Saint Gregory of Nyssa: a great figure in mariology

Today we celebrate a notable figure in Mariology: Saint Gregory of Nyssa, a fourth-century thinker and mystic. At a time when the Arian heresy, which denied Christ’s divinity through the propagation of Nicene dispositions, was rampant, Gregory emerged. This Father of the Church proclaimed Christ’s full divinity, his eternity, and his consubstantiality with the Father. In contrast, Eunomius of Cyzicus promoted the Arian heresy through insidious rationalism, and the teachings of Apolinarius, which refused to acknowledge the incarnate Word as possessing a normal and complete human nature.In the face of these attacks on both the true humanity and true divinity, a development of Mariological truth was necessary, which Saint Gregory was able to undertake. A monk of ascetic life, Gregory was consecrated Bishop of Nyssa in 371, where he vigorously opposed Arianism. In 376, a synod of Arian bishops deposed him as bishop with the connivance of the imperial court, but this affront was short-lived, as Gregory was restored to his episcopate in Nyssa upon the death of Emperor Valens in 378. In 381, the Council of Constantinople took place, where he played a decisive role, and later in his last year of life, he participated in the Synod of Constantinople in 394.Regarding the Virgin Mary, Gregory expounds his mariological thought in a homily on Christ’s birth, in his treatise on Virginity, in his commentary on the Song of Songs, in the life of Saint Gregory Thaumaturge, and in his polemical works against Eunomius and Apollinarius.The author’s mariological thought, in general, is developed to safeguard the hypostatic union of the human and divine natures of the incarnate Word. Apollinarianism affirmed that in the human nature of the Word, there existed only a body devoid of a rational soul, as this depended solely on the divine Word. To safeguard the perfect and complete humanity of Christ, Gregory will insist on Mary’s true and real motherhood and writes:«All those who hold the true faith, I also declare to believe that He is both God and man. Not as Apollinarius thinks. Indeed, the reality is not as he sees it, that divinity becomes something earthly and humanity something celestial. On the contrary, the power of the Most High, through the Holy Spirit, covered the human nature, and it was thus formed. This means that the portion of flesh was molded in the immaculate Virgin. This is why He who was born is called the Son of the Most High. Indeed, the divine power makes possible a certain affinity of the human nature with God, while the flesh makes possible for God a certain kinship with humanity.» (PG 45, 1136).From Gregory’s words, we can deduce that the true incarnation in the womb of the Virgin Mary corresponds to the true divine motherhood. In this sense, the title Theotokos is a criterion of orthodoxy, as Nisian says:”If we proclaim loudly and bear witness that Christ is the power and wisdom of God (cf. 1 Cor 1:24), ever unchanging, ever incorruptible. If he who dwells in a mutable and corruptible body does not remain defiled, but he who is defiled is purified, what does this new altar raised against us mean? Perhaps because we proclaim a different Jesus? Or do we indicate another? Do we proclaim a different Scripture? Has anyone dared to call the mother of a man the Virgin Theotokos, as we have heard some irreverently speak?” (PG 46, 1024).As we see from Gregory’s testimony, the fight is fierce because it does not respect Sacred Scripture. The human nature of Christ was not a pre-existing reality but was assumed in the womb of Mary and possessed the requirements of a human being joined to body and soul. Furthermore, the Son of Mary is the new man, the perfect one, as the Nicene Creed affirms:“When the Holy Spirit came upon the Virgin and the power of the Most High covered her with its shadow, a new man was formed within her. This one was called new because he was fashioned from God not according to human habit, but differently, so that he might become a dwelling place of God not made by human hands, since the Most High does not dwell in works made by hands, that is, humanly devised works. Then wisdom built for herself a house (Prov 9:1) and power formed within an image, like a seal. Then divine power mingled itself with both elements of human nature. I mean the soul and the body, equally united to each. Both these elements are subject to death because of disobedience: the soul’s death consists in the separation from true life. For the body, it is corruption and dissolution. Therefore death must be expelled by the conjunction of these two elements with life. And just as, therefore, divinity united itself to both elements of man, both these elements manifested notable signs of a superior nature” (PG 46, 316).As we can predict, St. Gregory, when he speaks of “signs of a superior nature,” is referring to the miracle of Mary’s virginity. The virgin birth of Jesus had been foreshadowed in the messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. Obviously, the prophecy of Isaiah was not forgotten when the Nicene illustrates:“For the body, it is corruption and dissolution.”“Listen to Isaiah who proclaims: ‘A child is born to us. A Son is given to us’ (Is 9:6). Learn from the same prophet how the child was born, how a Son was given to us. Was it in accordance with the laws of nature? The prophet denies it. The Master of nature does not obey the laws of nature. But how was the child born? Tell me. The prophet answers: ‘Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel’ (Is 7:14), which translated means: God with us. What a wonderful event! The Virgin becomes a mother and remains virgin! Notice this novelty in nature. All other women, while remaining virgins, do not become mothers. When one becomes a mother, she does not preserve her virginity. Here, on the contrary, both terms are attributed to the same person. It is the same woman who, in fact, presents herself as Mother and as Virgin, since neither virginity was an obstacle to her childbirth, nor did motherhood eliminate her virginity. It was indeed fitting that the Redeemer, who entered human life to make us all incorruptible, should himself have his origin in an incorruptible generation.” (PG 46, 1133-1136)

Many more Mariological writings can be found in Saint Gregory’s works. However, the one that had the greatest impact from a liturgical-iconographic perspective was the interpretation of the Old Testament theophany of the burning bush in a Marian key. Thus, Bishop of Nicea speaks: