works – most of them, even the orations, written in verses – as euphoric and melodious, sincere and intimate[60].

                        Sozomen notes that he had written about three million verses and Theodoret of Cyrus calls him a “poetic genius”[61].

                        Ephraem’s poetry was divided in memre, orations, homelies which might explain why his verses are so many, and madrase, hymns, which contain instructions written for choral singing and even to be accompanied by harps[62].

                        In his about 1000 works[63] Ephraem basically intended to give moral instruction, to glorify God and the Theotokos and to fight heresy. He wrote against the gnostics, against Marcion and Manes specifically, against the Arians and Julian the Apostate[64] and against Bardesanes (Bar-Daisan), and his son Harmonius[65].

                        Bardesanes was the first Syrian poet and a heretic teacher; he used to spread his teachings in metrical forms in order to have better success with the public[66].

                        As Greogory of Nazianzus did with his verses against the Apollinarians, so Ephraem, in order to fight the heretic with their own weapons, had put his theological doctrines in verses as well.

                        According to Florovsky “it is Ephraem’s talent as a poet that accounts for his exceptional influence and broad and immediate popularity of his verses”.[67]

 

                        Apollinaris the Elder was a Christian grammarian living in the 4^th century, first at Berytus in Phoenicia, then in Laodicea, in Syria. When in 362 Julian the Apostate forbade Christian professors to teach the Greek letters in their schools, he and his son, Apollinaris the Young, started to replace the Greek literature with Christian and composed great works in verse and prose of Christian root and inspiration. Socrates, in his Ecclesiastic History mentions that Apollinaris the Elder put the Old Testament Pentatench in Greek hexameters, converted the first two books of Kings into an epic poem, wrote tragedies, comedies, odes, imitating the Greek authors.

                        Sozomen in his history does not mention Apollinaris the Elder’s works but indicates those of his son. All those works did not survive[68].

 

                        Apollinaris the Young, according to Charles Raven, “perhaps the most remarkable, as he is certainly the last, of the great Hellenic Students and thinkers who devoted their lives […] to the pursuit of truth[69]”, was born in Laodicea in 310. With an incontestable, profound and solid education, he was a brilliant rhetor who, just like Origen, earlier, “combined in himself off that is best in the culture of his time”[70], according to one testimony.

            In 360 he was elected bishop of Laodicea; G. Florovsky mentions that he wrote “countless” works, most of which have been lost[71], and he certainly worked with his father at the creation of a Christian literature imitating the Greek models after Julian the Apostate’s edict. Sozomen tells that Apollinaris’s writings were of great elegance and at least equal to the originals based on which they were modeled[72]. His poetical works and as well those of his father enjoyed extreme popularity in their time. They were sang and recited, we are told, by people at work, at meals, at festivals, and many other events great and small.[73]

                        Apollinaris was a Nicene theologian, admirer and friend of Athanasius. For his friendship with the great Alexandrian bishop, in particular for having received him when Athanasius was traveling through Laodicea, Apollinaris was excommunicated by the Arian bishop of Laodicea, George.[74]

                        Before 362, according to G. Florovsky, apparently in order to counter the teaching of Diodore of Tarsus, leader of the Antiochene School, Apollinaris developed his own Christological views yet trying to stay faithful to Athanasius’s Christology according to whom in Incarnation the Divine Logos took upon himself our flesh[75] (μία φύσις τοũ λογοũ Θεοũ σεσαρκομένη).

                        Florovskly explains that Apollinaris did not distinguish between nature and hypostasis; consequently, he saw in Christ one person with one nature and one hypostasis. In order for Christ to have been able to save us, He must have had a Divine Intellect, not a human one that is bound to weakness and cannot overcome sins. Hence, in Jesus Christ the Word of God had taken an animated body. The intellect was that of the Divine Logos itself. Consequently, the Word became flesh, but not fully human. It results that the two entities, divine and human, only coexisted in Christ’s person[76].

                        According to Florovsky, Apollinaris was a trichotomist. Jesus Christ had a flesh and soul that were human and a spirit or nous – The Divine Logos. The above mentioned author believes that based on the Apollinarian theology Jesus Christ’s humanity is only similar to ours but not consubstantial with it[77] even though it is also said that Apollinaris made a “lasting contribution to the Orthodox theology in declaring that Christ was co-substantial with the Father as regarding His divinity and co-substantial with us as regarding his humanity[78].

                        For their Christology, the Apollinarists were called “sarkolaters” - or those who adored the flesh[79], because they refused to recognize the human spirit in Christ.

                        Paul Galley considers that Gregory had to get involved in the Apollinarian controversy. On his way to Constantinople, he tells us, he worried about it. In addition, he had to write a professional refutation of the heresy at the request of Cledonius, the priest he installed at Nazianzus, since this city dear to the poet was invaded by adepts of Apollinaris[80]. Yet, his response, like his entire Christology, in Florovky’s evaluation, in as much as it relates to this heresy is not elaborated like a theological system. It is rather a confession of faith expressed in clear and precise language that anticipates the later Christological formulae relating to the two natures and one person of Christ[81].

 

 

 

Conclusions

 

Gregory of Nazianzus, with his solid and vast knowledge in dialectic, philosophy, theology and scriptures, with his incomparable eloquence, and his talent as a writer, exercised a great influence on his contemporaries and on generations after him. These qualities made him win all the disputes where he had to defend Christian Orthodoxy, as A. Benoit notices[82].

Gregory was a poet of first rank who surpassed all other poets in the first Christian centuries who wrote in Greek; he is rival to the greatest writers of the pagan antiquity. These classic writers were great and inimitable indeed. However, they addressed with their literary production people’s imagination and spirit. Gregory’s works yet, in no inferior position vis-à-vis the first ones, address not only the mind and spirit but the heart of the reader as well.[83]

Villemain considers Gregory of Nazianzus “the poet of Eastern Christerdom” per excellence, as he believes that poetry is the chief accomplishment of the saint[84].

It is worthy to note that fifty years after Gregory’s death his writings became normative and the Roman Church issued a declaration that his poetry was to be admitted entirely in the Church as works of greatest authority.[85]

For his import of great and exalted ideas from the theological science into poetry he was even liked to Dante and was suggested that he be considered on just ground the father of modern poetry[86].

In summary, this is what Gregory’s providential mission in the Church was, according to A. Benoit: to fight successfully against the great heretics of his century; to work towards the reform of the clergy’s morality; to bring Constantinople to the Orthodox faith; to create a form of Christian poetry and use it in order to serve, defend, ornate and beautify the Christian truth[87].