Patristic Section

I. Introduction.

A. This will not be only Patristic theology, but also Patristic philosophy: the views of the Fathers on questions that are not directly dogmatic. The disruption of knowledge brought about by a disproportionate emphasis on logic and science in the modern West has affected many Orthodox thinkers also. One effect has been to place “theology” and “philosophy” and “science” in watertight compartments. This results in the retreat of theology before science, which gives a large part of one’s “worldview” now. This makes it possible for very fervent and zealous Orthodox Christians to think they can believe both in the Patristic account of creation and in evolution-as if the two were entirely distinct. No, they overlap, and there is a place of conflict which can only be resolved by applying the Patristic philosophy to the whole of one’s worldview.

B. The distinction, of course, must be made between the realm of facts (and those views which depend on facts) and the realm of philosophy as such; quote Fr. Michael Pomazansky on St. Basil and St. John of Kronstadt. The Fathers to be sure can be mistaken in their views if these depend on facts which are wrong; we must read them with discernment and no preconceived notions.

II. The question of “Nature” and “Seed.”

A. This is not a scientific but a philosophical question. Even the idea of “species” is arbitrary, as scientists admit. Philosophy, on the other hand, does not demand that we know all the details of the distinctions and similarities and categories of creatures, but it has a definite view about the idea of the “natures” of things.

B. The evolutionary view constitutes a philosophy in itself: that nature in principle is fluid, one kind of creature becoming another kind, and all creatures proceeding from one or a few primitive types. This is a sweeping philosophy for which, of course, there is no proof whatever. … Since this vast view of evolution is not scientific but philosophical, we must criticize it on the basis of Patristic philosophy.

C. St. Gregory of Nyssa, in On the Resurrection, teaches that nature is not confused, and things are distinct, each with its own nature. The book of Genesis says “each according to its kind.” So also St. Basil and St. Ambrose. … The Patristic view is definitely that natures are distinct and don’t mingle, and that this is the way God created them. “Freaks” are dearly exceptions. The evolutionary philosophy of “one nature” running through all creation is unfounded scientifically and un-Patristic philosophically, and is the opposite of the heresy of the preexistence and transmigration of souls, about which more will be said below.

III. The Creation of the Six Days.

A. If the Patristic philosophy of “nature” is different from that of evolution, the Patristic idea of the creation of nature must likewise differ. Here we must think precisely on a number of points.

B. Kalomiros: quote St. Gregory of Nyssa, and the popular idea that Genesis describes creation just like modern science. But this is very vague.

C. Twenty-four-hour days: is this some kind of defect in the Fathers, a “fundamentalism” before its time, a captivity of pre-modern science?

D. No: there is profound meaning in it.

God’s omnipotence and swift action is emphasized, for one’s idea of nature is indeed dependent on one’s idea of God. We shall see later that the “God” of “evolutionists” is not at all the God of Christians.
The Six Days are a mean between extremes, and define the nature of time.
The nature of the creative process (and of the first-created world) is understood by the Fathers quite differently from evolutionism. Evolutionism merely projects present natural laws into the beginnings, without seeing that Genesis, the beginning of all things, is something quite distinct from the present state of things, and knowledge of it is not available to science but only through revelation. Which brings us to the key point:

IV. The Patristic Interpretation of Genesis.

A. Moses; Divine knowledge; the realism of the Fathers.

B. The nature of our knowledge of the first-created world.

V. The first-created world; the fall.

VI. Adam and the nature of man.