Fathers and Apologetics

[firebrand]

Cardinal Avery Dulles has a book called A History of Apologetics. I am reading some of the Fathers’ works that are the first examples of apologetics with them. I am excited to learn that almost all of the Fathers were philosophers. So I am collecting a little information about Christian philosophy. I wonder if there is a scientific name and field devoted to studying the Fathers AS apologists, who are they and what do they do?

 

[utunumsint]

Cardinal Avery Dulles has a book called A History of Apologetics. I am reading some of the Fathers’ works that are the first examples of apologetics with them. I am excited to learn that almost all of the Fathers were philosophers. So I am collecting a little information about Christian philosophy. I wonder if there is a scientific name and field devoted to studying the Fathers AS apologists, who are they and what do they do?

I suppose apologetics could be considered a kind of theology that incorporates both philosophical and theological data. I would venture to say that the ancient philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, and of the stoics had a great impact on the early church fathers. Especially Plato. For example, Justin Martyr was a Platonists before coming to the faith. St. Augustine as well. We have only fragmentary information from Eusebius of some very early church fathers such as Aristides who wrote an apology to Marcus Aurelius, the famous stoic emperor. There are lots of other examples of neo-platonic thinkers.

All of these men used the philosophy of their day to try to bring the Gospel message to the intelligencia. In many cases they were greatly successful. It certainly allowed men like Justine and Augustine to dialogue with the people of their age.

But I also think we can overestimate the influence of Greek philosophy on the early church fathers. They may have used it to craft their apologetics and theology, but they were also totally immersed in the Bible and the tradition of the church. Just read some of Hilary of Poitier’s on the Trinity. He discusses the limites of human reason when applied to the revealed truth of the Trinity.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Jolly_Joe]

Christian philosophy is almost an oxymoron. Philosophy is very dangerous and you can see it in the early fathers. Take Origen, a great man certainly, a very accomplished writer, one who knew much. Yet what happened? Condemned as a heretic by Council, many of his works destroyed by the Church because they were dangerous.

It is too bad Origen did not limit himself to the Christian faith, but wandered, being led astray by philosophy.

You can see much the same in Tertullian. While a great teacher, he too seems quite clearly to hold heretical beliefs at the end.

So the major problem with reading people who are writing as man writes and thinking as man thinks is that they do not stick to a faith once delivered. So you have to norm them.

A lot of that has really been done already for you if you read the fathers. For there are many who have every credential to be a church father who aren’t even included in those we would think of as a church father because they were heretical in their beliefs and writings.

JJ

 

[Janet_S]

If you’re interested in philosophy, you should read JPII’s encyclical, Fides et Ratio:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_15101998_fides-et-ratio_en.html