Qs for the Moderators or the Group

[Nemo]

A thread to answer any questions that people might have but don't know where to put them.

If a question is complicated or controversial, and generates long discussions, it might be moved to its own thread.

[Nemo]

Cleo asked, "Are we looking at the Church Fathers from an Orthodox or Catholic perspective or both? ...How do we incorporate the different views (RC & Orth.) or do we even try? :-Z "

I personally prefer what C. S. Lewis called "Mere Christianity" approach, that is, to clarify and explain the core teachings of Christianity, the common ground shared by Protestant, Eastern Orthodox and Catholic traditions.

However, Church Fathers are not "mere" Christians, but individual human beings, with their unique perspectives, knowledge and life experiences. For that matter, so are their readers.

Each person can and does look at the Church Fathers from his/her own perspective, incorporate some of their teachings into his/her own worldview, and reject others.

As St. Augustine once said about interpreting the Scripture, there may be many valid interpretations, provided they are consistent with sound reason and faith.

[AJ]

Wasn't there a historical topic on Jesus where you had brought up Tacitus? I can't seem to find it now.

[Nemo]

There are two of them;

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

[AJ]

Ah it was the second one, thanks

[Kerstin]

If I see a citation of, say, ANF 1:34 in another book, how do I find that in the first volume?

[AJ]

I don't have that in my index Kerstin on ANF01

[Nemo]

Kerstin wrote: "If I see a citation of, say, ANF 1:34 in another book, how do I find that in the first volume?"

I think it is page 34 of ANF1, Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians.

[Kerstin]

Nemo wrote: "Kerstin wrote: "If I see a citation of, say, ANF 1:34 in another book, how do I find that in the first volume?"

I think it is page 34 of ANF1, Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians."

Ah, this makes sense! With the Kindle versions you get locations only. Online they show the page numbers.

Though, the printed Hendrickson edition must have an updated translation. The above citation in Mike Aquilina's book refers to

"whoever interprets to his own perverse inclinations is the firstborn of Satan"

whereas our translation says

"and whosoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, and says that there is neither a resurrection nor a judgment, he is the first-born of Satan."

[Nemo]

Kerstin wrote: "Nemo wrote: "Kerstin wrote: "If I see a citation of, say, ANF 1:34 in another book, how do I find that in the first volume?"

I think it is page 34 of ANF1, Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians."
..."

That is a significant difference in translation. Reading it in context, I think the Hendrickson edition makes more sense. Could you please post the context in the Aquilina version?

[Kerstin]

Nemo wrote: "That is a significant difference in translation. Reading it in context, I think the Hendrickson edition makes more sense. Could you please post the context in the Aquilina version"

OK. Let me tie a few passages together to capture where he is coming from. (The Fathers of the Church: An Introduction to the First Christian Teachers pages 28-32)

"The Fathers' primary source of Jesus' acts, teachings, and sufferings was "the Gospel." Today, we take this word to represent the books of the New Testament, especially the four books of the life of Christ. But in the time of the Apostolic Fathers, and even into the succeeding centuries "the Gospel" meant the received Tradition, whether in written, or oral form (see 2 Thess 2:14). The first generations of Christians did not so much read the Gospel as absorb it, through the liturgy* and other prayers of the Church, through the catechetical homilies of their local bishop, and through everyday life in the Church community. Relatively rare was the believer who could read, and rarer still was the literate Christian who could afford to own pages of the Gospels copied our for study."

""Faith comes by hearing," St. Paul said (Rom 10:17), and the early Christians heard the Word from the men they revered as their Fathers."

"The Fathers' own writings testify that they would have no Christian ignorant of Scripture."

"There were two major schools of biblical studies in the ancient Church. The school of Alexandria favored an allegorical reading of Scripture, and its most famous proponent was Origen... The school of Antioch, on the other hand, promoted a deep study of the literal sense of the Scripture, emphasizing historical and linguistic scholarship."

"In reading the Scriptures, the Fathers held themselves accountable to a community of interpretation - the Church, the communion of saints. To consider the Gospel apart from Tradition was unthinkable to the Fathers. St. Polycarp wrote that "whoever interprets according to his own perverse inclinations is the firstborn of Satan.""

*Liturgy:
1) The word "liturgy" comes from the Greek leitourgia, which means "public service." ...as well as fulfilling religious duties

2) The public worship of the people of God. In the biblical religion, this involves various cultic acts such as the offering of sacrifice and incense, the proclamation of sacred texts, and the recitation of prayers, the singing of sacred music, and the administration of sacraments. ... Liturgy is the principal means of ratifying, renewing, and maintaining the covenants between God and his people in the history of salvation. (Catholic Bible Dictionary)

[Nemo]

Kerstin wrote: "Nemo wrote: "That is a significant difference in translation. Reading it in context, I think the Hendrickson edition makes more sense. Could you please post the context in the Aquilina version""

I thought Aquilina was quoting a specific translation that is somehow different from the Hendrickson edition, but now it seems that he was quoting from memory. Although I understand what he is driving at, I think Polycarp original point is quite different -- he was referring to the so-called Gnostics.

"For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist;” and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is of the devil; and whosoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, and says that there is neither a resurrection nor a judgment, he is the first-born of Satan.

Eusebius relates an encounter between Polycarp and Marcion (a notorious Gnostic) in Church History (bk. IV chap. 14)

And Polycarp himself, when Marcion once met him and said, ‘Knowest thou us?’ replied, ‘I know the first born of Satan.’ Such caution did the apostles and their disciples exercise that they might not even converse with any of those who perverted the truth;

[Kerstin]

Nemo wrote: "Although I understand what he is driving at, I think Polycarp original point is quite different -- he was referring to the so-called Gnostics."

Aquilina mentions the Gnostics in this context beginning with the previous chapter. In hindsight I should have continued the last quote.

"...Satan. The heretics Arius and Eutyches both aroused horror in their judges when they sought to interpret scripture in ways contrary to all the Fathers who had gone before.
Interpreting the Gospels, the Fathers sought to communicate the Gospel to the faithful, whose faith came by hearing. St. Jerome was representative of all the Fathers when he wrote, "A man who is well grounded in the testimonials of Scripture is the bulwark of the Church.""

[Nemo]

Kerstin wrote: "Nemo wrote: "Although I understand what he is driving at, I think Polycarp original point is quite different -- he was referring to the so-called Gnostics."

Aquilina mentions the Gnostics in this ..."

If I'm not mistaken, unlike the Gnostics, Arius and Eutyches didn't deny that Christ came in the flesh, died on the Cross and bodily resurrected. They might be heretics, but not Gnostic.

[Kerstin]

Nemo wrote: "Kerstin wrote: "Nemo wrote: "Although I understand what he is driving at, I think Polycarp original point is quite different -- he was referring to the so-called Gnostics."

Aquilina mentions the G..."

I am sure you are right.
Though what one sees, and what we've been reading to a great extend so far, is how important it was for the early Church to preserve the authentic Tradition entrusted to them from the Apostles on. You have all sorts of heretics trying to hobble their own versions together, and what's more, it hasn't stopped to this day.

[AJ]

I think Arianism is actually much closer to what Agnostic Christians tend to gravitate towards knowing or unknowing.

[Nemo]

Aaron wrote: "I think Arianism is actually much closer to what Agnostic Christians tend to gravitate towards knowing or unknowing."

You sound as if Orthodox Christians don't gravate toward knowing. After all, didn't the saying, "You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free" come from the Gospels?

[AJ]

I'm not sure I follow, I mean knowing or unknowing of what Arianism is. 'Agnostic' on the other hand is a symptom of unknowing too, I just meant that 'Christians' who have embraced their doubts at the expense of their truth, but maintain their tradition or affinity (either for communal purposes or because they have doubts about their doubts) are more like Arians.

[Nemo]

Aaron wrote: "I'm not sure I follow, I mean knowing or unknowing of what Arianism is. 'Agnostic' on the other hand is a symptom of unknowing too, I just meant that 'Christians' who have embraced their doubts at ..."

I see what you mean, though I think it is hard for people who doubt everything to form communities, for communities need common ground to subsist. I tend to think that every person believes in some things, while doubting other things.

[AJ]

I agree, we cannot truly know what's in the minds of our brothers and sisters. Christian community is about sharing, think of the kids for example growing up we were rascals, Church was boring, we wanted to have fun and laugh, but we know the routine and didn't or could not challenge it if we wanted to and yet we were part of that community.

[AJ]

Actually I was a pretty well behaved kid even so.