4 questions about the early church fathers

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Sinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Ben_Sinner

Guest
  1. What are the earliest known writings and works (other than the bible) from the church fathers?
  2. Did any of the church fathers know any of the apostles personally
  3. and if so, which apostles did they know?
  4. did any of the apostles have any writings outside of the bibles of apocrypha?
 
A la en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Fathers:
  1. The Didache, 1 Clement, St. Ignatius of Antioch’s letters, etc.
  2. St. Ignatius knew the Apostle John–tradition says he was the only apostle to escape an early martyrdom.
  3. I don’t understand the question. What do you mean by “bibles of apocrypha”? The early Church Fathers wrote quite a lot, on various subjects.
 
Ben_Sinner said:
  1. What are the earliest known writings and works (other than the bible) from the church fathers?
    **The Didache, Epistle of Barnabus, Clements letter to the Corinthians, fragments of Papias. **
  2. Did any of the church fathers know any of the apostles personally
    Yes.
  3. and if so, which apostles did they know?
    I would imagine most of them. Peter and Paul are mentioned by Clement.
  4. did any of the apostles have any writings outside of the bibles of apocrypha?
    Not that are approved by the Church.
Click to expand...
 
In response to your “four questions” I offer a book called “four witnesses”. contained in the book is a very nice graph showing how the earliest ECF’s overlap the Apostles and each other. It is a wonderful pictorial demonstration of the continuity of The Church.

In addition to this one page, which you can look at in the book store - 😉
The book is well written and demonstrates how “catholic” was teh early Church.

Peace
James
 
We actually do not know who wrote the books of the New Testament. Only one, Romans, is signed by the writer, Tertius, who was Paul’s scribe. In others of his epistles (1 Cortinthians, Galatians, 2 Thessalonians) Paul apparently writes in his own hand.

It appears by the second century that names were attached to the different gospels. I have seen it speculated that it was because they began to circulate and people needed to have some way to differentiate them. Regardless of which timeline you accept for the writing of the books of the New Testament, it took some time for them to be copied and then distributed.
 
  1. The Shepherd of Hermas (c. 90-95 AD)
    Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians (c. 95)
    The Letters of Ignatius of Antioch (c. 105)
    The Didache (Late 1st/early 2nd century)
    Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians (early/mid 2nd c.)
    Fragments of writings by Papias (early 2nd c.)
    Epistle of Barnabas (early 2nd c.)
2 & 3)
Ignatius and Polycarp were students of John
Clement knew Peter and Paul
Hermas and Barnabas knew Paul
  1. I’m entirely sure what this question means. If it means, are there any writings by the apostles outside of the Bible and apocrypha, then the answer is none that we know of for certain.
    Some claim that Paul also wrote another letter to the Ephesians, two others to the Corinthians, and a letter to the church in Laodicea. They no longer exist (if they ever existed), but they weren’t condemned as apocrypha.
 
How do we know that the printed copy of the church fathers we have today is what they actually wrote?
 
psyche825 answered the 4th question very good! I do want to bring up one writing that I personally believe St. Mark wrote but it is not canonical, and that is the Acts of Barnabas. I highly recommend reading it newadvent.org/fathers/0817.htm

I love the part where Mark talks about the time when Paul and Barnabas split over Mark, and Mark gives his side of the story to what happened. Also where St. Luke tells us where Paul went after that split, St. Mark tells where him and Barnabas went. Great stuff!
 
Big Dummy said: “How do we know that the printed copy of the church fathers we have today is what they actually wrote?”

You compare manuscript copies from around the world: Latin, Greek, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopian. You compare translations to each other. You compare the manuscripts you have to the quotes other ancient documents have, that they say is from them. You look for old manuscript copies that some monk wrote on, or that were used to stuff an old book back in the 13th century. You compare the kind of expressions used to other ancient authors, and you figure out how old the text is. And so on.

Most Western manuscripts, our most ancient copy is something copied in Charlemagne’s time from an old Roman Empire manuscript. With Syriac stuff, not to mention Egyptian and Ethiopian, you get a lot older manuscripts (even ones from ancient times), because the climate in those areas is so dry.

We have a lot more manuscripts of the Church Fathers than of most of classical Greek and Roman literature. The attributions are pretty well attested. (Except for Pseudo-Dionysus, who was only writing under Dionysus as a sort of pet name.) There have been some forgeries that you can read about; but surprisingly few. Most people just want to write continuations that stick out like a sore thumb, or write under a pen name of their favorite saint, like Dionysus.

If you want the full story of the palaeographic study or textual analysis of any manuscript, you’ll want to consult academic sources.
 
What academic sources do you have in mind that deals directly with the church fathers?
 
This is the book referred to by JRKH. Four Witnesses, by Rod Bennett. It is a readable and useful book with which to explore early Church history through a knowledge of the early Church fathers.
 
psyche825 said:
  1. The Shepherd of Hermas (c. 90-95 AD)
    Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians (c. 95)
    The Letters of Ignatius of Antioch (c. 105)
    The Didache (Late 1st/early 2nd century)
    Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians (early/mid 2nd c.)
    Fragments of writings by Papias (early 2nd c.)
    Epistle of Barnabas (early 2nd c.)
2 & 3)
Ignatius and Polycarp were students of John
Clement knew Peter and Paul
Hermas and Barnabas knew Paul
  1. I’m entirely sure what this question means. If it means, are there any writings by the apostles outside of the Bible and apocrypha, then the answer is none that we know of for certain.
    Some claim that Paul also wrote another letter to the Ephesians, two others to the Corinthians, and a letter to the church in Laodicea. They no longer exist (if they ever existed), but they weren’t condemned as apocrypha.
Click to expand...
Clement of Rome knew Peter and probably Paul, but don’t confuse him with Clement of Alexandria (not suggesting psyche825 is confusing them, but others may). We have quite a bit from Clement of Alexandria, who lived after all the Apostles had passed. We have very little written by Clement of Rome.
 
Perhaps some answers here claim information that is not really correct.

Some of the earliest known writings may be older than parts of the NT. One needs to be cautious in replying to this query as information is so scarce.

Possible dates are:
1 Clement 96 AD
Ignatius 107
Polycarp 108
Barnabas 119 ?
Didache 150 ?
Papias 110-130 ?

Did any of the early fathers know the apostles? Polycarp knew John. Did Clement know Peter and/or Paul? Possibly. Irenaeus said that Papias was a “a hearer of John, and a companion of Polycarp”.

I do not think “Four Witnesses” is accurate. Much of it is based on legend.
 
There are several books called “Four Witnesses.” The one I referred to, by Rod Bennett, is largely based upon the written works of Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Justin Martyr, and Ireneus of Lyons.
 
COPLAND_3 said:
psyche825 answered the 4th question very good! I do want to bring up one writing that I personally believe St. Mark wrote but it is not canonical, and that is the Acts of Barnabas. I highly recommend reading it newadvent.org/fathers/0817.htm

I love the part where Mark talks about the time when Paul and Barnabas split over Mark, and Mark gives his side of the story to what happened. Also where St. Luke tells us where Paul went after that split, St. Mark tells where him and Barnabas went. Great stuff!
Click to expand...
Acts of Barnabas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The text of the pseudepigraphical Acts of Barnabas claims to identify its author as “John Mark,” the companion of Paul, as if writing an account of Barnabas, the Cypriot Jew who was a member of the earliest church at Jerusalem; through the services of Barnabas the convert Saul was welcomed into the apostolic community. Three pseudepigraphical works are linked with the name of Barnabas: the Epistle of Barnabas, written between AD 70 and 135, this Acts and the medieval forgery Gospel of Barnabas. None of them were accepted into the Biblical canon.

The language and the ecclesiastical politics of Acts of Barnabas reveal it to be a work of the 5th century, designed to strengthen the claims of the church of Cyprus to apostolic foundation as the site of Barnabas’ grave, and therefore of its bishops’ independence from the patriarch of Antioch. These are 5th century concerns, the independence of the Church of Cyprus having been declared by the First Council of Ephesus in 431 and confirmed by Emperor Zeno of the Byzantine Empire in 474-75 (see link).
 
firstmode said:
Acts of Barnabas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The text of the pseudepigraphical Acts of Barnabas claims to identify its author as “John Mark,” the companion of Paul, as if writing an account of Barnabas, the Cypriot Jew who was a member of the earliest church at Jerusalem; through the services of Barnabas the convert Saul was welcomed into the apostolic community. Three pseudepigraphical works are linked with the name of Barnabas: the Epistle of Barnabas, written between AD 70 and 135, this Acts and the medieval forgery Gospel of Barnabas. None of them were accepted into the Biblical canon.

The language and the ecclesiastical politics of Acts of Barnabas reveal it to be a work of the 5th century, designed to strengthen the claims of the church of Cyprus to apostolic foundation as the site of Barnabas’ grave, and therefore of its bishops’ independence from the patriarch of Antioch. These are 5th century concerns, the independence of the Church of Cyprus having been declared by the First Council of Ephesus in 431 and confirmed by Emperor Zeno of the Byzantine Empire in 474-75 (see link).
Click to expand...
Wikapedia is not a reliable source, and the case made is not very convincing considering first of all another Wikapedia page on Barnabas himself says that he was martyred in Cyprus, which shows an inconsistancy. Plus, St. Barnabas was a native of Cyprus (Acts 4:36, 37), and when Paul and Barnabas split Barnabas and Mark went to Cyrus, which is exactly what Luke said happened in Acts 15:39. Also the translator and editor of it (Phillip Schaff) had this to say,
“Acts of Barnabas.—This book has more an air of truth about it than any of the others. There is not much extravagance in the details, and the geography is correct, showing that the writer knew Cyprus well. It seems to have been written at all events before 478, in which year the body of Barnabas is said to have been found in Cyprus.”
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top