<論説>ナジアンゾスのグレゴリオス｢バシレイオス追悼頌｣におけるバシレイオス像 --戦友、殉教者、正統信仰の守護者--

Abstract

本稿ではナジアンゾスのグレゴリオスが亡き友人カイサレイアのバシレイオスの追悼のために披露した弁論『バシレイオス追悼頌』を分析の対象とする。この作品はグレゴリオスとバシレイオス二人の友情の記念碑として知られているが、本稿はこの作品をキリスト教的な頌辞・伝記として読み解くことを意図している。この作品は頌辞・伝記の技法を用いて、バシレイオスを預言者や殉教者になぞらえることで、バシレイオスに現代の殉教者としての聖性をまとわせる。同時に、グレゴリオスは自らを友人の人生の目撃証人とすることで、バシレイオスの教義上の立場を擁護し保証してもいる。アテナイでの学生時代にともに議論に参加して以来、二人が同じ思考を共有していたと語ることで、グレゴリオスは自分とバシレイオスの二人が常に正統教義を擁護していたことを示そうとしているのである。グレゴリオスは、バシレイオスの記憶を正統信仰の守護者のそれとして固定化するとともに、バシレイオスの立場に与する者のみが正統教義の側に属することを認められると主張してもいる。この作品は友人の記憶を語ることで、何が正統で何が正統でないのかを区別し定義するという性格も持っていると言える。この作品は正統をめぐって戦わされる言説の一つとして解釈できるのである。このことはキリスト教化の過程自体も、単なる教義と教会の発展としてではなく、そのような正統をめぐる言説のせめぎあいとして理解する必要があることを示唆している。

Gregory of Nazianzus' Funeral Oration for Basil is well-known as a model of integration of the Christian faith and classical rhetoric and understood as a monument to the friendship between Basil and Gregory Nazianzen. But here I attempt to interpret this piece as portraying a friend's life as a struggle for orthodox faith by means of panegyrical methods. One of the characteristic techniques in writing panegyric is the comparison of the object of praise with heroes of the past. Within Funeral Oration, Gregory of Nazianzus uses this technique to make Basil his own comrade and equate him with a martyr. In the section narrating their experience at Athens, Gregory Nazianzen depicts Basil and himself engaged in controversy with the Armenians, like Homeric heroes in battlefield. The two friends in controversy, wearing the personas of epic comrades, take the same position and fight the same opponents. The intention of this part seems to be to emphasise the intimacy and unity of thought between the two. In the section narrating the conflict in Cappadocia between Basil and the Arian Emperor Valens, Gregory Nazianzen depicts Valens as persecutor and Basil as martyr. With this portrayal of Basil as the re-enactor of the struggle for the faith of the past age, Gregory makes his friend a modern martyr and presents his life as a constant battle against heresy. All this description seems to have the intention of affirming Basil's unwavering stance on doctrinal orthodoxy. Basil himself avoided making clear his support for the divinity of the Holy Spirit in public discussion and his discretion on doctrinal controversy invited criticism and perversion of his doctrinal position. Against this, Gregory Nazianzen stresses in this oration that Basil had always defended orthodoxy. According to him, Basil's silence on the nature of the Holy Spirit was a deliberate tactic on the controversy and he confided his support for the consubstantiality of the Holy Spirit before Gregory of Nazianzus. Gregory Nazianzen guarantees Basil's doctrinal orthodoxy by making himself an eyewitness. Presumably, the credibility of his testimony is enhanced by the narrative of their Athenian memory that emphasises the intimacy and unity of thought between the two friends. This indicates the possibility that the Athenian memory of the two has the function of proving Basil's position as an orthodox. The portrayal of Basil as comrade and martyr in Gregory of Nazianzus' Funeral Oration seems to have a purpose of demonstrating that his friend's doctrinal position was steadfastly orthodox. Gregory Nazianzen's oration depicts Basil's life as devoted to the struggle for the orthodox faith. And this depiction is an attempt to present the memory of the friend as that of an orthodox and authorise it as such against those who suspect Basil's doctrinal consistency. This oration is not the already authorised version, but a still authorising discourse of Basil's life as an orthodox.