8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

1/45

\ Vigiliae'^" Christianae

BRILL Vigiliae Chnstianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 www.brill.nl/vc

Christian Soteriologe and Christian Platonism:Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, and the Biblical and

Philosophical Basis of the Doctrine of Apokatastasis1

Ilaria L.E. RamelliCatholic University ofthe SacredHeartof Jesus, Milan, Italyilaria. ramelli@virgilio. it

AbstractPauls statement that God will be all in all and other NT and OT passages are taken by

Origen and by Gregory of Nyssa as the scriptural basis oftheir eschatological doctrine

of apokatastasis and eventual universal salvation. At the same time, their doctrine rests

(1) on philosophical arguments mainly deriving from Platonism (Gregorys De animaetresurrectione is deeply influenced by Platonism both in form and in content, and so is

Origen, although both are Christians first and Platonists second), and (2) on the alle

gorical exegesis ofScripture, another heritage ofHellenistic culture: Origen was very

well acquainted with the Stoic and Platonic allegorical interpretations of Greek myths.

Keywordsallegory, relationship between philosophy and Christianity, doctrine of evil, purification

of the soul, resurrection, eschatology

The structure of the argument that I shall endeavour to develop is the fol

lowing: (1) Paul's statement that God will be all in all and other NT and

OT passages are taken by Origen and Gregory of Nyssa as the scriptural

basis of their eschatological doctrine of apokatastasis and eventual univer

sal salvation. (2) This biblical foundation often passes through the alle-

l)

This paper was originally delivered at the SBL Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, 19-22November 2005, Unit: Corpus Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti. I am very grateful to the

participants who with their questions contributed to its improvement especially Margaret

http://www.brill.nl/vchttp://www.brill.nl/vc

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

2/45

314 ILE. RamelliI Vigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313-356

gorical exegesis of Scripture, a significant heritage of Hellenistic culture:

Origen was very well acquainted with the Stoic and Platonic allegoricalinterpretations of Greek myths, already applied to the Bible by Philo and

Clement of Alexandria. (3) At the same time, their doctrine rests on philo

sophical arguments mainly deriving from Platonism, an even weightier

heritage of Hellenistic culture: e.g. Gregorys De anima etresurrectione is

deeply influenced by Platonism both in form and in content, and so is

Origen, especially in his De principiis, although both are Christians first

and Platonists second.

1. The Scriptural Foundation of Apokatastasis in Origen and Gregory

Origen s exposition of the doctrine of apokatastasis, especially in De prin

cipiis, but also elsewhere, is always supported by scriptural quotations, and

his arguments are grounded in the Bible and structured around it, in an

intimate logical relationship. Many of his arguments and quotations

confirming them will be taken up by Gregory of Nyssa.2

Among all scriptural evidence, ICor 15:21-28 seems to be absolutelyessential in Origen s viewas it will later be in Gregory sand, whenever

he discusses apokatastasis, it is often quoted, both entirely and partially, in

particular in the final statement, that God will be all in all.3

This is

2) See my essay on the apokatastasis in Origen and Gregory in my Gregono di Nissa.Sull'anima e la resurrezione,Milan 2007; history of the apokatastasis in my Apocatastasi,forthcoming in Milan. The bibliography on this subject, especially for Origen, would be

impressively wide: I refer to my book for complete documentation; here I only mention e.g.W. van Laak, Allvershnung, Sinzig 1990 for Origen, and M. Ludlow, Universal Salvation,Oxford 2000, for Gregory; also C. Lenz, "Apokatastasis," in Reallexikon fr Antike undChrstentum, I, Stuttgart 1950, 510-516; R. Parry-C. Partridge, eds., Universal Salvation?,Carlisle 2003 with my review in Stylos 14 (2005) 206-208, and some recent entries by L.-F.Mateo-Seco in Diccionario de san Gregono de Nisa, eds. Id.-G. Maspero, Burgos 2006 (ofwhich an enriched English edition is also expected to appear): "Escatologia," 357-378;"Purificacin ultraterrena," 765-769; "Soteriologia," 803-812; P. Tzamalikos, Origen: Philosophy of History andEschatology, Leiden 2007.3)

On early Christian interpretation of ICor, including this very important passage, nowsee J.L. Kovacs, / Corinthians Interpreted by Early Christian Commentators, Grand Rapids2005, 233-260 (my review in Archaeus 10,3 [2006] 166-167); see also E. Schendel,

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

3/45

ILE. Ramelli IVigiline Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 315

extremely important for Origers contention, because it is connected with

the final elimination of evil, an assumption that turns out to be completely

consistent with his metaphysical doctrine of the non-substantiality of evil

from the ontologica! point of view.4

In 3,6,2-3 Origen reflects on ICor 15,

28 and draws some consequences from it: When God becomes "all in

all", we cannot admit evil, lest God may be found in evil. That God is said

to be "all in all" means that he is all also in each individual... in the sense

that everything the rational intelligence, freed from any dirtiness of sin and

purified from any taint of evil, will be able to perceive, to grasp and to

think, all this will be God..., and so God will be all for this intelligence...,

because evil will not exist any more: for such intelligence, God, not touched

by evil, is all... After removing every sense ofevil, only he who is the sole

good God will become all for the creature returned to a state of soundness

and purity... and not only in few or in many, but in all God will be all, when

at last there will be no more death, nor deaths sting, nor evil, most

definitely: then God will truly be all in all. Here, as he often does else

where, Origen even offers a quotation inside another: deaths sting, which is

sin, is a reminiscence of ICor 15:55-56.5

In the same passage of ICor 15:15-28, Christ's victory over his enemies

is repeatedly mentioned, especially in w. 24-27: this is another point taken

by Origen as important evidence of the doctrine of universal apokatastasis.

In v. 25,

, there is a quotation of Ps 109:1 LXX [110:1 Hebr.]

(quoted in turn in Heb 10:13),6

Sede ad dexteram meam..., where the

dignity of the throne is connected to victory over enemies, which is

achieved by the Lord for my Lord {dixit Dominus Domino meo...); in v.

27 the concept is repeated and strengthened:

ltimo," in Arche e Telos. L'antropologia di Origene e di Gregorio di Nissa, eds. U. Bianchi-H.Crouzel, Milano 1981, 58-117; H. Crouzel, "Quand le Fils transmet le Royaume Dieu

son Pre," Studia Missionalia 33 (1984) 359-384; R. Roukema, "La rsurrection des morts

dans l'interprtation orignienne de 1 Corinthiens 15," in La rsurrection chez les Pres, Stras-

bourg-Turnhout 2003, 161-177,praes. 166-169 on ICor 15:24-28.4)

For this central doctrine in Origen and Gregory see, with ample documentation, the

philosophical essay in my Gregorio di Nissa; a synthesis is to be found in A.A. Mosshammer,

"Mai," in Diccionario de san Gregorio, 583-591.5) , , ; .

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

4/45

316 ILE. RamelliI Vigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

. Origen quotes Ps 109:1 both in Princ. 1,6,1 and in his Com

mentary on the GospelofJohn, 6,295-296: in the latterpassage he sees in t

biblical sentence evidence for his doctrine offinal restoration ofall. He

interprets the words ofthe Psalm as addressed bythe Father to the Lord

ofeach ofus and the submission of all his enemies as achieved when the

last enemy, Death, will be defeated and all evil annihilated, according to

the fundamental metaphysical theory of non-substantiality ofevil. Univer

sal submission to Christ, including the destruction ofdeath, is also the

theme of ICor 15:26 ( ) and its

context, an important passage often quoted byOrigen in defence ofhis

theoryofapokatastasis and universal salvation, and joined to Ps 109:1 inour passage ofthe Commentary on John, which is a patchwork ofbiblical

quotations, especially from Paul: The Fatheris good and the Son is the

image ofhis goodness [Wis 7:26; Mk 10:18]. God, however, although

he benefits the world byreconciling it to himself in Christ [2Cor 5:19],

while it had become his enemy as a consequence ofsin, distributes his

benefits accordingto a plan, not putting his enemies as a stool underhis

feet all at once. In fact, the Fathersays to him who is the Lord ofeach of

us: "Take your seat to my right, until I put your enemies as a stool foryourfeet" [Ps 109:1 ; Hebr 10:13], which will occurwhen the last enemy, Death,

will be annihilated byhim [ICor 15:26]. So, if we grasp what it means to

be subjected to Christ, especiallyin the light of this passage: "And when all

will be submitted to him, he himself, the Son, will submit to him who has

subjected everything to him" [ICor 15:28], then we shall understand

God's lamb, who takes up the sin ofthe world, in a wayworthy ofthe

goodness ofthe God ofthe universe.

The basis ofsuch exegesis consists in the identification ofthe submission ofall to Christ, maintained byPaul in ICor 15:5-28, with the salva

tion ofall, as Origen states in Princ. 1,6,1: Quae ergo estsubiectio, qua

Christo omnia debentesse subiectaiEgo arbitrorquia haec ipsa qua nos qu

optamus eiesse subiecti, qua subiectieisuntetapostolietomnes sanci

secutisunt Christum. Subiectionis enim nomen, qua Christo subicimur

salutem quae a Christo estindicatsubiectorum, a theme that will be deve

oped byGregory in his In illud: Tunc et ipse Filius, in perfect continuit

with Origen, bymeans ofthe same quotations and exactlythe same interpretation, as we shall see. The persistent presence ofthe same interpretation

d d t i i th C t th G l f J h itt

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

5/45

ILE Ramelli IVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 317

seen by him as wholly compatible with the doctrine of free will,7

and that

he thought it was definitely grounded in Scripture, both in the Old and

the New Testament, which he considered as strictly joined and forming

one and the same body.8

The same Pauline passages as a basis, and the same interpretation of

universal submission as salvation, are to be found in Princ. 3,5,6: the

only-begotten son of God, Logos and Wisdom of the Father, must reign

until he has put his enemies under his feet and destroyed the last enemy,

Death, embracing in himself, at the end of the world, all those whom he

subjects to the Fatherandwho come to salvation thanks to him... This is the

meaning of what the Apostle says about him: "When all is submitted to

him, then the Son himselfwill submit to him who has subjected every

thing to him, so that God may be all in all" . Among the several quota

tions, ICor 15:28 is the most emphasized, and in fact it is one of the most

important passages, and most often quoted by Origen,9 in defence of his

theory of universal salvation,10 which is implied in universal submission:

Origen goes on {ibid. 7): as the Sons submission to the Father means

perfect reintegration of all creation [sc. universal apokatastasis], so the sub

mission of his enemies to the Son means salvation of his subjects andreintegration of the lost. Origen carries on his interpretation of Pauls

passage in 8, explaining that this submission will take place in certain

ways and times and according to precise rules: the entire world will submit

to the Father, not as a result of violence, nor by necessity that compels sub

jection, but thanks to words, reason, teaching, emulation of the best, good

norms, and also threats, when deserved and apt... Providence operates in

7)See my "La coerenza della soteriologia origeniana: dalla polemica contro il determin

ismo gnostico all'universale restaurazione escatologica," in Pagani e cristiani atta ricerca detta

salvezza. Atti delXXXIVIncontro di Studiosi dell'Antichit Cristiana, Roma, Augustinianum,

5-7V.2005, Roma 2006, 661-688.8)

Documentation in my "Origen and the Stoic Allegorical Tradition," delivered at the

Annual Meeting of the SBL, San Antonio, TX, November 20-23 2004, Invigilata Lucernis

28 (2006).9)

The occurrences of ICor 15:28 in Origen are listed in Biblia Patristica, III, Paris 1980,

404 (for 15:27-28) and 405 (for 15:28). The writing in which this passage most frequentlyoccurs is Deprincipiis: 1,6,1 and 2,3,7 for ICor 15:27-28 and 1,7,5; 2,3,5; 3,5,6; 3,5,7;

3,5,7+; 3,6,1; 3,6,2; 3,6,3; 3,6,6; 3,6,8; 3,6,9 and other six occurrences for ICor 15:28.

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

6/45

318 I.L.E. RamelliIVigiline Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

favour ofeach one, safeguarding the rational creatures' free will.11 Origen

is very attentive to the problem of free will, and, as Gregory too will do,

explains that the universal submission to which Paul refers will not be

slavery, but salvation thanks to everyone's free adhesion to the Good, which

will occur sooner or later. The interpretation of the final submission to

Christ as salvation was repeated by Origen elsewhere too, in the very same

terms.12 This subjection that means salvation is universal, as confirmed by

many other passages in Origen, always based on Paul's statements, espe

ciallyPrinc. 2,3,3 recalling ICor 15:15-28: our condition will be incor

poreal one day, and if we admit this, since all will be subjected to Christ,

necessarily this condition will extend to all, to whom the subjection to

Christ is referred. And all those who are subjected to Christ in the end will

be also submitted to the Father, to whom Christ will hand his reign. If

the salvation of rational beings has to be universal, it must also include all

fallen angels: to account for and to strengthen this claim, Origen has

recourse to Phil 2:10-11, a passage that will be used by Gregory for the

same argument, and that affirms the final adhesion of all creatures to

Christ, including those who are in the underworld, and, since this submis

sion means salvation, it follows that all creatures, angels, humans, anddemons, will be saved. Origen, in fact, argues in Princ. 4,6,2: I refer to all

those who, bending their knee in Jesus' name, have given a sign of their

submission, the heavenly, earthly, and infernal creatures. These three des

ignations indicate the sum ofall created beings, i.e. all those who had one

and the same origin, but, differently driven each one by his impulses, have

n )Cf. Princ. 3,5,8: HowGod's Providence operates for each one, safeguarding all rational

creatures' free will... why and in which occasion all this happens, only God knows, andhis only-begotten Son, thanks to whom all has been created and reintegrated [Jn 1:3], and

the Spirit, through whom all is sanctified, who proceeds from the Father, to whom is glory,

etc. . See also, e.g., Princ. 3,3,5 on Providence and free will, teaching and persuasion and

differentiation of times and ways ofsalvation for each one, including the demons, in apo-

katastasis; ibid. 2,1,2; Horn, in Lev. 9,8, where Origen affirms that Providence takes care of

each being, including the smallest; it is minutissima et subtilissima. Cf. De Prov. 2,9,8

3,1,15.17, where Providence is said to be .12)

E.g. Comm. in Matth. S. 8: Howthe Saviours enemies are put by the Father as a stoo

for his feet, we ought to understand in a worthyway, according to God's goodness. For we

should not believe that God puts Christ's enemies as a stool for his feet in the same wayas

enemies are put under the feet of the earthly kings, who exterminate them. Instead, God

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

7/45

ILE. RamelliIVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 319

been distr ibuted in different orders according to their merits, since in all of

them the Good was not present in ontological form, as it is in God. For,according to Origen, each one's condition is determ ined by his own respon

sibility. Originally, all were created absolutely identical; then, they

were differentiated into angels, hu man s, and dem ons because of their free

choices, according to the movements of their minds and wills.13

In Pnnc. 1,6 Origen, insisting on a concept of reditus that seems to

prefigure the Neoplatonic idea of to unity, after and

toward multiplicity,14

but also quoting Is 65:17 and Paul, depicts

the long future ages in which the dispersion and division of the one and

sole Principle15

will be reintegrated in to one and the same likeness... There

will be "a new heaven and a new earth"... for those who tend to that end

of blessedness, about which it is said that also the enemies will be sub

jected, and God will be "all in all" , with the further reminiscence of lCor

15:25-28. In Princ. 2,3,7, too, this assertion of Paul seals the final perfec

tion of apokatastasis. The quotation of lCor 15:28, together with other

references to the Psalms and the Gospels, concludes yet anotherpassage in

Princ. 2,3,5, where Origen states that apokatastasis will come at the end of

all , whe n everything will be brought back to absolute unity and

God will be all in all.16

And the same quotation marks the passage from

13)Detailed discussion in my "La coerenza della soteriologia origeniana" and my "La colpa

antecedente come ermeneutica del male in sede storico-religiosa e nei testi biblici," opening

paper delivered at the Congress of the Associazione Biblica Italiana, Settimana Biblica,

Ciampino, IlCarmelo, 5-7.IX.2005, forthcoming in Ricerche Storico-Bibliche.14)

Documentation in my"Uno-molti," in Encichpediafilosofica,new edition, dir. V. Mel

chiorre, XII, Milan 2006, 11911-11912.15)

This idea of oneness obviouslyis a Platonic, and especiallyNeoplatonic, ideal, which Ori

gen transmitted to Gregory of Nyssa, too: see G. Maturi, "Reductio ad unum: l'escatologia di

Gregorio di Nissa sullo sfondo della metafisica plotiniana," Adamantius 10 (2004) 167-193.16)

But ifthere is anything superior to (so that can be found in the crea

tures, it is true, but also in other things that are superior to visible creatures, which will be

the case in the , when all comes to a perfect end), one should probably

understand that the situation in which there will be the ofall things will

be something more than the . I am induced to think so bythe authority ofScripture,

which says: "in the and further" [Mich 4:5: ]. The factthat it says "further" lets us understand that it means more than one . And, please,

consider whether the Saviour's words "I want them to be with me where I am" and "As

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

8/45

320 ILE. RamettiIVigiline Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

image to likeness and then from likeness to unityin the progression

(at the beginning and in this life) => (thanks to moral improve ment in this or the future life) => (total unityin final apokatastasis when

God will be all in all)17

in Princ. 3,6,1, where the quotation from Paul is

joined to several from John, on likeness and unitywith God.18

The idea of

likeness and unityin apokatastasis, after all , is joined to the quota

tion of ICor 15:25 and 28 also in Princ. 1,6 infine.19

And the whole pas

sage of ICor 15:24-28 is referred to in Princ. 3,6,9 in support of the view

of universal instruction, on the part of the angels and then of Christ, and

consequent salvation.20

ICor 15:28 also seals the universal perfection of

eventual apokatastasis in Princ. 2,3,7: We shall be able to live without a

bodywhen everything will be subject to Christ and, through Christ, to

God the Father, and "God will be all in all" .

On apokatastasis as superior to and also see Princ. 2,3,1. Here clearly

means "ages", not "eternity": for a complete surveyof and in Origen, Gregory

ofNyssa, and classical and Patristic literature, and the philosophical development of the

two concepts in Greek and Christian authors, see I. Ramelli-D. Konstan, Termsfor Eternity, Piscataway, NJ 2007. For the "ethical" conception of the in Origen, conceived

as the intervals through which the rational creatures choose for good or evil and receive

reward or instruction, until all ofthem will freelychoose for the Good and the will

come to an end in the ofthe apokatastasis, see P. Tzamalikos, Origen: Cosmolog

andOntology of Time, Leiden-Boston 2006, 272-070, with my review forthcoming in

Rivista diFilosofiaNeoscolastica 99 (2007).17) For these stages see my philosophical essayin Gregorio diNissa.18) This concept has been expressed in the clearest and most plain way bythe apostle John,

in these terms: "Children, we do not yet know what we shall be, but when this is revealed

us", and he is certainly referring to the Saviour, "we shall be similar to him* [ljohn 3:2],

where he assuredlyindicates the end ofall things... and expresses the hope ofbeing similar

to God, which will be granted thanks to excellence of merits. Origenfinallyquotes Jesus'

words in John 17:24 and 21: Father, I want them to be with me where I am, and: as

you and I are one and the same thing. Here, as Origen notes, it seems that likeness too, so

to say, perfects itself, and that there is a passage from likeness to unity, undoubtedly because

in the end "Godis allin all"[1 Cor 15:28]... all creation will be set free from the slavery of

corruption when it has received the gloryof the Son ofGod, anduGodisallin all".

19)... long future in which the dispersion and division ofthe one and only Prin

ciple will be reintegratedinto one andthe same end andlikeness... for those who tend to tend ofblessedness whereit is said"the enemies also will be submitted" and "God will

be all in all" [ICor 15:25 28]

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

9/45

ILE. RamelliIVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 321

Another connection in which the references to Pauls passage of1 Cor 15:22-

28 buttress logical arguments is that ofthe order ofuniversal reintegration,depending on each one's merits, as is clear from Princ. 1,7,5, quoting lCor

15:24.28,21 and in Princ. 3,6,6, quoting lCor 15:26.28 and displaying,

once again, the theme of final unity: Every being will be reintegrated

in order to be one and the same thing

[John 17:21], and "God will be all in all" [lCor 15:28]; now, this will not

occur in one instant, but slowly and gradually, through infinite ,

because correction and purification will take place litde by little and sin

gly... Thus, through innumerable orders constituted by those who make

progress, and, after being enemies, become reconciled with God, we reach

the last enemy, Death, so that this too may be destroyed and there may be

no enemy left [lCor 15:26] . The idea that some creatures will make rapid

progress whereas others will proceed very slowly, which produces a large

varietyof situations, is expressed by Origen also in Princ. 3,1,17 and 3,5,8,

where he stresses that submission, that is, salvation, must be wanted freely

by each rational creature, not imposed on all automatically: so, the times

and ways will vary according to each one s merits and spiritual situation.

The question of the order of final reintegration is also faced in Comm.

in Io. 32,26-39, on the basis of lCor 15:22 and other scriptural quota

tions. Origen starts from John 13:3, according to which the Father has

delivered everything into Jesus' hands, interpreted by Origen in the

strongest sense, in parallel with other biblical passages, such as Ps 109:1,

from which Origen deduces that the Father has handed even the enemies

to Christ. The second scriptural passage quoted by Origen in support of

his faith, in chaps. 26-27, is lCor 15:22: As all die in Adam, so all will be

vivified in Christ: Origen reads this passage with anti-Gnostic aims: heconfirms the recompense of merits for each one, quoting the immediately

following section: each one in his own order.22

A little later, he repeats

21 )At the end ofthe world... some souls, due to theirinertness, will move on more slowly,

others, instead, will fly swiftly owing to their zeal. Since all have free will and can freely

acquire virtues and vices, some will be found in much worse conditions than now, while

others will attain a bettercondition, because different movements and inclinations in both

directions will bring different conditions... When, subsequently, Christ has handedhisreign to the Father[lCor 15:24], then these living beings too, who had alreadybecome part

of Christ's reign will be handed to the Father together with the rest Thus when God will

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

10/45

3 2 2 ILE. RamelliI Vigline Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

that the restoration will be realized in different times, depending on each

one's merits, and in this sense he interprets John 13:36, where Jesus tellsPeter that he cannot follow him in that moment, but that he will do it

later. Anyway, in the end every creature will be restored and every enemy

destroyed, even Death (chaps. 37-39).

Another important scriptural quotation connected to philosophical

argument by Origen, and then by Gregory, is ICor 15:42-44, concerning

the character of the risen body,23

called by Paul . Origen

recalls it in Princ. 3,6,6: The Apostle clearly says that the risen dead will

not be given other bodies, but theywill receive the same bodies they had

when alive, and even better. For he declares: "an animal body is sown, a

spiritual bodywill rise; it is sown in corruptibility, it will rise in incorrupt

ibility; it is sown in weakness, it will rise in power; it is sown in ignominy,

it will rise in glory" >>.24

These are only some few examplesnotably, those later taken up by

Gregory ofNyssa more closelyfrom the many we could give, indeed, but

I thinkthey are enough to provide an overview of the method followed by

Origen in his arguments in support of apokatastasis, and of the impor

tance of Scripture in them, above all Pauls witness.25

power, as far as the last enemy, Death (chaps. 30-31), basing his claims on ICor 15:24-26:

He will hand the Kingdom to God the Father, after annihilating every power... for it is

necessarythat he reigns until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be

annihilated will be Death, the passage ending with . In chaps.

32-34 Origen insists on the submission to the Logos even on the part ofdeath.23 )

For the question ofa material or spiritual body for the risen dead in Origen see my Accatas

tasiand my philosophical essayin myGregorio diNissan Ead., "Threats, Punishment, and Hope:

Jeremiah Interpreted by Origen to Support the Doctrine of Apokatastasis," delivered at the

AnnualMeetingofthe SBL, Washington, 18-21 November 2006, forthcoming, with references.24 )

Also in the preface, 5, Origen quotes ICor 15:42.25 )

Paul was himself, to some extent, hellenized, although Christianity's heart, Jesus' salvific

cross and resurrection, is equally a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles ,

as Paul himself states in ICor 1:23, according to the NRSV; Gr.:

, , . Vulg.: nos autem

praedicamus Christum crucifixum, Iudaeisquidem scandalumtgentibus autem stultitiam. See

ample documentation in my "Philosophen und Prediger, pagane und christliche weise

Mnner. Der Apostel Paulus," in E. Amato, . Borg, R. Burri, S. Fornaro, I. Ramelli, J.Schamp, Dio von Prusa: Der Philosoph und sein Bild, Gttingen 2007, chap. 4. The NT

itself although it certainly has deep Jewish roots arose in a profoundly Hellenized world

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

11/45

ILE. Ramelli IVigiliae Christian 61 (2007) 313 -356 323

Gregory in his De anima etresurrectione?6a philosophical writing of the

most philosophical-minded of the Cappadocians27

and one of the main

rmischen Kaiser, Mnchen 1998; Id.-U. Victor-U. Stingelin, Antike Kultur undNeues Testament, Basel 2003; T.H. Ulbricht, "Preface," in Early Chrisranity andClassical Culture.Comparative Studies in Honor ofA.]. Malherbe, eds. J.T. Fitzgerald-Id.-L.M. White, Leiden-

Boston 2003, 1-12, and the whole volume, with my review article: "La ricerca attuale sui

rapporti tra il primo Cristianesimo e la cultura classica/' Espacio, Tiempo y Forma, ser. , 17

(2006) 223-238. For knowledge of the NT among pagan cultivated persons see e.g. G.

Rinaldi, La Bibbia deipagani, I-II, Bologna 1998; my / romanzi antichie ilCristianesimo:

contesto e contatti, Madrid 2001; Ead., "The Ancient Novels and the NT: Possibile Contacts,"AncientNarrative 5 (2005), 41-68; Ead.,"Indizi della conoscenza del Nuovo Testamento nei

romanzieri antichi e in altri autori pagani del I sec. d.C," in // Contributo dette scienze storiche

atta interpretazione delNuovo Testamento, eds. E. Dal Covolo-R. Fusco, Citt del Vaticano

2005, 146-169; Ead., Un quindicennio di studi sulla prima diffusione dell'Annuncio cris

tiano e la sua prima ricezione in ambito pagano," in E. Innocenti-I. Ramelli, Ges a Roma.

Commento altesto lucano degli Atti degli Apostoli, Roma 20063, 277-518.26)

PG 46,12-160. New edition, translation, commentary, with critical essays and bibliog

raphy on Gregorys De anima in my Gregorio di Nissa. Sull'anima e Uresurrezione. All thetranslations ofDe anima (as those ofIn illud: Tunc et Ipse Filius) here quoted are mine and

based on my edition, with textual critical notes (for some criteria on which it is based see

my "Il contributo della versione copta all'edizione del De anima etresurrectione di Gregorio

di Nissa," Exemplaria Classica n.s. 10 [2006] 191-243).27)

An overview of the debate on the relationship between philosophy and Christianity in

Gregory is provided e.g. by A. Le Boulluec, "Corporeit ou individualit? La condition

finale des ressuscites selon Grgoire de Nysse," Augustinianum 35 (1995) 307-326; E. Per-

oli, "Gregory of Nyssa and the Neoplatonic Doctrine of the Soul," Vigiliae Christianae 51

(1997) 117-139: a complete survey and discussion is provided in the philosophical essay in

my Gregorio di Nissa. Suttanima e h resurrezione. E.g. J. Danilou, PUtonisme et thologiemystique, Paris 1953

2and M. Pellegrino, "Il Platonismo di san Gregorio Nisseno nel dial

ogo intorno all'anima e alla resurrezione," Rivista di Filosofia Neoscolastica 30 (1938) 437-

474, consider Gregory a fundamentally and consistently Christian thinker who harmonized

Platonism and Christianity; J. Rist, "Christianisme et antiplatonisme: un bilan," in Hel

lnisme et Christianisme, eds. M. Narcy-E. Rebillard, Villeneuve d'Ascq 2004, 153-170

states that he and the other Platonic fathers consciously assumed the philosophical princi

ples and used them to provide Christian faith with a philosophical foundation, to demon

strate their own coherence and criticize the adversaries; P. Chuvin, "Christianisation et

rsistance dans les cultes traditionnels," ibid. 15-34 too supports a deep and fruitful con

ciliation between Christianity and classical philosophy. Other scholars, instead, emphasize

contradictions in Gregory as a Platonist, as H. Cherniss, The Pktonism ofGregory of Nyssa,New York1971

2, who deems Gregory a philosopher more than a religious man, as Macrina

forced him to become; Ch Apostolopoulos Phaedo Christianus Frankfurt a M 1986

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

12/45

3 24 ILE. Ramelli I Vigtliae Christiane* 61 (2007) 313-356

works of his in which he discusses the question of apokatastasis,28 together

with In illud: Tunc et ipse Filius and some additional sections of otherworks, quotes several passages from the Bible, and principally from Paul,to support his view. Apart from the Lazarus episode in Luke s Gospel, withwhich we shall deal later, we can recall many instances in the discourses ofMacrina, Gregorys sister and the chief character in this dialogue, the otherbeing Gregory himself, who often contradicts her purely to reinforce thedialectic structure.

A key quotation, in 72B and again in 136A, is Phil 2:9-10,29 on theeventual bending of all knees in heaven, on earth and under the earth beforeChrist, a quotation that appears in all periods of Gregorys production. In72B Gregory sees there an allusion to the ultimate salvation ofall rationalcreatures, angels, humans, andas already Origen maintainedeven daemons, who, after long cycles of ages, when evil will have vanished andthere will remain nothing else than the Good, will return to God andsubmit to Christ.30 For Gregory, as already for Origen, the underlying idea

(1987) 191-197; J. Danilou-M. Altenburger-U. Schramm, Hrsg., Gregor von Nyssa und diePhilosophie, Leiden 1976, and many other studies that I mention in my Gregorio di Nissa.28) For complete documentation on apokatastasis in Gregory see J. Danilou, L'apocatastasechez Saint Grgoire de Nysse, Rech. Science Religieuse 30, 3 (JuiHet 1940); Id., L'tre et le tempschez Grgoire de Nysse, Leiden 1970,2 21-226 ; C.N. Tsirpanlis, The concept of universal salvation in Saint Gregory of Nyssa, in Studia Patristica, XVII, 3 (1982) 1131-1144; H.M. Meissner, Rhetorik und Theologie: derDiahg Gregors von Nyssa De anima et resurrectione, Frankfurta.M. 1991 ,82; 356-361; M. Ludlow, Universal Salvation, in particular chaps. 1-3; C. Mores-chini, Storia dellafilosofiapatristica, Brescia 2004, 580; 608-609; 734; G. Ferro Garel, Gre

gorio di Nissa. L'esperienza mistica, il simbolismo, ilprogresso spirituale, Torino 2004, 6; myGregorio di Nissa. Sull'anima e h resurrezione-, Ead., "Note sulla continuit della dottrinadell'apocatastasi in Gregorio di Nissa," Archaeus 10 (2006) 105-145; R. Simini, "La speranza cristiana nel dialogo De anima et resurrectione? NicoUus 33 (2006) 61-73.29) For the exegesis of this passage in Gregory see Danilou, L'tre et le temps, 69-73.30) 72B: Since three are the conditions of rational natureone, which since the beginninghas been allotted the incorporeal life and which we call "angelic"; the other, tied to flesh,which we call "human", and the third, freed from flesh thanks to death, I think that thedivine Aposde... intended to indicate that general harmony of all rational nature that oneday there will be in the Good, calling "heavenly" what is angelical and incorporeal and

"earthly" what is joined to a body, and referring the "underworld" to what is separate fromthe body, or else, if among rational beings we can see, besides those mentioned, some othernature too which if one wished to call of "demons" or "spirits" or anything else of the sort

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

13/45

LL.E. RamelliIVigiline Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 325

is that all rational creatures' submission to God coincides with theirsalva

tion, which is also the core concept of Gregorys In illud: Tunc etipse Filius,as we shall see.

Another group ofquotations from the New Testament in reference to

apokatastasis in De anima is related to the problem of purification through

pains, both in this and in the next world. In 97B-100C Macrina demon

strates that the first and foremost cause of purification is not punishment,

but God'ssaving will, who attracts the soul to himself with the purpose of

reciprocal union: ifthe soul is pure, it is pulled up without impediments;

otherwise, it first has to be purified from the waste ofevil, in which case

suffering is involved, but as a mere side effect.31

In 100-105A, Macrina

indicates the measure and aim of this cathartic process: the complete

extinction ofevil and vice ( ), and she

makes use ofthe Gospel's parable ofthe inept servant in Mt 18:23-25 and

Lk 7:41 to argue that purification is necessary and must be proportional to

the measure of impurity and evil accumulated by each individual, in order

that each soul can attain virtue, which coincides with the goal of purification

and is assimilation to God. Such is a well known

Platonic ideal (Theaet. 176A) passed into Christian thought thanks toClement ofAlexandria and Origen, and then resumed byGregory

32and

the underworld, meaning that, when one day, afier longcyclesofages, evilhasvanished, there

willremain nothingehe butGood, andeven those creatureswilladmit, in concordandunanim

ity, Christs lordship; 136A: The Apostle, expressing the harmonyofthe whole universe

with Good, means, rather transparently, what follows: "Every knee will bend in front of

him, ofheavenly and earthly creatures and ofthose ofthe underworld, and every tongue

will confess that Jesus Christ is the Lord, forGod the Fathers glory", through the "horns"

signifying the angelic and heavenly breed, and through the rest the intellectual creatures

coming after the angels, i.e. us, who will be allinvolved in one andthe same bigfeastcharac

terized by harmony.31 )

100 C: SoI said, as it seems, it is not that Gods judgment brings, as its principal

aim, punishment to those who sinned, but, forhis part, as your argument has proved, God

exclusivelyproduces good, distinguishing it from evil, and pulling up the persons to him

self, fortheir participation in blessedness, whereas the violent separation ofthat which was

united and attached turns out to be painful to him who is pulled .32 )

See also Gregorys De vita Mosis, 2,251-252.318, and his first homily on the SongofSongs: each one must make himselfsimilar to God, become similar to him who is truly

beautiful andgood etc This principle was widespread in the imperial age: Plotinus in

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

14/45

326 ILE Ramelli IVigiline Chrsranae 61 (2007) 313 -356

joined to the biblical in combination with in Gen 1:26, a

crucial conception in Patristic thought and above all in our CappadocianFather.

33

Macrinas inquiryand argument is confirmed by the interpretation of

several scriptural passages, and chieflyof a fundamental statement by Paul,

already used by Origen many times in support of apokatastasis: ICor

15:28, about Gods eschatological presence as all in all, .

This is preciselywhat leads Macrina to conclude that the ultimate

of purification is the complete and definitive annihilation of evil, once and

for all, in the end, since it has no ontological positive existence, a Platonic

doctrine veryimportant alreadyin Origen. Let s quote the most important

passages:

Evil mustnecessarily be eliminated, absolutely and in every respect, once andfor a

from all that is, and, since in fact itisnot..., neither will it have to exist, at ali For

as evil does not exist in its nature outside will, once each will has come to be in

God, evil will be reducedto complete disappearance, because no receptacle will be

left for it.... Gods right judgment is applied to all, and extends the time of

extinction of the debt according to its amount, without neglecting even the tiniest

debts [cf. Mt 18:23-25; Lk7:41]... through necessary suffering, he extinguishes

the debt accumulated by participating in miserable and painful things... and so

[the sinner], after getting rid of all that is alien to himself, and taking off the

shame deriving from debts, can achieve a condition offreedom and confidence.5*

Now, freedom is assimilation to what has no master and has absolute power, and

at the beginning it was given us by God, but then it was covered and hidden by

the shame ofdebts. Thus, as a consequence, each one who is free will adapt him

selfto what is similar to him; but virtue has no masters: therefore, each one who

is free will turn out to be in virtue. Now, Gods nature is the source ofallvirtue;

so, in itthere will be those who have attained freedom from evil, so that, asthe Aposays, God will be allin all [ICor 15:28]. This statement actuallyseems to me to

provide confirmation to the idea stated previously, because it affirms that God will

be both allandin all. Gods nature will become all to us and will take the place of

his master, 12,148: I thinkthat everyone s end and goal and realization ofits true being is

nothing else but to make oneself similar to God through purification, to get close to him

and to remain in him (on this writing see, with interesting interpretation, M. Rizzi, Gre

gorio il Taumaturgo (?), Encomio di Origene, Milano 2002, and J.W. Trigg, "God's Mar

ous Oikonomia,"Journalof*Early Christian Studies9 [2001] 27-52).33 ) For and in Gregorysee my philosophical essayin my

Gregorio di Nissa. Sull anima e la resurrezione.

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

15/45

ILE. RamelliIVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 327

all, distributing itselfin a waythat will be suitable to the needs ofthat life. Andfrom divine revelation it is clear that God, forthose who deserve it, is place,house, garment, food, drink, light, richness, reign, and whatever it is possible tothinkand express among those things that contribute to a good life forus. Well,he who is allalso is in all. And in this itseems to me thatScripture teaches the complete

disappearance ofevil[]. For, if in allbeings there willbe God, clearly in them

there willnot be evil. (An. etres. 101-104)

In the sixth and last part ofthe dialogue (129A-160C),35

which crowns the

whole work and is focused on resurrection and universal restoration, Mac-

rina resolves several questions dealing with the future life, with the support

ofScripture, both the Old and the New Testament, especially the Gospels

and Paul: Ps 103:20-30 (129C-132A);36

Ps 117:27, with the interpretation

of the feast of Sukkoth (Gr. , "tents"; 132A-136A); Ez 37:1-14,

with the famous vision ofthe dry bones wrapped again in flesh and vivified

by God, in 136AB; Pauls ICor 15:52 and llhess 4:16 in 136C;37

finally,

the Gospels (136C-137A), whose is presented as the culminat

ing point ofa klimax. In fact, Jesus, who is the Logos, attested to resurrec

tion not only in words (), but also in fact, directly realizing it

().38 Some sections offer an allegorical exegesis and we shall treat

them subsequently. Other key quotations from Paul used by Macrina in

support of her arguments are to be found in ICor 15:35-52, with the

description of the raised body as a glorious and spiritual body, in a set of

comparisons with the earthly body: she uses this passage to prove that each

one will be given back his own body, but with characteristics different

from those of the fleshly body, with a more magnificent complexion

(153C). Macrina expands on Paul's description of the spiritual body and

grounds her own exposition in it,39 exactly as Origen did in Princ. 3,6,6,

35)I follow the division proposed by Meissner, RhetonkundTheologie, 343-370.

36)Cf. J. Danilou, L'tre etle temps, 211.

37) llhess 4:16 could be interpreted as a restriction ofthe promise ofresurrection only to

those who "died in Christ", but see D. Konstans and my "The Syntax of inllhess 4:16," forthcoming in theJournalofBiblicalLiterature: it is probable that we shouldread not those who diedin Christ willrise , but those who died will rise in Christ.38)

The usage ofthe verb in Gregory is influenced bythat ofOrigen, on which seeA. Bastit-Kalinowska, "'Agirdans:' autourde l'emploiienergeindans l'oeuvre et l'exgsed'Origene " Atlamantius 10 (2004) 123 137

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

16/45

328 ILE RamelliIVigHiae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

relying on the same Pauline passage for the very same argument. The glori

ous body of ICor 15:52, wrapped in incorruptibility, as Macrina saysexplicitly quoting Paul in 15 5D and 157A, will cause no more sins and

will no longer prevent the soul from remaining in the Good. Its new char

acteristics, incorruptibility, glory, honour, power, drawn from Paul s text,

are typical of God s nature: originally they also belonged to the human

being as of God, and then they are hoped for again for the future

(157AB); the same concept, based on Pauls account of the spiritual body,

concludes the whole dialogue in 160D: Once those passions have been

purified and have vanished, thanks to the necessary treatment imparted

with care, by means of the therapy of fire, the place of those deficiencies

will be taken by each of the respective realities that are conceived in a

positive sense: incorruptibility, life, strength, grace, glory, and any other

prerogative of this kind that we conjecture it is possible to contemplate

both in God himself and in his , that is human nature. In fact,

Gods image will shine forth again in every human being in the eventual

restoration of all.

In his In illud: Tunc etipse Filius, written several years after De animal

but in perfect continuity with it, Gregory endeavours to explain precisely

a Scriptural passage, ICor 15:28, about the final submission of all crea

tures to Christ and that of Christ to the Father, so that God will be all in

all,41

a passage constantly quoted by Origen, and also by Gregory in De

40)It was probablycomposed between 385 and 393, and more likelyin the latest years of

this interval. J. Danilou, "La chronologie des oeuvres de Grgoire de Nysse," Studia Patristica 7 (1966) 187 dated it to the third period ofGregorys production (385 to 390); J.K.Downing, GNO III, 2, pp. 3-28 (the edition to which I refer here), and Id., The Treatise ofGregory ofNyssa In Illud: Tunc et ipse Filius, Diss. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA1947, summarized in Harvard Studies in Classical Phihlogy 58-59 (1948) 223, proposed383; G. Maspero, La Trinit e l'uomo. L'AdAblabium di Gregorio di Nissa, Roma 2004, 4observes that the arguments adduced by Downing are not sufficient to date In illudto 383rather than 385 or later, and ibid. 39 and 256, points out that in this treatise there is thetheme of, which is more present and highlighted in the works ofthe last period.The authenticityof the brieftreatise is beyond question. See also C. MacCambley, '"When(the Father) Will Subject All Things to (the Son), Then (the Son) HimselfWill Be Sub

jected to Him (the Father), Who Subjects All Things to Him"\ GreekOrthodox TheologicaReview 28 (1983), 1-15, and A. Penati Bernardini, Gregorio diNissa. Commento alNuovTestamento^ translation and notes Roma 1992 20 ss

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

17/45

.L.E. Ramelli IVigliae Chrsranae 61 (2007) 313 -356 329

anima, as we have seen, as evidence for universal salvation. In this writing,

Gregory offers an eschatological picture of universal restoration that is

wholly coincident with that ofDe anima and inspired by Origen s concep

tions, often with very close correspondences, even ad verbum. But the

whole writing, which is exegetical in its nature, although at the same time

displaying philosophical arguments too, is interwoven with Scriptural

quotations, particularly from the New Testament, and more especially

from Paul. A significant parallel with Origen, who comments on the same

Pauline passage that constitutes the title of Gregorys treatise, is to be found

in the prologue (p. 3 Downing) and confronts the theological problem of

the sense of the Sons submission: it is necessary to interpret Pauls passage

without leaving room for theories that make the Son inferior to the Father.42

For the ofoursubmission to God is , as Gregoryputs itin a thesis that is central to the whole o In Illudane derives from Origen.The Alexandrian exegete, whom Gregory knew very well, in Princ. 3,5,6-7

and Comm. Io. 6,50-60 interprets Pauls verse in the very same way, as we

have seen.

Next, Gregory reflects on the whole context of ICor 15:28, as he also

does in De an. etres. 152B-156B and De horn. opif. 224D: in ICor 15:35the Corinthians ask how the dead can rise and with what body: Gregory,

just like Paul, reminds them that God was able to create bodies ex nihilo,

without a substratum of pre-existent matter: God s will [ ]

became matterand the substance ofcreatures (p. 11,4-9 Downing):43

a

fortiorihe will be able to reshape bodies that had alreadybeen created. Andon 1 l,10ff. Downing, Gregoryrecalls ICor15:47-49, according to which,as Adams fall produced, as a consequence, death for all, in the same way

Christ's redemption has provided life forall, with the transmission ofgoodfrom one to all.

44Gregory stresses the universality of future vivification,

42 )Theodoret, commenting on ICor, in PG 82,357, attests that both Arians and Eunomi-

ans used Pauls passage to support their own subordinationalist doctrines; cf. MacCambley,

"When (the Father)", 1-15 and J.T. Lienhard, "The Exegesis ofICor 15:28 from Marcellus

of Ancyra to Theodoret of Cyrus", Vigiliae Christianae 37 (1983) 340-359.43 )

' . Cf., more extensively, Gregorys Apol. in Hex.,

PG 44,69AC.44 )

Adam was dissolved because of sin... consequendy, his descendants also became all

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

18/45

330 ILE RamelliIVigiliae Christian61 (2007) 313 -356

presented by him as the terminal point of our hopes,

.45

On p. 13,17ff. Downing he describes this state as charac

terized by the final vanishing of evil, one of the pillars of Origen s eschatol-

ogy, supported by Gregory elsewhere too.46

And, once again, he joins his

argument to the exegesis of Pauls passage: what the Apostle means when

he speaks of the final submission ofall to Christ and ofChrist to the Father

is this: One day, the nature of evil will pass to non-being [ ],

after disappearing completely from being, and divine and pure Goodness

will enfold in itselfevery rational nature [ ], and none

of those who have come to being thanks to God will fall outside God s

kingdom [

], when, once all evil that is mixed up with the beings has

been consumed, as a kind ofwaste of nature consumed through the fusion

of purifying fire, every being [] that originated from God will return

precisely as it was from the beginning [ ], when it had not yet

received evil.

The subsequent argument, on p. 15 Downing, is entirely grounded in

Pauls writings and assembles six quotations from them in five lines: the

phrases first fruit of the dead and first born from the dead re-echoICor 15:20; Col 1:18 and Acts 2:24; the idea that Christ has annihilated

the power of death in himself seems to be a reminiscence of 2Tim 1:10

and Hebr 2:14; the whole phrase also recalls ICor 15:24. The subject,

already discussed by Origen, is the order in which each one will receive

goodness in himself and follow Christ, who has opened the way: this will

be in the order ofeach ones merits and faculties: in this way, the value of

human free will, too, is safe. In fact, Gregory says, even though the end

will be the same for all in the general apokatastasis, when each one hasdestroyed in himself the power of death, imitating Christ in alienation

from evil, the order in which human perfection will be attainedon the

model of Christ, will depend on each ones

merits. Thus, Gregory dwells upon the description of this process: first

there will come those who are already perfect, then the others, more and

as we had carried the image ofthe earthly man, so we shall also carry that of the heavenly

man . In his De anima Gregorytreats veryspecifically the possibility and modalities ofthat

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

19/45

ILE RamelliIVigiline Chrstianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 331

more imperfect, according to the conception of the descending gradation

of the Good.47 We have seen that already Origen maintained the same

concept of order in the access to blessedness according to each ones mer

its, and, both in De principiis and in his Commentary on John, he based

his argument on many scriptural quotations, and above all Pauls phrase

each one in his place (lCo r 15:22).

Also in the following section (p. 16,1-8 Downing) Gregory makes ample

use of Paul, when he affirms that the advance of the Good,

, will even reach the and will make it totally dis

appear( is a strong verb): nothing opposed to Good will remain,

and divine life, extending through all beings ( ), will make death

absolutely vanish from them.4 8

This complete vanishing of evil from all

creatures is precisely the ofourhopes, as Gregory notes with a remi

niscence ofCol 1:5. This will be possible because before the destruction of

evil there will be that of sin, thanks to which death obtained its lordship

overhumankind, according to Rom 5:12. Immediately afterward, Gregory

introduces the concept of body, always drawing inspiration from Paul

(p. 16,12-13 Downing): resuming the fundamental question ofthe treatise

what the eventual of all to God really is, and answering that it

is the complete alienation from evil, ,

he explains that, once we all () have become far removed from evil,

then the whole mass ofhuman nature ( ),49

joined to its and become one and the same body, according to

Rom 11:16, will receive in itself only the hegemony of Good. Thus, when

the entire body of our nature ( ) has

merged with God's immortal nature, the Sons submission will take place

through us (' ), in that such submission will be accomplished by theSons body, that is, the entire human nature.

The New Testament basis for Gregorys discourse is evident in the fol

lowing section, too (p. 16,23-17,12 Downing), which presents itself as an

exegesis of Pauls words: it begins with the statement, The meaning of the

teachings offered by Paul, the great, is, to my mind, as follows , and goes

47)

, an idea also found in the Neoplatonists, well known to GregoryofNyssa, esp. Plotinus, 1,8,7,19.48)

The iteration of produces an impressive cumulative effect further empha

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

20/45

332 ILE RamelliIVigiline Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

on with a section (p. 17 Downing) in which the elements taken from Ori

gen are numerous and essential, both in the quotations from Paul and in

the way in which they are interpreted; the parallels are indeed uninter

rupted. Gregory quotes ICor 15:22-28, as already Origen had done, in

order to confirm the doctrine ofapokatastasis through the Apostles author

ity: As all die in Adam, so all will also be vivified in Christeach one,

however, in his order: the first fruit is Christ, then those who belong to

Christ in his Parousia, and then the will come, when he will hand

the kingdom to God the Father, once he has annihilated every principality,

force and power; it will be necessary, in fact, that he continues reigning

until he has put all his enemies under his feet; the last enemy to be annihi

lated will be death. .. And once he has submitted everything to himself,

then he also will submit to him who has submitted everything to him, in

order that God may be all in all. Pauls passage, and especially its last

phrase, that God may be all in all , is often quoted by Origen as evidence

for apokatastasis. Gregory explains (p. 17,13-21 Downing) that God will be

all in all when in all beings there will be no evil left, so Pauls phrase

expresses the non-substantiality of evil, . For

God will be all in all when nothing evil will be visible in beings, since it isimpossible that God may be . Thus, either God will not be in all,

in case anything evil might remain among creatures, or, if we have to

believe that he will really be in all, then, together with this belief we get the

demonstration that nothing evil ( ) will remain. The same

remarks, in the connection with the interpretation of the same Pauline

passage, can be found already in Origen, Princ. 3,6,2-3, quoted above,

which Gregory follows adverbum. Gregory comments on the last verse of

Pauls passage on p. 18,1-18 Downing, expressing many ideas already setforth in De an. etres. 104, where he interprets the same verse, ICor 15:28,

on Gods presence as all in all: Gregory maintains that this indicates

the simplicity and uniformity of the life that we hope for, for the variety

and multiplicity characterizing the present life will dissolve, because we

shall have God alone instead of all the various objects of our needs: Gre

gory here interprets Paul s statement in the light of the Neoplatonic motive

of return to unity.50 God, in fact, will be for us food and drink, garment,

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

21/45

ILE RamelliIVigiline Chrstianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 333

house, air, and again richness, joy, beauty, health, vigour, wisdom, glory,

blessedness, and all good: those who are in God have everything, in that

they have God himself. Now, to have God means nothing else than to

become one and the same thing with God, , which, in

turn, is to become one body with God, to be with Goda clear

echo of Eph 3:6, and this will occur when all will constitute the one and

same body of Christ ( ) through participation, ,

as Gregory says recalling ICor 10:17: ...

.

Now, Gregory argues (p. 19,19-20,7 Downing), it is this body that will

submit to the Fatherand this will be Christ's final submission to him,

this body which is the Church, according to Col 1:24-25, ,

. This section, actually, is rich both in argument and in

references to Scripture: in fact it is a mosaic of quotations from Paul. As for

the argument brought forth, it is evident that the equation between the

whole human nature and Christ's body, and then between the latter and

the Church, leads Gregory to affirm the absolute universality of the

Church, which will comprise, in this way, the entire human nature, whose

final salvation is affirmed, although with differences of times and modalities in the course of purification and conversion. Gregoryalso evokes ICor

12:27, where Paul reminds the Corinthians that they are Christ's body and

his limbs, and then Eph 4:5-16, saying that Christ's body is built up

, since, as Gregoryexplains, Christ constitutes himself through those

who progressivelyjoin themselves to faith,

. With further Pauline reminiscences (Eph 2:20; 4:13, already quoted

by Origen in Princ. 1,6 for apokatastasis), Gregoryasserts that all will con

tribute to this construction, and will be built up and edified () and all ( ) will reach unity of faith and knowl

edge, so to make up Christ as perfect man in his wholeness. Then, Gregory

develops Eph 4:16 and ICor 12:20-21, specifying that each one will con

stitute a different member of Christ's body, according to his faculties; any

way, he confirms that allwill be part of Christ's bodyall, , a

phrase that is significantly repeated three times in this paragraph, given

that Christ makes all ( ) limbs ofits own body.

In the following section (p. 20,8-24 Downing), Gregory combines bothtraces ofHellenistic philosophical doctrines and allusions to Paul, who, as

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

22/45

334 I.L.E. RamelliIVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

it seems, was already partly acquainted with such doctrines.51

Gregory

envisages the eschatological harmony ofthe whole creation, which will be

possible because Christ, after becoming one and the same thing with us

through all ( ), makes all that is ours his own and conciliates it

to himself, as Gregory says using the terminology of Stoic ,52

already widely employed by Origen:53

. This

way, the whole ofcreation ( ) will be in harmony with itself,

, and, according to Phil 2:10-11, already quoted by

Gregory before, every knee ofall beings will bend, in heaven, on earth, or

in the underworld, and every tongue will proclaim that Christ is the Lord.

All will be saved because all, sooner or later, will believe; not only thewhole human nature, but the entire creation will become one and the same

body: . Gregory depends on Origen,

Princ. 4,6, who, as we have seen, also quotes Phil 2:10-11 and interprets

the universal submission of all to Christ as universal salvation of all, angels,

humans and demons, in heaven, on earth, and in the underworld. Then,

51)

See above, note 25.52)See S.G. Pembroke, Oikeiosis," in Problemsin Stoicism, ed. A.A. Long, London 1971,

114-149; G. Striker, "The Role of oikeiosisin Stoic Ethics," OxfordStudiesin AncientPhi

losophy 1 (1983) 145-167; T. Engberg-Pedersen, "Discovering the Good: Oikeiosis and

Kathekonta in Stoic Ethics," in The Norms of Nature, eds. M. Schofield-G. Striker, Cam

bridge-Paris 1986, 145-183; Id., The Stoic Theory ofOikeiosis, Aarhus 1990; M. Isnard

Parente, "Ierocle stoico. Oikeiosis e doveri sociali," in Aufstiegund Niedergang der RmischenWelt, 11,36,3, Berlin-New York 1989, 2201-2226; G. Schnrich, Oikeiosis. Zur Aktualitt eines stoischen Grundbegriffs," PhilosophischesJahrbuch 96 (1989) 34-51; M. WhitlockBlundell, "Parental Nature and Stoic Oikeiosis", Ancient Philosophy 10 (1990) 221-242; R

Radice, Oikeiosis. Ricerche sulfondamento delpensiero stoico e sulla sua genesi, MilanoOn the presence of Stoicism in Gregory see briefly I. Pochoshajew, "Estoicismo," in Die-

donano de san Gregorio de Nisa, 382-383. Its presence in Origen is broadly discussed byTzamalikos, Origen, passim.53)

Apart from related forms, such as , we find numerous occurrences of

in Origen, with exactly the same meaning as in Gregory: "to make one's own, familiar; to

conciliate," also in reference to Christas then will be seen in Gregoryin relation to

mortal realities: C. CeU. 3,54; 4,26; 8,4: Christ conciliates humanity with God; in the pas

sive diathesis, the verb is used in Comm. in Io. 6,11,7, in reference to God conciliated and

"made own" to humans: ... .

Clement, Origen s master, had alreadyused this verb in the sense of "to reconcile," in Strom.

7,7, about humans toward God. Gregoryof Nazianzus, who also knewOrigens writings

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

23/45

ILE. Ramelli IVigiliae Chrstianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 335

on p. 20,25-21,21 Downing, Gregory draws very important consequences

from what he has demonstrated so far: ifevery being () that comes to

be in Christ is saved, and if submission means salvation, as Ps 71:2 sug

gests, and if all will be in Christ, who will subsume all in his body, then we

must think that no being will remain outside of those saved:

. ForG regory arguesgiven the total elimination ()

of death and the submission to the Son, at a certain mom en t death will no

longer exist and all will turn out to be in life, , because

all will be in Christ, and Christ is life, according to his own statement in

John 11:25: . For this reason, Christ is

called between God and humans in lTim 2:5, because he who isin the Father and has come among humans accomplishes the mediation

(), in that he unifies all ( ) in himself and, through

himself, to the Father. Here, Gregory relies again on John 17:21: in order

that all may be one and the same thing [ ] . . . one and the same

thing [] in us, and explains that Christ, who is in the Father, having

joined us to himself in unity [], accomplishes our un ion with the

Father (p. 21,22ff. Downing). Gregory, after quoting the immediate con

tinuation of the above mentioned passage ofJohn (17:22: The glory yougave me, I have given them), introduces a further element in his argu

ment: the Holy Spirit, equivalent to the glorythat Christ had before crea

tion according to John 17:5, substantiates the above mentioned unity, for,

as humans and God were separate because of sin, only the Spirit in its

unity could join them again: the Spirit's role was fundamental in human

reditus already in Origen.54

With no interruption, Gregory goes on in the

exegesis of the passage (John 17:21.23), in which, moreover, he inserts

reminiscences ofJohn 10:30 and other similar bei of the same author: sothat they may be one and the same thing just as we are one [], for you

and I are one [], in order that they may be made perfect as far as to con

stitute a unity [] . Gregory, quoting John 17:22, explains that all become

one and the same thing, , in unity with Christ and God

who are one, thanks to Christ who is in them all. Drawing inspiration from

John, 17:23, Gregory demonstrates that, if the Father loves humankind,

54)Cf. M. BayerMoser, TeacherofHoliness: The Holy Spiritin Origens Commentary on the

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

24/45

336 ILE RamelliIVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

and ifthe Father loves the Son and in the Son are present all ofus humans

(), it follows that the Father loves us in that we are the Sons body,

and the Son s submission to the Father indicates the knowledge of Being

and, at the same time, the salvation of the entire human nature [

] . We should notice, once again, the affirmation

ofthe universal character of final salvation, which will involve the whole of

human nature: all, though at different times, will attain the true knowl

edge of God, who is the true Being and is Good itself, opposed to evil,

which is , according to Gregorys theory of non-substantiality of evil:

these also are reflections evidently derived from Origen.55

The major concepts expressed so far are further confirmed by Gregory

in several quotations from Paul on p. 23,19ff. Downing, especially Gal

2:19-20, I have been crucified together with Christ and it is no longer I

who live, but Christ who lives in me, and 2Cor 13:3, where Paul main

tains that it is Christ who speaks in him, ICor 15:9 and Gal 1:13, where

he recounts his conversion from persecutor of the Christians to Christ s

apostle. Pauls transformation, as far as to become one with Christ, took

place thanks to his to God, a submission which is for us the

origin of all goods. Now, Gregorys point (p. 24,18ff. Downing) is thatwhat is said about Paul will logically fit the whole ofcreated human nature,

, when, as Jesus asserts in Mk 13:10 and

16:15 and in Mt 28:19, the Gospel has reached every part of the world. All

() will reject the old manaccording to Col 3:9 and Eph 4:22

and will receive in themselves the Lord, who activates the good things (

) in them. Now, of all goods, the most important is salva

tion, which can be attained thanks to alienation from evil, derived from

submission and union to God.The last stage of Gregorys argumentation (p. 26,1 Off. Downing) is

devoted to the eschatological fate of Gods enemies: Gregory makes a

strong case that not even their submission is to be seen as forced and invol

untary, but must be interpreted as as well. H e draws a distinction,

on the basis of Paul's own terminology, between what will submit

() and what will be annihilated (): the

latter will be the case of the enemy of all nature, i.e. death, and, together

with this, the principle of all sin, which produced death, and its power. Itis interesting to compare this distinction with that drawn by Origen in

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

25/45

ILE Ramelli IVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 337

Princ. 3,6,5 between the complete annihilation of enemy will , i.e. sin,

and of what derives from it, i.e. death, and the restoration of the created

substance ofall those who have sinned, including the devil, who is not to

be saved as devil, because what was enemy and death and evil will perish,

whereas he himself, as created by God and endowed with a substance by

him, will return to his original condition before his sin, reintegrated into

the Good. For he will not be annihilated in his substance, which was made

by God and can by no means be destroyed.56

And all the more interesting

is it that Origen sets forth this view precisely in his exegesis of 1 Cor 15:26,57

the same passage commented on by Gregory. In Princ. 3,6,5, in fact, Ori

gen explains: "even the last enemy, who is called death", will be destroyed,so that there may be nothing painful left when death will no more exist,

nothing opposed, "when there will be no enemy left, \ Butwe must under

stand the last enemy's destruction not as annihilation of his substance,

which has been made by God, but as annihilation of the enemy's inclina

tion and will, originated not by God, but by the enemy himself. Hence,

he will be destroyed not so as to cease existing, but to be no longer enemy

and death.58

56)For the salvation of the devil according to Origen see at least H. Crouzel, "A Letter from

Origen 'To Friends in Alexandria' ", in The Heritage ofthe Early Church. Mlanges G.V.Fhrowsky, ed. D. Neiman-M. Schatkin, Roma 1973, 135-150; Y.M. Duval, "Jerome et

Origene avant la querelle origniste. La cure et la gurison ultime du monde et du diable

dans Y In Nahum," Augustinianum 24 (1984) 471-494; D. Satran, "The salvation of the

Devil," Studia Patristica 23 (1989) 171-177; A. Monaci, "La demonologia di Origene," in

Origeniana quinta, Leuven 1992, 320-325; H. Crouzel, "Diable et dmons dans les hom

lies d'Origene," Bulletin de Littrature Ecclsiastique 95 (1994) 303-331; G. Bunge, "Cr

pour tre," ibid. 98 (1997) 21-29; my "La coerenza della soteriologia origeniana."57)

The same Pauline passage is quoted by Origen also in Comm. in Matth. 12,33; Horn, in

Jos. 8,4; in Lev. 9,11; injer. 18,3.58)

This is, in Origen, the most important affirmation of thefinalsalvation of the devil, also

recognized by H. Crouzel, "Apocatastase chez Origene", in Origeniana Quarta, ed. L. Lies,

Innsbruck 1985, 282-290 (cf. Id., Le fin derniersehn Origene, Aldershot 1990); Satran,

"The Salvation of the Devil", 171-177; Bunge, "Cr pour tre," 21-29, according to whom

Origen s doctrine of apokatastasis depends on that of the roots, nature, and final destiny of

evil: on the basis of Wis 1:14, quoted by him, Origen can maintain that what was made in

order to exist cannot stop existing and thus the devil's ontological annihilation must be

excluded. Hence, there remains only the possibility of his re-conversion to Good. Gregory

also saves all the substances that took part in sin, postulating the destruction of sin and

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

26/45

33 8 ILE. RamelliIVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

Gregory, who is evidently following Origen, argues that death and sin,

i.e. evil, will be completely extinguished, to such a point that theywill no

longer exist ( ), and the empire of evil will be entirely

destroyed ( ), whereas the beings that will be

subjected will be those who are called enemies of God in another sense,

that is, those who have deserted from his reign to sin. The latter, according

to Gregory, is precisely the category meant by Paul when he affirms that,

while we were still enemies, we have been reconciled to God, and, having

been reconciled, we shall be saved in his life. For those who are called

God s enemies on account of disobedience will become his friends owing

to submission. The last idea developed by Gregory on p. 27,19ff. Downing

depends, once again, on a Pauline statement located in the same passage

that inspired the whole treatise, ICor 15:25: It is necessary that he goes

on reigning until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The submis

sion of all his enemies will be accomplished by Christ progressively, during

his reign; in the end, once he has subjected all and has unified all beings

( ), he will hand over everything to the Father, which

meansas Gregory explainsto lead all ( ) to

God, in one and the same spirit with God. Those who were God s enemieswill become a stool for Gods feet, according to the phrase of Ps 109:1:

theywill receive God s footprint on themselves, his , which is also his

markand signan idea certainlyassociated with the so-called "theology of

image", so very central in Gregory, and already in Origen s thought too,59

with the presence of God s in every human being. Given that there

will be nobody who dies, death will vanish and we all ( ), Gre

gory affirms, shall enjoy a submission to God that is not slavery, but, on

the contrary, sovereignty, incorruptibility, blessedness: , ,. The perspective and terminology are the same as that we find

in the final section of De anima etresurrectione, with the depiction ofuni

versal apokatastasis and the salvation ofall, which Gregory believed to be

fullygrounded in Scripture.

was profoundly consistent with the whole of Origens eschatological and metaphysical

theory: the devil will be reintegrated and saved not as devil, but as a creature of God, once

it has been set free from evil.

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

27/45

ILE. RamelliIVigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 339

2. The Allegorical Interpretation ofScripture and the Continuity

with Greek Philosophical Allegory

Origen was,firstandforemost,an exegete, the greatest exegete the Church

has ever had according to Simonetti,60

and this is relevant: Young has

recently called attention to the importance ofexegesis in the formation of

early Christian culture,61

and on the other hand scholars have shown the

philosophical roots ofOrigen s exegesis: he was verywell acquainted with

the Stoic and Platonic allegorical interpretations ofGreek myths, already

applied to the Bible byPhilo and Clement of Alexandria.62

Porphyry, in a

fragment ofthe third book of his ,63

attests that Origen,the outstanding Christian exponent ofthe allegorical method,

64knew

very well the allegorical works ofCornutus and Chaeremon, Stoic allego-

rists ofthe Neronian age and heirs ofthe secular Stoic allegorical tradi

tion,65

and ofthe Neo-Pythagorean and Middle-Platonist Numenius, who

read the Old Testament (and perhaps some ofthe New) allegorically, and

that he transferred the ancient allegorical tradition to the interpretation of

Scripture. Edwards66

claims that this dependence on the Stoics in the field

ofallegoresis was attributed to Origen byPorphyry, who applied allegoryto Greek myths but did not admit allegorical interpretations of Scripture,67

60 )M. Simonetti, Origene esegeta e Usua tradizione, Brescia 2004.

61 ) F. Young, BiblicalExegesisandthe Formation ofChristian Culture, Cambridge 1997.62 )

M-J. Edwards, "Precursors ofOrigen s Hermeneutic Theory," in Studia Patristica 29

(1993) 231-237; Id., Origen againstPlato, Aldershot 2002; broad documentation in my

"Origen and the Stoic Allegorical Tradition."63 ) Ap. Eus. Hist. Eccl. 6,19,8 = F39 Harn.; cf. Jerome, Ep. 70. G. Rinaldi, La Bibbia dei

pagani, I, Bologna 1998, 142-143; II, nr. 14; P.E Beatrice, "Porphyrys Judgement on Ori

gen," in Origeniana V, ed. RJ. Daly, Leuven 1992, 351-367;M)

So E. Auerbach: see J.D. Dawson, Christian FiguraiReadingandthe FashioningofIden

tity, Berkeley-Los Angeles 2002, chap. 5 fora critique of Auerbachs attack against Origens

allegorical interpretation.65 ) On them full documentation in myAnneo Cornuto. Compendio diteologia greca, Milano

2003; Ead., Allegoria, I, L'et classica, in coll. with G. Lucchetta, Milano 2004, chaps. 6-7.66) Edwards, Origen against Plato, 145. But see P.E Beatrice, "Porphyry's Judgement on

Origen," in Origeniana V, 351-367. Also M. Zambn, " : la critica di

Porfirio ad Origene (Eus., HE VI 19,1-9)," in Origeniana Vili, ed. L. Perrone, Leuven

2003, 553-564.

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

28/45

340 I.L.E. RamelliIVtgiliae Cbristianae 61 (2007) 313 -356

for a polemical purpose, in order to cast an ambiguous light on Origen's

allegoresis. At anyrate, Porphyryprobablyknew Origen in his youth68

and

then criticized him for his exegetical method, and for his being a Christian;

what is now relevant is that, among many other things, he testifies: He

was familiar with Plato, always held in his hands the writings of Numen-

ius, Cronius, Apollophanes, Longinus, Moderatus, Nicomachus, and the

most distinguished of the Pythagoreans; he availed himselfof the books of

the Stoic Chaeremon and Cornutus, from which he learned the allegorical

method ofthe Greekmysteries, which he applied, then, to the Jewish Scrip

tures >>.69

And, according to Jerome, Origen, drawing inspiration from Clem

ent s work, wrote in which he matched the Christian

conceptions with those of the philosophers, and confirmed all the truths of

our faith by means of Platos, Aristotle's, Numenius', and Cornutus' texts 7

In both passages the allegorists Cornutus and Chaeremon or Numenius

are mentioned near Plato and other outstanding philosophersmostly

Middle-Platonists and Neo-Pythagorean thinkersas the main sources of

Origen's philosophical formation.

The importance of Origen's contribution lies not only in his exegesis

applied to Scripture, in a number of works, but also in the theoretical

exposition of the levels of interpretation of Scripture in Princ. 4. He

68)It is discussed whether Porphyrywas a Christian when young: see W. Kinzig, "War der

neuplatoniker Porphyrios ursprnglich Christ?/' in Mousopolos Stephanos. Festschrift H

Grgemanns, Heidelberg 1998,320-332. He knew the Scriptures well: see R.M. Berchman,"In the Shadow of Origen: Porphyry and the Patristic Origins of the NT Criticism," inOrigeniana VI, Leuven 1995, 657-673; Rinaldi, La Bibbia, I, 124-175.69)

Cf. J. Ppin, " propos de l'histoire de l'exgse allgorique: l'absurdit, signe del'allgorie," in Studia Patristica 1 (1957) 395-413; Id., Mythe et allegore, Paris 1958; 1981462-466; W. Den Boer, "Some Striking Similarities in Pagan and Christian AllegoricalInterpretation," in Studifihlogicie storici in onore di V.De Falco, Napoli 1971,465-473; Id"Allegory and History," in Studia/.H. Waszink, ed. Id. et ai, Amsterdam 1973, 15-27;Rinaldi, La Bibbia, I, 124fF., esp. 142-143; , 53-56, nr. 14, with bibl.; F. Ruggiero, La

follia deiCristiani, Roma 2002, chap. 10; MJ. Edwards, "Origen on Christ, Tropology, andExegesis," in Metaphor, Allegory, andthe ClassicalTradition, ed. G.R. Boys-Stones, Oxf

2003,235-256: 252; Porphyryvs. Origen in Eus. HE6,\9; Eusebius vs. Porphyryin Praep.

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

29/45

ILE RamelliI Vigiliae Christianae 61 (2007) 313 -356 341

theorizes71

a threefold interpretation72

of the Bible, literal, moral, and

spiritual (i.e. typological and allegorical),73

in which each level corre

sponds to a component ofthe human being, , , , and

to a degree ofChristian perfection: incipientes, progredientes, perfetti.

Here I shall not linger on his theorization, but I shall offer a few exam

ples of allegorical reading of Scripture applied byOrigen in his arguments

in support of apokatastasis.

In Origens perspective ofcathartic sufferings and final reintegration,

adhesion to the Goodi.e. Godought not to derive from fear ofpun

ishment, but from knowledge and free will and conscious conviction. So,

in his homilies on Genesis (7:4) he draws a distinction between those who

adhere to God in awareness and out oflove and those who do so for fear

and because ofthreats, comparing the two categories to the children ofthe

free woman, Sarah, and those ofthe slave, Hagar. This, ofcourse, recalls

not only the story of Abraham in the bookofGenesis, but also the figurai

reading of it offered byPaul, in Gal 4:22-31, where he says that Hagar's and

Sarahs vicissitudes were .74

It is an allegorical interpretation

71 )This theorization {Princ. 4,2,4-6; 3,5) is analyzed e.g. byC. Blnnigen, Die griechische

Ursprung derjdisch-hellenistischen Allegme, Frankfurt a.M. etal. 1992,205-265, esp. 207-220, and Edwards, Origen against Plato, 123-152, who intends to demonstrate that Origens

exegesis cannot be defined Platonic or Middle-Platonic, although he admits Philo s influence

on Origen; see esp. 135ff. on the three exegetical levels, and 139-140: Origens exegetical

tripartition also corresponds to that ofGreek philosophy in , , .72 )

See K.J. Torjesen, "Body, Soul, and Spirit in Origens Theory ofExegesis," Anglican

TheobgicalReview 67(1985) 17-30; Dawson, Christian FiguraiReading, 75, 78and passim;

Simonetti, Origene esegeta, 20fF. Cf. also Horn. Lev. 5,1; Horn. Num. 9,7; Horn. Gen. 2,6;

Horn. Lev. 1,4; K. Torjesen, HermeneuticalProcedure and TheologicalMethodin Origens

Exegesis, Berlin 1986, 40ff., and my"Origen and the Stoic Allegorical Tradition," with

broad documentation on the three senses ofScripture.73 )

On the relativity of this distinction see my"Origen and the Stoic Allegorical Tradition."74 )

Dawson, Christian FiguraiReading, 24-27; Simonetti, Origene esegeta, 15. For Pauls

influence on Origen see E Cocchini, IIPaolo diOrigene, Roma 1992, and M. Simonetti,

"Presenza di Paolo nella cristologia patristica," Vetera Christianorum 40 (2003) 191-205,

194; Id., Ortodossia ederesiafra 1e IIsecoh, Soveria Mannelli 1994, 63fi. Paul himself seems

to have theorized the allegorical reading in 2Cor 3:12-18, where the veil on Moses' face at

Sinai is considered as follows: forthose who arefixatedon the text as an end in itself, thetext remains veiled, but those who turn to the Lord are enabled to see through the text to

its true aim and meaning (): for them the veil is removed: see Dawson Christian

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

30/45

342 I.L.E Rameli I Vigiline Christian 61 (2007) 313 -356

that highlights these two different levels in the intellectual and moral

development of the .Likewise, in Princ.

3,5,8,Origen emphasizes thatthe submission of all creatures to God, i.e. their salvation, will take place

not as a result of violence, nor by necessity that forces to subjection, but

thanks to words, reason, teaching, emulation of the best, good norms, and

also threats, when deserved and apt... For we humans too, when we edu

cate our servants or children, while they are not yet in the age of reason,

compel them by means of threats and fear, but when they begin to under

stand what is good, useful, and honest, then the fear of beating stops, and

they, persuaded by words and reason, find satisfaction in all that is good.

Thus, in Origen s view, the threat of an everlasting fire after death may be

helpful for those who still cannot adhere to the Good freely;75

for Origen

is persuaded that purifying fire is not really eternal,76

and in anycase, even

if it should last after the final apokatastasis, it will remain empty. The spir

itual interpretation of sufferings in the future world is provided by Origen

in the preface to Book1 of his Deprincipiis, 5: For the sinners there are

prepared the , the outer darkness, the prison and the furnace,

but let s see how we should understand all this, too . These torments are

interpreted in an allegorical way, and an eternal duration is excluded for

them, for Origen thinks that sin and the souls disharmony constitute a

punishment in themselves and that fire is nothing else but the fire of pas

sions, as is clear from Princ. 2,10,4: Now, let us see what the threat of

[Mt 25:41] means: in Isaiah, the prophet, we find that the fire that

punishes each one is defined as peculiar to each one. For he says: "Go into

the flash of your fire and the flame that you yourselves lit" [Is 50:11].7 7

It

seems to me that these words indicate that each sinner lights the flame of

his own fire. Tinder and nourishment for this fire are our sins, defined bythe Apostle as "wood, hay, and straw" [ICor 3:12].7 8 And I assume that,

75)For the pedagogical function ofGod s threats and the spiritual interpretation ofthe

resurrection held byOrigen (who never denied the resurrection of the body, however) seemy "Threats, punishment, and hope."76)

For a study of the meaning of in Origen see myApocatastasi, in the chapter

concerning Origen; Ead., "Origene ed il lessico dell'eternit," Adamantius 13 (2007); for a

study ofthe meaning of and in Greek pagan and Christian literature seeRamelli-Konstan, Termsfor Eternity.77)

The same quotation from Isaiah is used to confirm the same idea also in Horn, in Lev.

8/3/2019 At La 0001607148

31/45

ILE. RamelliIVigiliae Chnstianae 61 (2007) 313-356 343

just as in our body abundant consumption and quantity and quality of

harmful food produce fevers, and fevers of different kind and duration in

proportion to the consumption and the stimulation brought by the

infi rmity..., so, when the soul has gathered in itselfa large amount ofevil

deeds and abundance of sins, in due time all this collection ofevils boils to

produce torments and blazes forth to cause punishment. And when the

mind or conscience... will see, disclosed before its eyes, as it were, the

story of its crimes, then it will be agitated and stung by its own pricks, and

will become prosecutor and witness against itself... As to the souls sub

stance, some torments are provoked precisely by the sinners' evil feelings.

Origen does not at all seem to be disturbed by the characterization of the