To: a Christian Evolutionist
who wants to argue with me
excerpts from a correspondence:
... But I'm not the one to argue with you. I never went to college. It
is not a fair fight [so to speak, I'm not fighting you personally].
Better to first see if you can convince Fr. Nikita Grigoriev. First
convince him, then the two of you together can get back to me.
I just had another idea! Kalomiros NEVER got back to Fr. Seraphim
after Fr. Serpahim's letter to him - his point by point 76-page letter.
Why don't You write the answer to this letter? And do it without
ignoring any of his points, just like he did not ignore any of
Kalomiro's points. And stick to the monkey thing and leave the
age-of-the-earth thing for another book. Be certain to bring up
fresh arguments - not just repeat the same things that Fr. Seraphim
already addressed. In other words - don't start from scratch. Jump
in and pick up where Kalomiros left off.
For this book you are writing:
a possible title: Kalomiros' Long-awaited Answer to Fr. Seraphim
For your notes:
A point you are not permitted to restate, since Fr. Seraphim already addressed it.
As I have told you several times now, there is no contradiction between Divine revelation regarding cosmogenesis and modern science. The illusion of contradiction resolves when one finally grasps the relativistic nature of time in the universe. ... As I said before, it is better for the ignorant to trust in scripture and the saints, as they can understand them, than to reject scripture on the basis of some misinterpretation of scripture or science..
Fr. Seraphim addressed this in his letter.
He says that no matter what way God created us, that we accept what is divinely revealed. God can do anything, nothing would surprise us or shake our faith or cause us to reject Scripture. Could be we were created from a wooden puppet, a moon beam, dust of the earth, a tongue of flame, a monkey, a pile of God's laundry -- whatever way is divinely revealed is the way we accept on faith. If evolution were divinely revealed to be the way, we would believe it.
Fr. Seraphim addressed the subpoint contained in your point that divine revelation does not contradict true science. Divine Revelation is not subject to interpretation EXCEPT by the consensus of the Holy Fathers. We are not permitted to re-interpret the consensus of the Holy Fathers. Scientific "facts" and data, on the other hand, are quite open to interpretation and are continually being reinterpreted. And it is not possible for science to observe/test anything from Paradise, where Adam first had an immaterial body of sorts.
Fr. Seraphim addressed this subpoint from quite a few angles. If you think you have an angle that he omitted, check to be sure he didn't cover it.
I know he addressed the angle that evolution was not an issue in the time of the Holy Fathers, and that saints are human and not infallible. But divine revelation IS infallible and the Consensus of the Saints IS the Church's teaching.
So, your job will be to show, by consensus of the Holy Fathers, that evolution is possible. Fr. Seraphim showed that it is impossible, and impossible to mix the two even with fancy theories about time being relative. We start with Moses and we can end, for now, with the most recently canonized saint, who was aware of the theory, and who spoke against it in passing, St. Philaret. And I think I recall reading that St. John of Kronstadt said something against it, too, somewhere [probably My Life in Christ], and he was known to be clairvoyant even during his lifetime. Also the Serbian St. Justin said something against it.
Another rule for your book should be that by the word "evolution" you mean Christianized evolution philosophy and not the atheist evolution philosophy. Assume your readers are Orthodox.
It would be a good idea to get the new edition of the Creation book. I haven't seen it yet, but I know it has 1140 pages where the original has 710 pages.