What do you think?
Rate this book
Popular Patristics Series #60
Catechetical Discourse: A Handbook for Catechists
St Gregory of Nyssa wrote the Catechetical Discourse as a handbook for his catechists, to help them defend and articulate the foundations of the faith, the Trinity, creation and the image of God, the fall and the nature of evil, the saving work of Christ, and the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist. The Discourse draws upon the previous tradition-especially Origen, St Methodius of Olympus and above all, St Athanasius' On the Incarnation (PPS 44) and influences later fathers like St John of Damascus in his On the Orthodox Faith (PPS 62).
This complex work is also known for its ambiguous relationship to Origen's universalism, perhaps including the idea that the devil himself will be saved. The translator's introduction places this question, and a clear understanding of the Catechetical Discourse in general. In the context of St Gregory's use of rhetoric, his other writings and the broader patristic tradition.
Ignatius Harry Green is a priest of the Orthodox Church. His doctoral work focuses on St Gregory of Nyssa's Catechetical Discourse.
This complex work is also known for its ambiguous relationship to Origen's universalism, perhaps including the idea that the devil himself will be saved. The translator's introduction places this question, and a clear understanding of the Catechetical Discourse in general. In the context of St Gregory's use of rhetoric, his other writings and the broader patristic tradition.
Ignatius Harry Green is a priest of the Orthodox Church. His doctoral work focuses on St Gregory of Nyssa's Catechetical Discourse.
171 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 2019
13 people are currently reading
337 people want to read
About the author
Gregory of Nyssa
154 books121 followersGregory of Nyssa was a Christian bishop and saint. He was a younger brother of Basil the Great and a good friend of Gregory Nazianzus. His significance has long been recognized in the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Roman Catholic branches of Christianity.
Gregory along with his brother Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nazianzus are known as the Cappadocian Fathers. They attempted to establish Christian philosophy as superior to Greek philosophy.
Gregory along with his brother Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nazianzus are known as the Cappadocian Fathers. They attempted to establish Christian philosophy as superior to Greek philosophy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
January 4, 2022
Incredible resource. My love for Gregory of Nyssa increases with every sentence I read from him (even the ones I disagree with).
Here are several thoughts on this book in no particular order.
First, Gregory demonstrates well the importance of apologetic sensitivity. This is a handbook of sorts for theological teachers and preachers. He is instructing the instructors of catechesis, and therefore has to offer instructions on how to instruct people from different backgrounds. His instruction includes the refutation of many objections throughout. As if to say, "Now, when you say this, a skeptic might retort, 'But what about X?' if he does, you simply reply with 'Y.'" As such, he anticipates different objections from different points of view. He opens the book with laying out two very different strategies for arguing for theology proper: one for the Greek, and one for the Jew. I think this offers a lot of insight for apologetics today. There is not a one-size fits all "method" and we shouldn't try to look for one. Another point to make about Gregory's apologetic sensitivity is that he considers "the defense of the faith" against the skeptic and non-believer on the one hand, and the heretic on the other, as fundamentally the same thing. He weaves in and out of responses to heretics, Jews, and skeptical Greeks all in the same context. That is instructive, I think.
Second, and relatedly, Gregory clearly and unambiguously affirms natural theology. He assumes it. He doesn't defend it because it wasn't a controversial concept, and it shouldn't be.
Third, on the saving work of Christ. Gregory's reflections on the saving import of the resurrection are some of the most profound and moving sections of literature I have read in a long time. Gregory considers the resurrection a *restorative and healing* aspect of Christ's soteriological work. Here's a sample:
"And this is the mystery of God's economy regarding death and the resurrection from the dead: he did not prevent the soul from being loosed by the death of the body in the necessary order of nature, but led [them] back to each other again by the resurrection, so that he himself might become the meeting point of both, of both death and life, in himself establishing the nature that had been divided by death, and himself becoming the principle of the union of what had been divided." (16.9)
Fourth, continuing on Gregory's reflections on the saving work of Christ, Gregory does not offer an exhaustive description of any doctrine in this handbook, and that includes his thoughts on the atonement. This is an important point to emphasize for Protestants who may feel uncomfortable when Gregory says very little about the satisfaction of guilt and quite about about the atonement as a sort of "ransom." It's also important to point that throughout this section, Gregory is pretty ambiguous about in what sense Christ was a "ransom." Ransom for whom? Ransom to whom? Often it seems like the party Christ is "paid to" is not the devil, but rather Death personified. And when the devil *is* is view, Christ's death as a gift or payment to him is described fundamentally as a deception: that is, Christ wasn't given to the devil as a ransom--the devil thought he was trading authority over all of us creatures for authority over Christ, but Christ tricked the devil into bringing Christ into the land of the dead so that he could harrow death. The whole thing was an elaborate deception of Satan. As Ignatius Green says in the introduction,
"Gregory does not, in fact, teach the 'ransom theory' in the Catechetical Discourse, though it has long been read this way... In reality, the Catechetical Discourse is a handbook for catechists, a rhetorical text with multiple layers of meaning. The ransom is merely the illusory surface appearance that deceived the devil. The ransom itself is a deception, but neither the ransom nor the deception saves us. They serve as a Trojan horse, that Christ might gain entry to the realm of the dead. There he saves us by harrowing hades." (pg. 36).
Fifth, speaking of "the devil," what's really striking is that Gregory doesn't identify pride as Satan's downfall vice. It was rather *envy.* And it wasn't envy of God, but rather envy of *man.* According to Gregory, Satan envied the authority and dignity ascribed and promised to man, and since he wanted what man had and resented man for it, he tempted man to fall from grace. (Lewis seems to paint a very similar picture, especially in Perelandra).
Sixth, modern day Baptists may get uncomfortable at Gregory's use of "regeneration" language of baptism. Taken strictly linguistically, it does seem like Gregory endorses a kind of "baptismal regeneration." With that said, however, it's not simple. It's not entirely clear what Gregory means by it, and Gregory by no means clearly articulates what many modern proponents of baptismal regeneration espouse. For one thing, he ties the baptismal rite inextricably to faith--faith of the baptizand, specifically! He seems to assume that the one who is baptized is doing so as an act of faith in Christ. And I don't think that a Lutheran conception of faith following baptism works here, because Gregory argues explicitly that the person being baptized must have an at least somewhat clear conception of faith in the Trinity before they are baptized. Gregory can't be snagged by a Roman Catholics as endorsing their conception of ex opere operato either, because he goes on to say explicitly that those who are baptized but then fail to demonstrate a life of increasing godliness has not actually experienced the grace of baptism. Don't take it from me, here's Gregory himself:
"Now if the washing is applied to the body, and the soul has expunged the stains of the passions, but life after initiation should be on par with uninitiated life, though it may be daring to say, I will say it and not be deterred, that in these cases the water is water, since the gift of the Holy Spirit is nowhere manifest in what takes place, when not only the shame of anger mutilates the divine form, or the passion of greed, and unbridled and unseemly thought, and vanity, and envy, and arrogance, but also things gained by injustice remain with him, and the woman he acquired for himself through adultery serves his pleasures even after this. If these things and the like should similarly surround the life of him who is baptized both before and after, I am unable to see what has been remade, since I see him the same as before." (40.3-4).
In sum, Gregory seems to be saying more about baptism than most baptists: in baptism, and not a moment before it, the work of conversion is complete. (Or, to use an analogy Gregory offers, the adoption is complete). He is, in some sense, "regenerated." He is remade, renewed, mysteriously and supernaturally, into a new person. (And honestly, I'm closer to Gregory here than most baptists. I wouldn't use the language "regeneration," but I can't shake the feeling that it's more of a semantic difference.) But in whatever sense he is "regenerated," this only happens in tandem with faith--a faith that manifests itself in subsequent fruit of obedience. Baptism without a knowledgable faith in the Trinity, and subsequent obedient living to which the baptized can be held accountable, seems to be a foreign concept to Gregory. Which is to say, there are great benefits to be gained by the Protestant (and even the Baptist!) who reads Gregory.
Here are several thoughts on this book in no particular order.
First, Gregory demonstrates well the importance of apologetic sensitivity. This is a handbook of sorts for theological teachers and preachers. He is instructing the instructors of catechesis, and therefore has to offer instructions on how to instruct people from different backgrounds. His instruction includes the refutation of many objections throughout. As if to say, "Now, when you say this, a skeptic might retort, 'But what about X?' if he does, you simply reply with 'Y.'" As such, he anticipates different objections from different points of view. He opens the book with laying out two very different strategies for arguing for theology proper: one for the Greek, and one for the Jew. I think this offers a lot of insight for apologetics today. There is not a one-size fits all "method" and we shouldn't try to look for one. Another point to make about Gregory's apologetic sensitivity is that he considers "the defense of the faith" against the skeptic and non-believer on the one hand, and the heretic on the other, as fundamentally the same thing. He weaves in and out of responses to heretics, Jews, and skeptical Greeks all in the same context. That is instructive, I think.
Second, and relatedly, Gregory clearly and unambiguously affirms natural theology. He assumes it. He doesn't defend it because it wasn't a controversial concept, and it shouldn't be.
Third, on the saving work of Christ. Gregory's reflections on the saving import of the resurrection are some of the most profound and moving sections of literature I have read in a long time. Gregory considers the resurrection a *restorative and healing* aspect of Christ's soteriological work. Here's a sample:
"And this is the mystery of God's economy regarding death and the resurrection from the dead: he did not prevent the soul from being loosed by the death of the body in the necessary order of nature, but led [them] back to each other again by the resurrection, so that he himself might become the meeting point of both, of both death and life, in himself establishing the nature that had been divided by death, and himself becoming the principle of the union of what had been divided." (16.9)
Fourth, continuing on Gregory's reflections on the saving work of Christ, Gregory does not offer an exhaustive description of any doctrine in this handbook, and that includes his thoughts on the atonement. This is an important point to emphasize for Protestants who may feel uncomfortable when Gregory says very little about the satisfaction of guilt and quite about about the atonement as a sort of "ransom." It's also important to point that throughout this section, Gregory is pretty ambiguous about in what sense Christ was a "ransom." Ransom for whom? Ransom to whom? Often it seems like the party Christ is "paid to" is not the devil, but rather Death personified. And when the devil *is* is view, Christ's death as a gift or payment to him is described fundamentally as a deception: that is, Christ wasn't given to the devil as a ransom--the devil thought he was trading authority over all of us creatures for authority over Christ, but Christ tricked the devil into bringing Christ into the land of the dead so that he could harrow death. The whole thing was an elaborate deception of Satan. As Ignatius Green says in the introduction,
"Gregory does not, in fact, teach the 'ransom theory' in the Catechetical Discourse, though it has long been read this way... In reality, the Catechetical Discourse is a handbook for catechists, a rhetorical text with multiple layers of meaning. The ransom is merely the illusory surface appearance that deceived the devil. The ransom itself is a deception, but neither the ransom nor the deception saves us. They serve as a Trojan horse, that Christ might gain entry to the realm of the dead. There he saves us by harrowing hades." (pg. 36).
Fifth, speaking of "the devil," what's really striking is that Gregory doesn't identify pride as Satan's downfall vice. It was rather *envy.* And it wasn't envy of God, but rather envy of *man.* According to Gregory, Satan envied the authority and dignity ascribed and promised to man, and since he wanted what man had and resented man for it, he tempted man to fall from grace. (Lewis seems to paint a very similar picture, especially in Perelandra).
Sixth, modern day Baptists may get uncomfortable at Gregory's use of "regeneration" language of baptism. Taken strictly linguistically, it does seem like Gregory endorses a kind of "baptismal regeneration." With that said, however, it's not simple. It's not entirely clear what Gregory means by it, and Gregory by no means clearly articulates what many modern proponents of baptismal regeneration espouse. For one thing, he ties the baptismal rite inextricably to faith--faith of the baptizand, specifically! He seems to assume that the one who is baptized is doing so as an act of faith in Christ. And I don't think that a Lutheran conception of faith following baptism works here, because Gregory argues explicitly that the person being baptized must have an at least somewhat clear conception of faith in the Trinity before they are baptized. Gregory can't be snagged by a Roman Catholics as endorsing their conception of ex opere operato either, because he goes on to say explicitly that those who are baptized but then fail to demonstrate a life of increasing godliness has not actually experienced the grace of baptism. Don't take it from me, here's Gregory himself:
"Now if the washing is applied to the body, and the soul has expunged the stains of the passions, but life after initiation should be on par with uninitiated life, though it may be daring to say, I will say it and not be deterred, that in these cases the water is water, since the gift of the Holy Spirit is nowhere manifest in what takes place, when not only the shame of anger mutilates the divine form, or the passion of greed, and unbridled and unseemly thought, and vanity, and envy, and arrogance, but also things gained by injustice remain with him, and the woman he acquired for himself through adultery serves his pleasures even after this. If these things and the like should similarly surround the life of him who is baptized both before and after, I am unable to see what has been remade, since I see him the same as before." (40.3-4).
In sum, Gregory seems to be saying more about baptism than most baptists: in baptism, and not a moment before it, the work of conversion is complete. (Or, to use an analogy Gregory offers, the adoption is complete). He is, in some sense, "regenerated." He is remade, renewed, mysteriously and supernaturally, into a new person. (And honestly, I'm closer to Gregory here than most baptists. I wouldn't use the language "regeneration," but I can't shake the feeling that it's more of a semantic difference.) But in whatever sense he is "regenerated," this only happens in tandem with faith--a faith that manifests itself in subsequent fruit of obedience. Baptism without a knowledgable faith in the Trinity, and subsequent obedient living to which the baptized can be held accountable, seems to be a foreign concept to Gregory. Which is to say, there are great benefits to be gained by the Protestant (and even the Baptist!) who reads Gregory.
March 26, 2023
Excellent. As pastorally insightful for his own age as for us. The section on the sacraments was sublime.
May 31, 2025
The introduction framing this as a manual for catechists was helpful, otherwise I think I would have found this hard to follow. I found the first and second sections (on the Trinity and on Creation and the Fall) really compelling, and Nyssa's hamartiology especially is really important and helpful. The rest of the book is helpful too, but I find the Ransom theory of atonement really difficult to get behind, though I understand how it makes sense if one holds strongly to the harrowing of hades.
January 10, 2025
One of my first reads of the early church Fathers. For that and other reasons I didn't get as much out of it as was there that's for sure! But what a great book especially if you want to think like Jonathan Pageau. I could hear him talking as I was reading some sections.
The Discourse is broken into 4 parts that the introduction states is mimicking rhetorical practices of the period.
St. Gregory of Nyssa begins by saying that the defense of the faith must be tailored to the presuppositions of one's audience. At that time there was a huge difference between a pagan and a Jew. I have always considered Christianity a monotheistic religion but actually it is a kind of synthesis of polytheism and monotheism the like of which would make Hegel proud haha. A much higher synthesis that takes in the differences and weaknesses of each opposite and combines them.
St. Gregory's description of the Trinity was very interesting. The Father is the divine source of the Trinity and is like a person (my words not his). Jesus is the Word of God which is not like our words that pass away but an eternal Word that never passes away and has it's own identity. Out of the mouth of the Father comes the Word (Christ) and the breath of God that comes with the Word is the Holy Spirit. At least this is what I understood him to mean. Thus the Word of God is the active creating part that is assisted by the Holy Spirit.
Man in order to partake of the good must have something in common with the good and it's creator. Thus man was made in the image of God. Man was originally created to be immortal and eternal. St. Gregory seems to say that like is attracted to like and for us to recognize and share in the divine and perfect nature of God we must have something in common with Him. "Therefore what is similar to the divine in all things must by all means have self mastery and independence by nature, so that the prize of virtue may be participation in all good things.
Evil and vice and even death is nothing other then the absence of the good and essentially the absence of God since God is the origin of all good.
Existing things are divided into noetic and sensory perception. And these are divided from each other. The sensory is not the noetic but it's opposite. Sensory is what has body to it and perceived through our senses. While the noetic is bodiless and immaterial. The divine Wisdom has harmonized the opposites so that there is a symphony of all things and there is a mingling of the elements so that all partake of the good.
79 "Now it is agreed that the beginning of every matter is the cause of the things that follow after it in order:" For example if one is sick weakness follows. "For then, once he who begot envy in himself but turning away from goodness came to have an inclination to evil, just as a stone torn from a mountain ridge is forced down headlong by its own weight, so too he was torn from an innate affinity with the good and weighed down towards vice on its own initiative, as if by some weight he was forced and carried away to the last boundary of wickedness," This section was interesting to see a kind of noetic physics on Satan's fall. By being so close to God and rejecting Him he was forced downward as sets the limit of evil. He is thus the father of all evil and sets the pattern for the turning of every virtue into a vice. By turning that which has existence into the absence of existence.
Evil has no substance in itself. It is only the absence of good.
pg 84 "For since he says the first human beings came to be amid forbidden things and were stripped naked of that blessedness, the Lord puts "garments of skin" on the first-formed ones." St Gregory does not believe these skins are literal animal skins. But that the healer of mankind clothed us with the power to be dead. Which is significant for the healing through baptism he talks about later. These skins clothed man in flesh which was originally created for eternity. These new skins did not tough the image of God in us.
St. Gregory hints at this plan of healing by talking about a potter who creates a clay vessel and someone comes and evilly pours lead into it. The only way to restore it like knew is to break the vessel and remake it to get the lead out.
"that only is good by nature which sensory perception does not touch" "But to judge the good and what is not good by pains and pleasures is a property of an irrational nature, of those whose understanding has no room for the truly good, since they do not partake of the things of the mind and thought." There goes materialistic rationalism and utilitarianism! Destroyed in the 4th century.
Only vice is shameful. Everything outside of vice is not shameful. In response to God deigning to become man.
How is the divine mixed with mans nature in the incarnation? It is a mystery.
"neither is the good truly good, if it is not ranked with the just and the wise and the powerful"
St Gregory introduces the idea that God is infinite and can never be fully known in his essence.
God deceived Satan by clothing himself in man's nature so Satan will think he can be killed like other men. Thus Christ was a bait for death to swallow not realizing that doing so would be it's own end. This idea is artistically displayed on the cover of the book! Christ thus brings light to the darkness. This defense of deceit is odd to the West but John Chrysostomas well as the Ladder of Divine assent.
The Church rejected pagan notions of fate.
Symbolism of the cross. Ancient cosmology saw earth with heaven above and hell below. The cross reaching out left and right reaches to the limit of earth. The beam going up reaches into heaven and the one below reaches into hell. And thus the "four corners" of the universe are all tied together and bringing the different things together and uniting them with himself. This kind of feels like a reversal of the skins being put on but will be more fully reversed in baptism.
pg 137 "For just as for for each of the things that exist there is some property that is the distinguishing mark of its nature, so truth is a property of the divine nature." This sentence is very hard for me to understand but the idea is that one part stands for the whole. So as Pageau would say the part of the cup that defines it would probably be it's function and that stands for the whole.
We have to follow Christ and imitate him to make it out of the labyrinth that is this earthly life.
Our baptism is an imitation of Christs death. Where we go down and are remade. This is how we are restored and are able to partake in the new the life to come when we are remade and given new bodies. Hopefully without the extra flesh skins!
How do we know baptism has worked? By having a changed life.
The Discourse is broken into 4 parts that the introduction states is mimicking rhetorical practices of the period.
St. Gregory of Nyssa begins by saying that the defense of the faith must be tailored to the presuppositions of one's audience. At that time there was a huge difference between a pagan and a Jew. I have always considered Christianity a monotheistic religion but actually it is a kind of synthesis of polytheism and monotheism the like of which would make Hegel proud haha. A much higher synthesis that takes in the differences and weaknesses of each opposite and combines them.
St. Gregory's description of the Trinity was very interesting. The Father is the divine source of the Trinity and is like a person (my words not his). Jesus is the Word of God which is not like our words that pass away but an eternal Word that never passes away and has it's own identity. Out of the mouth of the Father comes the Word (Christ) and the breath of God that comes with the Word is the Holy Spirit. At least this is what I understood him to mean. Thus the Word of God is the active creating part that is assisted by the Holy Spirit.
Man in order to partake of the good must have something in common with the good and it's creator. Thus man was made in the image of God. Man was originally created to be immortal and eternal. St. Gregory seems to say that like is attracted to like and for us to recognize and share in the divine and perfect nature of God we must have something in common with Him. "Therefore what is similar to the divine in all things must by all means have self mastery and independence by nature, so that the prize of virtue may be participation in all good things.
Evil and vice and even death is nothing other then the absence of the good and essentially the absence of God since God is the origin of all good.
Existing things are divided into noetic and sensory perception. And these are divided from each other. The sensory is not the noetic but it's opposite. Sensory is what has body to it and perceived through our senses. While the noetic is bodiless and immaterial. The divine Wisdom has harmonized the opposites so that there is a symphony of all things and there is a mingling of the elements so that all partake of the good.
79 "Now it is agreed that the beginning of every matter is the cause of the things that follow after it in order:" For example if one is sick weakness follows. "For then, once he who begot envy in himself but turning away from goodness came to have an inclination to evil, just as a stone torn from a mountain ridge is forced down headlong by its own weight, so too he was torn from an innate affinity with the good and weighed down towards vice on its own initiative, as if by some weight he was forced and carried away to the last boundary of wickedness," This section was interesting to see a kind of noetic physics on Satan's fall. By being so close to God and rejecting Him he was forced downward as sets the limit of evil. He is thus the father of all evil and sets the pattern for the turning of every virtue into a vice. By turning that which has existence into the absence of existence.
Evil has no substance in itself. It is only the absence of good.
pg 84 "For since he says the first human beings came to be amid forbidden things and were stripped naked of that blessedness, the Lord puts "garments of skin" on the first-formed ones." St Gregory does not believe these skins are literal animal skins. But that the healer of mankind clothed us with the power to be dead. Which is significant for the healing through baptism he talks about later. These skins clothed man in flesh which was originally created for eternity. These new skins did not tough the image of God in us.
St. Gregory hints at this plan of healing by talking about a potter who creates a clay vessel and someone comes and evilly pours lead into it. The only way to restore it like knew is to break the vessel and remake it to get the lead out.
"that only is good by nature which sensory perception does not touch" "But to judge the good and what is not good by pains and pleasures is a property of an irrational nature, of those whose understanding has no room for the truly good, since they do not partake of the things of the mind and thought." There goes materialistic rationalism and utilitarianism! Destroyed in the 4th century.
Only vice is shameful. Everything outside of vice is not shameful. In response to God deigning to become man.
How is the divine mixed with mans nature in the incarnation? It is a mystery.
"neither is the good truly good, if it is not ranked with the just and the wise and the powerful"
St Gregory introduces the idea that God is infinite and can never be fully known in his essence.
God deceived Satan by clothing himself in man's nature so Satan will think he can be killed like other men. Thus Christ was a bait for death to swallow not realizing that doing so would be it's own end. This idea is artistically displayed on the cover of the book! Christ thus brings light to the darkness. This defense of deceit is odd to the West but John Chrysostomas well as the Ladder of Divine assent.
The Church rejected pagan notions of fate.
Symbolism of the cross. Ancient cosmology saw earth with heaven above and hell below. The cross reaching out left and right reaches to the limit of earth. The beam going up reaches into heaven and the one below reaches into hell. And thus the "four corners" of the universe are all tied together and bringing the different things together and uniting them with himself. This kind of feels like a reversal of the skins being put on but will be more fully reversed in baptism.
pg 137 "For just as for for each of the things that exist there is some property that is the distinguishing mark of its nature, so truth is a property of the divine nature." This sentence is very hard for me to understand but the idea is that one part stands for the whole. So as Pageau would say the part of the cup that defines it would probably be it's function and that stands for the whole.
We have to follow Christ and imitate him to make it out of the labyrinth that is this earthly life.
Our baptism is an imitation of Christs death. Where we go down and are remade. This is how we are restored and are able to partake in the new the life to come when we are remade and given new bodies. Hopefully without the extra flesh skins!
How do we know baptism has worked? By having a changed life.
February 16, 2020
I read this book for my Special Topics in Theology: Gregory of Nyssa course under Dr. Jacob Lett. I enjoyed reading this in that it helped me gain a deeper understanding of 4th-century Christian thought and catechesis. Although the first three sections of the book ("Introduction: One God, Three Persons," "The Narrative: Creation, the Image of God, the Fall, the Nature of Evil, and Death," and "The Proof: Defending the Economy of the Incarnation") were quite challenging and dense to wade through at times, Gregory provides very interesting and enlightening (and extended) illustrations which I found enjoyable. The final section of the book ("Conclusion: Baptism and Eucharist") was the most engaging for me, likely because it was more concrete and dealt with subjects that are more commonly discussed (or in controversy) in the church today.
December 29, 2021
Essential Nyssen reading. Some have rightly pointed out that much of his argumentation would not fly in our (post)modern philosophical environment, but to fault Gregory of Nyssa for that is a bit ahistorical and anachronistic. Gregory was writing in a world where divinity was mostly accepted in one form or another, and so his method of arguing for what is “fitting” would have carried more weight at the time.
Also, it is important that this is a catechetical manual rather than a straightforward piece of theology or philosophy. The purpose is to enable catechists to answer common questions from those outside the faith. To categorize it outside of this genre and evaluate it therefrom is to miss the mark.
Green argues in the introduction that he thinks calling Gregory of Nyssa a universalist is jumping the gun based on the text. Though one might suspect that this would cloud his translation, it appears that Green does an admirable job laying bare the passages that could point at that direction quite well. I find that to be quite commendable.
Also, it is important that this is a catechetical manual rather than a straightforward piece of theology or philosophy. The purpose is to enable catechists to answer common questions from those outside the faith. To categorize it outside of this genre and evaluate it therefrom is to miss the mark.
Green argues in the introduction that he thinks calling Gregory of Nyssa a universalist is jumping the gun based on the text. Though one might suspect that this would cloud his translation, it appears that Green does an admirable job laying bare the passages that could point at that direction quite well. I find that to be quite commendable.
April 19, 2024
Truly excellent. At least Gregory was. This work has many resonances with Athanasius' On the Incarnation in its apologetic character.
I was less impressed by the translator's introduction given his calling into question a point that I think is blatantly obvious in Gregory's thought, namely that Gregory taught the salvation of all things. Oh well...the rest was good.
I was less impressed by the translator's introduction given his calling into question a point that I think is blatantly obvious in Gregory's thought, namely that Gregory taught the salvation of all things. Oh well...the rest was good.
August 6, 2025
Catechetical Discourse
By St. Gregory of Nyssa
Translation, Introduction, and Notes by Ignatius Green
This is a translation of Gregory of Nyssa’s handbook of instructions to catechists believed to be written in the years prior to 387 AD. He wanted to provide catechists arguments to help in their instruction of catechumens from varying contexts. He realized that the objections of those coming out of the polytheism of paganism would naturally be different than those coming out of the monotheism of Judaism for example. He wrote, “But it is necessary, as has been said, to look to men’s presuppositions, and for the discussion to be made according to the error in which each is involved, putting forward certain principles and reasonable propositions for each dialogue, so that through the things admitted by both sides the truth may be unveiled in order.” The main topics he covers are as follows: Part 1 the Trinity; Part 2 Creation, the Image of God, the Fall, the nature of evil and death; Part 3 the Incarnation; and part 4 Baptism and the Eucharist.
Nearing the conclusion of Part 1 Gregory writes, “And thus he who looks precisely into the depths of the mystery grasps in secret in [his own] soul some measure of understanding of the teaching of the knowledge of God, yet is not able to make clear in speech this unutterable depth of the mystery. How is it that the same thing is both numbered and escapes enumeration, is both seen separately and apprehended in unity, is both distinguished in hypostasis and not divided in underlying subject [ούσία]? For in hypostasis the Spirit is one thing and the Word another, and another again is he to whom the Word and Spirit belong. But whenever you understand the distinction in these, again the unity of nature does not admit partition, so that neither is the might of the monarchy split, being cut up into differing divinities, nor does the discourse agree with Jewish teaching, but the truth passes through the mean of the two suppositions, casting down each of the heresies and accepting what is useful from each.”
Throughout the work he engages with questions such as why did we fall, how is the divine mixed with the human in the incarnation and objections such as birth and death are unbefitting of the divine and human nature, small and circumscribed, is incompatible with the infinite divine nature. Most of the questions and objections were relatable and relevant and it was very interesting to hear fourth century Christian answers. One of my favorite quotes was in answer to the objection “What is the cause of the divine condescension to our humiliation?” Gregory answered that “God’s love for man and our need for a saviour are the causes.” stating, “If, then, love for man [philanthropy] is the characteristic property of the divine nature, you have the reason which you sought, you have the cause of God’s presence among men. For our infirm nature stood in need of a healer, man in the fall stood in need of someone to set him upright, he who was deprived of life stood in need of the giver of life, he who declined in participation of the good stood in need of him who leads back to the good, he who was shut up in darkness needed the presence of light, the captive sought the redeemer, the one in bondage the fellow struggler, he who was held fast in the yoke of slavery the liberator; were these small and unworthy things to importune God to descend to visit human nature, since humanity was in so pitiful and wretched a state?”
May 17, 2024
St Gregory of Nyssa, Catechetical Discourse: A Handbook for Catechists. Trans. Fr Ignatius Green. St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2020.
This text is an updating of the Greek The Great Catechism found in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, volume 5.
Epistemology
Fr Green translates “prolepsis” as “presupposition,” but I do not think that is accurate. Even though I do not think it is accurate, I cannot think of a better word. “Presupposition” is what distinguishes the Jew from the Greek from the Christian. As they have different presuppositions, we must use different starting points. On the other hand, presupposition does not mean for Gregory what it means for today’s apologists: Gregory has little interest in (and probably no knowledge of) post-Kantian debates over what is needed to make reality (or even this sentence) intelligible. His strategy is relatively simple, and one our Lord himself used: if someone does not accept the authority of a particular position, then do not use that position.
Theology
Baptism: Gregory uses language of regeneration and mimesis.
Salvation: Gregory does use the fish hook analogy, but he does so in the context of Christ’s defeating of Leviathan. Modern readers, both conservative and liberal, uncomfortable with the overt supernaturalism of the ancient world, completely miss the Leviathan reference.
Universalism: Gregory does use apokatasis, but he never says the nature of the Devil will be redeemed. He says the vices from the Devil will be removed and if the Devil truly saw the mystery of redemption, he, too, would be saved. Gregory, of course, denies the consequent. As a result, he does not teach universalism.
Moreover, in his comments on baptism, he connects apokatasiswith those who have been baptized, which hardly lend credit to the claim that he teaches universalism. He does, however, hint at something like Purgatory.
Text
In this review I follow the chapter divisions found in the NPNF series.
Argument: God has a Logos, his word. Because his Word and rationality are eternal, the Logos must have an eternal subsistence (Ch. 1). Because the Logos does not depend or participate, it must be its own subsistence and person.
The Spirit: the Spirit goes with the Logos and manifests its energy (ch.2).
On evil: Evil, not having a particular subsistence, is engendered from within, “springing up in the will at the moment when there is a retrogression of the soul from the beautiful” (ch. 5, note the Platonic language).
On the soul and man: The body is circumscribed, but it also seems that Gregory says the soul “can coincide at will with the whole of creation.” It can ascend to the heavens, etc. (ch. 10).
While Gregory uses Platonic language throughout his corpus, he is clear to also cut Platonism off at the pass. Responding to the claim that the Incarnation, being connected with the body, dishonors God, Gregory makes the following astute remark: the body is not opposite to virtue. Rather, virtue’s contrary is vice (ch. 15).
The fish hook: For those who are interested, Gregory uses this famous analogy in chapter 25. It is not meant to be taken literally. And while Gregory does not connect it with Leviathan, that would only strengthen his argument.
The Eucharist: “it is necessary that the antidote should enter the vitals in the same way as the deadly poison” (ch. 37).
Conclusion
As a catechetical text, this is far more accessible than those of earlier contemporaries such as Cyril of Jerusalem, if only because of its brevity. Gregory writes with a vivid style, making use of engaging, if sometimes notorious, metaphors. Although he is careful to avoid certain Platonic language, his language (and probably much of his thought) is heavily Platonic. St Vladimir’s Seminary Press has done us a service in making Gregory’s writings up to date and available in a useful format.
July 11, 2022
“This one therefore is God the Word, the Wisdom, the Power, demonstrated according to the order as the maker of human nature, not led by some necessity to the fashioning of man, but rather crafting the genesis of such a living thing out of an excess of love. For it was necessary that the light not be unseen, nor the glory be without witness, nor his goodness be unenjoyed, nor for all the other things seen about the divine nature to lie idle, there being no one partaking of or enjoying [them]” (72-73)
“The account of the illustration is something like this: let us suppose some vessel to have been made out of clay, and this has become full of molten lead by some treachery, and the lead that was poured in hardens and remains impossible to pour out, but the vessel’s owner lays claim [to it] and, having a knowledge of ceramics, he smashes the earth in the vessel around the lead, and in this way he re-forms the vessel again, according to [its] former form for his very own use, empty of the matter that had been mixed into it. So too, then, he who formed our vessel, when vice was mingled in our sensory (I mean the bodily) part, by dissolving the matter that received evil, [and] again re-forming it through the resurrection, unmixed with [its] opposite, he will restore [it] to the beauty [it had] from the beginning.” 85
“Now he is mixed with us, as the one who holds together nature in existence, but then he was mingled with what is ours, so that by admixture with the divine, what is ours might become divine, delivered from death and beyond the tyranny of the adversary. For his return from death becomes the beginning of the return to immortal life for the mortal race.” 117
“The account of the illustration is something like this: let us suppose some vessel to have been made out of clay, and this has become full of molten lead by some treachery, and the lead that was poured in hardens and remains impossible to pour out, but the vessel’s owner lays claim [to it] and, having a knowledge of ceramics, he smashes the earth in the vessel around the lead, and in this way he re-forms the vessel again, according to [its] former form for his very own use, empty of the matter that had been mixed into it. So too, then, he who formed our vessel, when vice was mingled in our sensory (I mean the bodily) part, by dissolving the matter that received evil, [and] again re-forming it through the resurrection, unmixed with [its] opposite, he will restore [it] to the beauty [it had] from the beginning.” 85
“Now he is mixed with us, as the one who holds together nature in existence, but then he was mingled with what is ours, so that by admixture with the divine, what is ours might become divine, delivered from death and beyond the tyranny of the adversary. For his return from death becomes the beginning of the return to immortal life for the mortal race.” 117
March 14, 2020
The book for me is what I would call Christian philosophy. Gregory is making an argument for Christianity and providing some answers to objections non-believers in his day might raise to Christian thinking. He is somewhat going back to the basics - what are the basic objections of Jews and Hellenists to Christianity. It is a little more difficult to glean from his writings responses to objections that non-believers today might raise. For me, I have to suspend some of my own thoughts to accept some of his premises - something you have to do at times when reading fiction. He makes some assertions that strike me as just philosophical opinions and therefore not of great consequence. Gregory works hard at trying to develop a consistent and logical defense of Christianity, but there is a reality that the Scriptures were not written as dogmatic theology, but narratives which contain theology. One can be completely consistent only by doing some damage to the what the texts say. I guess I feel more comfortable with allowing for inconsistencies and ambiguities in Scripture than in trying to force them to be completely consistent and dogmatically logical. Gregory's arguments may have helped Christianity in antiquity convince some Hellenists that Christianity was philosophically superior to Hellenism. However, that does little to help Christianity witness to the great competitors with and challengers to Christianity today. Scientific materialism also rejects much of Hellenistic philosophy, but that doesn't bring them into the Christian camp. Christianity felt its understanding of God and creation were superior to that of the pagan philosophers. In some ways the arguments of people like Gregory helped defeat paganism, philosophy and mythology. But this also paved the way for scientific materialism, and now Christianity needs to think how to address its own step child. But Gregory won't help us much as his arguments will do little to change the minds of atheistic scientists today.
April 1, 2025
Gregory is a brilliant author, and his arguments are rooted firmly in the Greek logical traditions. My favorite singular supposition he refutes is the idea that God created sin. In response, Gregory likens virtue to light and vice to darkness: vice is not an opposite force to virtue, but is instead its absence and has no being of its own. As God only created "being" things, He clearly did not create sin. The book is chock full of similar exacting lines of argument on a wide range of theological topics, and I wish I could give it a five.
Some doctrinal differences lower the esteem of the book, in my eyes. Aside from Gregory's universalism (which is not outright stated herein, but strongly influenced the text), his viewpoint on the ransom theory of attornment--namely that we are ransomed from Satan(!), that Christ came in human form to trick Satan into accepting His ransom(!!), and that this was an intentional deception on God's part(!!!)--somewhat soured me on the work.
Some doctrinal differences lower the esteem of the book, in my eyes. Aside from Gregory's universalism (which is not outright stated herein, but strongly influenced the text), his viewpoint on the ransom theory of attornment--namely that we are ransomed from Satan(!), that Christ came in human form to trick Satan into accepting His ransom(!!), and that this was an intentional deception on God's part(!!!)--somewhat soured me on the work.
August 12, 2024
St. Gregory of Nyssa’s “Catechetical Discourse” stands out as both an exceptional manual for catechists and a profound exposition of the key elements of the Christian faith, essential for catechism and preparation for baptism. Gregory’s work offers beautiful, poetic, and allegorical descriptions that illuminate the core doctrines, such as the shared divine nature of the three Persons of the Trinity and the Eucharistic element of salvation. These vivid portrayals deepen the catechumen's understanding, making the discourse an invaluable resource for anyone seeking to grasp the essentials of Orthodox faith more deeply. Whether you are a catechumen or simply striving to enrich your essential spiritual knowledge, this discourse is an indispensable read.
March 20, 2024
Greg of Nyssa open this work describing teaching as an essential duty which serves to enlarge the church. Then he moves through the doctrines of God, creation, fall, death, incarnation, ransom and atonement. Sometimes Greg of Nyssa seems less of a theologian and more of an apologist, a defender of the faith. This causes him to lose himself in philosophical discourse and speculation. The Discourse ends on the Sacraments. Baptism represents the beginning of new life, regeneration. His view of the Eucharist is, in my judgment, complicated.
Read
May 14, 2025The introduction seems very keen to debunk the idea that St. Gregory's seeming universalism makes it allowable. Nevertheless, the translation read well and St. Gregory's ethical focus is, as always, starkly clear.
May 5, 2020
Nyssa rules
January 12, 2021
This was tremendous. I was blown away by the profundity and depth.
February 25, 2021
I generally enjoy Nyssa and the Cappadocians but this didn’t click with me so much. I prefer Life of Moses, for instance, much more.
February 4, 2024
Not only a catechetical work with stellar content, but incredibly illuminating as a model for structure for catechism and mystagogy.
June 22, 2025
Tackles some of the theological fundamentals of the fourth century with both precision and accessibility.
August 9, 2025
Beautifully written. One of the great expositions of the Christian faith written by one of the greatest saints of the Church age.
September 27, 2025
Excellent translation. This little book comes with the Greek on one side and a fresh translation on the other. The introduction and footnotes are very informative. A great resource
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews