Gregory of Nazianzus Approved Idolatry

Gregory of Nazianzus tells a story about a legion of soldiers in the army of emperor Julian the Apostate, many of whom were “Christians,” and that they were accustomed to bowing to and offering incense to Julian’s image. He says Julian acted very deceitfully and cleverly one day by having his image painted alongside a bunch of pagan deities, and then telling everyone to bow and offer incense to his image as usual, causing the Christians to commit idolatry by worshiping the idols that were placed alongside his own image – as if offering incense to the emperor’s image hadn’t already anathematized by the church in the first 300 years! How could all of these men be converted to Christianity and not know that offering incense to the image of the emperor was THE way to deny Christ for the first three centuries? How could they be so ignorant?

Truly, this constituted a complete failure on the part of bishops like Gregory of Nazianzus, who was raised by a father belonging to a bizarre religion that blended paganism and Judaism (called the Hypsistarii), then converted to post-Nicene Christianity at his wife’s persuasion, and then spent most of his life as an Arian in the pocket of the emperor. It would come as no surprise that such a man failed to teach his son correctly, when Gregory himself received an unlawful ordination to the priesthood from his own father!

Here is the story in which the ignorant Gregory endorses idolatry (even as it is defined by the Cathodox):

80. It is an imperial law—whether it holds for all men among whom kingship exists I know not, but for the Romans it is one of those customs most zealously observed—that those who rule are to be honored (τιμᾶσθαι) with public images. For crowns, diadems, the splendor of the purple robe, the ranks of spearmen, and the multitude of subjects are not enough to establish their sovereignty; rather, they also require obeisance (προσκυνήσεως), so that they might appear more august. And not only the obeisance (προσκυνοῦνται) paid to their own persons, but also that paid to their likenesses in sculptures and paintings, so that the reverence (σέβας) given to them may be more insatiable and complete.
81. And what does he [Julian] contrive? What snare does he set for the more steadfast among the Christians? Just like those who mix poisons with food, he mixed impiety with the customary honors (τιμαῖς) paid to the emperors, bringing the laws of the Romans and the worship (προσκύνησιν) of idols into one. And for this reason, painting the demons right alongside his own images, he displayed his portraits to the publics and cities—and especially to the governors of the provinces—as if they were just some other customary paintings, so that it would be entirely impossible to escape doing evil. For either one had to conform to the worship of idols along with the honor (τιμῇ) of the emperors, or insult the emperors by fleeing from these idols, since the worship (προσκυνήσεως) was mixed. This trap and this so sophistically devised snare of impiety was escaped by only a few of the more devout and discerning, who also paid the penalty for their discernment; under the pretext, indeed, that they had broken the law regarding the honor (τιμὴν) of the emperor, but in truth risking danger on behalf of the true King and true religion. Yet many of the more simple-minded and gullible were caught. For these, perhaps, there is forgiveness for their ignorance, since they were snatched away into impiety by trickery. Such then was this matter, and it alone would have been enough to publicly expose the king’s purpose; for we do not assume that the same behaviors are becoming to kings and to private citizens, because both are not of the same dignity. For we might permit a private citizen to act even with craftiness; for to him who is not able to use force openly, a clever device is forgivable. But for a king—for whom being overcome in power happens to be exceedingly shameful—it is even more shameful, I think, and more unbecoming to steal his attempts and objectives by trickery.
82. But there is another matter, which belongs to the very same mindset and purpose, but in its measure is much worse and more impious, as the evil reached more people; this I will add to what has been said. It was a day for an imperial gift—whether an annual one, or one devised by the king at that moment on account of his wickedness—and it was necessary for the military forces to be present to be honored (τιμηθησομένους), according as each held rank or position. Again came the stage-play of servility; again the drama of impiety: that the inhuman should be drugged with a kind of benevolence, and military mindlessness along with greed—by which most of them live—should be baited with money. He, therefore, sat presiding, brilliantly celebrating against true religion, and thinking highly of his schemes; like some Melampus, I think, or Proteus, being and becoming all things, and easily changing himself into different forms. And what were the things around him, and how worthy of how many laments by those of right mind—not only for those who were present then, but also for those who now receive that spectacle by hearsay?”
83. Gold was laid out, frankincense was laid out, the fire was near at hand, and the heralds stood close by; and the setup was made to look persuasive, as if this were the rule of an imperial gift, at least of the more ancient and honorable (τιμιωτέρας) kind. Then what? It was required to cast incense upon the fire, and to receive from the king the wages of destruction, so small for so great a matter—for entire souls and for impiety toward God. Alas for the bargain! Alas for the exchange! An entire army was purchasable by a single trick; and they who had subdued the world fell by a little fire and gold, and through a tiny bit of smoke, with the majority not even knowing their own slaughter; for this was the most grievous part. Someone would come forward expecting to gain, and did not even possess himself after the gain; he did obeisance (προσεκύνει) to the right hand of the king, and did not understand that in doing obeisance (προσκυνῶν) he was greeting his own executioner. Even for those who did know, it was of no help, once they were caught beforehand by the evil, and considered their initial folly an unbreakable law. What myriads of Persians, what archers, what slingers could have achieved this? What iron soldier, invulnerable from every side? What siege engines against walls could have accomplished what a single hand, a single moment, and a foul counsel brought about?
84. I will mix with these accounts a story more pitiable than what has been said. Some of those who were caught through ignorance are said, after they suffered this and returned home, to have shared a meal with their messmates. Then, as the drinking proceeded to the usual cold water, as if no danger was upon them, they looked up, made the sign of the cross, and invoked Christ over the cup of cold water. But one of their messmates wondered at this and said, “What is this? You invoke Christ after your denial?” “How have we denied Him?” said those half-dead men, “and what is this strange thing we hear?” And when he said, “Because you cast incense upon the fire,” and explained that this constituted the denial, they immediately jumped up from the banquet, just like madmen and those driven out of their minds, boiling with zeal and passion. They ran through the marketplace shouting and saying, “We are Christians, Christians in our souls! Let every man hear, and before all, God, for whom we both live and shall die! We have not been false to You, Savior Christ; we have not denied the blessed confession. Even if our hand stumbled, our intention did not follow it. We were outwitted by the emperor; we have not been wounded by gold. We strip off the impiety, we are cleansed by blood.” Then, running up to the emperor and flinging down the gold very boldly, they shouted, “We have not received gifts, Emperor, but have been condemned to death; we were not called to receive honor (τιμὴν), but have been sentenced to dishonor. Grant a favor to your soldiers: slaughter us for Christ, by whom alone we are ruled. Return fire for fire; make us ashes instead of those ashes. Cut off the hands which we wickedly extended; the feet with which we wickedly ran. Honor (τίμησον) others with your gold, who will not regret taking it; but for us Christ is enough, whom we have in place of all things.” They spoke these words and at the same time urged the others to recognize the deceit, to sober up from the intoxication, and to make their defense to Christ through blood. – Gregory of Nazianzus, Against Emperor Julian I (362 AD), chapter 80

No one can excuse Gregory or the “Christians” in the army who offered incense to Julian’s image as if they just didn’t realize Julian was a pagan emperor, since publicly renounced Christianity and reinstituted the worship of the pagan gods only WEEKS after assuming the throne in 361. The event described by Gregory took placed in late 362, a full year after Julian’s persecution of Christianity began. Thus, Gregory was giving permission for Christians to bow down and serve the images of pagan emperors! There is simply no denying that the post-Nicene church was falling into apostasy by allowing such a great sin, which had previously been well-known as the quintessential act of denying Christ.

If you ask any Cathodox why it was a sin for the three youths to worship Nebuchadnezzar’s image, they’ll give all sorts of responses: “Because Nebuchadnezzar called himself a god! And he wasn’t a canonized saint! And he was threatening people with death if they didn’t bow to his image!” All of these responses are foolish, of course, since Nebuchadnezzar never called himself a god, nor did he need to be a canonized saint to lawfully receive proskynesis (according to the Cathodox, bowing to an image is no different from bowing to their living person), nor would Nebuchadnezzar be any different from the other kings of the earth if he required people to bow to him under penalty of death! But let’s address the hypocrisy now: Julian the apostate called himself a god (in traditional Roman emperor fashion), he never even claimed to be a Christian (he was openly pagan), and he was vigorously trying to stamp out Christianity by persecuting Christians who didn’t worship his images! So how could it POSSIBLY be lawful to bow to his image? If you aren’t allowed to worship Nebuchadnezzar’s image, why would you be allowed to worship Julian’s? How could Gregory (and presumably others) think this was lawful? It could only come from mass amnesia in the church, a total failure to recollect even RECENT dogmas held by their fathers.

John of Damascus defends bowing to images of the saints, but Gregory goes so much farther by defending the worship of a pagan emperor’s statue! And he even admits that the emperors command it! One orthodox apologist I debated named Jacob came up with his own reason for refusing to worship Nebuchadnezzar’s statue (we always hear new reasons). He said, “I wouldn’t bow if the emperor commanded me to. It has to be voluntary. It’s a sin to require people to bow and offer incense to the statue, but it’s no sin fi they do it voluntarily.” This argument completely fails to recognize the fact that Christians were actually given COMPASSION for being threatened with torture if they didn’t worship, whereas those who voluntarily worshiped were considered the worse sinners. Aside from that, Gregory of Nazianzus endorses bowing to and offering incense to the image of an openly pagan emperor, a persecutor of the church, and who COMMANDS people to honor him through his image! Gregory of Nazianzus has clearly lost his mind. And how utterly ridiculous to call this a “clever” trick! Julian asked them to do nothing more than the previous emperors asked in the first three centuries. “Bow to my statue and offer it incense!” Does Gregory know nothing of church history?

We can safely assume that being the bishop of Constantinople brought enormous pressure. There was certainly no city where worship of the emperor’s image was more prevalent than the emperor’s own headquarters, New Rome. How can any bishop be expected to oppose the emperor’s edicts when their very ordination relies on the emperor’s approval? And how can he be expected to condemn such practices when the whole church is run by completely disingenuous people – mostly pagans who converted because Christianity had become popular, or Arians who were willing to do absolutely anything to secure an appointment by the emperor? No doubt, Gregory observed people worshiping the emperor’s images frequently, but because he had never been educated on the matter, he thought nothing of it.

Gregory’s endorsement of idolatry is indefensible, as Theodosius I outlawed the offering of incense to imperial images less than a year after Gregory stepped down as bishop of Constantinople. Even the mass-murdering Theodosius knew it was idolatry! Why didn’t Gregory?

Around the time of Julian’s reign, there are stories of “Christians” offering incense to the image of the supposedly-Christian Constantine and being condemned for it by bishops. In one account (which comes from Photius, who summarizes the Arian historian Philostorgius),

This enemy of God [Philostorgius] also accuses the Christians of propitiating the image (εἰκόνα) of Constantine, which stands on the porphyry column, with sacrifices, and of honoring it with lamp-lightings and incense, and of offering prayers to it as if to a god and performing avertive supplications for deliverance from calamities. – Photius, Epitomes of Philostorgius’ Ecclesiastical History, 2.17

As we have proven repeatedly, Christians in the post-Nicene era were acting exactly like pagans. Nowadays, the Cathodox continue to do this very thing to images of Constantine!

In fairness, even though Gregory told his congregations that worshiping the images of pagan emperors was harmless, he never taught that Christians should worship God through lifeless images. On the contrary, he taught correctly concerning the true worship of God, that God is worshiped without a man-made image. In a book he wrote almost 25 years later, during his retirement (and following the ban of image-worship throughout the empire), Gregory either recants his own past sin or else contradicts himself accidentally:

13. And Justice and Love, are they not praiseworthy dispositions, the one opposed to injustice, the other to hate, and at one time intensifying themselves, at another relaxed, now taking possession of us, now leaving us alone, and in a word, making us what we are, and changing us as colours do bodies? Or are we rather to leave all these things, and to look at the Deity absolutely, as best we can, collecting a fragmentary perception of It from its images (εἰκασμάτων)? What then is this subtle thing, which is of these, and yet is not these, or how can that Unity which is in its Nature uncomposite and incomparable, still be all of these, and each one of them perfectly? Thus our mind faints to transcend corporeal things, and to converse with the Incorporeal, stripped of all clothing of corporeal ideas, until it contemplates, along with its own weakness, things beyond its power. For every rational nature longs for God and the first cause; but it is unable to grasp Him, for the reasons I have stated. And laboring with desire, and as it were convulsing, and not bearing the loss, it makes a second voyage — either to look at visible things and make some one of them a god, a poor contrivance — for what among visible things is higher and more divine in form than the one who sees, so that one might be the worshipper (προσκυνοῦν) and the other the worshipped (προσκυνούμενον)? — or through the beauty and good order of visible things to come to know God, and to use sight as a guide to things beyond sight, and not to be deprived of God because of the magnificence of visible things.
14. From this cause some have made a god of the Sun, others of the Moon, others of the host of Stars, others of heaven itself with all its hosts, to which they have attributed the guiding of the Universe, according to the quality or quantity of their movement. Others again of the Elements, earth, air, water, fire, because of their useful nature, since without them human life cannot possibly exist. Others again have worshipped any chance visible objects, setting up the most beautiful of what they saw as their gods. And there are those who worship images (εἰκόνας) and molded figures (πλάσματα), at first indeed of their own ancestors—at least, this is the case with the more affectionate and sensual—and honour the departed with memorials; and afterwards even those of strangers are worshipped by men of a later generation separated from them by a long interval; through ignorance of the First Nature, and following the traditional honour as lawful and necessary; for usage when confirmed by time was held to be Law. And I think that some who were courtiers of arbitrary power and extolled bodily strength and admired beauty, made a god in time out of him whom they honoured, perhaps getting hold of some fable to help on their imposture. – Gregory Nazianzus, Songs on Theology (381-389 AD), chapter 13-14

Ante-Nicene Christianity

Gregory of Nazianzus Approved Idolatry

Leave a Reply Cancel reply