ST ANDREW’S GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE

A Member Institution of the Sydney College of Divinity

ASSESSMENT TASK COVER SHEET

The student must accurately fill out all the required information on this page only.

STUDENT: Asiikkis Marios

Surname First Name

COURSE UNIT: T7171A 9 Early Church Fathers

Code Credit Points Unit Name

LECTURER: Dr. Michael Ibrahim DUE DATE: 13/08/2023

Name Day / Month / Year

ACTUAL NUMBER OF WORDS: 1100 SUBMISSION DATE: 22/08/2023

Text & Footnotes Day / Month / Year

VALUE OF THIS ASSESSMENT TASK TOWARDS STUDENT’S OVERALL MARK: 20%

% Value
TITLE OF ASSESSMENT TASK:
Write a brief review of Chapter 4 from John Chryssavgis’ book: The Way of the Fathers: Exploring the Patristic Mind

DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP

I declare that this assignment is my own work.

I have not submitted this assignment in any other course nor at any other institution. I have
referenced all sources (printed, electronic and other) used in this assignment.
I have read and understood the Policy on Academic Misconduct on the College’s website, and understand that
plagiarism is a serious offence that may lead the College to commence proceedings against me for potential
student misconduct.
I understand that I have an obligation to inform the lecturer of any assistance I have received in the research or
composition of this assignment.

Did you receive assistance in the writing of this assessment task? If yes, I YES NO
have received assistance in the following way:

SIGNED: DATE: 22/08/2023

Student Day / Month / Year
 The page is to be filled out by the lecturer.

LECTURER’S COMMENTS:

EXTENSION UNTIL: ALPHABETICAL GRADE:

(only with permission) Day / Month / Year (for this assessment task) See Key Below

SIGNED: DATE:
Lecturer Day / Month / Year

SIGNED: DATE:
Second Assessor (if required) Day / Month / Year

(Graded assessment task to be returned by the Lecturer to the Registrar and by the Registrar to the Student)
KEY: H (High Distinction) = 85-100; D (Distinction) = 75-84; C (Credit) = 65-74; P (Pass) = 50-64; N (Fail) = 0-49
 John Chryssavgis discusses the Church Fathers’ methodology in this chapter.

Specifically, he examines the Spiritual Elders and Church Fathers, their ascetically

and mystically methodology, theological language and knowledge perception,

apostolic succession, and dogma’s development in patristic methods. This essay

presents Chryssavgis’ understanding of the patristic methodology, my opinion on

what distinguishes it from a secular approach, whether this difference can be

harmonised, and a brief critique.

Initially, the author presents the Spiritual Elders’ teaching methods. First,

Chryssavgis states that the Spiritual Elders have charismatic leadership and apostolic

authority in the prophetic Tradition’s context (p.80). Also, the Spiritual Elders’

loyalty and love to their spiritual children, who are obedient to them, acts as

dissemination of the Tradition (p.81). Moreover, Spiritual Elders are spirit-bearers,

possessing legitimate and spiritual authority, having received the charisma of truth

from the Holy Spirit (p.82). Further, Chryssavgis discusses the notion of children's

spiritual birth through the Holy Spirit by the spiritual fathers and their personal

relationship, “one soul in eternal love” (p.83). Finally, Spiritual Elders are the living

model example able to “initiate [them] into God’s mystery” (p.83).

Church Fathers' methodology also encompasses ascetical and mystical dimensions.

First, Chryssavgis mentions that the ascetics and saints perceive the Church’s

teachings and her “exegetical and dogmatic authority” through ascesis, such as prayer,

purification, and katharsis (p.85-86). Also, the patristic methodology has a mystical

dimension, a state of “surmounting of thought and intellectual knowledge (p.87). This

is a state of “ignorance” and “silence” (p.87) in which patristic theology expresses

apophatically God’s revelation—divine manifestation (p.88). Moreover, patristic

theology’s existential character is the “mystery of theology and faith", which through
"apophasis opens up to the silence of theosis” (p.89). Additionally, Patristic theology

and methodology are kerygmatic, constantly referring to the vision of faith (p.89) and

not dialectic (p.90). Finally, Patristic theology aims to confess the God-become-man’s

mystery, Christ’s reality, God’s vision, and express faith and life in Christ (p.90).

Then, Chryssavgis examines the dogma's development in patristic methods. The

Fathers are the Church’s living dogma (p.85). The dogma’s language witnesses the

saints' mystical experience (p.91). Also, the doctrines and dogmas—the living

testimony and tested evidence—are intimately connected with ascesis since they are

“revealed to the saints” (p.92). Further, the Fathers followed a method that

appreciated mystery without dispelling it: the development of the doctrine’s language

(p.93). Moreover, theoria is to receive God’s revelation in the silence of faith and

vision (p.94), the fulness of revelation (p.96) and Tradition (p.97). Finally, Fathers

theologise not to conform but transform society and the world; thus, patristic theology

continues to develop living Tradition (p.98).

Moreover, the author examines the Church Fathers’ methodology regarding

knowledge perception. First, Chryssavgis states that Church Fathers did not neglect or

consider knowledge insignificant; instead, they separated it into “intellectual and

spiritual knowledge” and were against its abuse—misuse(p.101). The former,

philosophy, is more tentative than the latter—theology—whereas the latter is an

actual realisation, discourse about and intercourse with God (p.101). Moreover,

Chryssavgis argues that according to the Fathers, theological knowledge’s purpose is

to move “beyond the stage of learning as understanding things divine to a level of

learning as undergoing divinity” (p.102); thus, theology’s reduction will be avoided.

Additionally, the Fathers acknowledge that faith seeks knowledge and that dogmas

are not unacceptable or indigestible to the intellect (p.103). Besides these, the Fathers,
as Chryssavgis supports, “prescribed orthodoxy content while probing the limits of

thought and language” (p.104). Concluding, the Fathers saw these two world views—

philosophical thinking and Christian doctrine [revelation]-as neither contradictory nor

identified (p.104).

Lastly, the author discusses another principle of the Patristic methodology:

apostolic succession. First, Chryssavgis argues that true living Tradition is preserved

through the Church Fathers' “charismatic succession” (p.105). Also, the Church

Fathers are historical witnesses of that living truth, demonstrating the Holy Spirit’s

continual presence (p.106). Therefore, the Patristic and Apostolic aspects of the

Church are inseparable.

There are differences between the secular approach and the Orthodox

understanding of patristic methodology that hinder their harmonisation. First, the

modern secular approach diverges from systematic theology. It aims to embrace and

value only patristic theology’s overlooked qualities, such as their extraordinary

contribution to solving and eradicating social-anthropological-psychological issues

and improving social conditions. Despite patristics’ relevance and diachronic

resonance with society, its social reform’s impact, this approach brings many

challenges and concerns to theology. This method decentralises the patristic Christian

context—Christ-centred—and overemphasises or solely examines patristics’ social

aspects. Thereby, Church Fathers are perceived as mere sociologists and patristic

thought is presented from a sociological perspective that fits the social scientific and

humanities fields. Thus, this led to the patristics religious devaluation and

secularisation. Concluding, the Fathers are not merely great social reformers but

something more than that; they are “the living voice of” Tradition—of the Holy

Spirit(p.78).
 Another secular approach emphasises the Church Fathers’ philosophical and

intellectual thoughts and knowledge as metaphysical yet of human origin. This

approach scholastically emphasises Fathers’ wisdom and sophisticated philosophical

notions without engaging with religion or theology. However, this reduces Fathers to

an object of intellectual inquiry. Their words stop interpreting God’s word and start

seeing it as merely human wisdom and intellect-reasoning. Nevertheless, the Fathers

are not “intellectual giants of human theories”, and outside Orthodox phronema-ethos

and “hesychastic practice… [they are] inconceivable”1. Consequently, since the

Fathers express not merely metaphysical but divine and mystical knowledge, they are

understandable through an ascetical-neptic, empirical life, katharsis-purification, and a

crucified-illuminated nous. Hence, patristics should not be approached solely

intellectually or scholastic philosophically but through an Orthodox Christian lens: an

ascetic-neptic method and an approach of silence and love in understanding God.

The present chapter effectively expounded on patristic methodology without

Western scholasticism influence or modern approaches-tendencies. Also, Chryssavgis

refers to primary sources and theologians like St. Gregory in context to support his

notions with clarity and erudition. It effectively showcases the coherence of its

positions, orthodox phronema-ethos, with that of the Church Fathers. The author’s

presentation propounds an approach grounded in silence and love that enables a more

profound comprehension of God, thus surpassing mere intellectual knowledge and

philosophy. Finally, another remarkable feature of the author is the parallelism of the

orthodox approach to the patristic and the challenges and differences between the

secular modern approach and philosophy.

1
Fr Metallinos George, The Way: An Introduction to the Orthodox Faith (Trikala: St. Stephen’s Holy
Monastery, 2013), chap. 11.
https://www.oodegr.com/english/biblia/Metallinos_The_Way/chapt.11.htm
 Concluding, Chryssavgis presents his understanding of the Fathers’ methodology.

First, Chryssavgis explores the Spiritual Elders, the Church Fathers' ascetical and

mystical dimensions, theological language, apostolic succession and knowledge

perception. Finally, he examines the dogma’s development in patristic methods.