{"id":306,"date":"2013-05-30T12:00:35","date_gmt":"2013-05-30T19:00:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thisrestlesspilgrim.wordpress.com\/?p=306"},"modified":"2015-02-02T15:24:35","modified_gmt":"2015-02-02T22:24:35","slug":"paternal-protestations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/2013\/05\/30\/paternal-protestations\/","title":{"rendered":"Paternal Protestations"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"As you’ll see from the categorization of this entry, this is an apologetics<\/a> post. In this article I am going to be defending the use of the writings of the Early Church Fathers<\/a> in demonstrating the historicity and veracity of the Catholic Faith.<\/p>\n

The problem with writing a defence of anything<\/em> is that, even with the best will in the world, it’s still\u00a0easy to come across as though you’re attacking those to whom you are responding.<\/p>\n

So, if you’re reading this post and you feel that it comes across as Protestant-bashing then I’m truly sorry. \u00a0This is certainly not my intention. \u00a0In fact, this was one of the reasons why I penned the\u00a0Ecumenical Apologist<\/a> entry, to try and dispel such charges. In this post I simply want to present something of an explanation as to why one should care about the Early Church Fathers.<\/p>\n

Forgotten Treasure<\/h2>\n

On the occasions when I’ve been engaged in apologetics with non-Catholic Christians I’ve often mentioned the Early Fathers. \u00a0I’m usually met with blank stares. \u00a0The Early who<\/em>?! Unfortunately, like Catholics, our separated brethren haven’t read much of the Early Church Fathers either \ud83d\ude41<\/p>\n

One of my hopes for this blog is that it will encourage\u00a0both<\/em> groups to read the Fathers and learn more about our common heritage. \u00a0The Early Church Fathers are fundamentally important in ecumenical work since they were living in a time prior to the divisions of the Great East\/West Schism and the Reformation.<\/p>\n

On the odd occasion when I do encounter non-Catholics who have heard<\/span><\/em> of the Fathers, they usually only have second-hand information and have actually not read any of their writings. \u00a0This is not true of all non-Catholics, of course, but in my limited experience it has at least been the larger majority. It should come as no surprise then, upon meeting Catholic or Protestant Christians unfamiliar with the Fathers, I immediately encourage them to begin by\u00a0reading<\/a>\u00a0the letters of my favourite Early Church Father,\u00a0St. Ignatius of Antioch<\/a> \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n

How You Shouldn’t Treat The Fathers<\/h2>\n

Yesterday, Joe over at Shameless Popery<\/a> wrote a great post entitled Three Ways You Shouldn’t Treat The Church Fathers<\/a>. Here were his three points:<\/p>\n

Wrong Way #1: Ignoring or Fearing the Church Fathers
\n<\/b>Reason: It Reduces Christianity to Incoherence<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Wrong Way #2: Exploiting the Church Fathers
\n<\/b>Reason: It Doesn\u2019t Treat the Fathers Honestly<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Wrong Way #3: Treating the Church Fathers as Infallible
\n<\/b>Reason: The Fathers Occasionally Disagree<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

In this blog post I would like to talk a little bit about the third item. In apologetic exchanges I have often had to correct the non-Catholic assertion that we regard the Fathers as infallible. We don’t. As Joe points out, the Fathers occasionally disagree. It is on this point that I sometimes hear another objection. Here is what someone recently wrote to me:<\/p>\n

“The fathers didn’t agree on every matter of doctrine so their opinion is no more reliable than anyone else’s. There were some heated arguments between some of them. \u00a0In what way are they different from two modern-day non-Catholic pastors disagreeing over a certain interpretation of the Bible?<\/span>“<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

I would like to take the rest of this blog entry to address this objection.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Patristic Divergence<\/h2>\n

In the above extract, my non-Catholic friend asks a perfectly reasonable question and it offered a perfect opportunity to share with him more about the Early Church Fathers.<\/p>\n

1. Scale<\/strong>
\nThe disputes among the Fathers were predominantly over secondary matters. \u00a0By comparison, the disputes in the non-Catholic world, even today, are over\u00a0the most crucial, basic aspects of faith: effects of baptism, nature of the church, the role of faith in salvation, the Eucharist, availability of charismatic gifts, role of women in ministry…<\/p>\n

2. Schism<\/strong>
\nAs a consequence of continuing Protestant disagreements since the Reformation there has been a constant splintering of church congregations and an ever-increasing diversity of belief.<\/p>\n

This is true on a global scale, but also on a local one, such as in my hometown. When one member of leadership disagreed with another he left that church and founded his own down the street. \u00a0The Fathers, in comparison remained part of the same visible Church despite<\/em> their disagreements.<\/p>\n

3. First Attempts<\/strong>
\nThe Early Fathers are the giants on whose shoulders modern theologians stand. For example, the Fathers were the first people to come up with ways of explaining the mystery of the Godhead (a theological minefield). Another example would be that they were the first to explore the relationship between Christian faith and the reason found in Greek Philosophy.\u00a0 Given this, it was inevitable<\/em> that there would be some heated debate among them.<\/p>\n

4. Areas of Speculation:<\/strong>
\nMany of the disagreements between the Fathers were over matters not yet explicitly taught by the Church.\u00a0 In an area where the Church has not definitively taught, theologians are free to speculate.\u00a0 The Catholic Church has not offered definitive teaching on many aspects of the faith, such as some aspects of\u00a0eschatology<\/a>, and therefore there is some latitude of belief permitted.\u00a0 Different theologians will have different speculations and will spend lots of time arguing about them (and usually try and sell their books in the process).<\/p>\n

On this point, it is important to understand the difference between “formal<\/span> heresy”<\/em><\/span> and\u00a0“material<\/span> heresy”<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0 Formal heresy is the obstinate rejection of the official teaching of the Church in favour of one\u2019s own private judgment. \u00a0However, in contrast, material heresy is some disagreement based upon either the lack of explicit Church teaching or an ignorance of it.<\/p>\n

However, once the Church has directly addressed an issue (usually in a council) the discussion ends. \u00a0For example, prior to the official institution of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, St. Bernard wrote a letter attacking its celebration. However, he ended his letter with the perfect attitude of humility:<\/p>\n

“…I have said all of this in submission to the judgment of anyone wiser than myself and especially in submission to the authority of the Roman Church<\/span> to whose decision I shall refer all that I have said on this and any other subject and am prepared to modify anything I have said if it is contrary to what she thinks.\u201d<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

5. Consensus Patrum<\/em> (Consensus of the Fathers)<\/strong>
\nThe Church draws upon the\u00a0consensus<\/em> of the Fathers. \u00a0This consensus is what is important, not an individual and personal view expressed by a particular Father. \u00a0If we find baptismal regeneration taught consistently from the beginning (and we do) then we can safely say it\u2019s Apostolic Tradition.<\/p>\n

Other examples of consistent testimony include the concepts of the bishops, the Eucharist and ecumenical councils. \u00a0With all these and many other issues the Fathers speak with one voice,<\/em> despite the immense diversity among the Fathers in country of origin, point in history, language, culture and occupation. \u00a0When they do this, they are witnessesing to something beyond<\/em> them, they are witnessing to ancient Apostolic Tradition of Christianity.<\/p>\n

Perspective of the Early Reformers<\/h2>\n

In closing, something else is probably worth mentioning.\u00a0 If you ever read the works of the founding fathers of the Reformation (Luther, Calvin etc), you will notice that they are not nearly as dismissive of the Early Church Fathers as the majority of non-Catholics are today.<\/p>\n

People like Calvin saw a problem in rejecting the Fathers and went to great lengths to try and show that his theology was in accord with that of the historic Church.\u00a0 This is why the Reformers regarded themselves as \u201creformers\u201d<\/em> rather than \u201crevolutionaries\u201d<\/em> – they thought they were returning the Church to an earlier, purer stage.<\/p>\n

Among Protestant apologetics today, I would suggest that this approach to the Fathers has virtually disappeared.\u00a0 This isn\u2019t that surprising since as Cardinal Newman, an Anglican convert, once said,\u00a0“To read the Fathers is to become Catholic”.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

So go on, read them. \u00a0I dare you\u2026 \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n

As you’ll see from the categorization of this entry, this is an apologetics post. In this article I am going to be defending the use of the writings of the Early Church Fathers in demonstrating the historicity and veracity of the Catholic Faith. The problem with writing a defence of anything is that, even with the best will in the<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_crdt_document":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[28,17,23],"tags":[3260,51,2969,1573],"class_list":["post-306","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-apologetics","category-faith","category-church-fathers","tag-church-fathers","tag-early-church-fathers","tag-featured","tag-st-ignatius-of-antioch"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/306","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=306"}],"version-history":[{"count":56,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/306\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":54864,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/306\/revisions\/54864"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=306"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=306"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/restlesspilgrim.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=306"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}

The article\u00a0Paternal Protestations<\/a>\u00a0first appeared on\u00a0RestlessPilgrim.net<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"