THE CHURCH FATHERS AND THEIR OPINIONS.
By C. Castberg
“The Bible, and the Bible only,” is the religion of Protestants. But for all that, appeals are often made to the so-called “church fathers,” and it is a fact that there is not an opinion that could be advanced, so foolish, so manifestly absurd, but that one can find passages to sustain it on the page of some musty old folio from the third or fourth century. For the benefit of the reader who may be ignorant as to the worth of these opinions, we will show who these “fathers” were, and what dependence can be placed upon them and their writings:— The Apostolic Fathers [of the first century] are Clement, bishop of Rome, and author of the Epistles to the Corinthians; Ignatius, disciple and companion of the apostles, who suffered martyrdom under Trajan, being exposed to wild beasts in the theater at Rome; Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who suffered martyrdom at an extreme age in the middle of the second century. Several works ascribed to these Fathers are known to be spurious; others are doubtful; and those which are generally received as genuine are not free from interpolations.—Wharey’s Church History, Cent. 1, p. 26. Among the Fathers of this [second] century who rendered themselves famous by their writings, were Justin Martyr, so called because he suffered martyrdom. He was a converted philosopher, learned and pious. His writings are numerous and erudite, but his style harsh, and his opinions sometimes unsound. Irenæus, bishop of Lyons in France. His writings that remain are five books against heretics. Athenagoras, an able and eloquent writer. Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, has left three books in defense of Christianity. Clement of Alexandria, a man of great reading, but his love of philosophy led him into great errors. Tertullian, a native of Carthage, and bred a lawyer. He possessed great genius, but it was wild and unchastened. His piety was active and fervent, but also gloomy and austere. It is difficult to say which were greater, his excellence or defects.—Id., Cent. 2, Par. 5, p. 34. There are but few of them whose pages are not rife with errors—errors of method, errors of facts, errors of history, of grammar, and even of doctrine. This is the language of simple truth, not of slighting disparagement.—Archdeacon Farrar, Hist. of Interpretation, pp. 162, 163. The writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers have unhappily, for the most part, come down to us in a condition worthy of very little confidence, partly because under the names of these men, so highly venerated in the church, writings were early forged for the purpose of giving authority to particular opinions or principles.—Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Relig. and Church, Vol. 1, p. 657. In the early ages of the church, the writings of the Fathers were corrupted without scruple, to serve the purposes of contending sects. The truth is, that the practice of vitiating these holy writings, and even of forging whole treatises and letters, detracts materially from the value of all that has come down to us as the productions of the Fathers.—Cox’s Literature, Vol. 1, p. 123. So much as to the works of these “fathers.” What is their worth? and how much dependence can be placed upon writings that, according to the testimony of these historians, are “spurious” and “doubtful,” full of “interpolations” and “unsound” opinions, and “rife with errors.” If all those who are so prone to betake themselves to the “fathers” as soon as they are driven to the wall on some “orthodox” doctrine that has no foundation in the Scriptures, would take the stand of the illustrious Dr. Adam Clarke, they would act like men. Here is the learned doctor’s plea regarding this matter:— But of these [the Fathers] we may safely say that there is not a truth in the most orthodox creed that can not be proved by their authority; nor a heresy that has disgraced the Romish Church that may not challenge them as its abettors. In points of doctrine, their authority is with me nothing. The Word of God alone contains my creed.”—Comments on Proverbs 8. How, then, shall we regard the opinions of the “fathers”? To avoid being imposed upon, we ought to treat tradition as we do a notorious . . . liar, to whom we give no credit unless what he says is confirmed to us by some person of undoubted veracity. . . . False and lying traditions are of an early date, and the greatest men have, out of pious credulity, suffered themselves to be imposed upon by them.—Bower’s “History of the Popes,” Vol. I., p. 1, Phila. Ed., 1847. In speaking of these same traditions, Luther strikes the right cord when he says:— When God’s Word is by the Fathers expounded, construed, and glossed over, then, in my judgment, it is even as when one strains milk through a coal sack, which must needs spoil and make the milk black. God’s Word of itself is pure, clean, bright, and clear; but through the doctrines, books, and writings of the Fathers, it is darkened, falsified, and spoiled.—Table Talk, p. 228. Filled with the Spirit of God, Paul had a prophetic view of the future, and in writing to Timothy, his “own son in the faith,” he says that “the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” 2 Tim. 4: 3, 4. Because a doctrine is supported by the majority does not prove that it is of divine origin; and a custom that has no sanction in Holy Writ can never become truth, be it ever so hoary with age. Paul said of the time in which he was living, “The mystery of iniquity doth already work.” 2 Thess. 2: 7. If the evil was working in the church in spite of the personal labors of the apostles, what might not be expected when the church was deprived of their presence? Paul was keenly alive to this fact. Hence his timely warning. To the Colossians he wrote, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” Col. 2: 8. And in warning the flock against the subtle and evil influence of unscrupulous and false teachers, he said, “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” Acts 20: 29, 30. No sooner had the last of the apostles left the stage of action than this wicked work commenced. The churches came under the influence of heathen teachers, calling themselves philosophers, and as a consequence,— The noble simplicity and majestic dignity of the Christian religion were lost, or at least impaired, when these philosophers presumed to associate their dogmas with it, and so bring faith and piety under the dominion of human reason.—Mosheim, Ecclesiastical History, Cent. 2, part 1, chap. 1, section 12. Rites and ceremonies of which neither Paul nor Peter ever heard, crept silently into use, and then claimed the rank of divine institutions.—Killen, “The Ancient Church.” Truth has no need of being sustained by the testimony of the “fathers.” Therefore those who wish to walk in the straight and narrow way, will not go for guidance to the opinions of mortal men, but to the Word of God, “which liveth and abideth forever.” Oakland, Cal. C. CASTBERG.