Validity of the Church Fathers

[George]

How valid are the Church Fathers? And if there is one who sticks out to you, who is it?

 

[visionary]

James, Yeshua's brother and leader of The Way in Jerusalem.

 

[Cassia]

James, Yeshua's brother and leader of The Way in Jerusalem.

Was that the old way? I always classify James as being of the OT ways, like Psalms is a mixture of law and grace.

 

[popsthebuilder]

The epistle of barnabas, Clement 1 and 2, and the Shepard of Hermas.

All seem to be the inspired word of GOD and should be at least read by Christians at least once I think.



Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

 

[Tigger]

1st & 2nd generational ECF's carry a lot of clout with me veralls:

 

[Ackbach]

I think they should be paid attention to a lot more than they are, at least in my circles (Presbyterian and Reformed). Most of the top-notch Reformed theologians, e.g., were absolutely steeped in the ECF's. Calvin and Bullinger could quote them from memory, and I'm sure others could as well.

I place a great deal of weight on Augustine, especially his doctrine of salvation. Not so much his ecclesiology.

 

[Josiah]

.

Tradition: Catholic and Protestant.



Catholic Definition:


1. It's the RC denomination alone that determines what is and is not Tradition:


"It is the Authoritative Voice of the Catholic Church which determines what is to be accepted and rejected as Tradition." The Handbook of the Catholic Faith, page 151



2. It's the RCC itself individually and uniquely that determines the meaning is of this Tradition that it itself alone chose.

The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, teaching office of the [Catholic] Church alone [Sola Ecclesia]. This means that the task of interpretion has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the bishop of Rome." Catholic Catechism # 85



3. This "Tradition" as the RCC has chosen and as the RCC itself has interpreted, is not accountable to God's Scriptures but is EQUAL and SUPPLIMENTAL to it.

The [Catholic] Church does not derive its certainty about truth from the holy Scriptures alone. But both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments." Catholic Catechism # 82

"Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the [Catholic] Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, they all contribute equally...." Catholic Catechims # 95


Realize, too, that this Holy Scripture which is equal to the Tradition as the RCC itself alone as chosen as it itself alone interprets, is....

Scripture is written principally in the heart of the [Catholic] Church rather than in documents or records, for the [Catholic] Church carries in its Tradition the living memory... Catholic Catechism # 113




Classical Protestant Definition:


Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodist and often Reformed Protestants speak of "tradition" in several way:


1. It refers to the historic, ecumenical, consensus of God's people, especially regarding the interpretation and application of Scriptures. This if often held in very high esteem, but at least a tad under God's Word (as indeed Protestants tend to regard the words of men as under the Word of God). Examples would be the Apostles and Nicene Creeds.


2. The historic, consensus and generally official teachings of the specific theological community. In Lutheranism, we call this type of Tradition, "Confessions." This is not ecumenical since it may be distinctive to a denomination. For example, the "Lutheran Confessions" (the Book of Concord), the Reformed Confessions. The Lutheran Book of Concord (unchanged since 1580 - with no additions, revisions, developments or expansions) begins with the 3 ecumenical creeds - in a category unto themselves, then addresses the Lutheran Confessions.


3. The historic and broadly accepted customs and practices of God's people - which may be ecumenical or perhaps more limited in terms of time or community.




.

Contrary to what some declare, the early church (roughly first 300 years of Christianity) was a chaotic, diverse time. Christianity was a movement - an underground, illegal movement - that (by necessity) was very loose. There was no denomination, no central government, no "lists", it was all pretty "loosey-goosey." This applied to a lot of theology, too. The great heresies pretty much belong to this era, and there was often different theology in different areas. In this milieu, there was MUCH debate - and often it focused on very important things! In this era, there was even a whole religious spin-off, a new religion was born out of Christainity: Gnosticism (which eventually all but died).


In this milieu, there arose some truly great and helpful men! Some believe that God Himself arose these men - similar to Christian Prophets - whose wisdom and insight often cut through the "mess" and debate in a way that provided leadership and (above all) helped to bring Christianity into focus. These men - fathers of orthodox theology - were extremely helpful! Whether they were God-given Reformers or Prophets or not, they were extremely helpful and MUCH of orthodox theology must be credited to their insight. Later (from 300-800 AD), this role would largely go to the Seven Ecumenical Councils which continued to deal with debate and form consensus, but these were ecumenical rather than personal. I personally do not consider these men or these Councils to be divinely infallible/unaccountable or equal to God's penned words on the pages of His Inscripturated words (the Scriptures). BUT, I regard them with very high esteem and with great gratitude and seriousness. I think it's not too much to say that Christianity today is largely indebted to them - who knows what MESS (es) would exist without them (maybe we'd all be Gnostics today). I think it is unfortunate (and dangerous!) that recently, many Christian clergy have abandoned this Tradition (in the Protestant sense) and are largely ignorant of early Christian history, the Christian "Fathers," the Christian Ecumenical Councils..... many "Evangelical" seminaries and Bible colleges doen't require courses here and likely don't even offer many of them as electives, mandating that the clergy and teachers who graduate from them will be ignorant and destined to repeat the errors (even the heresies) of early Christianity... and indeed, we are witnessing the reguritation of them once again - innocently but dangerously.



My half cent.


Pax Christi



- Josiah


.