Whose Metaphysics?

Metaphysical diversity in early Trinitarianism

Johannes Zachhuber is one of the most interesting patristic scholars writing today. His recent Rise of Christian Theology and the End of Ancient Metaphysics reshuffled the whole debate about the Christian use of metaphysics by focusing attention on the Christological debates of the fifth century rather than the Trinitarian debates of the fourth. His essay on nature in patristic theology (in the Routledge Handbook of Early Christian Philosophy) is a good example of both his scholarly care and his daring.

“Nature” became part of official Christian dogma with the formula of Chalcedon (451). The idea had been long used, of course, not only by Christians but by pagan philosophers. Zachhuber remarks that, surprisingly, Christian debates about nature were “remarkable independent” of pagan influence and sources. The church fathers’ most important non-Christian influence was the Hellenistic Jewish philosopher, Philo of Alexandria. Christian discussion of nature is a “fascinating test case” for seeing patristic thought not as a Christianized form of paganism, but as “an autonomous philosophy” (27).

For pre-Christian Greek thinkers, “nature” (Greek physis) had two main meanings. On the one hand, it was “the essential being of a thing or the principle of its existence,” which included its power and potency. On the other hand, physis meant “origin” or “generation” or “birth.” Thus, physis combined two primary interests of philosophy, which investigated both the being of things and their ultimate origin (28).

The two meanings of physis, however, were in some tension.