Order tuned to chaos

NOTES

• This article is a revision of a paper read at the June 1993 conference of the North American Patristic Society. It is based on my research for an MA thesis (University of Pretoria), in which different aspects of order and disorder in the CG/DI are scrutinized. I am grateful to my adviser, Prof. H.F. Stander, for his kind support and encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. M.D. Herholdt, a former colleague, for introducing me to the study of order and disorder through his unpublished dissertation, The dialectic of order and chaos—a model for understanding the relationship between God and reality, 1992.
   Google Scholar
• J. Neyrey. Paul in other words—a cultural reading of his letters, Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1990, p. 57.
   Google Scholar
• For a good introduction to reader-response criticism, cf. B.C. Lategan, ‘Reader Response Theory’. In: The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 5, New York: Doubleday, 1992, pp. 625–628.
   Google Scholar
• For a general introduction to sociological approaches, cf. S. R. Garrett, ‘Sociology of early Christianity’. In: The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 6, New York: Doubleday, 1992, pp. 89–99. For the use of this method in Patristics, cf. E.A. Clark, The Origenist controversy—the cultural construction of an early Christian debate, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Reference can be made to S.L. Jaki (see the numerous references to his work in this article); T.F. Torrance (recent works include The trinitarian faith: The evangelical theology of the ancient Catholic Church, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988; The Christian frame of mind—reason, order and openness in theology and natural science, Colorado Springs: Helmers & Howard, 1989; Divine meaning, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993 (forthcoming)); I. Paul (Science and theology in Einstein's perspective—theology and science at the frontiers of knowledge, Vol. 3, Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 1986); and to a lesser extent. J.C. Polkinghorne (One world—the interaction of science and theology, London: SPCK, 1986, introductory quote taken from the CG).
   Google Scholar
• The edition of R.W. Thomson, Athanasius: Contra Gentes and De Incarnatione. Oxford early Christian texts, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971, is used. This is probably still the best available edition of the CG. Kannengiesser's Sources Chrétiennes (no. 199) text is to be preferred for the DI, but because there is only one specific reference to the DI in this article (cf. n. 18), Thomson's text will be used throughout. The translations of references are, however, my own.
   Google Scholar
• Cf. P.E. Hodgson, ‘The significance of the work of Stanley L. Jaki’, The Downside Review 105, 1987, pp. 260–276; and K.J. Sharpe, ‘Stanley L. Jaki's Critique of Physics’, Religious Studies 18, 1982, pp. 55–75.
   Google Scholar
• S.L. Jaki, ‘Christology and the birth of modern science’, The Asbury Theological Journal 45, No. 2, 1990, pp. 61–72. (This article has also been translated into Italian and was published in Annales Theologici 4, 1990, pp. 333–347.) Cf. also his more recent ‘Christ and Science’, The Downside Review 110, 1992, pp. 125–127.
   Google Scholar
• For a brief overview of the life and work of this immensely learned scholar, professionally trained both as a theologian and a physicist, cf. Who's who in theology and science: an international biographical and bibliographical guide to individuals and organizations interested in the interaction of theology and science, Framingham, MA: Winthrop Publishing, 1992, pp. 106–107.
   Google Scholar
• Here I follow the advice of R. Williams: ‘The time has probably come to relegate the term “Arianism” at best to inverted commas,… the sheer uselessness and inaccuracy of the word become clearer with every new piece of research….’ Article review of the late R.P.C. Hanson's ‘Search for the Christian doctrine of God’, Scottish Journal of Theology 45, 1992. p. 102. Cf. also M. Barnes and D. Williams (eds.), Arianism after Arius, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993 (forthcoming).
   Google Scholar
• A.L. Pettersen. ‘A reconsideration of the date of the Contra Genres—De Incarnatione of Athanasius of Alexandria’, Studio Patristica 17, 1982, pp. 1038–1039 (based on articles written in French by Kannengiesser, 1964, 1970). Add to this the names of E.P. Meijering and R.J. Voyles.
   Google Scholar
• R.C. Gregg and D.E. Groh, Early Arianism—a view of salvation, London: SCM, 1981, pp. 180–181. It is interesting to note the remarks made by H. Crouzel on Origen: ‘As for the Stoics, their morality is accepted but their cosmology and their theology are regarded as materialist, and Origen pokes fun at their cyclical view of time’ (Origen, transl. by A.S. Worrall, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1989, p. 157): and B.E. Daley: ‘An endless cycle of alternating falls and redemptions is almost certainly foreign to his thought’ (The hope of the Early Church—a handbook of Patristic eschatology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991, p. 58). Note should also be taken of the work of P. Tzamalikos on Origen's concept of time.
   Google Scholar
• Jaki, op. cit. 1990. p. 68. Gregg and Groh refer to the Stoic influences on Arius' ethical thinking but never call his cosmology ‘Stoic’. In Jaki's 1992 article he is more reserved when he writes: ‘Very little has remained of Arius’ statements, and practically nothing of his cosmology. It is safe to assume that his cosmology was similar to that of Plato', op. cit. p. 126.
   Google Scholar
• Jaki, op. cit. 1990, p. 68.
   Google Scholar
• Reference can be made to concepts such as διακοσμϵίν, διακόσμησις, διάταξις, and τάξις. The remark by D.E. Hahm on Stoic cosmology is worth mentioning: ‘Even though the cosmos alternates between a state of pure fire and a state of several elements, it alternates between different ordered states, not between order and disorder’ (The Origins of Stoic Cosmology, Ohio State University Press, 1977. p. 192). Cf. also J. Geffcken's Zwei griechische Apologeten, New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 1970 (reprint), pp. 33–34, for references to Athanasius' use of these Stoic concepts. The following words of caution by H.F. Stander must, however, be kept in mind: ‘…although some theologians derive their terminology from Stoicism, they placed these terms in an entirely different world-view and thus gave them completely different significance’ (Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, New York: Garland Publishing, 1990, p. 870).
   Google Scholar
• Although this translation of the NPNF is legitimate, one should note that both R.W. Thomson and E.P. Meijering use the word ‘completely’ in their translations.
   Google Scholar
• Jaki's definition of science is that it is ‘the emperico-quantitive investigation of things in motion’, op. cit. 1990, p. 63. He goes on to say that every branch of modern physics is ultimately based on Newton's three laws of motion. He traces Newton's thinking on order to Athanasius when he writes that ‘there is a long way, a dozen centuries from Athanasius to Newton. But the way is uninterrupted’, op. cit. 1992. p. 126.
   Google Scholar
• Cf. S.L. Jaki, God and the cosmologists, Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 1989, pp. 142–169; as well as the review of this book by J.C. Polkinghorne, Theology 93, 1990, p. 408.
   Google Scholar
• Cf R.S. Westfall, ‘Newton and Order. In: P.G. Kuntz (ed.), The concept of order, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1968, pp. 77–88. Note should be taken that Newton, the founder of classical mechanics, did not advocate a mechanistic philosophy. However, the historical effect of his description of mathematical order in nature resulted in the idea of an autonomous clocklike universe. This was contrary to his intention of restoring the dependence of all natural processes on material powers, and ultimately, on God. Cf W. Pannenberg, An introduction to systematic theology, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1991, pp. 37–38.
   Google Scholar
• S.L. Jaki, ‘Physics and the ultimate’, Ultimate Reality and Meaning 11, 1988, p. 68. It is interesting to note that Athanasius agrees with the Stoics that the world is a great body (σώμα), DI 41.17.
   Google Scholar
• Cf. R. Markley, ‘Isaac Newton's theological writings: problems and prospects’, Restoration 13, 1989, p. 42.
   Google Scholar
• Jaki, op. cit. 1992, p. 126.
   Google Scholar
• For this basic definition of semiotics, cf. O'Sullivan et at., Key concepts in communication, London: Methuen, 1983, p. 210.
   Google Scholar
• C. Kannengiesser, The Athanasian decade 1974–84—a bibliographical report’. Theological Studies 46, 1985, p. 535.
   Google Scholar
• J.P. Louw and E.A. Nida stress the importance of socio-semiotics in the preface to their book, Lexical semantics of the Greek New Testament, Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992, p. viii, when writing that ‘language as a code can only have meaning in terms of the social setting in which it is used’.
   Google Scholar
• Space does not permit us to discuss the relationship between the CG and DI. Suffice to say that in the CG the knowledge of God through the work of the Logos in creation is emphasized, and in the DI, the emphasis is on the works of the incarnate Logos through his body. Cf. also E.P. Meijering, ‘Struktur und Zusammenhang des apologetischen Werkes von Athanasius’, Vigiliae Christianae 45, 1991, pp. 313–326.
   Google Scholar
• C.R. Smith, ‘The Life-of-Christ structure of Athanasius’ De Incarnatione Verbi', The Patristic and Byzantine Review 10, 1991, pp. 7–24.
   Google Scholar
• For the idea of ‘natural theology as apologetics’ in the fourth century, cf. J. Pelikan, Christianity and classical culture—The metamorphosis of natural theology in the Christian encounter with Hellenism, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993 (based on his recent Gifford lectures). In this regard, G.C. Stead makes the following statement in chapter 10, ‘Gottesbeweise’, of his book, Philosophie und Theologie—Die Zeit der Alten Kirche, Köln: Kohlhammer, 1990, p. 84: ‘Das Argument, daβ die Welt nach einem Plan geordnet sei, spielte eine gröβere Rolle im frühchristlichen Denken”. Cf. also G. Zaphiris, ‘Connaissance naturelle de Dieu d' apres Athanase d' Alexandrie’, Kleronomia 6, 1974, pp. 61–91.
   Google Scholar
• C.R. Smith, op. cit. pp. 21–22.
   Google Scholar
• Special note should be taken of the work of C.M. Badger, The new man created in God: Christology, congregation and asceticism in Athanasius of Alexandria. Unpublished dissertation, Duke University, Durham, 1990. Cf. also the contributions of J.R. Lyman, S. Elm and C. Kannengiesser.
   Google Scholar
• CG 47.29–31.
   Google Scholar
• CG 47.32–35.
   Google Scholar
• R.A. Skeris, XPΩMA θEOY: On the origins and theological interpretation of musical imagery used by ecclesiastical writers of the first three centuries with special reference to the image of Orpheus, Altötting: Alfred Coppenrath, 1976, p. 94.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid. p. 142.
   Google Scholar
• For the relationship between the ideas of cosmic harmony and the moral purpose of music in the Early Church, cf. E. Ferguson, ‘Music’, Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, New York: Garland Publishing, 1990, p. 632.
   Google Scholar
• J.R. Lyman, Christology and cosmology—models of divine activity in Origen, Eusebius and Athanasius, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993, p. 143. I am indebted to Prof. Lyman for kindly providing me with a copy of the chapter on Athanasius. Cf. also P. Brown, The body and society. New York: Columbia University Press, 1988, p. 254.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid. p. 131.
   Google Scholar
• A. Louth, ‘Athanasius' understanding of the humanity of Christ’, Studia Patristica 16, 1985, p. 312.
   Google Scholar
• Cf. especially CG 37–39.
   Google Scholar
• I want to thank the Rev. Dr. Alvyn Pettersen for his helpful remarks on Athanasius' understanding of disorder (chaos).
   Google Scholar
• Ellen T. Charry, ‘The case for concern: Athanasian Christology in pastoral perspective’. Modern Theology 9, 1993, p. 271.
   Google Scholar
• A.L. Pettersen, Athanasius and the human body, London: Bristol Press, 1990, pp. 17–18.
   Google Scholar
• Such an understanding would not have been foreign to Egyptian spirituality with their sense of Ma'at where a ‘righteous and ordered cosmos of necessity demanded a righteous and ordered life on the part of those who inhabited it’. Cf V.A. Tobin, Theological principles of Egyptian religion, New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 1989, p. 81.
   Google Scholar
• Cf J. Barton's criticism of D. Nineham, ‘Reflections on cultural relativism—I’, Theology 82, 1979, p. 107.
   Google Scholar
• I. Prigogine and I. Stengers, Order out of chaos—man's new dialogue with nature, Toronto: Bantam Books, 1984, p. 293.
   Google Scholar
• Cf. the excellent article by D. Heyns, ‘Time and reality: Science in dialogue with the prophet Amos’. In: W. Wessels and E. Scheffler (eds.), Old Testament science and reality—a mosaic for Deist, Pretoria: Verbi Vitae, 1992, p. 260.
   Google Scholar
• Jaki, op. cit. 1989, p. 227.
   Google Scholar
• S.L. Jaki, ‘The only chaos’. This world, Summer 1988, p. 99 (cf. also p. 109).
   Google Scholar
• S.L. Jaki, ‘The chaos of scientific cosmology’. In: D. Huff and O. Prewett (eds.), The nature of the physical universe, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1979, pp. 102–105.
   Google Scholar
• J.C. Polkinghorne, ‘The nature of physical reality’, Zygon 26, 1991, p. 225. Cf. also P. Stehle, Order, chaos, order—the transition from classical to quantum physics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Quoted in J. Briggs, Fractals—the patterns of chaos, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992, p. 12.
   Google Scholar
• S.H Kellert, In the wake of chaos—unpredictable order in dynamical systems, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993, p. x.
   Google Scholar
• D. Steenburg, ‘Chaos at the marriage of Heaven and Hell’, Harvard Theological Review 84, 1991, p. 448. Cf. also R.W. Batterman, ‘Defining chaos’. Philosophy of Science 60, 1993, pp. 43–66.
   Google Scholar
• Cf R. Lewin, Complexity—life at the edge of chaos, London: J.M. Dent, 1993; J. Briggs and F.D. Peat, Turbulent mirror—an illustrated guide to chaos theory and the science of wholeness, New York: Harper St Row, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• I am aware of the fact that this metaphor is more often used in conjunction with the anthropic principle. Cf P.A. Wilson, ‘Explaining a finely tuned universe’, Christian Scholar's Review 21, 1992, pp. 408–415; cf. also the remarks of T.F. Torrance and J.C. Polkinghome in D.L. Block, Our universe: Accident or design?, Sandton: Starwatch, 1992, p. 2. In my opinion, the ‘fine tuning’ of the universe is also implicit in one of the basic tenets of chaos theory: extreme sensitivity to initial conditions.
   Google Scholar
• S.P. Schilling, ‘Chance and order in science and theology’, Theology Today 47. 1991, p. 375.
   Google Scholar
• F.M. Young, Can these dry bones live?, London: SCM, 1982. p. 90.
   Google Scholar
• Editorial comment on Markley's article, ‘Representing order: Natural philosophy, mathematics, and theology in the Newtonian revolution’. In: N.K. Hayles (ed.), Chaos and order—complex dynamics in literature and science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991, p. 24. Cf. also Markley's book (with K. Knoespel), Newton and the failure of Messianic science (forthcoming).
   Google Scholar
• D.L. Schindler (ed.), Beyond mechanism. The universe in recent physics and Catholic thought. New York: University Press of America, 1984, pp. 7–9.
   Google Scholar
• R.K. Tacelli,‘Of one substance: Saint Athanasius and the meaning of Christian doctrine’. The Downside Review 108, 1990, p. 110. Cf. also the appropriate remark made by J.W. de Gruchy, Liberating reformed theology—a South African contribution to an ecumenical debate. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991, pp. 115–116: ‘Reformed theology has to overcome the captivity to the Newtonian and Cartesian worldviews which played such a powerful role in shaping Calvinism in the seventeenth century, and which continue to bedevil attempts to think and act in wholistic (sic) ways.’
   Google Scholar