What Should Protestants Know about the Early Church Fathers?
To this day, the Nicene and Chalcedonian Creeds are honored among Protestants as the gold standard of a right biblical interpretation of the tri-unity of God and the two natures (divine and human) of the incarnate Christ. Reading the fathers on the Trinity and the incarnation immerses us in the rich, formative period of church life when those fundamental truths were first given clear and precise expression. The debt we owe to the early church fathers is thus incalculable.
Luther, Calvin, and the other “founding fathers” of Protestantism were disciples of the early church fathers. They had a special regard for one father in particular: Augustine of Hippo. Luther belonged to the Augustinian order of friars and found life-transforming resources of theology in his order’s patron saint. Still, the Reformers were widely read in the fathers generally. Calvin famously said to a Roman Catholic opponent, Cardinal Jacob Sadoleto:
Our agreement with antiquity is far closer than yours. All we have attempted has been to renew that ancient form of the church, which was at first besmirched and distorted by uneducated men of undistinguished character, and afterwards disgracefully mangled and almost destroyed by the Roman pope and his faction. I will not press you so closely as to call you back to that form of the church which the apostles instituted (though it presents us with a unique pattern of a true church, and deviation from that pattern, even slightly, involves us in error). But to indulge you so far, I beg you to place before your eyes that ancient form of the church, such as it is shown to have been during those times in the writings of Chrysostom and Basil among the Greeks, and Cyprian, Ambrose, and Augustine among the Latins.1
If we are Protestants, that very fact should give us a bias toward knowing the early church fathers. We are simply doing what the original theologians of the Reformation did. They considered the fathers to be much better interpreters of the gospel than the medieval theologians were. In a careful study of the fathers, they found weighty historical testimonies to the supremacy of Scripture and justification by faith, the twin pillars of the Reformation.
But who exactly were the early church fathers? It is a name we give to the significant leaders and writers of the first few centuries of Christianity. Different historians suggest different timeframes, anywhere from the first three hundred years to the first six hundred. However, the name “father” isn’t automatically given to every Christian figure from this early period. It is normally reserved for those who came to be recognized as sound, reliable teachers.
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
Four Years Later, Do We Love Christ More?
If we have learned anything through the last four years, we ought to have learned how worthy Christ is of our love. We have seen so much more clearly the necessity of His body, the beauty of holiness, and the majesty of worship. Moreover, we have seen His unyielding faithfulness to us, sustaining us through an unprecedented period in our lives.
Recently a picture of the 2020 AWANA Grand Prix displayed on my tv screensaver. As I looked at the image and saw many familiar faces of people sitting close together and kids smiling and playing, I reflected on how this event was the last major event we had as a church before the world shut down in response to the COVID-19 virus. Little did we know during the Grand Prix how quickly and drastically everything was about to change.
In what seemed like an instant in March 2020, the entire world changed. Curfews were enacted. Many stores and restaurants were closed. All sporting events were canceled. Schools were shut down and eventually went online. Travel was halted. Gloves were initially recommended for grocery shopping to help slow the spread of the virus. Then those recommendations were eventually replaced with mask mandates. And, most shocking of all, countless churches closed their doors and sat nearly empty on Sunday mornings. Typically, only the preacher and the support staff needed to livestream a service were present, as worship went virtual for the majority of congregants.
Debates quickly began to swirl about whether the church should be open or closed due to the COVID-19 virus. Was the church essential, or could the functions of the church go virtual without losing the essence of what the church is all about? When mask mandates were imposed, the debate intensified: should churches require their congregations to mask to attend worship? Did church leaders even have the biblical authority to make such a requirement of God’s people? Churches divided sharply over these and other issues throughout the year, with the result that many people today attend a different church than the one they attended on February 29, 2020. Tragically, many people who went virtual with worship have never returned to church even four years later.
Throughout this tumultuous time, American Christians had the opportunity to reflect on the significance of the local church. The freedom to wake up on a Sunday morning and attend worship without government regulations affecting our gatherings was something we took for granted pre-COVID-19. In light of COVID-19 and the government mandates, we came to terms with the reality that this freedom is not guaranteed and is something that we should cherish.
Yet there are signs that the lessons learned during 2020 are starting to grow dim in our memories. With life returning mostly to normal, masks becoming less commonplace, and society running at full steam, we quickly forget how essential and precious the gathering of the saints is. We once again can begin to take for granted the centrality of worship. We easily might skip a Sunday because we had a long week at work and feel tired, or we allow other obligations to crowd out the central priority of corporate worship.
Read More
Related Posts: -
What Is TULIP?
TULIP, or the five points of Calvinism, summarizes God’s work of salvation, and it highlights the omnipotent love of God. Christians can rest assured that if they believe, it is because of the work of God, and that work cannot fail because His love cannot fail.
What do tulips, the love of God, and a centuries-old understanding of salvation have in common? They are all reflected in what has come to be known as the five points of Calvinism.
How are these things interconnected? The word tulip forms an acrostic that summarizes a particular understanding of salvation that has at its center the love of God. Let’s see how this works.
Total Depravity
T stands for total depravity, which describes how sin affects human beings. But to understand this, we have to start before sin entered the world. Our triune God from all eternity has existed as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, equal in power and glory, enjoying a never-beginning and never-ending relationship of holy love. This holy love motivated God’s free decision to create the universe and to create man and woman in His own image to love Him and each other. However, Adam chose to reject our Creator, and, through Adam’s disobedience, humanity fell into sin (Gen. 3; Rom. 5:12–21). Total depravity says that sin has so twisted us that apart from grace, we love other things more than we love God. Our minds, our bodies, our affections, our spirits—every part of us has been affected by sin, and of our own accord, we cannot escape this predicament. God has not stopped loving His creation, however (John 3:16). And in His love, He restrains sin, keeping us from being as bad as we possibly could be. Thus, even those who do not know Christ can do things that are outwardly good. They can be good neighbors, love their children, and so on. However, outside of grace, none of us does these things with the right motivation to love and glorify God.
Unconditional Election
U stands for unconditional election, which is part of God’s solution to our total depravity. The fall into sin, of course, did not surprise God. He knows the end from the beginning and has ordained history as part of the outworking of His plan and purposes for all things (Isa. 46:8–11; Eph. 1:11). The Lord would have been just to keep us in our state of sin and estrangement from Him, but He decided to set His special love on His people, choosing to redeem them and restore to them their status as God’s children. Unconditional electionis God’s loving choice of specific sinners for salvation without respect to any good in them(Rom. 9:1–29). His saving love for us isnot conditioned on our intelligence, our looks, our kindness, our social status, or anything else. He loves His people not because they are less sinfulthan others. Everydescendant of Adam and Eve (except for Christ) is a sinner. Unconditional electionsays that God chooses to save some people and to pass over others. He has a love for some people that He does not have for others. If you are a Christian, it is because in eternity past, long before you were born, God chose to love you with His saving love. He did not choose youbecause you were better than others. He did not choose youbecause He knew you would choose Him if He gave you the chance. He simply chose to love you, and since His love is not conditioned on anything in you, He will never stop loving you.
Limited Atonement
L stands for limited atonement, which describes God’s intent behind the death of Christ in providing salvation. The question is, Did Christ intend to atone for the sins of all people who have ever lived, or did He intend to atone for the sins of the elect only? Another way of putting it: Did God love people generally, without reference at all to them as individuals, and send Christ to die to provide a possibility of salvation?
Read More -
Natural Law and Socialism
The resistance to socialist ideology remains powerful in the West, ironically, especially among the “Proletariat,” the working class. Roughly half the electorate in the US is anti-socialist or “reactionary.” Some recent European elections appear to be in part a repudiation of internationalism, if not socialism per se, though the two go hand-in-hand.And the most powerful voting bloc opposed to socialism, at least in the US, is indeed the Church. This is because the natural law moral commitments of the Church are opposed to socialist ideology.
As it supplants Revelation [Revolution] acquires the influence of a new Religion of Humanity, kindling in the hearts of its confessors a fanaticism that acknowledges no distinction of means in order to attain its ends.
Groen van Prinsterer, Unbelief and Revolution, 1847
The Christian…imagines the better future of the human species…in the image of heavenly joy…We, on the other hand, will this heaven on earth.
Moses Hess, A Communist Confession of Faith, 1846
Why is This Happening?
Polling indicates that currently, only 18% of Americans are “satisfied,” with the way things are going in the US, with 81% believing that our democracy is “threatened.” Politically-alert Americans hardly need reminding that our political division is disturbing, with both major parties threatening that if the other is elected, this could mean the end of our country. Indeed, we seem to be coming apart. The cause of the polarization is far more than discrete policy disagreements over defense or taxation, or mere regional factionalism. Rather the cause is an ideological crisis. In fact, it is the culmination of a centuries-old religious war.
An impressive number of books, including by Evangelicals, sounds a deafening alarm that variations of “critical theory” or “identity politics” are taking over our republican form of government, the news media, education, corporations, charitable foundations, and even churches — placing our society and even our civilization at risk.[1] Some trace the ideology to the early 20th century, to the Frankfurt School, or limit it to the rise of “identity politics,” denying that it has anything to do with classical Marxism.
What then we are dealing with? While the Church must recognize a dangerous trend, we can’t address it adequately unless we understand its origins. This will help us detect it, and also resist it when it has begun to influence the Church itself. We cannot afford to be “…the incompetent physician who fights the symptoms but does not know the cause of the disease.”[2]
Natural Law, Humanism, and Socialism
My thesis is as follows: Just as natural law is the moral theory of Christendom prior to modernity, socialism is the moral theory of modern atheistic Humanism. Because modern socialism is born of another religion, Humanism, it is hostile to Christianity-based natural law; indeed, it seeks to destroy it.[3] Its hostility to Christendom and to natural law is analogous to Baal or Moloch worship in the Old Testament, the practice of which continually threatened the worship of Yahweh. And just as ancient Israel had to resist pagan idolatry, the Church must resist the siren’s song of socialist ideology.[4]
The extreme dangers of socialism should be well-known, but in a kind of collective amnesia, no doubt intended by some, these dangers are often ignored or explained away. As Milan Kundera said, “The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.” Joshua Muravchic estimates that since 1917, 100 million people have died under socialist regimes, including the Soviet Union under Lenin and Stalin, China under Mao, and Cambodia under Pol Pot.[5] In addition, severe prohibitions on freedom of speech, secret police, the arrest, persecution, and assassination of political opponents, forced labor camps, wiretapping and other forms of surveillance, and religious discrimination are typically constitutive of socialist regimes. The detection of socialist ideology should be met with the same alarm as calls for the reintroduction of chattel slavery or concentration camps. Tragically, for reasons I will explore below, this is not happening.
Part of the reason for our forgetting is that as a cultural phenomenon, socialism is not necessarily linked to theory — socialist convictions can develop without direct exposure to socialist theory proper, sometimes through a naive desire for a perfect world free of inequality, but also through guilt for one’s advantages, or the incentivizing of envy. Guilt manipulation goes hand in hand with the vice of envy, wherein those with advantages, whether earned or not, are resented by those who see themselves as inferior, the “superiors” then responding with guilt and seeking atonement through compliance with their demands.[6] This is of course the strategic genius of the Oppressor/Oppressed distinction, i.e., that envy, a violation of the 10th Commandment, can be weaponized to produce guilt, one of, if not the most powerful incentive in the human psyche.
If a political candidate or party is socialistic, the Church must oppose that candidate or party by uniformly voting against them at the very least, if not pursuing all legitimate political means to defeat them. In our American political context, there are two dominant parties, the Democrats and the Republicans. As is well-recognized, the Democratic Party has been trending steadily toward socialism at least since the election of Barack Obama in 2008. Despite its manifest flaws, the Republican Party offers the only political instrument the Church has to resist our nation’s further slide into socialist policies and practices.
Natural Law and the State
The witness of nature together with Scripture affirms three institutions ordained by and under the sovereignty of God, each independent and possessing its own authority, yet deeply interrelated: the church, the family, and the state. When the integrity of these three are violated, e.g., when the state demands reverence and loyalty due God alone, or violates the sanctity of the family by hiding gender confusion from parents, or requires that Christians remain silent to accommodate modern ideology, the result is not only idolatrous, but calamitous for all three institutions.
A key element in maintaining the integrity of the three institutions is private property. The integrity of private property is recognized by Scripture in the 8th and 10th Commandments, “You shall not steal” and “You shall not covet,” as well as numerous additional verses and passages (e.g., Deut. 19:14; Prov. 23:10; Rom. 13:9). Private property defines and restricts the boundaries of each institution and is thus a buttress against the depredations of innate depravity. National borders function similarly to prevent the absorption of one state by another, or indeed, all of humanity under one tyrannical state. National borders also provide persecuted peoples with the opportunity to escape discrimination and persecution, as we see historically with the Moravians, the Huguenots, and the Puritans.
Whereas socialism assumes the cause of human evil lies in how society is organized, and believes the transformation of society will liberate people to express their inherent goodness, Christian natural law assumes the opposite, that the cause of evil lies in the human heart.[7] Neither the state nor the church may demand that Christians hand over their property (1 Kings 21:1-23). Private property thus justifies efforts to resist the tyrannical absorption of family and church by the state.
According to the fifth commandment, certain forms of inequality are “natural.” The man is the natural and biblical head of the family, and men are to lead the church. All must respect persons in authority, whether they are teachers, employers, or political leaders (1 Pet. 2:13; Titus 3:1).
Ultimately, all authority is given by God in Christ (Rom. 13:1; Matt. 28:18). Thus, mere government by consent of the governed is not enough without recognizing the authority of God because all authority is given by God, and he demands worship. Government by consent of the governed in a republic, with strong checks and balances to prevent tyranny by any one branch, is arguably the best form of government ever devised by man, yet for government by consent of the governed to function properly, the voters, or a critical mass of them, must recognize God as sovereign and vote according to the creation order he designed for our well-being, as the Founders recognized. When the voters reject this, or begin voting against the natural order, God allows a society to become degenerate and self-destructive (Rom. 1:18-32).
Depending on how far along a society is in becoming depraved, honest, candid discussion in mutual respect between Christians and non-Christians will become increasingly difficult, such that “finding a middle way” will require moral compromise. Consequently, there will be increasing conflict between those who fear God and those who reject him.
Socialism: A Very, Very Short History
In confronting socialism, the first thing the Church must realize is that socialism is less an ideology than a phenomenon.[8] It is akin to a virus that can affect a society’s thinking such that the state begins attacking or undermining other institutions God has established, especially, the church and the family. Thus, socialism is hardly new. Secondly, we must realize is that it is one of the most powerful forces in human history. A popular misconception is that socialism began during the French Revolution. In fact, socialism predates Christianity by several centuries. It has a long history across disparate cultures. Ancient Egypt and the Inca Empire employed elements of collective control that resemble modern versions of socialism. In Assemblywomen, Aristophanes depicts a feminist-socialist coup d’etat in which private property is banned, children are raised “in common,” and full sexual equality is demanded by law, along with “free love,” the rejection of monogamy. Plato recommends a socialist state in his Republic which institutes collective ownership, and replaces the family with common parenting and state assignments for procreative coupling. Thomas More’s Utopiaabolishes private property and legalizes euthanasia, though he retains the sexual morality of traditional Christianity. In the era of Christendom, splinter groups led by Anabaptists sought to create socialist societies, often with horrific results.
Read More
Related Posts: