THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA Motion (κίνησις) and Anthropology in the Writings of Gregory of Nyssa A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology and Religious Studies Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By Tera D. Harmon Washington, D.C. 2016 Motion (κίνησις) and Anthropology in the Writings of Gregory of Nyssa Tera D. Harmon, Ph.D. Director: Susan Wessel, Ph.D. Since the middle of the 20th century, scholars have commented on the frequency and range of topics for which Gregory of Nyssa employs the term kinesis. Besides categorizing all creation, including humanity, as the offspring of rest and motion, Gregory uses the language of motion to describe a vast array of human activities, including thought, language, emotion, sin, virtue, and spiritual ascent, among others. While Gregory’s emphasis on motion has been noticed and discussed, it has yet to be analyzed in a systematic or comprehensive fashion. This study analyzes Gregory’s use of the term kinesis in its varied contexts to develop a synthesis of Gregory’s thought on motion and consider how it relates to his anthropology. By examining descriptions of the motion many entities, both literal and metaphorical, the first part of this study affirms the centrality of kinesis to Gregory’s anthropology. Further, it argues that Gregory considered kinesis to be fundamental to humans, marking them as created beings, separate from God, even in the eschaton. The notions of kinesis and diastema being closely aligned with one another, this dissertation further argues that humans retain their diastemic nature in the resurrection. The second part of this study explores the implications of an anthropology indelibly marked by kinesis, concluding that kinesis prevents human isolation, both the isolation of one part from another in the same person and the isolation of humans from other humans and from God. Gregory’s kinetic anthropology also lends support to the idea that humans are holistic, connected between mind and body, intelligible and sensible, rather than dualistically divided. Finally, it asserts the importance of both continuity and change for humans, emphasizing the importance of a constant identity over time as well as the eternal need for growth. This dissertation by Tera Harmon fulfills the dissertation requirement for the doctoral degree in Church History approved by Susan Wessel, Ph.D., as Director, and by William J. McCarthy, Ph.D. and Dr. Robin Darling Young, Ph.D., as Readers. __________________________________________ Susan Wessel, Ph.D., Director __________________________________________ William J. McCarthy, Ph.D., Reader __________________________________________ Robin Darling Young, Ph.D., Reader ii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………..……..1 CHAPTER 1: CREATED AND UNCREATED MOTION…………………….............15 Motion and the Immutable God…………………………………………………16 Divine Motion and the Trinitarian Controversy………………………………....29 Created Motion…………………………………………………………..............40 CHAPTER 2: SENSIBLE MOTION……………………………………………………45 Motion of the Cosmos and the Physical World………………………………….47 Motion of the Human Body……………………………………………...............60 Motion of Time…………………………………………………………………..72 CHAPTER 3: INTELLIGIBLE MOTION………………………………………………81 Thought…………………………………………………………………………..81 Language…………………………………………………………………………85 Emotion…………………………………………………………………………..89 Will……………………………………………………………………………....98 Epektasis…………………………………………………………………………104 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………116 CHAPTER 4: MOTION IN THE GAPS: KNOWLEDGE AND LANGUAGE………...118 Knowledge……………………………………………………………………......121 Language………………………………………………………………………….136 CHAPTER 5: MOTION IN THE GAPS: ASCENT, UNION, AND PARADOX……….148 iii Ascent……………………………………………………………………………..148 Virtue, Time, and Motion…………………………………………………………159 Mingling…………………………………………………………………………..164 Paradox and Motion………………………………………………………………169 CHAPTER 6: HUMANS IN MOTION…………………………………………………..175 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………….189 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………………...…190 iv Acknowledgements Completing this dissertation has in no way been a solitary endeavor for me and I am deeply grateful for all the people who have given of their time, their expertise, and their encouragement throughout this process. I am thankful for my committee, Dr. Susan Wessel, Dr. Robin Darling Young, and Dr. William McCarthy for their assistance, particularly for Dr. Wessel’s direction and guidance throughout the process. Of a number of mentors who encouraged me in my pursuit of doctoral work, two stand out. Dr. Carroll Osburn employed me as a research assistant as an undergraduate, giving me valuable advice and opportunities for future graduate work and Dr. Jeff Childers was a mentor in navigating both academic goals and life in general. I am grateful for many friends and family members who helped in countless ways. I am especially thankful to my in-laws, Bob and Belinda Harmon for their encouragement and eagerness to celebrate small accomplishments along the way, not to mention for many hours of babysitting. My parents, Tim and Tanya Stidham have been a constant support, instilling in me the confidence to begin doctoral work and the encouragement to finish it, not to mention (again) the countless hours of babysitting. For my children, Owen and Cora, who were born at different stages of this program, the joy of watching you change each day, learn and grow and question the world you live in has convinced me of Gregory’s wisdom in seeing the good in these things. For my husband, David Todd Harmon, this dissertation simply would not have been possible without your endless support and assurance. I don’t know if you knew what you were getting into when we moved to Washington D.C. to start this program, but you have been with me every step of the way and I am profoundly grateful for your presence. v Introduction Following the deaths of his brother, Basil, and sister, Macrina, Gregory of Nyssa wrote with concern for the entire scope of the human experience, particularly what happens after death. In Dialogus de anima et resurrectione he contemplated doubts about the resurrection and near the end of this treatise summarized human nature in this way: “Who does not know that human nature is like a stream which is always moving from birth to death and that it ceases to move when it ceases to exist? But this movement is not an exchange of place, for nature does not go beyond itself, but it goes forward through change.”1 He goes on in this passage to compare human nature to a flame, appearing to stay the same, but in reality constantly moving and changing, making it impossible for one to touch the same flame twice. The human person is like a stream and a flame, he says, because although appearing to remain the same person, in reality they are constantly changing and moving forward. The concept of motion (κίνησις) arises frequently in Gregory’s discussions on human nature. In De hominis opificio, his major anthropological treatise, he follows Aristotle in categorizing all creation, including humanity, as the offspring of rest and motion. Metaphors of motion in Gregory’s corpus extend to physical, mental, and spiritual aspects of being human. In addition to describing human nature in terms of motion, Gregory uses metaphors of motion to describe human activities such as thought, language, and emotion. He describes sin as downward motion and virtue as upward motion. Hope and memory are guides in the spiritual motion toward 1 Dialogus de anima et resurrectione PG 46.141.8 (FOTC 58.262). Hereafter De anima. Translations of De anima come from Virginia Woods Callahan, trans., St. Gregory Ascetical Works, The Fathers of the Church 58 (Washington D. C.: CUA Press, 1967). In consulting this and other works of Gregory, I have made extensive use of the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae® Digital Library. Ed. Maria Pantelia. University of California, Irvine. http://www.tlg.uci.edu.proxycu.wrlc.org (accessed October 16, 2015). 1 2 the good and after death, the soul continues in infinite motion toward God. In short, every aspect of the human experience is infused with the concept of motion. Kinesis (κίνησις) was a significant philosophical term long before Gregory, being a central term in Aristotle’s exploration of physics. In studying dynamics, Aristotle attempted to organize various types of motion into a framework, beginning many ancient discussions about the nature of movement on earth and in the heavens.2 One such discussion centered around Aristotle’s theory of natural motion which assumed that every natural body has a resting place that it will move toward unless something blocks its way. Heavy materials, earth for instance, move downward and light ones, such as fire, naturally move upward.3 Whether an object has an internal source of motion is a litmus test for whether or not it is a natural object; artificial things require an external source of motion. Upholding this view required some careful explanation because he also upheld the view of Plato that all things in motion must be moved by something.4 Natural versus externally produced motion became a point of discussion prior to Gregory, with Galen denying the principle that objects must have an external source of motion and Alexander of Aphrodisias reasserting it.5 While Gregory did not formally weigh in on the issue, he borrowed much of his view of natural motion to Aristotle, as will be discussed later. Another significant