Bardenhewer. Notion and Purpose of Patrology

7/30/2019 Bardenhewer. Notion and Purpose of Patrology

1/5

NotionandPurposeofPatrology.

1.THEFATHERSOFTHECHURCH.ThewordPatrology ()dates fromtheseventeenth

century,anddenotedoriginallythescienceofthelivesandwritingsoftheFathersoftheChurch.Fathersof theChurchor simplyFatherswas the titleofhonour given to theecclesiastical

writersinthefirsteraoftheChurch.Itsusecanberecognizedasfarbackasthefifthcentury.In

modern times theexplanationof the termhasbeen sought in the similarityof the relationship

existingbetweena teacherandhisdisciple to thatwhich is foundbetween fatherand son;an

interpretationapparentlyconfirmedbysuchbiblicalparallelsasthesonsoftheprophetsinthe

OldTestament,andbypassagesintheNewlikeICor.iv.14.Itfails,however,todojusticetothe

historicaldevelopmentofthenameFathers.Inreality,thiswastransferredfromthebishopsof

the primitive Church to contemporaneous ecclesiastical writers. In the earlier centuries, by a

metaphor easily understood, the bishop, in his quality of head or superior,was addressed as

FatherorHolyFather(e.g.Mart.S.Polyc.12,2: ;andtheinscriptionCyprianopapaeorpapati,Cypr.Ep.303136).Theauthorityofthebishopwasbothdisciplinary

anddoctrinal.HewasthedepositaryoftheteachingofficeoftheChurch,andinmattersofdoubt

orofcontroversyitwashisdutytodecide,aswitnessandjudge,concerningthetruefaith.Since

the fifth century,however, this functionbegan todevolve (in learneddiscussions and conciliar

proceedings)on theecclesiasticalwritersof theprimitiveChurch.Mostof them,and those the

more eminent had, indeed, been bishops; but nonepiscopal writers might also bear reliable

witnesstothecontemporaneousfaithoftheChurch,andwhensuchtestimoniesdatedfromthe

earliestChristianperiod,theynaturallyenjoyedspecialrespectandauthority.Themorefrequently

the consciousnessof theprimitiveChurch inmattersof faithwasappealed to in the courseof

doctrinal disputes, themore rapidlymust so prevalent a term as Father have undergone acertainalteration. Itwasused todenote thewitnesses to the faithof theprimitiveChurch,and

sincesuchwitnesseswererather itswritersthan itsbishops,thetermpassed fromthe latterto

theformer.

Thechangeofmeaningjustalluded towillbemadeevidentby the following instances.According toSt.Athanasius(Ep.adAfros,c.6),thebishopsoftheCouncilofNica(325)appealedtothetestimonyofthe

Fathers( [] )indefenceoftheconsubstantialityoftheSonwiththeFather;especiallyprominentamongtheseFathersweretwoearlybishops( ),DionysiusofRome( 268)andDionysiusofAlexandria( 265),bothofthemdefendersoftheconsubstantialityoftheSon.HowcantheynowrejecttheCouncilofNica,saysAthanasius,sinceeventheirownfathers(

)subscribeditsdecrees?HehadjustmentionedthenameoftheArianizingbishopEusebiusofCesarea.Whoseheirsandsuccessorsarethey?HowcantheycallthosemenFathers( )

whose profession (of faith) they do not accept? Apparently Athanasius understands by Fathers onlybishops,especiallythoseoftheprimitiveChurch.Thebishops,andtheyalone,had inheritedtheteaching

officeoftheApostles.St.Augustine,inhisdisputewiththePelagianJulianusofEclanum(ContraJulian.I.34

;II.3336),appealstoSt.Jeromeasawitnessfortheecclesiasticalteachingconcerningoriginalsin;atthesametimehe isconsciousofhavingoversteppedacertainlineofdemarcation.Toforestallhisadversarys

refusal to accept the evidence of Jerome, he insists that, though the latter was not a bishop, hisextraordinarylearningandtheholinessofhislifeentitledhimtobeheldareliableinterpreterofthefaithof

theChurch.AtthefirstsessionofthecouncilofEphesus(431),testimonieswerereadfromthewritingsof


2/5

OttoBardenhewer.NotionandPurposeofPatrology.

2http://plgo.info

the most holy and godfearing fathers and bishops and other witnesses (

,Mansi,SS.Conc.Coll.,iv.1184).Thewritingsquoted are exclusively those of early bishops. In his famous Commonitorium (434) St.Vincentof Lrinsrecommendswithinsistence(c.333sq.)thatthefaithfulholdfasttotheteachingoftheholyFathers;atthe

sametimehemakes itclearthatherefers,notsomuchtothebishops,astotheecclesiasticalwritersof

Christianantiquity.

2.FATHERSOFTHECHURCH,ECCLESIASTICALWRITERS,DOCTORSOFTHECHURCH.Alltheancient

ecclesiasticalwriterswerenottrustworthywitnessesofthefaith;henceitisthatposterityhasnot

conferredonallwithoutdistinctionthetitleofFathersoftheChurch.St.VincentofLrinssays

that, inordertotrythefaithofChristians,Godpermittedsomegreatecclesiasticalteachers, like

OrigenandTertullian,tofallintoerror.Thetruenormandruleoffaith,headds,istheconcordant

evidenceof thoseFatherswhohave remained true tothe faithoftheChurch intheir time,and

weretotheendoftheir livesexamplesofChristianvirtue:Eorumdumtaxatpatrumsententiae

conferendae sunt, qui in fide et communione catholica sancte, sapienter, constanter viventes,

docentesetpermanentesvelmoriinChristofideliterveloccidiproChristofelicitermeruerunt.1

Pope Hormisdas 2 refuses to accept appeals to the SemiPelagian Faustus of Riez and other

theologians,onthepleathattheywerenotFathers.LaterCouncilsoftendistinguishbetween

theologicalwritersmoreor lessuntrustworthyandtheapprovedFathersoftheChurch.3The

earliest descriptive catalogue of Fatherswhosewritingsmerit commendation, aswell as of

othertheologicalauthorsagainstwhosewritingspeoplearetobewarned,isfoundintheDecretal

De recipiendis et non recipiendis libris, current under the name of PopeGelasius I. (492496).

Modern patrologists indicate four criteria of a Father of the Church: orthodoxy of doctrine,

holinessof life,ecclesiasticalapproval,andantiquity.Allother theologicalwritersareknownas

ecclesiasticiscriptores,ecclesiaescriptores4.TheFatherswerenotallheld inequalesteem

bytheirsuccessors;bothaswritersandtheologianstheydiffermuchastoplaceandimportanceinecclesiasticalantiquity.IntheWestfourFathersoftheChurchhavebeenheldaspreeminent

since theeighth century:Ambrose ( 397), Jerome ( 420),Augustine ( 430),andGregory the

Great ( 604);BonifaceVIII.declared (1298) thathewishedthese fourknownasDoctorsofthe

Church par excellence, and their feasts placed on a level with those of the apostles and

evangelists.5LaterpopeshaveaddedotherFatherstothe listofDoctorsoftheChurch,either in

liturgicaldocumentsorbyspecialdecrees.Suchare,amongtheLatins,HilaryofPoitiers ( 366),

PeterChrysologus( ca.450),LeotheGreat( 461),IsidoreofSeville( 636).AmongtheGreeks,

Athanasius( 373),BasiltheGreat( 379),CyrilofJerusalem( 386),GregoryofNazianzus( ca.

390), John Chrysostom ( 407), Cyril of Alexandria ( 444), John ofDaInascus ( ca. 754), are

honouredasDoctorsof theChurch.Some later theologicalwriters thusdistinguishedare:Peter

1Common.c.39;cf.c.41.2Quosinauctoritatempatrumnonrecipitexamen:Ep.124,c.4.3Probabilesecclesiaepatres:Conc.Lat.Rom.(649)can.18(Mansix.1157); :Conc.Nic.II(787)act.6(Mansixiii.313).4St.Jerome,Devirisillustr.,prol.5Egregiosipsiusdoctoresecclesiae:c.un.,invi.,dereliquiis3,22.


3/5


3http://plgo.info

Damian( 1072),AnselmofCanterbury( 1109),BernardofClairvaux( 1153),ThomasAquinas(

1274),Bonaventure( 1274),FrancisofSales( 1622),andAlphonsusLiguori( 1787).In1899Leo

XIII.declaredtheVenerableBede( 735)aDoctoroftheChurch.TheliturgicalbooksoftheGreek

Church make mention of only three great ecumenical teachers (

): Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzum, and John Chrysostom. The patrological

criteriaofaDoctoroftheChurchare:orthodoxyofdoctrine,holinessoflife,eminentlearning,

andformalactionoftheChurch:doctrinaorthodoxa,sanctitasvitae,eminenseruditio,expressa

ecclesiaedeclaratio.

J. Fessler, Instit.Patrol. ed.B. Jungmann (Innspruck1890), i.1557.On the earliest LatinDoctorsof theChurchcf.C.Weyman inHistorischesJahrbuch(1894),xv.96sq.,andRevuedhistoireetde littrat.relig.(1898),iii.562sq.OnthegreatecumenicalteachersoftheGreekscf.Nilles inZeitschriftfrkatholischeTheologie(1894),xviii.742sq.;E.Bondy,LesPresdelEgliseinRevueAugustinienne(1904),pp.461486.

3.THEPATRISTICEPOCH.As lateas the fifthcenturyevenvery recentwriterscouldbecounted

amongtheholyFathers.AmongthemostholyandgodfearingFatherswhosewritingswerereadinthefirstsessionoftheCouncilofEphesus(June22.,431)6wereTheophilusofAlexandria

( 412) and Atticus of Constantinople ( 425). In the list of patristic citations, paternae

auctoritates,appendedbyLeotheGreattohisLettertoFlavianofConstantinople(June13.,449)7 there are passages from Augustine ( 430) and from Cyril of Alexandria ( 444) The later

Christian centuries tendedmoreandmore to confine thishonourable title to theecclesiastical

writers of antiquity. Itwas applied to them not somuch on account of their antiquity as on

accountoftheirauthority,which,inturn,haditsrootintheirantiquity.TheFathersofthefirst

centuries are and remain in a special way the authentic interpreters of the thoughts and

sentimentsoftheprimitiveChristians. In theirwritingsweresetdown forall timedocumentary

testimoniestotheprimitiveconceptionofthefaith.ThoughmodernChristiansectshavealwaysdenouncedtheCatholicprincipleoftradition,theyhavebeencompelled,bythelogicofthings,

toseekinecclesiasticalantiquityforsomebasisorcountenanceoftheirownmutuallyantagonistic

views.The limitsofChristianantiquitycouldnot,ofcourse,beeasilyfixed;theyremainevenyet

somewhat indistinct. The living current of historical, andparticularlyof intellectual life, always

defiesany immovabletimeboundaries.MostmodernmanualsofPatrologydrawthe lineforthe

GreekChurchatthedeathofJohnofDamascus( ca.754),fortheLatinChurchatthedeathof

Gregory theGreat ( 604).ForLatinecclesiastical literature the limitshouldbestretchedtothe

deathofIsidoreofSeville( 636).LikehisGreekcounterpart,JohnDamascene,Isidorewasavery

productive writer, and thoroughly penetrated with the sense of his office as a frontiersman

betweentheoldandthenew.

The teachingsof the Fathers of theChurch are among theoriginal sources of Catholic doctrine.On the

reasons for the sameand theextent towhich thepatristicwritingsmaybedrawnupon for theproofof

Catholicteachingcf.FesslerJungmann,op.cit.,i.4157.

6Mansi,iv.11841196.7Ib.,vi.961972.


4/5


4http://plgo.info

4.PURPOSEOFPATROLOGY.ThoughthescienceofPatrologytakes itsnamefromtheFathersof

theChurch,itincludesalsotheecclesiasticalwritersofantiquity.Thereby,thefieldofitslaboursis

enlarged,anditbecomespossibletodealwithecclesiasticalliteratureasawhole.Thepurposeof

this science is toproduceahistoryof theearlyecclesiastical literature, that is,of suchancient

theological literature as aroseon thebasisof the teachingsof theChurch. In thepeculiarand

uniquesignificanceofthisliterature,Patrologyfindsthejustificationofsuchanarrowlimitationof

its subjectmatter.Though this sciencedoesnot ignore thedistinctionbetween thehumanand

thedivine in thebooksof thenewTestament, itconfides thestudyof thesewritings toBiblical

Introduction,convincedthatitwouldotherwisebeobligedtoconfineitselftosuchatreatmentof

the same aswould be unjust to inspired documents that contain revelation. Patrologymight,

strictlyspeaking,ignoretheantiChristianandantiecclesiastical,orheretical,writingsofantiquity;

nevertheless, it finds itadvantageous topay constantattention to them.At theproper time, it

becomesthedutyofthepatrologist,inhisqualityofhistorianofChristiandoctrine,toexhibitthe

geneticgrowthofhissubject.Thedevelopmentofearlyecclesiastical literaturewasconditioned

and influenced inanotabledegreebythe literaryconflictagainstpaganism,Judaismandheresy.

The earliest ecclesiastical writers enter the lists precisely as defenders of Christianity against

formal literaryassaults.WedonotacceptasaccurateamoderndefinitionofPatrologyasthe

literaryhistoryofearlyChristianity.Fromthatpointofview, itwouldhaveto includeeventhe

profaneworksofChristianwriters,andbecome theChristianequivalentofheathenand Jewish

literature.Moreover, it isnotsomuchtheprofessionofChristianityonthepartofthewriteras

thetheologicoecclesiasticalcharacterofhisworkthatbringsitwithintherangeofPatrology,and

stampsuponitforalltimesomethingpeculiaranddistinctive.Ifwemustnolongerusetheword

Patrology, the sciencemaywellbedefined as the historyof early ecclesiastical literature. The

considerationsthataffecttheselectionofthematerial,andthelimitationsofPatrologyaffectalso

thetreatmentofthesubjectmatter.Stress is laidmoreonthetheologicalpointofview,onthe

contentsofthepatristicwritings,thanonmere literaryform. It istruethat literaryhistoryhasa

distinctlyartisticinterest.Ingeneral,however,thewritingsoftheFathersarenotliteraryartwork;

theyexpresslyavoidsuchacharacter.UntilverylatelyadistinctionwasdrawnbetweenPatrology

andPatristic.Tothelatter,itwassaid,belongedthestudyofthedoctrinalcontentoftheearly

Christianwriters.ThewordPatristiccomesfromthetheologiapatristicaofformerProtestant

manualsofdogmatictheologythatwerewonttocontainaspecialsectiondevotedtotheopinions

oftheFathers.Thiswascalledtheologiapatristica,anddistinguished fromtheologiabiblica

andtheologiasymbolica.Inthelatterhalfoftheeighteenthcenturythistheologiapatristica

gavewayamongProtestants toa specifichistoryofdogma,destined to illustrate the constant

development and evolution of the original apostolic teaching. Thereby, the special office of

Patristicwasexhausted.Thereremains,therefore,no longeranygoodreasonforwithdrawing

fromPatrologythedescriptionofthedoctrinesoftheFathers,andconfining ittoanaccountof

their lives and deeds. With the loss of its subjectmatter, the raison dtre of Patristic

disappears. In the last fewdecades,all former expositionsofPatrologyhave suffered severe

reproachesbothfromfriendandfoe.Broadlyconsidered,suchreproacheswerebothreasonable

andjust.ItisproperthatinthefuturePatrologyshoulddevelopalongthelineofscientifichistory,


5/5


5http://plgo.info

shouldgraspmore firmlyandpenetratemoredeeply itsownsubjectmatter,should firstdigest,

andthenexhibitinascientificandphilosophicway,themassofliteraryhistoricalfactsthatcome

withinitspurview.Inotherwords,itsofficeisnolongerlimitedtothestudy,inthemselvesalone,

ofthewritingsofindividualFathers,orofindividualwritingsoftheFathers;itmustalsosetforth

theactiveforcesthatarecommontoall,andtherelationsofalltotheirownworldandtheirown

time.

Fr.Nitzsch,GeschichtlichesundMethodologischeszurPatristik:JahrbcherfrdeutscheTheologie(1865),x.

3763. Nitzsch uses the term Patristic as identical with Patrology. Fr. Overbeck, ber die Anfnge derpatristischenLiteratur:HistorischeZeitschrift(newseries)(1882),xii.417472.A.Ehrhard,ZurBehandlungder Patrologie: Literarischer Handweiser, 1895, 601608. J. Haussleiter, Der Aufbau der altchristlichenLiteratur:Gtting.GelehrteAnzeigen(Berlin,1898).

5. MODERN HISTORY OF EARLY CHRISTIAN LITERATURE. Modern Protestant and Rationalist

scholarshavecreatedintheplaceofPatrologyahistoryofearlyChristianliterature,thepurpose

ofwhichistoinvestigateandcriticize,independentlyofitstheologicalorecclesiasticalaspects,the

entireintellectualproductofChristianantiquityfromapurelyliterarystandpoint.Theyhavebeen

led to this transformation, or rather rejection of Patrology, not somuch by general scientific

principles,asbythehypothesesofmodernrationalisticProtestantism,foremostamongwhich is

the denial of the supernatural origin of Christianity and the Church. According to them, the

socalledCatholicChurchwasnot foundedby JesusChrist. Itwasonlyaftera longevolutionary

period,duringwhichtheGospelofChristunderwentsteadilyanumberofprofoundlymodifying

influences in the sense of paganism, and particularly of hellenism, that the Catholic Church

appearedamongmentowardtheendofthesecondcentury.Sincethattime,boththisChurchand

itsdoctrineshavebeenatall times the subjectof themost farreaching changesand themost

inconsistent innovations.ThesocalledFathersof theChurch representonly theirownpersonalandverymutableopinions.Thereisnomoreobjectivedifferencebetweenecclesiasticalandnon

ecclesiastical,orthodoxandhereticalteaching,thanbetweentheinspiredandnoninspiredbooks

oftheScriptures,etc.

Itisthisviewofearlyecclesiasticalliterature(inthefirstthreecenturies)thatpredominatesintheworksofA.HarnackandG.Krger(cf.2,4).

Source:Bardenhewer.Patrology.ThelivesandworksoftheFathersoftheChurch.Introduction.

B.Herder.FreiburgimBreisgauandSt.Louis,Mo.1908.pp.17.

Trascripcin:FranciscoArriaga.Mxico,FronteraNorte.14Septiembre2009.

Bardenhewer. Notion and Purpose of Patrology

Documents

Transcript of Bardenhewer. Notion and Purpose of Patrology