Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:49:28.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Church And Tradition1 In The Pre-Nicene Fathers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2009

Extract

There is an old tradition which can be traced back to the Middle Ages that the moon is made of green cheese. If we are to take as authentic all the traditions in all the old inns of England to the effect that Queen Elizabeth I slept a night in them, then we shall have to envisage that queen as spending most of her reign in bed. In other words, the word tradition is today used very loosely and vaguely, and there is such a thing as unreliable tradition as well as authentic tradition. These facts apply to tradition in the early Church as well as to other sorts of tradition. Indeed, we are sometimes tempted to ask whether there was such a thing as a consistent tradition of doctrine in the early Christian centuries, for some evidence suggests that there was not, or at any rate that ‘the tradition of the Church’, is not an easy phenomenon to identify in the early centuries. Justin Martyr, for instance, says that all orthodox Christians believe in a literal Kingdom of Christ which is to last on this earth in a restored Jerusalem for a thousand years. Origen says that it was part of the Apostles' teaching that accounts of such a Kingdom should be allegorised. Which of them is reproducing the tradition of the Church? Or (as seems to me most likely) are they both either exaggerating or mistaken and is neither reproducing it? Again, both Clement of Alexandria and Origen claim that the necessity of allegorising the Scriptures is part of the rule of faith.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1959

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 21 note 2 Dialogue, 80.5, 81.4.

page 21 note 3 De Principiis, II.I I.2, 3; Comm. on Matthew, XVII.35; De Oratione, XXVII.13; Comm. on Romans, X.I.

page 21 note 4 Clement, Stromateis, V.8, 14; VII.15, 16 (P.G. IX.84, 129, 528, 545). Origen, Hom, on Genesis, VI.3; Hom, on Leviticus, V.8; Hom, on Numbers, XXVII.2; Horn, Luke, XVI (on Luke 2.34); Ham. on Exodus, V.I; Hom, on Joshua, XV. I, etc.

page 21 note 5 Irenaeus Adv. Haereses, 1.2, III.4. Tertullian, De Praescr. Haer., 13.2–5; De Virg. Vel., I; Adv. Praxean, 2.

page 22 note 1 Ad. Autolycum, I.12 (p. 84 in Bardy's ed.).

page 22 note 2 Jerome, , Comm. on Daniel, VII (P.L., XXV.530)Google Scholar.

page 23 note 1 De Praescr. Haer., 36.

page 23 note 2 Comm. on Romans, V.9.

page 23 note 3 De Spir. Sanct., 66, 67.

page 25 note 1 Adv. Haertses, Ill.2, 3, 5.

page 25 note 2 De Pratscr. Haer., 22–25.

page 26 note 1 Origen, De Principiis, Preface, 4–10; the references in the other two fathers have already been given.

page 26 note 2 Adv. Haereses, III.4.

page 26 note 3 De Praescr. Haer., 19, 20, 21.

page 26 note 4 See my Origen's Doctrine of Tradition, Chapter IV.

page 27 note 1 De Praescr. Haer., 38.5, 44.9.

page 28 note 1 Comm. on John, XIII.16,44; frag. on Exodus (P.G., XII. 289); Contra Celsum, V.18, 19; Comm. on Matthew, XI.15, XVII.29.

page 29 note 1 See his Sacramentum Futuri.