Did Gregory of Nyssa Teach Sola Scriptura? [Part 1]

 

We will start this article series, as per usual, by examining the material from Gregory of Nyssa's writings appealed to by Roman Catholic apologists to suggest that he held to the RC viewpoint concerning Scripture and Tradition.

Gregory of Nyssa

Against Eunomius 4.6

"And let no one interrupt me, by saying that what we confess should also be confirmed by constructive reasoning: for it is enough for proof of our statement, that the tradition has come down to us from our fathers, handed on, like some inheritance, by succession from the apostles and the saints who came after them." (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/290104.htm)

By the underlining provided above, it is obvious what the Romanist argument is, namely that Gregory of Nyssa believed understood "tradition" (paradosis) in the Roman Catholic sense. There are a two problems with this.

First, we need to see the full context of what Gregory is saying here. Here is a wider portion of the paragraph:

"Let our author, then, show this to begin with, that it is in vain that the Church has believed that the Only-begotten Son truly exists, not adopted by a Father falsely so called, but existing according to nature, by generation from Him Who is, not alienated from the essence of Him that begot Him. But so long as his primary proposition remains unproved, it is idle to dwell on those which are secondary. And let no one interrupt me, by saying that what we confess should also be confirmed by constructive reasoning: for it is enough for proof of our statement, that the tradition has come down to us from our fathers, handed on, like some inheritance, by succession from the apostles and the saints who came after them. They, on the other hand, who change their doctrines to this novelty, would need the support of arguments in abundance, if they were about to bring over to their views, not men light as dust, and unstable, but men of weight and steadiness: but so long as their statement is advanced without being established, and without being proved, who is so foolish and so brutish as to account the teaching of the evangelists and apostles, and of those who have successively shone like lights in the churches, of less force than this undemonstrated nonsense?" (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/290104.htm)

Two things will evidence that Gregory of Nyssa's understanding of paradosis is a bit different than that of Roman Catholicism.

[1] - In the original context, Gregory of Nyssa is talking about the eternal generation of the Son. He says that it is enough that paradosis confirms it. Now who would be foolish enough to suppose that the eternal generation of the Son isn't found in Scripture? This shows he is not necessarily talking about extrabiblical dogma as Rome thinks.

[2] - In book 2 of Against Eunomius, Gregory says the following:

"The Christian Faith, which in accordance with the command of our Lord has been preached to all nations by His disciples, is neither of men, nor by men, but by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, Who being the Word, the Life, the Light, the Truth, and God, and Wisdom, and all else that He is by nature, for this cause above all was made in the likeness of man, and shared our nature, becoming like us in all things, yet without sin. He was like us in all things, in that He took upon Him manhood in its entirety with soul and body, so that our salvation was accomplished by means of both:— He, I say, appeared on earth and conversed with men Baruch 3:37, that men might no longer have opinions according to their own notions about the Self-existent, formulating into a doctrine the hints that come to them from vague conjectures, but that we might be convinced that God has truly been manifested in the flesh, and believe that to be the only true mystery of godliness 1 Timothy 3:16, which was delivered to us by the very Word and God, Who by Himself spoke to His Apostles, and that we might receive the teaching concerning the transcendent nature of the Deity which is given to us, as it were, through a glass darkly 1 Corinthians 13:12  from the older Scriptures, — from the Law, and the Prophets, and the Sapiential Books, as an evidence of the truth fully revealed to us, reverently accepting the meaning of the things which have been spoken, so as to accord in the faith set forth by the Lord of the whole Scriptures , which faith we guard as we received it, word for word, in purity, without falsification, judging even a slight divergence from the words delivered to us an extreme blasphemy and impiety. " (Against Eunomius 2.1; link)

Notice that Gregory views Scripture as being the "faith" which is "handed down" (paradosis). He also says that to depart from Scripture is "extreme blasphemy and impiety."

On "Not Three Gods."

"we must keep for ever, firm and unmoved, the tradition which we received by succession from the fathers," (https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf205.viii.v.html)

Yet again, pay close attention to what Gregory says later on:

"We, on the other hand, following the suggestions of Scripture, have learnt that that nature is unnameable and unspeakable, and we say that every term either invented by the custom of men, or handed down to us by the Scriptures, is indeed explanatory of our conceptions of the Divine Nature, but does not include the signification of that nature itself...."

This confirms what I said above regarding Gregory's understanding of the concept of tradition/"handed down".

On the Soul and Resurrection

"As for ourselves, we take our stand upon the tenets of the Church," (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2915.htm)

In the same treatise, Gregory says this:

"we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings." (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2915.htm)

Presumably, such universal language as "every tenet" would include "the tenets of the church" (from the other quote above). 

Here is more of what Gregory said about Scripture in On the Soul and the Resurrection:

"And to those who are expert only in the technical methods of proof a mere demonstration suffices to convince; but as for ourselves, we were agreed that there is something more trustworthy than any of these artificial conclusions, namely, that which the teachings of Holy Scripture point to: and so I deem that it is necessary to inquire, in addition to what has been said, whether this inspired teaching harmonizes with it all....But it somehow seems to me now, I said, that the doctrine of the Resurrection necessarily comes on for our discussion; a doctrine which I think is even at first sight true as well as credible , as it is told us in Scripture..." (https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2915.htm)