Dialogue Between St Basil and St Gregory the Theologian on the Invisible Essence of God

The following text has kindly been shared with us by Nathan Porter, a doctoral candidate in patristic studies at Duke University and the General Editor of Lux Patrum, a publisher that has come to the attention of many with its new bilingual editions of Greek and Latin patristic texts as well as other writings relevant to the study of the Early Church.

The dialogue between Basil and Gregory (CPG 3067) is not a fourth-century text but a later Byzantine composition that forms part of a wider genre of pseudepigraphical dialogues and ‘Question and Answer’ texts attributed to the Theologian.^[1] It represents part of the systematizing trend in middle Byzantine theology, in which the figure of Gregory Nazianzen, as “the Theologian” par excellence, loomed extremely large. In addition to a longer Greek recension,^[2] it has also come down to us in medieval Slavonic^[3] and Georgian versions.^[4]

The Pappas Patristic Institute is grateful to Nathan Porter for making this text available. He has also provided the footnotes to the translation seen below.

---

Dialogue between St. Basil and St. Gregory the Theologian on the Invisible Essence of God[5]

Translated by Nathan Porter,

PhD Candidate, Duke University; General Editor, Lux Patrum

1. Basil: What is a principle (archē)?

Gregory: The first cause of the second cause.

2. Basil: This second cause dwelt substantially in the Virgin Mary?

Gregory: Yes, substantially.

3. Basil: How do we know that he came down[6] in substance and not in activity?

Gregory: Jeremiah says: This is our God, and no other will be reckoned besides him. Afterwards he was seen on earth and conversed with human beings (Bar 3:36, 38). And he is a human being, and who will know him? (Jer 17:9)

4. Basil: And he came down substantially. Indeed, he appeared to the Virgin and was seen by her, since he saw fit to dwell in her.

Gregory: He did not appear to her, nor did she see him.

5. Basil: Well then, he didn’t dwell in her, either. For then she would have seen him.

Gregory: From the fact that we don’t see our souls, does it follow that we do not possess souls in an appropriate way?

6. Basil: Don’t we know that we have souls?

Gregory: Mary also knew that God was in her; but those who have the Holy Spirit also know that they possess him from the activity, even though they don’t see the Spirit.

7. Basil: So the saints saw God and did not see the Spirit?

Gregory: Who saw [God]?

8. Basil: Abraham first of all, for it says that God was seen by Abraham (Gen 12:7).

Gregory: It says not that God was seen, but rather that an appearance (phantasia) of light [was seen].[7]  For the Lord says, Abraham rejoiced that he might see my day, and he saw and was glad (John 8:56). Not “me,” but my; and he is not talking about a temporal day, but is calling his light day, since among us light is called day.

9. Basil: Didn’t Jacob see him, since he said, I have seen the Lord face to face, and my life was preserved (Gen 32:30)?

Gregory: He appeared as a human being, and he himself [Jacob] saw him; and he also saw the angelic highway in the form of a ladder, wrestling as though with a human being, face-to-face.

10. Basil: But why did he say I have seen God (Gen 32:30)?

Gregory: Because of the activity in his thigh; because of the ascent and descent of the angels; and because his name was fittingly changed to Israel (Gen 32:25).

11. Basil: Didn’t Job say, First I heard you with hearing, but now my eye has seen you (Job 42:5)?

Gregory: But it was through a storm and clouds (Job 38:1).

12. Basil: Didn’t Moses, with glory upon his face, [see him]? For it was said of him, Mouth to mouth I will speak to him, and not in riddles (Num 12:8).[8]

Gregory: Add that he saw the glory of the Lord, not that of God.[9] For it says, And the Lord called to Moses from the midst of the cloud, and the form of his glory was like a flame of fire (Exod 24:16-17).

13. Basil: Wasn’t Elijah taken up?

Gregory: Yet Elijah did not [see him], but heard the sound of a gentle breeze.[10] For it says, A breeze went out and stood in front of the Lord on the mountain. And behold, the Lord passed by, and a mighty wind broke up the mountain and crushed the rocks. And after the wind there was an earthquake, and the Lord was not in the earthquake; and after the earthquake there was a fire, and the Lord was not in the fire; and after the fire, there was the sound of a gentle breeze, and the Lord was there. And behold, Elijah put the sheepskin over his face, for he dared not look at him (1 Kgs 19:11).

14. Basil: Didn’t Isaiah say, I saw the Lord, and the Seraphim standing round about him (Isa 6:12)?

Gregory: Not only did Isaiah not see him, but neither did the Seraphim see. Isaiah saw a vision; for it is written, The vision which Isaiah saw (Isa 1:1). And the Seraphim, who have six wings, covered their face with two, unable to endure the sight of the glory of God. But if these beings, who are greater than all the heavenly spirits, did not see God, then those who fall under them necessarily did not see.

15. Basil: How then does the prophet say, I saw the Lord seated on a throne, and his whole army at his right and at his left, and the angels came from elsewhere to stand before the Lord (1 Kgs 22:19-20), and again, I am Gabriel, who stands before the Lord (Luke 1:19)? When such things have been said, how can you assert without falsity that the Lord was not seen by the angelic orders, or that these prophets and angels spoke falsely?

Gregory: They neither spoke falsely, nor did they see God. For no one has ever seen God except the Only-begotten Son, as it is written (John 1:18).

16. Basil: If they saw, then they did not speak falsely.

Gregory: If they saw, then the Lord spoke falsely;[11] if they did not see, then they spoke falsely; and so, on your way of thinking, someone did not speak the truth.

17. Basil: What then are we say about this?

Gregory: The language has this form on our account. For it is written, The army of angels stood at his right and at his left, and he said, “Who will deceive Ahab?” (1 Kigs 22:19-20), and again, The angels came, and the devil came with them (Job 1:6). On your way of thinking, there will be deceit even in God; and the devil, like a friend of God, converses with him, and goes up to heaven and comes down. But one should never think this way. For there is no injustice with God, nor is he false in any way.[12] So then, those who say, We saw [his] glory (John 1:18) speak truly, and the Lord likewise speaks truly, for no one has ever seen the nature of God except the Only-begotten Son (John 1:18). But Who will deceive Ahab? and the coming of the devil indicate God’s consent; for although he did not will it, yet unless he had consented, no one could have acted in opposition to him.

18. Basil: Don’t human beings see the nature of angels?

Gregory: Just as the angels don’t see the substance of God, so human beings do not see that of angels. And to the extent that they do see angels, they see them only in part.

19. Basil: How did Abraham see [the angels]?

Gregory: He saw them as human beings (cf. Gen 18:2), which is why he prepared a calf and a fire.[13]

20. Basil: How did Moses see [the angels]?

Gregory: In the form of fire. For it says, And the angel of God called out in the flame of fire in the bush (Exod 3:2, 4).[14]

21. Basil: How did Mary, the Mother of the Lord, see Gabriel?

Gregory: In the form of a human being, which is why she believed only after questioning him (Luke 1:29, 34).

22. Basil: Was it because of the invisibility of the nature that they did not see, or because of the greatness of the glory that surrounded them?

Gregory: It was because of both.

23. Basil: How did the angels who were with Abraham eat,[15] and how did the Lord eat after the resurrection?

Gregory: Regarding the angels: Just as the sun dries up all the moisture under it, and even if it should touch the moisture, receives none into its own nature, so also the angels consumed the bread set before them, but received none into their own nature. As for the Lord: just as a fire consumes all the matter it receives, reducing it to ashes while removing its own nature from it, even so, after the fashion of this analogy, did he make [eating] his own.

---

[1] See Tadeusz Sinko, De traditione orationum Gregorii Nazianzeni, pars II: De traditione indirecta (Academiae Litterarum, 1923), 37.

[2] See Medea Norsa, Papyri greci et latini, vol. 13 (Enrico Ariani, 1949), no. 1296a.

[3] See Anissava Miltenova, “Slavonic Erotapokriseis: Sources, Transmission, and Morphology of the Genre,” in Lorenzo Di Tommaso, The Old Testament Apocrypha in the Slavonic Tradition: Continuity and Diversity (Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 287.

[4] See Michael van Esbroeck, “Un dialogue entre Basile et Grégoire conservé en Géorgien,” Christijanskij Vostok 2 n.s. (2001): 56–101.

[5] Greek text: G. Heinrici, “Dialogus Inter Sanctum Basilium et Sanctum Gregorium Theologum de Inuisibili Dei Essentia,” in Griechisch-Byzantinische Gesprächsbücher Und Verwandtes Aus Sammelhandschriften, Abhandlungen Der Sächsischen Akademie Der Wissenschaften in Leipzig 28 (Teubner, 1911), 32-35.

[6] katēlthen, an allusion to the Nicene Creed.

[7] The interpretation of theophanies in this text bears comparison with that of Gregory Palamas, and perhaps suggests a connection to the Hesychast controversy, in which the exegesis of theophanic texts loomed large. See Cory J. Hayes, “Deus in se et Deus pro nobis: The Transfiguration in the theology of Gregory Palamas and Its Importance for Catholic Theology,” Ph.D. diss. (Duquesne University, 2015), 92ff.

[8] Palamas discusses this passage in Hom. 6.6; 13.4.

[9] For the author of this text, “Lord” apparently designates God in his synkatabatic or economic self-revelation to creatures—paradigmatically in the incarnation, which is why “Lord” ordinarily refers to Christ himself in this work (e.g., §§16-17).

[10] Palamas discusses this passage in Hom. 6.12; cf. Triads III.1.36.

[11] The author seemingly conflates John 1:18, which is spoken either by John the Baptist or by the fourth evangelist, with John 6:46 (or perhaps 5:37), which is spoken by Christ.

[12] Cf. Ps.-Athanasius, Dial. trin. I.21.

[13] I.e., because he supposed them to have bodies capable of consuming material food. Cf. Ps.-Athanasius, Dial. trin. III.10; Eutherius of Tyana, Conf. XV.

[14] Reading ο θεου φησιν αγγελος for ο θεος φησιν αγγελον.

[15] Cf. Ps.-Ath. Dial. trin. III.10; Eutherius of Tyana, Conf. XV.

** The manuscript illuminations above depict not Basil and Gregory but Gregory the Theologian and Gregory of Nyssa, the brother of Basil. It forms part of a celebrated deluxe edition of the Theologian's orations: Paris gr. 550, f. 204r.