Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

The Cordial Catholic

Home
Catholic
So You Think You’re Smarter Than the Early Church Fathers?

So You Think You’re Smarter Than the Early Church Fathers?

Last updated on: May 26, 2017 at 6:08 pm by K. Albert Little

So You Think You’re Smarter Than the Early Church Fathers? 2017-05-26T18:08:27-04:00 K. Albert Little

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Photo Credit: Megan Allen.

There were lots of reasons why I decided, as an otherwise happy Evangelical Protestant, to become a Roman Catholic.

Among these reasons were aesthetic and spiritual appeals—the beauty of the liturgy and the plethora of centuries old spiritual practices—and these were, indeed, powerful motivators.

But alongside the sometimes esoteric motivations were some fundamentally, concretely intellectual reasons to join the ranks of the ancient Catholic Church.

Chief among the intellectual appeals stand the towering figures of the Early Church Fathers.

It was the strong appeal and clear theology of these, some of the earliest and most foundational Christians, that contributed strongly to my intellectual conversion to Catholicism.

To read these, the Founding Fathers of Christianity, and to do anything otherwise, I’ll argue, would’ve been utterly foolish.

The Clarity of the Church Fathers

I’ve written before, in a tongue-and-cheek article, that a surefire way to avoid becoming a Catholic is to avoid reading from the Church Fathers altogether.

The reason is simple.

A genuine, face value reading of many of the earliest Church Fathers makes something very obvious: That the doctrine they held to—these the earliest Christians—was decidedly Catholic.

Take the Eucharist and Baptism, for example.

The Church Fathers on Baptism

In the Catholic Church, along with the Anglicans and the Orthodox, the Eucharist along with Baptism is considered sacramental. What’s called a sacrament.

That is, these practices hold the most special graces possible within the Church. In these acts, God does something specifically important.

In Catholicism, fundamentally, baptism saves.

It is the first initiation into the Church and a cleansing of all sin.

This is, of course, runs contrary to my Evangelical upbringing.

As an Evangelical baptism was merely an outward sign that I’d accepted Christ. I was baptized years after “becoming” a Christian. My wife sometimes jokes that she was baptized—in a Baptist church—so she could get a job at the Church bookstore. Regardless, for the both of us baptism was an outward sign—that’s what we would’ve called it, “an outward sign”—symbolizing our acceptance of the mission and message of Christ.

While baptism is seen, nearly universally amongst Evangelicals, as a mere “outward sign” this is in complete and absolute contrast to the teaching of the Early Church Fathers.

Irenaeus, for example, writing in the 2nd century, is unequivocal,

For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’.

Along with a myriad of other Early Church Fathers, Irenaeus speaks about the important saving power of baptism—and its necessity.

Irenaeus, to put him in his proper context, was a disciple of Polycarp who, himself, was a disciple of John. And, alongside the witness of the other Early Church Fathers, Irenaeus’s teaching on the necessity of baptism is in stark contrast to what was taught in the Evangelical communities I “grew up” in.

The Church Fathers on the Eucharist

Likewise, the Eucharist.

I’ve written several times before about the convincing and unambiguous witness of the Early Church Fathers about the Eucharist. In the mind of all of these Church Fathers, themselves disciples of the very first disciples of Christ, the Eucharist was the actual blood and body of Christ.

This doctrine, a true mystery and miracle, is referred to as transubstantiation in the Catholic Church and is held, in similar ways, by the Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran communities.

In these communities, the belief is that the elements of wine and bread, during Communion, actually become Jesus’ flesh and blood through a miraculous transformation.

Something akin to the feeding of the five thousand (which interestingly enough precedes Jesus’ famous Eucharistic Discourse in John 6).

This idea, in contrast, is fundamentally opposed by the whole of Evangelical Christendom.

Some denominations, like the Pentecostal church I was baptized in as a teen, would go so far as to hold Catholics as idolaters for their worship of the Communion elements.

But back up that truck.

Belief in the real presence was a cornerstone of Christian worship in the time of the Early Church; it was so widely held and well known that early Christians were accused of being cannibals.

Justin Martyr, one of the earliest Christian apologists, wrote around 150AD,

This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.

Like Irenaeus on Baptism, Justin Martyr, along with many other Early Church Fathers, writes unequivocally on the real presence of Jesus in the elements of Communion.

So You Think You’re Smarter than the Church Fathers?

I think, ultimately, there are two elements at play here.

First, for those that read the Church Fathers—those outside of the Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican faiths—it becomes a difficult balancing act.

If we give the Church Fathers the full weight they deserve, as apostles of the apostles and the early founders of a Church, then we need to do some serious thinking.

If baptism saved, if the bread and wine were believed to actually be Jesus in the time of the Early Church why, and when, did we cease to maintain that belief?

The question to me, as an evangelical, was too great of an intellectual stumbling block to simply ignore.

Do we really think we’re smarter than the Early Church Fathers?

Second, however, is that fact that so few of us read the Early Church Fathers to begin with—and that’s really the crux of the thing, isn’t it?

Would Protestantism proliferate 30,000 different denominations if we returned to the sources and, as a Christian people, read what the earliest Christians had to say?

The challenge of our times is one of rising above the status quo of whatever Christian tradition we happen to have been raised in—both spiritually and intellectually.

In the end, I suspect there are very few of us proposing to be smarter than the giants of the Early Christian Church. That would be a fool’s game.

Instead, and sadly, I suspect the vast majority who cling to beliefs adopted in much more recent times don’t even know it—and haven’t read the ancient Christian sources or heard the incredible things they have to say.

No, I don’t think many of us think we’re smarter than the Church Fathers.

I think most of us, sadly, haven’t bothered to read them, and find out.

And what they have to say is remarkable.

Stay in touch! Like The Cordial Catholic on Facebook:

The Cordial Catholic

Previous Post

May 12, 2016

Why I Pray to Dead People (And You Should Too!)

Next Post

June 1, 2016 Go Home Canada, You're Drunk.

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Appearances Christian Living Explaining the Faith Podcast Tough Questions Uncategorized Why I'm Catholic

Select a Month January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 October 2017 September 2017 July 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who opened the first seal to release the White Horse in Revelation?

Select your answer to see how you score.

An angel John The 24 Elders The Lamb (Jesus)

Support this
Column