Summary
Introduction
1 Who are the Cappadocian Fathers?
2 Why are they so important?
3 Main theological contributions
3.1 The end of the Arian controversy
3.2 Contributions to Christology
3.3 Contribution to mysticism
3.4 Exegesis
4 Men of the Church
5 Monasticism
Conclusions
References
Introduction
This text proposes a general introduction to the Cappadocian Fathers. It begins with a brief biographical presentation of each one, then indicates why they are important in the context of the Church and Christian theology, both in the East and the West. In a third part, the theological contributions of each one are presented, both in the controversy that followed the solution of Nicaea to the problem of Arianism, and in the elucidation of Christological issues, in the reflection on Christian mysticism, and in the development of exegesis. In a fourth part, the contribution of the three Cappadocians in the organization of the Church is indicated, and in the fifth part, to monasticism.
1 Who are the Cappadocian Fathers?
The term “Cappadocian Fathers” refers to three bishops of the 4th century: Basil of Caesarea (Cappadocia) (†379), also known as Basil the Great; his friend Gregory of Nazianzus (†389), known in the Christian East as “the Theologian”; and Basil’s brother, Gregory of Nyssa († after 394). The term “Cappadocians” refers to the region from which they originated, Cappadocia, an eastern region of the Anatolian peninsula, now Turkey. The custom of mentioning them together testifies to the Church’s perception of their union and unity of action, both in the theological field and in the ecclesiastical political action in facing the final phases of the Arian controversy. After the conciliar reform, the Latin liturgy celebrates Basil and Gregory Nazianzus on a single day, January 2, while the name of Gregory of Nyssa is found in the Roman Martyrology on January 10, where it also appeared before the Reform. It is the same date as the Byzantine calendar. Note that in the Byzantine (Gregorian) calendar, Basil and Gregory Nazianzus, in addition to their specific feast (respectively January 1 and January 25) are also celebrated on the feast of the Three Holy Doctors, January 30, together with John Chrysostom. The liturgical cult of the Nyssean appears later compared to that of his brother and of Nazianzus: the oldest mention we know of is in the Georgian version of the Jerusalem Lectionary (7th century), on August 23. Some theological positions of Gregory of Nyssa, which seemed too Origenist (even though there is debate about Nyssean’s actual idea regarding apocatastasis), probably cannot be excluded as a cause. The condemnation of Origen in 553 probably also influenced the late emergence of the Nyssean’s liturgical cult.
2 Why are they so important?
The importance of these three figures for the history of the Church and theology can hardly be underestimated. M. Simonetti writes:
With Basil, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa, the fusion between profound Christian feeling and Greek paideia is complete and is realized at the highest level, both of Christian spirituality and of classical education. Of high social extraction, educated in the most traditionally refined and complete way, and at the same time, raised in deeply Christian environments, they realized the ideal of a cultured Christianity, which knew how to accept everything valid in Hellenism, without distorting the main lines of the Christian message, in a synthesis that would remain paradigmatic for Eastern Christianity. (SIMONETTI, 1990, p. 89)
The family of Basil and Gregory of Nyssa is indeed one of the first examples of families that have been Christian for several generations, of great economic and cultural wealth, and that participated in the history of the evangelization of their own region, even giving personal testimony during persecutions. Their theology is therefore of particular interest, among other reasons, because it is one of the first products of people educated in the most classical Greek paideia, but at the same time, formed already in an environment that had long been Christian. Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus studied together in Athens, which was still the cultural capital of that time. Basil later moved to Constantinople, where, according to the testimony of the Nyssean, he was a disciple of the famous rhetorician Libanius. Basil left us an important work, known by various names, the most common being Discourse to the Youth, in which he shows how the study of the classics, done cum grano salis certainly, is not only not dangerous to faith but becomes even propaedeutic to the subsequent study of Holy Scripture and theology. Gregory of Nazianzus was a refined literate and a very capable rhetorician, and his works, both theological and literary, show his culture and his refined classical literary taste.
In addition to being linked to the evangelization of Cappadocia, the family of Basil and the Nyssean is also a family that gave the Church an impressive number of saints. Basil’s grandmother, Macrina Senior, was a disciple of Gregory Thaumaturgus (martyr, celebrated on March 2), who was, in turn, a disciple of Origen and is counted among the evangelizers of Cappadocia. In the Roman Martyrology before the Reform, Macrina Senior was remembered on January 14 (her name was omitted in the liturgical reform). Basil’s parents are also mentioned in the Martyrology (both in the old and reformed) on May 30. Besides Basil’s grandmother and parents, this family includes two other saints: another brother of Basil and Gregory, Peter, bishop of Sebaste (who was celebrated on January 9 but is now mentioned on March 26) and their sister Macrina the Younger (whose liturgical memory, in both calendars, remains on July 19). Macrina had a very notable influence on Gregory of Nyssa, who will remember her with touching accents in a letter (Ep. 19) and to whom he will dedicate an important work, the De Anima et resurrectione, defined by some as the Christian Phaedo, in which the dialogue on death and resurrection unfolds between Gregory and his sister on her deathbed, with the sister playing the “Socratic” role. It is impossible not to notice how important the feminine presence was in the transmission and personal experience of Basil and the Nyssean (PAMPALONI, 2003; SUNBERG, 2017). The persecutions faced by the family were undoubtedly one of the sources that gave Basil the peculiar energy with which he opposed anything that hindered the freedom of the Church. Gregory of Nazianzus’s family was located more or less in the same coordinates. It was an aristocratic and wealthy family, his father (known as Gregory the Elder), after converting from paganism, became bishop of Nazianzus, and his mother, Nona, also remembered in the Roman Martyrology (August 5), played an important role both in the conversion of her husband and in the education of her son, who dedicated a touching memory to his mother in one of his discourses (Orat. 18).
Basil and the two Gregories represent an almost unique case in the history of theology. First of all, for the friendship between them, especially between Basil and Nazianzus, although in the last years their friendship probably was severely tested and perhaps, in some way, experienced some cooling. Secondly, for the collaboration they managed to maintain, although not without difficulties, due to the different temperaments of the three and a certain “exuberance” in leadership by Basil towards his brother and friend during the struggle against Emperor Valens. But it was above all a peculiar union in the common effort in the field of theology, in which each one made their own capabilities fruitful in a synergistic way. The theological depth and overall vision of Church problems by Basil, the theological and literary sensitivity of Nazianzus, combined with his rhetorical skill, the gifts of philosophical speculation, and mystical experience of the Nyssean left an indelible mark on the history of theological development. To verify the possibility of explaining their method of doing theology “together” would be a topic worthy of deepening. After Basil’s death, which, according to most researchers, occurred in 379, the friend and the brother inherited his legacy. The tumultuous events that involved Gregory of Nazianzus in Constantinople and then in the council that Theodosius wanted to be held in the capital in 381 did not prevent that council and the role played by the two Gregories from representing the decisive victory of the theology of the three Cappadocians over the Arian danger.
3 Main theological contributions
3.1 The end of the Arian controversy
The theological contribution of the Cappadocians is situated in the final phase of the Arian controversy and, without a doubt, had a decisive impact on its cessation. The Council of Nicaea, with the affirmation of the term homoousios, had certainly cut off any possibility of the existence of Arius’s position, but, since the term ousia was not perceived as clearly distinct from hypostasis, the Eastern bishops, who had always supported a tripostatic Trinitarian theology (i.e., which emphasized the distinction of the three divine hypostases), saw in the term homoousios the danger of denying a real distinction between the Father and the Son, as affirming the same substance could also be understood as affirming the same hypostasis. The fear was not unfounded, for in Nicaea, among the supporters of Athanasius and homoousios, was also Marcellus of Ancyra, whose radical monarchian position was known and for which he would soon be condemned. Marcellus denied the distinction of hypostases in the Trinity because, for him, this would mean affirming three distinct gods, and proposed a purely economic modality of the distinction between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, which would ultimately be one “person.” The acceptance of the council’s conclusions by the Eastern bishops was obtained under undeniable pressure from Constantine, who wanted to quickly close the matter for political and strategic reasons, after the recent defeat of Licinius (324) and having become the sole emperor. But a theological convergence was not actually achieved, and this fact caused the internal tension that immediately deflagrated, leading to a tumultuous succession of synods and proposals of formulas of faith for twenty years, starting with the important synod of Antioch in 341 (for these formulas, see KELLY, 1989).
The next phase, which we can start with the death of Constantine and the division of the empire among his sons, saw Emperor Constantius impose, for the religious peace of the empire—of which, after the death of his brother Constans (350) and the defeat of the usurper Magnentius (353), he had become the sole emperor—a formula of faith that could satisfy all parties but which was actually unacceptable both to the Eastern bishops and, naturally, to those most loyal to Athanasius, as it contained expressions of clear Arian sense. The adherents of the new formula are called homoeusians, from the term homoiousios, “similar” to the Father, proposed to express what Athanasius and the other Nicenes intended, without using, however, the discussed term. For this reason, the term “semi-Arian” for this position is unacceptable today. Constantius managed, however, to obtain, by force and coercion, the signatures of almost all the bishops, both from the East and the West. This was achieved through the simultaneous celebration of two distinct councils, one in Seleucia Isaurica and the other in Rimini, where the emperor had separated the more divided Easterners from the more united Westerners in Nicene fidelity. But the acclamation of Flavius Claudius Julian (known as the Apostate) by the legions stationed in Gaul as emperor in 360 and Constantius’s death the following year halted the consolidation of the religious peace he had dreamed of. After Julian’s death in battle against the Sassanids in 363, Valens ascended to the throne of the Eastern part of the empire. Being sympathetic to the Arians, the project was vigorously resumed. This time, however, it was limited only to the East, as his brother Valentinian, the emperor in the West who had appointed him to govern the Eastern part of the empire, was Nicene.
This is the most important moment when the Cappadocians, especially Basil, are in action. He had the merit of understanding that, contrary to what the homoeusian current, in which Emperor Constantius recognized himself, had thought, a political solution to a theological problem could not work (and the same will be verified a century later with the reception of the Council of Chalcedon and the failure of the Henotikon). Then, in addition to the careful ecclesiastical policy of defending the Church in the face of Valens’s hostility, Basil developed a solution that would result definitively in the problem of distinguishing between ousia and hypostasis, based on an Aristotelian distinction between “first ousia” and “second ousia“, one indicating substance in general and the other individual substance, or hypostasis (for the path that led Basil to this result, see SIMONETTI, 2006). Thus, the Trinitarian formula one ousia and three hypostases was consecrated. Another decisive contribution, always arising from the polemic with the Arians, was regarding the divinity of the Holy Spirit, a central theme in theological discussions starting especially in 370, and about which Basil wrote a famous work (De Spiritu Sancto), also of great interest because Basil appeals to the lex orandi as a source of theology.
One of the evolutions of Arian thought, far beyond Arius’s own positions, was what became known as anomeanism, for which the difference between the Father and the Word was absolutely radical. One of the most famous theological representatives of this current was undoubtedly Eunomius, quite active in the second phase of the Arian controversy. His radical theological rationalism was refuted in two works, one by Basil and another by his brother Gregory, perhaps the most famous. Against the anomean theology are also the famous five theological discourses of Gregory of Nazianzus, pronounced in 380, in Constantinople.
3.2 Contributions to Christology
The classic subdivision of manuals characterizes the 4th century as the century of Trinitarian controversies and the 5th century as that of Christological controversies. In reality, in our opinion, it is not actually incorrect to also consider the Arian question as fundamentally Christological, as it questioned the divine nature of the Word. And the question about his incarnation, although fully thematized in the 5th century, was not absent in previous centuries. Without going back to the 3rd century with what could be called, in cinematic jargon, a trailer of the 5th-century controversies, i.e., the famous dispute involving, in Antioch, Paul of Samosata and the priest Malchion (NAVASCUÉS 2004), undoubtedly the second half of the 4th century also recognized the full actuality of the question, thanks to the figure of Apollinaris of Laodicea, against whom the most attentive theological minds of the time, including the Cappadocians, moved (BELLINI, 1978). At first, Basil held Apollinaris in good regard, not knowing him personally but only by reputation, as being, among other things, a fervent supporter of Athanasius and the Council of Nicaea (LIENHARD, 2006). He even consulted him on some issues (the Basilian epistolary). During his teaching in Antioch at the end of the 4th century, Apollinaris also had Jerome among his students. But when his Christology became better known, not only did the Cappadocians immediately distance themselves, but another theological front was formed in favor of the two Gregories (by then, Basil had already passed away). According to Apollinaris, in the incarnation, the Word would have taken the place (and therefore exercised the functions) of the human nous (in the classical tripartite model, nous, psyche and soma) or the soul (in the bipartite model anima/corpus), both models being found in his writings. Thus, in Apollinaris’s intention, who wanted to refute Arians and Sabellians, the reality of the incarnation was clearly affirmed. The resulting outcome was, however, unacceptable, as if the nous, the part that specifies humanity in man, was not human in Christ but the same Logos, at least two absurd consequences resulted: that Christ would not have been fully human and that divine transcendence was practically denied, reduced to one of the human “functions”. Gregory of Nazianzus strongly emphasized this, adopting the famous adage “what was not assumed by the Word was not saved”. Gregory of Nyssa also wrote an entire work against Apollinaris. In a polemic, very probably with Antiochene theologians (BEELEY, 2011), Gregory of Nazianzus used a famous expression that clarifies his view: in Christ, the two natures are not allos/allos, but allo/allo, using a distinction allowed by the Greek language, which practically means that in Christ there are not two subjects but two distinct natures. In the response to Apollinaris, an aspect peculiar to Gregory of Nyssa’s Christology (also called “Christology of transformation” DALEY, 2002) appears, which is deeply related to the peculiar Nyssean concept of epektasis and a positive conception of change (tropē) (DANIÉLOU, 1970).
3.3 Contribution to mysticism
Among modern researchers, Jean Daniélou was one of the first to intuit the importance of the mystical dimension of Gregory of Nyssa. In many aspects, Gregory was even considered the “father” of Christian mysticism, especially from the Life of Moses and his Homilies on the Song of Songs, which take up the Origenist heritage with their own specificities, such as the idea of infinite progress (PAMPALONI, 2010) and what has been called the mysticism of darkness (PONTE, 2013). Gregory’s thought influenced mystics both in the East and the West. In the East, beyond the Greek-speaking realm, the figure of the Syriac mystic John of Dalyatha should be mentioned (PUGLIESE, 2020), while in the West, certainly the name of William of Saint-Thierry and his influence on 12th-century Cistercian mysticism should be cited.
3.4 Exegesis
We cannot fail to mention the exegesis of these Fathers. From Basil, we have the first Hexaemeron of which we have knowledge, and it will represent a literary genre of enormous success, especially in the Middle Ages. The exegesis of Nazianzus and the Nyssean generally has a lot of influence from Origen but without lending itself to accusations of radical allegorism. A magnificent example of a response to accusations of allegorism is given exactly by Gregory of Nyssa, who, to respond to criticisms that he denied a real cognitive content to allegorical exegesis, wrote his Life of Moses in two parts. In the first, he presents Moses’ life through a literal exegesis, and in the second, he does so through spiritual, that is, allegorical exegesis, thus showing that one does not exclude the other.
4 Men of the Church
From what we have said about the description of the context in which the theological contribution of the Cappadocians developed, the dimension of Basil as a capable and decisive man of action in the struggle for the freedom of the Church, in opposition to Emperor Valens’s maneuvers, emerges. In this struggle, the two Gregories also act as protagonists – we might say – despite themselves. When Valens divided Cappadocia into two provinces (Cappadocia I, with the capital in Caesarea, and Cappadocia II, with the capital in Tyana) – according to some researchers to resize Basil’s power, then bishop of Caesarea and metropolitan of Cappadocia; according to others simply for fiscal reasons – Basil reacted promptly and decisively. To neutralize such a plan and the ambition of the (Arian) bishop Antimus of Tyana, who would have wanted to regain the rights of the metropolitan of Cappadocia II, Basil defends the thesis that there should be no coincidence between ecclesiastical and civil circumscriptions. A council held in 372 decided this way (DI BERARDINO, 2006), and Basil took advantage to create new dioceses in Cappadocia II, appointing friendly bishops, among whom was his friend Gregory, in the small locality of Sasima. Gregory refused to go there, provoking a rather harsh reaction from his friend, which seems to have strained the relationship between them. While his parents lived, Gregory remained in Nazianzus, then devoted himself, from 374 until Basil’s death, to a retired life, as he had always wanted to do. Basil, with the same method, also appointed his brother Gregory to the see of Nyssa, but the Nyssean’s administrative abilities were not comparable to his philosophical ones, and he was soon easily contested and finally deposed by an Arian council in 376. Some of his decisions were also strongly criticized by Basil, who did not spare criticisms to his brother in some of his letters to other bishops. The choice of Amphilochius, cousin of Nazianzus, for the see of Iconium was more successful, and the relationship with him remained one of great friendship, cordiality, and respect, unlike the relationship with his brother and friend Gregory, and Basil dedicated to Amphilochius the already cited treatise on the Holy Spirit.
Another field in which Basil passionately engaged was supporting Meletius in the events that followed the Antioch schism. He tried by all means, as his correspondence with Pope Damasus shows, to convince the West of the need to unite efforts to defeat Valens, and that, for this purpose, the support of the “Westerners” (including Athanasius) was necessary. Part of this effort consisted in convincing the radical Nicenes, through his intense epistolary activity and contacts, that Meletius’s homoeusian positions, and his own, were perfectly orthodox with the faith of Nicaea.
After Basil’s death in 379, the two Gregories gained their own light. With the tragic defeat of Adrianople against the Goths and Valens’s death in battle, Emperor Gratian appointed one of his generals, Theodosius, a proven Nicene, to the East. The political and religious climate then underwent a profound change, and Gregory of Nazianzus, thanks to the eminent position of Amphilochius of Iconium’s sister, Theodosia, was called in 379 to Constantinople to revive the small orthodox minority. He agreed to leave his beloved retreat in Isauria and embarked on the mission again. In Constantinople, no church was granted to non-Arians, and Theodosia made part of her palace available for a chapel, which would be called Anastasis, Resurrection Chapel, on which Gregory wrote some touching verses. His mission was not easy, and on the night of Easter 379, there was even an incursion of Arians into the chapel, determined to prevent baptisms and the non-Arian creed from being pronounced there. The events in Constantinople became complicated. With the seat vacant and considering that Gregory had never taken possession of Sasima, making him a “free” bishop, he was chosen for succession in the prestigious see of the imperial city. An usurper named Maximus, supported by Peter, bishop of Alexandria, contested his election, even managing to co-opt Ambrose of Milan and Pope Damasus to his side, causing great bitterness in Gregory. In power in Constantinople, Theodosius expelled the Arians from the city. The council then opened in 381. With the unexpected death of Meletius of Antioch, who presided over the council, the presidency was offered to Gregory, but he had to endure attacks from Egyptian bishops, Maximus, and Roman delegates, who accused him of not being able to be bishop of Constantinople as he was already titular of Sasima. Gregory, in full consonance with his very sensitive character, did not choose the path of resistance but left everything and went away, and Nectarius was consecrated in his place. This sad epilogue left indelible marks on Gregory, as can be seen in many of his subsequent writings. The last years finally saw him as bishop of Nazianzus, although reluctantly, engaged in studies, anti-Apollinarian polemics, and preaching. He died in 390.
The Nyssean, after Basil’s death, began a prolific activity in composing works that only ended with his death, which happened after 394. He also participated in the council of Constantinople, and after his friend’s departure from the scene, he became the most authorized representative of Nicene orthodoxy, being sent on some missions that manifest the great intellectual and ecclesial authority he had reached at this time, although not all these missions were concluded positively.
5 Monasticism
The three Cappadocians also left an important mark on the development of monasticism, particularly Basil and his experience before episcopal ordination. This experience, although not fitting into the canons of monasticism as we understand it today, nevertheless left indelible traces, especially in Eastern monasticism. Returning from studies abroad in 355, Basil moved towards a more conscious Christian life, thanks to the influence of his sister Macrina, who had always shown a great inclination for the ascetic life. The sister’s influence is reported by the Nyssean: some modern researchers suggest the influence of a famous ascetic of that time, Eustathius of Sebaste, an important figure for Basil for a long time, as we detect from his epistolary. He undertook various travels through regions known for the presence of figures living a life that today we would call monastic, although still lacking the structures we currently associate with the term. By the end of 357, he received baptism (also with a profound Christian formation, baptism at that time was still often received as an adult, as seen in the more known case of Augustine) and retired to solitude on a family property in Anesi. From there, he sent many letters to Gregory, inviting him to join him in that life. For a while, his friend joined him in Anesi. This experience of seeking solitude to be at peace, study, and meditate was lived within the family circle, on their properties (some suggested a parallel with Augustine’s retreat in Cassiciacum before his baptism). Later, having also spent some time with Eustathius of Sebaste, although his asceticism was too radical for Basil, over time, Basil developed a form of communal life original in relation to the anchoritic model, whose origin is connected with Anthony of the desert, and the cenobitic model, according to the Pachomian model. While still a presbyter, he created a true and unique small town to welcome pilgrims, foreigners, and the sick, known as Basileias. His ascetic teachings are evident, especially in his Rules (both the “short” and the “long” collections). Although Basil thought of this way of life for all Christians, his Rules and writings will constitute the solid foundation, still today, of Eastern monasticism, which, with the exception of the Studite origin, can rightly be called “Basilian”.
Conclusion
From these few references, it is possible to understand that the study of the Cappadocian Fathers takes us to the heart of the 4th century, with its difficulties and splendors. It is no coincidence that the 4th century is called the “golden century” of patristics. It is the time of the formation of the liturgy (the Eastern Church knows several anaphoras attributed to Basil), the development of the consciousness of dogmatic language, and the first ecumenical councils. Throughout this very fruitful period, the Cappadocians are present. To engage with them, therefore, if on the one hand requires large-scale effort because one must delve into philosophy, history, theology, classical rhetoric, and many other fields, on the other hand, it represents a magnificent gateway to knowing one of the most fascinating periods of Late Antiquity, when the scent of the classical world had not yet completely faded, and the cultural action of the Church, in its simultaneous commitment to inculturation and fertilization, was in one of its periods of greatest splendor. Studies on Basil and Nazianzus remain ever alive, but it must be recognized that among the three, the one who enjoys continuous interest from researchers, not only limited to the circle of Antiquity specialists, is Gregory of Nyssa, thanks also to the fact that he is one of the few Fathers whose almost complete works are available in a critical edition, Gregorii Nysseni Opera (GNO), a monumental enterprise initiated by W. Jaeger. Another sign of interest is that we have a dictionary dedicated to Gregory of Nyssa, which greatly facilitates the research of specific themes in the Nyssean’s work. Finally, contributing significantly to this current “success” of Gregory, also among authors not directly interested in the theological aspect of his writings, is the philosophical and mystical side, which seems to respond well to a research/interest that appears always current in the present historical conjuncture.
Massimo Pampaloni SJ (visiting professor at FAJE). Original Italian text. Submitted: 09/30/2022; Approved: 11/30/2022; Published: 12/30/2022. Translation: Francisco Taborda SJ
References
In the volume by Moreschini, which, in my opinion, remains today the best introduction to the Cappadocian Fathers (where Evagrius is also treated), there is an excellent bibliography for each of them; therefore, we refer to it. Here we indicate only some works we cited in the entry and some texts in Portuguese.
Main translations in Portuguese
BASIL OF CAESAREA. Homily on Luke 12; Homilies on the origin of man; Treatise on the Holy Spirit. 2nd ed. São Paulo: Paulus, 2005.
GREGORY OF NYSSA. The creation of man; The soul and the resurrection; The great catechesis. São Paulo: Paulus, 2011.
GREGORY OF NYSSA. Life of Moses. Campinas (SP): CEDET, 2018. (Note: this edition uses a translation that has long existed on the internet. It does not indicate who translated it and whether the translation was made from Greek or from a translation in another language).
GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS. Theological discourses. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1984.
Reading suggestions
BEELEY, C. A. The Early Christological Controversy: Apollinarius, Diodore, and Gregory of Nazianzen. Vigiliae Christianae, v. 65, p. 376-407, 2011.
BELLINI, E. (Ed.). On Christ. The great debate in the fourth century. Milan: Jaca Book, 1978.
CADERNOS PATRÍSTICOS, v. 5 n. 9 (2013). (Monographic issue on the Cappadocians)
DALEY, B. “Heavenly Man” and “Eternal Christ”: Apollinarius and Gregory of Nyssa on the Personal Identity of the Savior. The Journal of Early Christian Studies, v. 10, p. 469-488, 2002.
DANIÉLOU, J. L’être et le temps chez Grégoire de Nysse. Leiden: Brill, 1970.
DI BERARDINO, A. Cappadocia-II. Council. In: New Dictionary of Patristics and Christian Antiquities. Rome: Marietti 1820, 2006.
GREGORII NYSSENI OPERA (GNO). Online edition. Available at: https://scholarlyeditions.brill.com/gnoo/ Accessed: Sep 12, 2022.
KELLY, J. N. D. Early Christian doctrines. 5th ed. London: A&C Black, 1989.
LIENHARD, J. T. Two Friends of Athanasius: Marcellus of Ancyra and Apollinaris of Laodicea. Zeitschrift für antikes Christentum / Journal of Ancient Christianity, v. 10, n. 1, 2006.
MATEO-SECO, L.-F.; MASPERO, G. Gregory of Nyssa, Dictionary. Rome: Città Nuova, 2007.
MCCARTHY SPOERL, K. Apollinarius and the Response to Early Arian Christology. Studia Patristica, v. 26, p. 421-427, 1993.
MCCARTHY SPOERL, K. Apollinarian Christology and the Anti-Marcellian Tradition. Journal of Theological Studies, v. 45, p. 545-568, 1994.
MORESCHINI, C. Basil the Great. São Paulo: Loyola, 2010.
MORESCHINI, C. The Cappadocian Fathers. History, literature, theology. Rome: Città Nuova, [n.d.].
MORESCHINI, C. Gregory of Nazianzus. São Paulo: Loyola, 2010.
NAVASCUÉS BENLLOCH, P. Paul of Samosata and his adversaries: a historical-theological study of Antiochene Christianity in the 3rd century. Rome: Institutum patristicum Augustinianum, 2004.
PAMPALONI, M. The word as a doctor of the soul. Two letters of the “consolatio” genre by Basil of Caesarea. Perspectiva Teológica, v. 35, p. 301-323, 2003.
PAMPALONI, M. The infinite immersion: an introduction to Gregory of Nyssa. Cadernos Patrísticos, v. 5, n. 9, p. 69-88, 2010.
PIERANTONI, C. Apollinarius of Laodicea and his adversaries: aspects of the Christological controversy in the 4th century. Santiago: Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, 2009.
PONTE, M. N. Q. The mysticism of darkness in Gregory of Nyssa’s “Life of Moses”. Pensar-Revista Eletrônica da FAJE, v. 4, n. 1, p. 5-24, 2013.
PUGLIESE, P. R. The infinite inner garden. The mysticism of John of Dalyatha and Gregory of Nyssa. Rome: Pontifical Oriental Institute – Valore italiano Lilamé, 2020.
SIMONETTI, M. Genesis and development of the Trinitarian doctrine of Basil of Caesarea. In: STUDIES IN POST-NICENE CHRISTOLOGY. Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum. Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 2006. p. 235-258.
SUNBERG, C. D. The Cappadocian Mothers. Deification Exemplified in the Writings of Basil, Gregory, and Gregory. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2017.