"Scholars generally agree on two points regarding Gregory of Nyssa’s eschatology: That he believed in universal reconciliation, and that the salvation of all rational beings eventually will include Satan himself. Such beliefs, far from making Gregory a notorious figure, have largely gone unnoticed outside of academia. Further, even among those for whom Gregory’s universalism is a given, his contention that even Satan will be saved often is treated as an afterthought."
"Yet Gregory seemed to think the salvation of Satan was quite important."
To Heaven with the Devil: The Importance of Satan's Salvation for God's Goodness in the Works of Gregory of Nyssa | Anthony | Conversations: A Graduate Student Journal of the Humanities, Social Sciences, and Theology
"When, over long periods of time, evil has been removed and those now lying in sin have been restored to their original state, all creation will join in united thanksgiving, both those whose purification has involved punishment and those who never needed purification at all" (Catechetical Oration 26)
Eschatology and Final Restoration (Apokatastasis) in Origen, Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus the Confessor | Origen | Hell
"Ludlow examines the eschatological convictions of St Gregory Nyssen in detail. “Whoever considers the divine power,” Gregory writes, “will plainly perceive that it is able at length to restore by means of the aionion purging and atoning sufferings, those who have gone even to this extremity of wickedness.” Hell is purgation that culminates in salvation. Gregory’s views on the apocatastasis were not condemned by the Church at the 5th Ecumenical Council and would later profoundly influence the eschatological reflection of Sergius Bulgakov."
Readings in Universalism
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia:
"A name given in the history of theology to the
doctrine which teaches that a time will come when all free creatures will share in the grace of
salvation; in a special way, the
devils and lost
souls.
"This
doctrine was explicitly taught by
St. Gregory of Nyssa, and in more than one passage. It first occurs in his "De animâ et resurrectione" (P.G., XLVI, cols. 100, 101) where, in speaking of the punishment by fire assigned to
souls after death, he compares it to the process whereby gold is refined in a furnace, through being separated from the dross with which it is alloyed. The punishment by fire is not, therefore, an end in itself, but is ameliorative; the very reason of its infliction is to separate the good from the
evil in the
soul. The process, moreover, is a painful one; the sharpness and duration of the pain are in proportion to the
evil of which each
soul is guilty; the flame lasts so long as there is any
evil left to destroy. A time, then, will come, when all
evil shall cease to be since it has no existence of its own apart from the
free will, in which it inheres; when every
free will shall be turned to
God, shall be in
God, and
evil shall have no more wherein to exist. Thus,
St. Gregory of Nyssa continues, shall the word of
St. Paul be fulfilled:
Deus erit omnia in omnibus (
1 Corinthians 15:28), which means that
evil shall, ultimately, have an end, since, if
God be all in all, there is no longer any place for
evil (cols. 104, 105; cf. col. 152).
St. Gregory recurs to the same thought of the final annihilation of
evil, in his "Oratio catechetica", ch. xxvi; the same comparison of fire which purges gold of its impurities is to be found there; so also shall the power of
God purge nature of that which is preternatural, namely, of
evil. Such purification will be painful, as is a surgical operation, but the restoration will ultimately be complete. And, when this restoration shall have been accomplished (
he eis to archaion apokatastasis ton nyn en kakia keimenon), all creation shall give thanks to
God, both the
souls which have had no need of purification, and those that shall have needed it. Not only man, however, shall be set free from
evil, but the
devil, also, by whom
evil entered into the world (
ton te anthropon tes kakias eleutheron kai auton ton tes kakias eyreten iomenos). The same teaching is to be found in the "De mortuis" (ibid., col. 536). Bardenhewer justly observes ("Patrologie", Freiburg, 1901, p. 266) that
St. Gregory says elsewhere no less concerning the
eternity of the fire, and of the punishment of the lost, but that the Saint himself understood this
eternity as a period of very long duration, yet one which has a limit. Compare with this "Contra Usurarios" (XLVI, col. 436), where the suffering of the lost is spoken of as eternal,
aionia, and "Orat. Catechet.", XXVI (XLV, col. 69), where
evil is annihilated after a long period of
time,
makrais periodois. These verbal contradictions explain why the defenders of
orthodoxy should have thought that
St. Gregory of Nyssa's writings had been tampered with by
heretics.
St. Germanus of Constantinople, writing in the eighth century, went so far as to say that those who held that the
devils and lost
souls would one day be set free had dared "to instill into the pure and most healthful spring of his [
Gregory's] writings the black and dangerous poison of the
error of
Origen, and to cunningly attribute this foolish
heresy to a man famous alike for his virtue and his learning" (quoted by Photius, Bibl. Cod., 223; P.G. CIII, col. 1105).
Tillemont, "Mémoires pour l'histoire ecclésiastique" (Paris, 1703), IX, p. 602, inclines to the opinion that
St. Germanus had good grounds for what he said. We must, however, admit, with Bardenhewer (loc. cit.) that the explanation given by
St. Germanus of Constantinople cannot hold. This was, also, the opinion of
Petavius, "Theolog. dogmat." (Antwerp, 1700), III, "De Angelis", 109-111."
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Apocatastasis
"Dear me, you really think those are interpolations? That is something of a joke in scholarly circles. Especially since it would basically mean that Gregory’s whole theology, from the ground up, as unfolded in De anima et resurrectione and De hominis opificio and the Great Oration and the Psalms commentary is an interpolation. Maybe Gregory never really wrote anything (rather like the Oxfordian hyposthesis about Shakespeare). Something similar is true in Isaac’s case. And those two are far from being the only patristic universalists; both of the very distinct Alexandrian (including Cappadocian) and Antiochene tradition are full of them, from the days of Pantaenus to the 13th century writings of Solomon of Bostra. Goodness, there are almost overwhelming reasons to believe Gregory Nazianzen, and even Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria, were so disposed (Gregory unquestionably, really).
"And, had our our Lord spoken of everlasting punishment, that would be an interesting argument. But he did not speak English, and in fact did not speak Greek; and the Greek text of Matthew 25:46 (which is the only one you can have in mind) has been read by a great many Greek-speaking and Syriac-speaking fathers, from the earliest days, as saying nothing of the sort.
"As it happens, I number among my friends and acquaintances some of the greatest scholars of Orthodox canons and councils and history in the world; and to a man they would assert that the Orthodox Church–no matter what the inclinations of its catechists and prelates may have been down the ages–has never definitively condemned universalism as such, or even addressed it under any synodical or conciliar conditions of special import. It has condemned some teachings that are also, as it happens, universalist. But the sort of universalism found in Gregory and Isaac, which fully acknowledges the reality of judgment and hell, has never even been addressed.
"But let’s not pursue the issue. Be wrong in good conscience, and by that you shall be saved."
David Bentley Hart
Readings in Universalism
