On September 11, 2020, I discovered myself under a big tent, where 51 ministers of the Reformed Presbyterian Church had assembled for a COVID-era presbytery. They gathered to receive charges against me, initiating an ecclesiastical trial. I had published a book that affirmed the opportunity of theistic evolution—a view regarded by some as dangerous.
Through that process, I became personally (and painfully) aware of how heated Genesis 1 controversies proceed to be. My trial was ultimately dropped, but I used to be compelled to resign my pastorate and leave that denomination.
I still love the Reformed Presbyterian Church and am grateful for my a long time as a student and minister amongst its people. But I grieve that such passions for certain interpretations of Genesis 1 result in damaged relationships and truncated ministries. It mustn’t be so.
There are already loads of Genesis 1 studies on offer (including my very own, called The Liturgy of Creation). But what the church really needs are more resources to assist us engage these discussions more responsibly. Andrew J. Brown’s latest book, Recruiting the Ancients for the Creation Debate, is just such a resource.
Brown, an Old Testament lecturer at Melbourne School of Theology, takes no sides on the query of whether the six days of creation are literal or figurative days. Recruiting the Ancients isn’t an try and solve creation controversies. Instead, it surveys what historic church authorities needed to say on the topic, arguing that they shouldn’t be enlisted as straightforward allies of this or that contemporary position.
The book is predicated on Brown’s earlier book on the identical topic (The Days of Creation: A History of Christian Interpretation of Genesis 1:1–2:3), which itself draws upon his PhD dissertation. In other words, the current volume is a highly developed, mature project.
Entering mental worlds
There are many facets to Genesis 1 controversies: theology, science, exegesis, and history, to call just a few. Brown offers vital guidance to enhance our engagement with one in all those areas: the witness of the early church fathers.
As he interacts with their ideas, Brown introduces readers to concepts just like the world-week approach to Genesis 1, instantaneous creation, and double creation (where the creation of ideals precedes the creation of physical things), amongst other alternatives to a literal six-day model. Along the way in which, he describes different views on the connection of God to time and Christological interpretations of the creation week, illustrating how Genesis 1 was interpreted to handle the philosophical and pastoral needs of ages past.
The book’s 22-page introduction, while necessarily a bit dry in parts, outlines small print of methodology and the scope of the project. Most readers won’t be concerned with the finer points of a shift from the “history of ideas” movement to the “mental history” movement. But it is crucial that the creator understands his field and transparently welcomes us into it.
Once the work is introduced, the remaining of the book unfolds chronologically—and winsomely. Occasional dashes of humor remind us that theology doesn’t need to be tense: “Origen sought to guide his ecclesiastical horse to exegetical water, but in the long term might only have brought the top”; “Augustine is the patristic equivalent of that athletic schoolmate who was at all times picked first for any sports team”; Aquinas’s use of “the phrase ‘twenty-four hours’ causes somewhat flutter of joy in some readers’ hearts.”
The book covers distinguished early church figures like Clement, Origen, and Augustine; medieval theologians like Aquinas; and Protestant torchbearers like Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and the Westminster Divines.
Brown’s opening chapter on Origen is representative of his process. Origen famously espoused a non-literal view of the creation days. But all sides are likely to paint him on cardboard. Cherry-picking quotes flattens Origen right into a poster boy to champion or disparage. Instead, Brown helps us enter into Origen’s mental world. “At the middle of Origen’s thought,” Brown explains, “was his ontology, that’s, his concept of ultimate reality, an idea framed under the influence of his early immersion within the incipient Neoplatonism of the Alexandrian mental scene.”
That’s some pretty heady stuff! But understanding the ancients requires getting into one other world. Brown shows us Origen’s world at a level within sight for nonspecialists. Overall, his approach helps us replace the cardboard cutout with a three-dimensional, pondering human being.
Brown asks the query, “Can the fan of nonliteral interpretation safely rally Origen to his cause?” He answers, “Origen does offer a serious precedent for a figurative interpretation of the creation days, with the proviso that we must always study his interpretive stance and judge how closely we discover with it.” Two pages of study follow, exploring Origen’s figurative views and the pastoral and philosophical goals influencing those conclusions. In other words, we cannot offer pat answers to “recruit” a posh thinker like Origin.
Readers in search of to pigeonhole historical Christian leaders will likely be dissatisfied. Brown doesn’t draw back from stating instances where their views roughly align with a literal six-day framework, or other views debated today. But he does far more than that, and we’re higher served learning what thinkers like Origen sought to perform inside their very own times so we would genuinely learn from them , relatively than merely quoting (“recruiting”) them.
Responsible dialogue
Brown’s book is wealthy, insightful, and an example of historical responsibility. The past isn’t a mine where we dig for gems that suit our own settings and agendas; it’s a distinct world to step into and learn from. “Until we experience the shock of the unfamiliar in any source greater than a couple of century old and have scratched our heads [over it],” Brown writes, “we’ve probably not read it fastidiously enough.”
The book does have some shortcomings. Brown focuses on how church fathers viewed the creation days, whether literal or nonliteral, which is a reasonably narrow topic. That limited focus actually makes his project more manageable. But creation controversies today focus as much, if no more, on the character of Adam. Given the aim of Brown’s project, it might have been strengthened by greater attention to the church’s historic views on this subject, even when including them may need proven overly ambitious.
It can also be striking that the book features so many church fathers but no church moms. Historically, in fact, women haven’t had much voice in theological discourse. Furthermore, Brown’s stated focus is on those church leaders who’re prominently cited in modern creation debates, and men like Augustine and Luther are cited most. So it’s comprehensible that this book focuses exclusively on the voices of church men. But it might be edifying to listen to from historic church women on creation as well.
These shortcomings usually are not really flaws within the book as Brown has framed it, and he can’t be faulted for not writing the book one may need preferred. But they do indicate the necessity for further inquiry into historic church views on Scripture’s account of creation.
All told, Brown has provided a very important gift to the church on this volume. Perhaps most significantly, he has modeled the opportunity of charitable, responsible creation dialogue. In my very own work on creation, I consulted church fathers like Augustine, Origen, Luther, and Calvin (while my opponents drew heavily on the Westminster Standards). I’m inspired by Brown’s work to return and revisit my very own use of the church fathers.
And Brown’s sensitivity to the necessity for fruitful conversation leaves me encouraged that, despite the contentiousness marking an excessive amount of creation debate (including in my very own case), a greater path is feasible.
Michael LeFebvre is a Presbyterian minister and a fellow with the Center for Pastor Theologians.
