Ancient Christian Writers Series - Index Page

Ancient Christian Writers: The Works Of The Fathers In Translation, Edited by Johannes Quasten and Joseph C. Plumpe. These may be obtained from the publisher (link). Where I know the information, I've added the year of the book and a link to a free on-line source.

1. The Epistles of St. Clement of Rome and St. Ignatius of Antioch (translated and annotated by James A. Kleist, SJ)

2. St. Augustine: The First Catechetical Instruction (translated and annotated by Joseph P. Christopher)

3. St. Augustine: Faith, Hope and Charity (translated and annotated by Louis A. Arand, SS)

4. Julianus Pomerius: The Contemplative Life (translated and annotated by Mary Josephine Suelzer) (1947) (Archive Link)

5. St. Augustine: The Lord's Sermon on the Mount (translated by John J. Epson, SS) (Archive Link)

6. The Didache, The Epistle of Barnabas, The Epistles and the Martyrdom of St. Polycarp, The Fragments of Papias, The Epistle to Diognetus (translated and annotated by James A. Kleist, SJ)

7. Arnobius of Sicca: The Case Against the Pagans, Vol. 1, Introduction and Books 1-3 (translated and annotated by George E. McCracken) (1949) (Archive Link)

8. Arnobius of Sicca: The Case Against the Pagans, Vol. 2 (translated and annotated by George E. McCracken)

9. St. Augustine: The Greatness of the Soul, The Teacher (translated and annotated by Joseph M. Colleran, CSsR)

10. St. Athanasius: The Life of St. Antony (translated and annotated by Robert T. Meyer) (1950) (Archive Link)

11. St. Gregory the Great, Pastoral Care (translated and annotated by Henry Davis, SJ) (1950) (Archive Link)

12. St. Augustine: Against the Academics (translated and annotated by John J. O’Meara) (1950) (Archive Link)

13. Tertullian: Treatises on Marriage and Remarriage: To His Wife, An Exhortation to Chastity, Monogamy (translated and annotated by William P. Le Saint, SJ)

14. St. Prosper of Aquitaine: The Call of All Nations (translated and annotated by P. De Letter, SJ) (1952) (Archive Link)

15. St. Augustine: Sermons for Christmas and Epiphany (translated and annotated by Thomas Comerford Lawler) (1952) (Archive Link)

16. St. Irenaeus: Proof of the Apostolic Preaching (translated and annotated by Joseph P. Smith, SJ)

17. Works of St. Patrick, St. Secundinus, The: Hymn on St. Patrick (translated and annotated by Ludwig Bieler)

18. St. Gregory of Nyssa: The Lord's Prayer, The Beatitudes (translated and annotated by Hilda C. Graef)

19. Origen: Prayer, Exhortation to Martyrdom (translated and annotated by John J. O’Meara)

20. Rufinus: A Commentary on the Apostles' Creed (translated and annotated by J.N.D. Kelly)

21. St. Maximus the Confessor: The Ascetic Life, The Four Centuries on Charity (translated and annotated by Polycarp Sherwood, OSB)

22. St. Augustine: The Problem of Free Choice (translated and annotated by Dom Mark Pontifex) (1953) (Archive Link)

23. Athenagoras: Embassy for the Christians, The Resurrection of the Dead (translated and annotated by Joseph Hugh Crehan, SJ)

24. Tertullian: The Treatise against Hermogenes (translated and annotated by J.H. Waszink)

25. St. Cyprian: The Lapsed, The Unity of the Catholic Church (translated and annotated by Maurice Bévenot, SJ)

26. Origen: The Song of Songs, Commentary and Homilies (translated and annotated by R.P. Lawson)

27. St. Methodius: The Symposium: A Treatise on Chastity (translated and annotated by Herbert Musurillo, SJ)

28. Tertullian: Treatises on Penance: On Penitence and On Purity (translated and annotated by William P. Le Saint, SJ)

29. St. Augustine on the Psalms, Vol. 1 (translated and annotated by Dame Scholastica Hebgin and Dame Felicitas Corrigan)

30. St. Augustine on the Psalms, Vol. 2 (translated and annotated by Dame Scholastica Hebgin and Dame Felicitas Corrigan)

31. St. John Chrysostom: Baptismal Instruction (translated and annotated by Paul W. Harkins)

32. St. Prosper of Aquitaine: Defense of St. Augustine (translated and annotated by P. De Letter, SJ)

34. Palladius: The Lausiac History (translated and annotated by Robert T. Meyer)

35. Letters of St. Paulinus of Nola, Vol. 1 (translated and annotated by P.G. Walsh)

36. Letters of St. Paulinus of Nola, Vol. 2 (translated and annotated by P.G. Walsh)

37. Firmicus Maternus: The Error of the Pagan Religions (translated and annotated by Clarence A. Forbes)

38. Egeria: Diary of a Pilgrimage (translated and annotated by George E. Gingras)

39. The Octavius of Marcus Minucius Felix (translated and annotated by G. W. Clarke)

40. The Poems of St. Paulinus of Nola (translated and annotated by P.G. Walsh)

41. St. Augustine: The Literal Meaning of Genesis, Vol. 1 (translated and annotated by John Hammond Taylor, SJ)

42. St. Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis, Vol. 2 (translated and annotated by John Hammond Taylor, SJ)

43. The Letters of St. Cyprian of Carthage, Vol. 1 (translated and annotated by G.W. Clarke)

44. The Letters of St. Cyprian of Carthage, Vol. 2 (translated and annotated by G.W. Clarke)

45. Palladius: Dialogue on the Life of St. John Chrysostom (translated and annotated by Robert T. Meyer)

46. The Letters of St. Cyprian of Carthage, Vol. 3 (translated and annotated by G.W. Clarke)

47. The Letters of St. Cyprian of Carthage, Vol. 4 (translated and annotated by G.W. Clarke)

48. St. Augustine on Faith and Works (translated and annotated by Gregory J. Lombardo, CSC)

49. Theodoret of Cyrus: On Divine Providence (translated and annotated by Thomas Halton)

50. Sermons of St. Maximus of Turin (translated and annotated by Boniface Ramsey, OP)

51. Cassiodorus: Explanation of the Psalms, Vol. 1 (translated and annotated by P.G. Walsh)

52. Cassiodorus: Explanation of the Psalms, Vol. 2 (translated and annotated by P.G. Walsh)

53. Cassiodorus: Explanation of the Psalms, Vol. 3 (translated and annotated by P.G. Walsh)

54. Origen: Treatise on the Passover and Dialogue with Heraclides (translated and edited by Robert J. Daly, SJ)

55. St. Irenaeus of Lyons: Against the Heresies (translated and annotated by Dominic J. Unger, OFM Cap)

56. St. Justin Martyr: The First and Second Apologies (translated with introduction and notes by Leslie William Barnard)

57. John Cassian: The Conferences (translated and annotated by Boniface Ramsey, OP)

58. John Cassian: The Institutes (translated and annotated by Boniface Ramsey, OP)

59. Evagrius Ponticus: Ad Monachos (translation and commentary by Jeremy Driscoll)

60. Quodvultdeus of Carthage: The Creedal Homilies (translation and commentary by Thomas Macy Finn)

61. Isidore of Seville: De Ecclesiasticis Officiis (Thomas L. Knoebel)

I'm sorry so few have archival links, but these are mostly fairly recent translations from which, one presumes, the publishers still hope to get some royalties.

Enjoy!

-TurretinFan

Understanding Textual Variants

Dan Wallace at Parchment and Pen has an interesting post (link) that explains textual variants as well as a common mistake made by some "Evangelicals" who try to explain away the textual data, without really understanding it. I'm posting this link both because it is an interesting article, and also in attempt to falsify his quite reasonable prediction: "I suspect that more anti-Christian websites will link to this blog than Christian websites. That’s because these numbers feed their agenda."

-Turretinfan

Sightings of "Jesus" and "Mary"

Todd Pruitt at 1517 has the video (link). It's really amazing when someone manages to put all these together in one montage, and it shows the kind of superstition that crops up in religions that have lost sight of the invisible God, trading it for visible icons and images.

-TurretinFan

Confessions and the Magistrate

Steven Wedgeworth at Wedgewords has an interesting compilation of the Reformed confessions' statements on the civil magistrate (link). Those Presbyterians who follow a radicalized two kingdoms approach (contrasted with the more moderate and Scriptural form taught by the Reformers) will feel themselves at odds with what amounts to the apparent majority of the Reformed consensus, although it should be noted that they would be more comfortable (though still a bit queasy) with the shorter presentation provided in the London Baptist Confession of 1689:

Paragraph 1. God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, has ordained civil magistrates to be under him, over the people, for his own glory and the public good; and to this end has armed them with the power of the sword, for defence and encouragement of them that do good, and for the punishment of evil doers.1
1 Rom. 13:1-4

Paragraph 2. It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of a magistrate when called thereunto; in the management whereof, as they ought especially to maintain justice and peace,2 according to the wholesome laws of each kingdom and commonwealth, so for that end they may lawfully now, under the New Testament, wage war upon just and necessary occasions.3
2 2 Sam. 23:3; Ps. 82:3,4
3 Luke 3:14

Paragraph 3. Civil magistrates being set up by God for the ends aforesaid; subjection, in all lawful things commanded by them, ought to be yielded by us in the Lord, not only for wrath, but for conscience’ sake;4 and we ought to make supplications and prayers for kings and all that are in authority, that under them we may live a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty.5
4 Rom. 13:5-7; 1 Pet. 2:17
5 1 Tim. 2:1,2

Most particularly, even the Baptists (the least "magisterial" of the Reformers) recognized that the civil magistrate's responsibility in his office is to glorify God and do what is good. Thus, there is no appeal to an abstract natural law system for governing the state - but rather the system is specifically theistic and Christian, governed by what is acceptable in God's eyes, not simply what is accepted among men.

-TurretinFan

Reponse to Audio Clip from Steve Ray

This is my response to Steve Ray's Audio clip that was provided with the blog post to which I responded yesterday.



Enjoy!

-TurretinFan

Peddling Imitation Patristics - Ray's At it Again

I have almost started to feel sorry for Mr. Ray. He keeps peddling the same snake oil, and it is hard to say whether this is simply because he lacks the acumen or patience to deal honestly with the Early Church Fathers or whether it is because he is simply the sort of person who makes a living profiting from pilgrims, like a parasite that thrives on the gullible.

I was disappointed, but not surprised, to see that he has yet again posted a blog entry on one of his favorite bottles of oil (it's snake oil, though he presents it as holy oil): Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant. He again links to a paper he wrote a while back in which both of his patristic quotations are inaccurately attributed: that is to say, those attributed to Athanasius (which are from a spurious, or -at best- dubious work) and those attributed to Gregory Thaumaturgus (which are from a notoriously spurious work). He also links to a paper in which he provides a significant number of quotations from the fathers that he believes support his sect's (Roman Catholicism's) view of Mary (link to Ray). This blog post (as itself a paper) deals specifically with the latter of Ray's two linked papers.

Having already shown that the two leading quotations from Mr. Ray's defense of his sect's view on Mary being the "Ark of the New Covenant," let's examine briefly the remaining quotations he adduces. They could be variously counted, but they most naturally break down into 31 quotations.

Mr. Ray claims "The early Christians taught the same thing that the Catholic Church teaches today about Mary, especially about her being the Ark of the New Covenant." (Mary, Ark of the Covenant, p. 7) In support of his contention, Mr. Ray provides quotations aimed at providing a "comprehensive collection of patristic quotations" on the subject.

Of these quotations, 5 (or 6, depending on how you consider the 31st of the 31 quotations) are from spurious or (at best) dubious writings, and 6 (or 7, depending on how you consider that 31st quotation) are from sources that are presented as though they were anonymous. Thus, 12 of the 31 cannot be definitively linked with any of the fathers.

But it is far worse than just a matter of such a large fraction of the quotations being unassignable to any of the fathers of the church. The quotations don't really confirm Mr. Ray's claim that "The early Christians taught the same thing that the Catholic Church teaches today about Mary, especially about her being the Ark of the New Covenant."

First of all, even if all 31 were legitimate, and even all 31 were teaching that Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant, there are some rather unusual omissions from a "comprehensive list." Where are these teachings in Augustine? Where are they in Origen? Where are they in Tertullian? Where are they in any of the Apostolic fathers? Instead, Mr. Ray's earliest quotations come from the late 2nd century and some come from no earlier (even according to the attribution he provides) than the 9th century.

Second, not a single one of the quotations uses the expression "ark of the new covenant." Even the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" (referenced in an opening paragraph by Mr. Ray) simply says "Mary, in whom the Lord himself has just made his dwelling, is the daughter of Zion in person, the ark of the covenant, the place where the glory of the Lord dwells. She is 'the dwelling of God . . . with men.'" (CCC 2676)

Third, many of the quotations provided by Mr. Ray do not refer to Mary as an ark at all. The are at least three of the quotations (numbers 2, 21, and 26 by my numbering) where an ark is mentioned, but it is doubtful that Mary is the intended comparison. More significantly, there are ten quotations where Mary is clearly not described as an ark (7-8, 10-11, 16, 18-19, 22, and 28-29).

Fourth, the term "ark" doesn't always refer to the ark of the covenant. It can be a generic reference to any box or box-like item, including (famously) Noah's ark. In the third quotation, Mary is called an "ark truly royal" but is described as having a "pilot and merchant," which would make it more like Noah's Ark, although it is specifically distinguished from that ark, as well as from the ark of the covenant, in the quotation provided. There are at least seven additional quotations where the quotation leaves it unclear whether the ark in mind is the ark of the covenant or some other ark (numbers 4, 8, 13, 23, 27, and 30-31 by my count).

Fifth, at least some of the folks who call her an ark (or even "the ark") find her symbolized in lots and lots of things, with this being just one of the many things they compare her to. For example, Proclus (the first quoted father in the series) also compares Mary to Eve, to Noah's Ark, to Jacob's Ladder, to Gideon's fleece, to the "swift cloud" of Isaiah 19, to the sealed book of Isaiah 29, to the burning bush, and so on. With such numerous comparisons, the fact that occasionally the ark is mentioned by fathers who loved to draw parallels is hardly significant.

Sixth, the main point of the comparison in at least some instances seems to be simply to highlight the true claim that the womb of Mary served as a sort of box in which the second person of the Trinity lived, in a unique way, for ninth months. Mary's womb is no longer used in that way, and consequently the CCC's position that Mary "is" the ark is incorrect in the sense that - even if the Ark had been a type of Mary - Mary is no longer serving in that role, since Jesus has been born. Consequently, it would be improper to say that Mary "is" the ark.

Seventh, a number of the quotations express theology inconsistent either with Catholicism or with the modern defenses of Catholicism. For example, in the first quotation, Proclus states that " ... Mary is venerated (adored) ... " but modern Catholicism claims that Mary is given hyper-dulia (of course, what she is given looks to us to be virtually indistinguishable from the veneration/adoration given by them to Jesus, but we're accused of misrepresenting Rome when we bring that up). Likewise, in the twenty-fifth item on the list Ephrem calls Mary "best mediatress between God and man," whereas the current view of Catholicism general acknowledges Christ as at least one of the mediators between God and man, although there is a strong movement to define Mary as a "co-medatrix." Additionally, one would hope that Ephram's comment (in number 23), "in thee I have a secure salvation. Save me out of the pure mercy, O Lady," would be dismissed as excessive (since salvation should be properly ascribed to God and God's mercy. Likewise (in number 24) Ephrem calls Mary the "most holy consoler and directress of all" which would seem to tread on the Holy Spirit's unique role as comforter as well as God's role as the one who gives the decree of Providence, by which all is directed.

One would hope as well that pious Roman Catholic would balk at the description of Mary as "salvation of my soul" (in number 31) or the suggestion that she was an "unwedded" bride (same one). Certainly, if those do not cross the line, the idea of give her "our offering" or crying to her "Alleluia" (also in number 31) should make someone wake up and say, "Ok, now THAT is worshiping Mary."

Eighth, the quotations aren't even uniformly selected from among the fathers, Ephrem provides 5 of the quotations cited, although not all of those have to do with the Ark, specifically. The breakdown of the quotations is:

1. Anonymous 7 (Counting the 31st as Anonymous)
2. Ephrem 5
3. "Ambrose" 2 (both spurious, or -at best- dubious)
4. "Athanasius" 2 (both spurious, or -at best- dubious)
5. "Gregory Thaumaturgus" 2 (both notoriously spurious)
6. Dionysius 2
7. Hesychius 2
8. Theodotus of Ancrya 2
9. Chrysippus 1
10. Hippolytus 1
11. Jerome 1
12. Cyril 1
13. Methodius 1
14. Venantius Fortunatus 1
15. Proclus 1
16. Zeno 1
(17. Romanos the Melodist - if we count the attribution mentioned in Mr. Ray's parenthetical remarks on the 31st item)

Ninth, the quotations don't always accurately represent the father to whom they are assigned. For example, Hippolytus viewed the Ark as a type of Christ himself, but Mr. Ray quotes Hippolytus as though to suggest that Hippolytus viewed the Ark as Mary.

So, what's left of the quotations - of those things that actually talk about the Ark of the Covenant and whose authorship appears to be authentic? A small handful is all Mr. Ray has. Even among those, there is some interdependence. For example, Chrysippus (number 3) apparently relied on Hesychius (numbers 14-15).

Turning now to provide notes, where they may be valuable, with respect to each of the 31 quotations:

1. Proclus

As mentioned above, Proclus' point in identifying Mary with an Ark is simply to highlight Jesus' own divinity. Thus, Nicholas Constans explains, "The identification of the Theotokos with the ark of the covenant underlines her role as 'God-bearer,' so that the divine promise to "dwell in the midst of the daughters of Sion" (Zeph. 3:15) is fulfilled in her conception of Christ. (Proclus of Constantinople and the cult of the Virgin in late antiquity, Nicholas Constas, p. 272)

2. Ephrem

In this one, Mr. Ray follows Livius' bracketed indications that the "rib" and "ark" mentioned refer to Mary, although it is better (in context) to refer the "rib" to Eve (not Mary) and to refer the Ark to the actual ark.

With the weapon of the deceiver the First-born clad Himself, that with the weapon that killed, He might restore to life again! With the tree wherewith he slew us, He delivered us. With the wine which maddened us, with it we were made chaste! With the rib that was drawn out of Adam, the wicked one drew out the heart of Adam. There rose from the Rib a hidden power, which cut off Satan as Dagon: for in that Ark a book was hidden that cried and proclaimed concerning the Conqueror! There was then a mystery revealed, in that Dagon was brought low in his own place of refuge! The accomplishment came after the type, in that the wicked one was brought low in the place in which he trusted! Blessed be He Who came and in Him were accomplished the mysteries of the left hand, and the right hand. Fulfilled was the mystery that was in the Lamb, and fulfilled was the type that was in Dagon. Blessed is He Who by the True Lamb redeemed us, and destroyed our destroyer as He did Dagon!

3. Chrysippus

As noted above, the "ark truly royal" and "ark most precious" is described as having a pilot and merchant, which means it is more like Noah's ark than like the ark of the covenant.

4. Hippolytus

Even in the quotation provided (from the second half of the quotation), one can see that Hippolytus is referring to Jesus himself as the Ark. Recall as well what Hippolytus said (taken from Roberts and Donaldson's Ante-Nicean Fathers):

ON PSALM XXII OR XXIII
From the Commentary by the holy bishop and martyr Hippolytus on The Lord is my Shepherd
And, moreover, the ark made of imperishable wood was the Saviour Himself. For by this was signified the imperishable and incorruptible tabernacle (of the Lord) Himself, which gendered no corruption of sin. For the sinner, indeed, makes this confession: "My wounds stank and were corrupt because of my foolishness." But the Lord was without sin, made of imperishable wood, as regards His humanity; that is, of the virgin and the Holy Ghost inwardly, and outwardly of the word of God, like an ark overlaid with purest gold.

Moreover, the quotation itself from Hippolytus has been butchered, as one can see from looking at the second half of the quotation provided by Mr. Ray. Consider (from the same patristic collection) the quotation in a better translation:

At that time, then, the Saviour appeared and showed His own body to the world, (born) of the Virgin, who was the "ark overlaid with pure gold," with the Word within and the Holy Spirit without; so that the truth is demonstrated and the "ark" made manifest. From the birth of Christ, then, we must reckon the 500 years that remain to make up the 6000, and thus the end shall be. And that the Saviour appeared in the world, bearing the imperishable ark, His own body, at a time which was the fifth and half, John declares: "Now it was the sixth hour," he says intimating by that, one-half of the day.

Incidentally, we could add Hippolytus' view that the end of the world would be around the year 500, to be a further doctrine that clearly couldn't be held by Mr. Ray. But the main point here is that the referent as to who the ark is can be seen to be ambiguous at first (leading to the imagination that it was the virgin mother of our Lord), but is clarified in the same paragraph as well as by reference to other of Hippolytus' works.

5. Ambrose

This quotation is from "Sermo XLII" (Semon 42) from among Ambrose's works. Livius indicates that this is not authentic Ambrose with the "Int. Opp." designator that we saw him using previously regarding Pseudo-Gregory. With respect to the attribution of this work, Migne (PL 17(2):709) states: "Cur hunc sermonem nominatim cuipiam Patri potius quam alteri assignemus, nihil occurrit; ne vero Ambrosianum esse putemus, nihil non reclamat." (Why we assign this sermon by the name of this particular father rather than other, nothing comes to mind; we believe this not to truly be Ambrose's, everything contradicts [such an attribution].) To paraphrase, there's no good reason to think this is Ambrose.

6. Cyril

In the quotation provided, the Ark is Christ, and Mary is the temple.

7. Breviarium in Psalterium

In the quotation provided, Mary's body is a tabernacle. No mention of any ark.

8-9. Athanasius

These are from that spurious/dubious work we addressed in the previous series. These are 2 of the 3 quotations that were not taken from Livius' work - the 3rd is item 31, below.

10-11. Dionysius

In the quotations provided, the Ark is not mentioned, Christ is the priest, and Mary is the tabernacle.

12-13. Gregory Thaumaturgus

These are from the other spurious source we previously addressed.

14-15. Hesychius

These quotations don't specify that the ark involved is the ark of the covenant. Instead, the ark seems to be a box that holds the gem/pearl. It appears that perhaps a better (or, at least, another) quotation to provide would be the one used by Benedict XVI in his General Audience on 14 September 2004, where he said:

For example, the analogy Hesychius of Jerusalem, a priest in the first half of the fifth century, was to make between verse 8 and the Incarnation of Jesus is significant. In his Second Homily on the Mother of God, he addresses the Virgin in these words:

"Upon you and upon the One born of you, David does not cease to sing to the zither: "Rise, O Lord, and come to the place of your rest, you and the ark of your sanctification' (cf. Ps 132[131]: 8). What is "the ark of your sanctification?'". Hesychius replies: "The Virgin Mother of God, of course. For if you are the pearl, she is rightly the ark; if you are the sun, the Virgin must necessarily be called the sky; and if you are the uncontaminated flower, then the Virgin will be the plant of incorruption, the paradise of immortality" (Testi mariani del primo millennio, I, Rome, 1988, pp. 532-533).

Clearly, Benedict makes the link to the ark of the covenant, although, again Hesychius actually mentions only that the ark contains the pearl.

16. Zeno

In the quotation provided, Mary is the tabernacle.

17. Methodius

This quotation, from the middle to the late 9th century, is about the best one that Mr. Ray provided, as it does say that the Ark of the Covenant typified Mary, and it says so explicitly, as well as connecting it to the cult of Mary.

18-19. Theoditus of Ancyra

In the quotations provided, Mary is the tabernacle and the temple.

20. Ambrose

This is the same spurious/dubious work as before (item 5, above). Here, at least, there is some warning of the pseudo-graphic character of the work. It is disappointing, however, that this uncertainty is expressed as "The author is uncertain, but there is nothing to show that he is not S. Ambrose." In fact, as noted above, there's no reason to think it is Ambrose.

21. Jerome

In this quotation, the ark is the "spouse of Christ." Mary is Christ's mother, but not particularly his spouse. Furthermore, the person to whom this letter is directed is Eustochium, not Mary. Thus, the second-person references and the vocative references are to Eustochium, not to Mary. When he speaks of the "spouse of Christ" here, Jerome is speaking of Eustochium, a virgin embarking on a monastic life. He's not talking about Mary.

22. Unknown Author

In the quotation provided, Mary is the tabernacle.

23. Ephrem

The "Ark" in question is unclear from the quotation. Also, as noted above, the theology of this quotation is questionable, and one wonders whether Mr. Ray intends to endorse it.

24. Ephrem

The "ark" mentioned may well be the ark of the covenant. It should be noted, however, that this is just one of about a half dozen items to which the Mother of Jesus is compared in this short paragraph quotation. As well, as noted above, there is some questionable theology expressed, that one assumes Mr. Ray would not be so impious as to adopt for himself.

25. Ephrem

In the quotation provided, Mary is the "mercy-seat of the afflicted." The mercy-seat in the Old Testament was actually, in essence, the top portion of the ark of the covenant. So, this is a little different imagery, but it was doubtless thrown in because of the paucity of relevant patristic quotations. As above, there are numerous other comparisons made in the text, and some are questionable in their theology (for example, calling Mary "fountain of grace") and the claim that she's the "best mediatress between God and man" would seem to directly conflict with Jesus' claim to be the only mediator between God and man.

26. Ephrem

In the quotation provided, Mary is the stone tables of the law.

27. Venantius Fortunatus

An ark is mentioned, but it is not clear what kind of ark the author has in mind, based on the quotation provided. The quotation itself is in a metered rhyme (although Mr. Ray present it in paragraph form), which makes one immediately question how much liberty has been taken in the translation. Unfortunately, only the alleged author is identified, and not the particular work. Thankfully, I was able to track it down. It is the Hymn called "The God Whom Earth and Sea and Sky" The Latin original is:

1) QUEM terra, pontus, aethera
colunt, adorant, praedicant,
trinam regentem machinam
claustrum Mariae baiulat.

2) Cui Luna, Sol, et omnia
deserviunt per tempora,
perfusa caeli gratia,
gestant Puellae viscera.

2a) Mirantur ergo saecula,
quod angelus fert semina,
quod aure virgo concipit
et corde credens parturit.

3) Beata Mater, munere,
cuius supernus Artifex,
mundum pugillo continens,
ventris sub arca clausus est.

4) Beata caeli nuntio,
fecunda Sancto Spiritu,
desideratus Gentibus,
cuius per alvum fusus est.

5) Iesu, Tibi sit gloria,
qui natus es de Virgine,
cum Patre, et almo Spiritu,
in sempiterna saecula. Amen.

The quotation in question is (obviously) of verse 3, but the context does not clarify for us whether the ark of the covenant or some other ark is intended. The second half of the hymn (which is used as a hymn on its own) does not shed any further light, although we do see some of the same themes we have seen in other fathers of the restoration of Eve, etc.).

1) O GLORIOSA domina
excelsa super sidera,
qui te creavit provide,
lactas sacrato ubere.

2) Quod Eva tristis abstulit,
tu reddis almo germine;
intrent ut astra flebiles,
sternis benigna semitam.

3) Tu regis alti ianua
et porta lucis fulgida;
vitam datam per Virginem,
gentes redemptae, plaudite.

4) Patri sit Paraclito
tuoque Nato gloria,
qui veste te mirabili
circumdederunt gratiae. Amen.

28. Ethiopic Hymn

In the quotation provided, Mary is the Holy of Holies (the innermost chamber of the Tabernacle) and the box that contained the manna. The ark is not mentioned.

29. Ethiopic Hymn

In the quotation provided, Mary is Jerusalem, the city of God. The ark is not mentioned.

30. Ethipic Hymn

In the quotation provided, an ark is mentioned, but one cannot determine from the quotation whether the ark of the covenant, or some other ark, is intended.

31. Orthodox Hymn

Some of the theological problems of this hymn are discussed above. The ark mentioned is not specifically stated as being the ark of the covenant, although it is a gilded ark, which would be unlikely to be a comparison to Noah's ark.

Conclusion

Mr. Ray's inability to handle the church fathers has been adequately demonstrated by this paper. Whether we consider him simply a dishonest salesman of snake oil, passing it off as holy oil, or whether we consider him a rube, duped by his church, it is hard to be sure. Whichever is the case, Mr. Ray's paper demonstrates a number of important points that have been set forth above. Most notably, Mr. Ray's paper demonstrates the danger he poses to those within his church that look up to him as some sort of teacher. This guy clearly doesn't know what he is talking about when it comes to the church fathers, and yet people repeatedly rely upon Mr. Ray's teaching, as though it were correct or worthy of trust.

I hope that this paper will at least permit those more interested in the truth to have a starting point from which to help to demonstrate to Mr. Ray's followers that Mr. Ray's teachings regarding the fathers show that he hasn't yet gotten deep into history. The deeper I get in history, the more reasons I find to reject the ahistorical (lacking any legitimate historical support) and contra-Biblical (opposed to the Bible) teachings of the modern-day bishop of Rome.

-TurretinFan

The Importance of Irenaeus

An anonymous reader asked: Why are the witings of St. Irenaeus now so suddenly important[?] I thought that his relics were sacked by the Calvinists becaused he was alleged to be a heretic, ie., he is a proponent of Free Will and that his other writings do not support TULIP.

The importance of Irenaeus is merely historical. In many ways, Irenaeus is notable more for what he did not say, than for what he did say. Of course, we have only a limited amount of what he wrote and said, but what we find in those writings is some amount of evidence as to what was believed and held in his day. The process of preserving his writings has not been unbiased, and has been subject to some serious "selection" concerns. Nevertheless, considered with the appropriate caveats, Irenaeus gives us a picture into the mind of some Christians of the late 2nd century.

It (Irenaeus' writings) is not infallible, and it is not our rule of faith, but it is interesting - just as the writings of Calvin and Aquinas are interesting but not the rule of faith.

Irenaeus' alleged remains disappeared when Calvinists destroyed a shrine where they were supposedly held. Whether they were actually there or not, we cannot know with certainty. Why the shrine was destroyed is better assigned to the fact that Calvinists oppose the veneration of the dead, more than any antipathy for the teachings of Ireneaus on any particular point. Unfotunately, as far as I know, the details are sparse as to any stated reason for the shrine's destruction, and no information regarding what happened to the interred remains has come to light in subsequent years.

One would not be surprised if the Calvinists simply buried Irenaeus' remains in an unmarked grave to prevent further idolatry, just as the bronze serpent was piously destroyed by Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:4) because people had come to venerate it.

-TurretinFan

Further Response to Dyer

Dyer has produced a further response (link) and my response to him is below.

Dyer wrote: "1. Turretinfan is at it again, in an audio response to my audio response, found here. To begin with, he says I mischaracterize the reformed position according to Charles Hodge about Jesus suffering the wrath of God, which is not true. Charles Hodge most definitely held to this awful, anti-Trinitarian view. Turretinfan says I misquoted, because Hodge was simply laying out various views. On the contrary--it is most certainly his view."

a) My objection was to the idea that Hodge held that Jesus had to spend an eternity in hell. That was not Hodge's view, though Mr. Dyer made it sound like that.

b) Hodge, of course, held the perfectly orthodox view that Jesus suffered the wrath of God.

c) Mr. Dyer has not shown that this orthodox view is anti-trinitarian, nor (apparently) can he do so. We've given him several tries to do so, and all we can do is ask him again to try to set forth his demonstration.

Dyer wrote: "Hodge clearly says that the Father turned His favor from the Son for a period."

I answer: ok

Dyer continued: "That is an undeniable division in the Trinity, if one accepts the orthodox view that Jesus is a divine Person."

I answer: Why on earth should that be? Mr. Dyer just asserts this, but he in no way substantiates this.

Dyer continued: "Note that Hodge doesn't want to go there, as its "vain to enquire." Yes, it is, because its heretical."

I answer: That's just a silly argument from Hodge's unwillingness to speculate.

Dyer continued: "For more examples of this heresy, Nick of Nick's Catholic Blog has listed several quotes here."

I answer: I'm actively debating "Nick" on the topic of the atonement, and so (in fairness to Nick) I'll decline to address Nick's quotations using this mechanism, as that might be viewed as trying to circumvent the word limits imposed on that debate. The debate will be over in a month or two, at which point I will be free to respond at greater length if need be.

Dyer again: "2. Turretinfan goes on to remark that St. Augustine had some things in common with Rome, but others in common with Protestantism. He implies its the same with St. Athanasius. This is not the case. I showed last year in this article that St. Augustine is thoroughly a Roman Catholic, and its not just "monasticism" as Turretinfan tries to say. St. Augustine was a Catholic Bishop. Consider his view of the papacy, as shown here."

I answer:

a) I don't know why it is so difficult for Mr. Dyer to accept that Athanasius and Augustine both had points of agreement with the Reformed church as well as points of agreement with his (Dyer's) church. It's like he wants to exclusively "own" the early church.

b) But, the early church cannot be "owned" by anyone. They are who they are, which was neither "Protestant" nor "Roman Catholic." That's why I continue to insist that it is improper to pick a few doctrines where a particular father is not "X" (whether "X" is Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, or Reformed) and then conclude that a particular father is consequently "Y" (where "Y" is whatever the person making the claim himself is). This is not only an absurd anachronism, it is a display of one's ignorance of the full range of any particular father's beliefs as expressed in writing.

c) Certainly, on particular doctrines, we can say that a particular father held to "the Roman position" or "the Reformed position," but what I'm objecting to here is therefore concluding that they were "thoroughly" this or that, based on one or a few points of agreement.


d) Augustine's view of the papacy was not the same as post-Vatican I Roman Catholicism's view. This is the sort of undeniable historical truth that everyone who has seriously explored the topic has to agree. If Dyer is suggesting otherwise, and it sounds like he is, then he is either ignorant of the definition of papal infallibility in Vatican I, or ignorant of Augustine's mode of thought.

Dyer continued: "Turretinfan says St. Athanasius had no view of papal authority as we do, yet he hasn't read much of St. Athanasius, since had he done so, he would know St. Athanasius, an Eastern Patriarch, appealed to Rome to Pope St. Julius. for condemnation of Arius. All one has to do is read his Apologia Contra Arianos, which I have."

I answer: The idea that Athanasius appealed to a bishop of Rome is an example of Athanasius not acting like a modern Reformed person. There is no doubt about that. But why has Dyer conveniently forgotten about Athanasius' opposition to Pope Liberius, Julius' successor? If one wants to deal honestly with Athanasius, one has to recognize that parts of Athanasius not only that agree with one's theology, but that disagree with it as well. It seems that Dyer would prefer to remember only a part of Athanasius' life and writings, but not the remainder of it.

Dyer wrote: "Yes, I am quoting a second-hand work, but I've read Contra Arioanos. Within, St. Athanasius reproduces the entire Arian contrversy, including the papal appeals. It can be read here. I'm willing to bet, however, Turretinfan has not read it. He's sure, nevertheless, about the Christianity of Augustine and Athanasius' day."(errors in original)

I answer: The entire Arian controvery would span many volumes (with Athanasius' "Against the Arians" providing a partial summary). If, however, Mr. Dyer can find one time where Athanasius claims that the doctrine of the Arians is wrong using the reasoning that (a) the pope says it is wrong, and (b) the pope is infallible, then I'll be happy to revise my view of Athanasius. I'm sure I can give plain statements where Athanasius appealled to the infallibility of Scripture - does Dyer think that Athanasius appealed in as clear terms to anything else as infallible besides Scripture alone?

Dyer wrote: "3. Inregards to Jaroslav Pelikan, with whom Turretinfan is obviously unfamiliar, since he didn't know he was the chief editor of Luther's works and became Serbian Orthodox, I admit to not knowing the Serbian pronunciations of names (as he made fun of me for doing). And yes, Pelikan if of Serbian descent. However, Pelikan is world renowned as both a patristics scholar and asa textual scholar. I've read several of his books, and I highly recommend them, including others beyond his 5 volume set, such as his work on the Cappadocians, his book on textual traditions, and his book on Mary in history. I mean, seriously--we used Pelikan at Bahnsen Seminary."

I answer: As with so many things, Dyer is wrong in assuming that I'm unfamiliar with Jaroslav Pelikan. There's no doubt that he's a famous historian - and it is for that he is known, not for being a great theologian. If you recall, however, Mr. Dyer cited him as a theologian in his original audio clip, and I took him to task for that. He may well have edited/translated one edition of Luther's works (actually, an impressive 22-volume edition in English, if I recall correctly), but (of course) the primary editions of Luther's works came out long before Pelikan was a twinkle in his father's eye.

Dyer continued: "Turretinfan continues to say I do't understand Nestorianism when what I mentioned was various possibilities for Nestorian outcomes. "

I answer: I think in his attempts to be polemical against Calvinism, Mr. Dyer brings a lot into the definition of Nestorianism beyond what Nestorianism actually is.

Dyer further stated: "There are different ways of being Nestorian, since Nestorius was not always clear, and even admitted a "hypostatic union," yet always denied a single subject, as McGuckin explains."

I answer: As I've pointed out numerous times already, Nestorius did not define Nestorianism, his theological opponents did. Trying to get Dyer to recognize this difference between Nestorius and Nestorianism seems to be as difficult as getting Amyraldians to recognize the difference between Calvin and Calvinism.

Dyer continued: "St. Cyril did not misunderstand Nestorius, and I have read selections of actual writings of Nestorius at tertullian.org."

I answer: It's hard to say whether Cyril misunderstood Nestorius or whether Cyril knowingly misrepresented Nestorius. Nevertheless, it does not appear, on the historical record that we have before us, that Cyril accurately represented Nestorius in his characterization's of Nestorius' views. I'm not sure why Dyer is so set on defending Cyril on this point. Why not just admit that Cyril was fallible, and may have misunderstood Nestorius for a variety of reasons? Nestorius' own words can be found (to a limited extent) on-line here (link).

Dyer continued: "I mentioned Pelikan on this because he quotes from Nestorian works."

I answer: I only addressed the Pelikan issue because it seemed that Mr. Dyer wanted to consider him a theologian rather than an historian.

-TurretinFan

Princes of this World?

An anonymous reader asked: In 1st Corinthians 2:7-8 who do you think are the "princes of this world"? and what is their goal? Thanks in advance.

I answer:

1 Corinthians 2:6-8
6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: 7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

The princes of this world refers either specifically to the Jewish leaders or to both the Jewish and Roman leaders. Either way, the point is that those with power in this world did not, when Christ came, recognize who he was. Thus, the bigger point is that not only are the general masses of the world spiritually unwise, but so also are the elite of this world.

Their goals are not mentioned specifically in the passage. Generally, the princes of this world seek for themselves power, riches, and glory in this life. In contrast, in this life we receive persecution and sometimes death, but we seek good things in the life to come, because we seek the city of God.

-TurretinFan

Archbishop Rino Fisichella and Excommunication for Abortion

In a letter that certainly surprised me, Roman Catholic Archbishop Rino Fisichella criticized the equal application of his own church's law in the case of a young Brazilian girl who received an abortion (link to story about letter). Apparently, Mr. Fisichella believes that excommunication should not be automatic, since he believes that the murder of the girls unborn twins was necessary to save her "innocent life."
Remarkably, the article doesn't identify the odd double-standard of excommunicating the doctors and the girl's mother, but not excommunicating the man who incestuously raped his nine-year-old step-daughter, placing the mother in the dilemma of killing her grandchildren or risking the life of her daughter.
-TurretinFan

Response to Jay Dyer's Audio Remarks

Mr. Dyer has provided an audio response (audio - corresponding page at Dyer's blog) to several of the comments I have provided to his critique of Calvinism. For the bigger context, including my thirteen-part series defending Calvinism from his accusations, see my index of interactions with Mr. Dyer (link).

I've broken up the response into three parts, since it is around 30 minutes long (compared to about 50 minutes for Mr. Dyer's audio response).

Part 1


Part 2


Part 3


In the series I challenge a number of significant assertions by Mr. Dyer. To put it very briefly, I think Mr. Dyer's claims seem to hang on what he thinks are the logical consequences of Reformed doctrines, but it seems that Mr. Dyer has erred in understanding what the Reformed authors teach, at least some of the time.

-TurretinFan

The Real Turretin on: Via Media (In Spanish!)

Mr. Matthew Lankford has recently directed me to a post at the Reflexion Latina Reformada blog, where the blogger has provided some commentary on Francis Turretin and the Via Media, the "Middle Way" that is Reformed Theology (link). The post is in Spanish, although a Google translation may be found here (link).

Enjoy!

-TurretinFan

Augustine: A New Translation - Index Page

This is an index page for the electronic versions of "The works of Aurelius Augustine: a new translation," Edited by Marcus Dods. It was completed around 1876, so take the description "new" as a relative term. This obviously is not a complete translation of all of Augustine's works, but it is a good start for anyone who wants to get more familiar with Augustine's works at a low cost.

1. The city of God, v. 1. Translated by Marcus Dods. (Google)(Archive)

2. The city of God, v. 2. Translated by Marcus Dods. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

3. Writings in connection with the Donatist controversy. Translated by J.R. King. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

4. The Anti-Pelagian works of Saint Augustine, v. 1. Translated by Peter Holmes. (Google)(Archive)

5. Writings in connection with Manchaean heresy. Translated by Richard Stothert. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

6. The letters of Saint Augustine v. 1. Translated by J.G. Cunningham. (Google)(Archive)

7. On the Trinity. Translated by Arthur West Haddan. (Google)(Archive)

8. The sermon on the mount expounded ; and, The harmony of the evangelists. Translated respectively by William Findlay and S.D.F. Salmond. (Google)(Archive)

9. On Christian doctrine; The Enchiridion; On Catechising; and On Faith and the Creed. Translated respectively by J.F. Shaw and S.D. Salmond. (Google)(Archive)

10. Lectures or tractates on the Gospel according to St. John, vol. 1. Translated by John Gibb. (Google)(Archive)

11. Lectures or tractates on the Gospel according to St. John, vol. 2. Translated by James Innes. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

12. The Anti-Pelagian works of Saint Augustine, v. 2. Translated by Peter Holmes. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive does not yet appear to have scanned this volume)

13. Letters of Saint Augustine, v. 2. Translated by J.G. Cunningham. (Google)(Archive)

14. The Confessions of Saint Augustine. Translated by J.G. Pilkington. (Google)(Archive does not appear to have copy from original printing)(Archive later printing)(Archive later printing 2)

15. The Anti-Pelagian works of Saint Augustine, v. 3. Translated by Peter Holmes and Robert Ernest Wallis. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

Enjoy!

-TurretinFan

The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Schaff) - Index Page

The Ante-Nicene Fathers (also available at CCEL - except volume 10)

This is the first segment of Schaff's famous patrology.

1. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus (Clement of Rome, Mathetes, Polycarp, Ignatius, Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus.) (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

2. Fathers of the Second Century (Hermas, Tatian, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria) (Google)(Archive)

3. Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian (Three Parts: I. Apologetic; II. Anti-Marcion; III. Ethical) (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

4. The Fathers of the Third Century (Tertullian Part IV; Minucius Felix; Commodian; Origen) (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Google 4)(Archive)

5. The Fathers of the Third Century (Hippolytus; Cyprian; Caius; Novatian; Appendix) (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

6. The Fathers of the Third Century (Gregory Thaumaturgus; Dinoysius the Great; Julius Africanus; Anatolius and Minor Writers; Methodius; Arnobius) (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

7. The Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries (Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, Homily, Liturgies)(Google)(Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

8. The Twelve Patriarchs, Excerpts and Epistles, The Clementia, Apocrypha, Decretals, Memoirs of Edessa and Syriac Documents, Remains of the First Ages (Google)(Archive)

9. Recently Discovered Additions to Early Christian Literature; Commentaries of Origen (The Gospel of Peter, The Diatessaron of Tatian, The Apocalypse of Peter, The Visio Pauli, The Apocalypses of the Virgin and Sedrach, The Testament of Abraham, The Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena, The Narrative of Zosimus, The Apology of Aristides, The Epistles of Clement (Complete Text), Origen's Commentary on John, Books I-X, Origen's Commentary on Mathew, Books I, II, and X-XIV)(Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Google 4)(Archive)

10. Bibliographic Synopsis; General Index (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

Enjoy!

-TurretinFan

Potential Shake-Up in American Roman Catholicism

I found interesting this news report (link) regarding a plea to the pope to do something about the fact that much of American Roman Catholicism disregards key doctrines of Catholicism.

Most interesting line to me: "Vatican officials were presented with irrefutable evidence that a majority of U.S. bishops refuse to uphold key teachings of the Church."

I wonder what the Vatican's answer will be!

-TurretinFan

To Whom Can Roman Catholics Pray?

That is to say, is it permitted by the sources of authority of Catholicism for the members of Catholicism to pray to anyone beyond God, Mary, and the saints? For some background, James Swan has been discussing this issue at his own blog (Can you pray to whoever you want to?).

Book IV, Part II, Title IV governs "The Veneration of the Saints, Sacred Images, and Relics." The Title includes the following canons:

Canon 1186 To foster the sanctification of the people of God, the Church commends to the special and filial reverence of the Christian faithful the Blessed Mary ever Virgin, Mother of God, whom Christ established as the mother of all people, and promotes the true and authentic veneration of the other saints whose example instructs the Christian faithful and whose intercession sustains them.

Canon 1187 It is permitted to reverence through public veneration only those servants of God whom the authority of the Church has recorded in the list of the saints or the blessed.

Canon 1188 The practice of displaying sacred images in churches for the reverence of the faithful is to remain in effect. Nevertheless, they are to be exhibited in moderate number and in suitable order so that the Christian people are not confused nor occasion given for inappropriate devotion.

Canon 1189 If they are in need of repair, precious images, that is, those distinguished by age, art, or veneration, which are exhibited in churches or oratories for the reverence of the faithful are never to be restored without the written permission of the ordinary; he is to consult experts before he grants permission.

Canon 1190
§1. It is absolutely forbidden to sell sacred relics.

§2. Relics of great significance and other relics honored with great reverence by the people cannot be alienated validly in any manner or transferred permanently without the permission of the Apostolic See.

§3. The prescript of §2 is valid also for images which are honored in some church with great reverence by the people.

As you can see, a lot of the title is taken up with the issue of the idolatry of relics and images. For the issue at hand, the two relevant canons are 1186 (which promotes the veneration of Mary) and 1187 (which prohibits public veneration of non-canonical people).

Now, as a preliminary matter, from what I have read, there is no single global list in reality. Nevertheless, the basic of the idea is that "public veneration" of uncanonized/beatified people is not permitted.

Here's the question: can someone within Catholicism legitimately pray to (religiously venerate) just anyone?

The answer that is typically given in popular circles today is, "As long as you have a good faith belief that the person is in heaven, you can pray to them," or occasionally, "As long as you don't think that the person is in Hell, it's ok to pray to them."

The problem I have with that is two-fold:

1) Obviously, the Scriptures don't tell us that.

2) There does not appear to be any other authoritative source within Catholicism that tells people that they can pray to anyone other the canonized or the blessed.

Now, I can anticipate one argument:

Argument: "Since canon law doesn't prohibit it, as long as it is not 'public,' it's ok."

This is a sort of "if it is not prohibited, then it is permitted" mentality. I understand this mentality, but it does not seem consonant with other of Rome's canon law. For example:

Canon 214 The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church and to follow their own form of spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church.

So then, the question is whether this particular practice is, objectively, "consonant with the doctrine of the Church" or not.

I liken the arguments that because canon law doesn't specifically address it, people can do what they like, to the argument of the modernists (at Catholic Answers and elsewhere) against the historic practice of prayer veils, a practice clearly mandated in Scripture.

So, for now, I pose this as a question to my readers. What authoritative source out there tells you that you can pray (as Mr. Jimmy Akin of Catholic Answers seems to think) to your dead mother, who has not been beatified and really has no real likelihood of being either beatified or canonized, ever?

-TurretinFan

For those who would prefer the main title discussed above in the authoritative Latin language (I think it still is the authoritative language in canon law) ...

Latin:

Can. 1186 — Ad sanctificationem populi Dei fovendam, Ecclesia peculiari et filiali christifidelium venerationi commendat Beatam Mariam semper Virginem, Dei Matrem, quam Christus hominum omnium Matrem constituit, atque verum et authenticum promovet cultum aliorum Sanctorum, quorum quidem exemplo christifideles aedificantur et intercessione sustentantur.

Can. 1187 — Cultu publico eos tantum Dei servos venerari licet, qui auctoritate Ecclesiae in album Sanctorum vel Beatorum relati sint.

Can. 1188 — Firma maneat praxis in ecclesiis sacras imagines fidelium venerationi proponendi; attamen moderato numero et congruo ordine exponantur, ne populi christiani admiratio excitetur, neve devotioni minus rectae ansa praebeatur.

Can. 1189 — Imagines pretiosae, idest vetustate, arte, aut cultu praestantes, in ecclesiis vel oratoriis fidelium venerationi expositae, si quando reparatione indigeant, numquam restaurentur sine data scripto licentia ab Ordinario; qui, antequam eam concedat, peritos consulat.

Can. 1190 —

§ 1. Sacras reliquias vendere nefas est.

§ 2. Insignes reliquiae itemque aliae, quae magna populi veneratione honorantur, nequeunt quoquo modo valide alienari neque perpetuo transferri sine Apostolicae Sedis licentia.

§ 3. Praescriptum § 2 valet etiam pro imaginibus, quae in aliqua ecclesia magna populi veneratione honorantur.

P.S. Let me be clear about one other thing. It is wrong to religiously venerate anyone but God. This is a clear teaching in Scripture ("Him only shalt thou serve"). My question in the post, however, is not about that issue - but rather about one apparently unfounded practice that is prevalent in modern Romanism of religiously venerating folks that are not canonized saints, and have no immediate prospects of becoming such.

Ante-Nicene Christian Library - Index Page

This an index page for the “Ante-Nicene Christian Library” series, with Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, editors. This was later - in effect - replaced by the "Ante-Nicene Fathers" series, which I have index here (link to ANF). This could be considered another of the lesser patrologies, dwarfed by Schaff, but mentioned by him in his introduction (link). The Google and Archive versions offer different features. For downloading, though, the Archive versions are generally superior.

1. The Apostolic Fathers. Translated by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and F. Crombie. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

2. The Writings of Justin Martyr and Athenagoras. Translated by Marcus Dods, George Reith, and B.P. Pratten. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

3. The Writings of Tatian and Theophilus and The Clementine Recognitions. Translated by B.P. Pratten, Marcus Dods, and Thomas Smith. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Google 4)(Archive)

4. The Writings of Clement of Alexandria (Vol. 1). Translated by William Wilson. (Google)(Archive)

5. The Writings of Irenaeus (Vol. 1). Translated by Alexandre Roberts and W.H. Rambaut. (Google does not appear to have this volume yet.)(Archive)

6. Hippolytus (Vol. 1) The Refutation of All Heresies (translated by J.H. MacMahon) and Fragments from His Commentaries on Various Books of Scripture (translated by S.D.F. Salmond). (Google)(Archive)

7. Tertullian Against Marcion. Translated by Peter Holmes. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

8. The Writings of Cyprian (Vol. 1). Translated by Robert Ernest Wallis. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

9. The Writings of Irenaeus (Vol. 2), the Writings of Hippolytus (Vol. 2), and Fragments of the Third Century. Translated by ???. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

10. The Writings of Origen (Vol. 1). Translated by Frederick Crombie. (Google does not appear to have this volume yet.)(Archive)

11. The Writings of Tertullian (Vol. 1). Translated by Peter Holmes and S. Thelwall. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

12. The Writings of Clement of Alexandria (Vol. 2). Translated by William Wilson. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

13. The Writings of Cyprian (Vol. 2) together with The Writings of Novatian, Minucius Felix, etc. Translated by Robert Ernest Wallis. (Google)(Archive)

14. The Writings of Methodius, Alexander of Lycopolis, Peter of Alexandria, and Several Fragments. Translated by (in order in the tome) William R. Clark (to p. 230), James B.H. Hawkins (to p. 363), B.L. Pratten (to p. 395), and S.D. Salmond (remainder). (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

15. The Writings of Tertullian (Vol. 2). Translated by Peter Holmes. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

16. Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, and Revelations. Translated by Alexander Walker. (Google)(Archive)

17. The Clementine Homilies and The Apostolic Constitutions. Homilies translated by Thomas Smith (Books 1-4), Peter Peterson (Books 6-12), James Donaldson (Books 13-20), and the Apostolic Constitutions apparently translated by James Donaldson. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

18. The Writings of Tertullian (Vol. 3) with the Extant Works of Victorinus and Commodianus. Translated by S. Thelwall (Tertullian), Robert Ernest Wallis (Victorinus and Commodianus). (Google)(Archive)

19. The Seven Books of Arnobius Adversus Gentes. Translated by Hamilton Bryce and Hugh Campbell. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

20. The Writings of Gregory Thaumaturgus, Dionysius of Alexandria, and Archelaus. Translated by S.D.F. Salmond (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

21. The Works of Lactantius (vol. 1). Translated by William Fletcher. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

22. The Works of Lactantius (vol. 2) together with The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and Fragments of the Second and Third Centuries. Translated by William Fletcher. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

23. The Writings of Origen (vol. 2) Orgien contra Celsum (books 2-8). Translated by Frederick Crombie. (Google)(Archive)

24. Early Liturgies and Other Documents. Translated by William MacDonald, George Ross Merry, and Robert Donaldson. (Google)(Archive)

Enjoy!

-TurretinFan

Library of Fathers - Index Page

The "Oxford Movement" headed by Drs. Pusey, Newman, and Keble (using the printer John Henry Parker) produced a series entitled, "A Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Anterior to the Division of the East and West." It apparently spans 48 volumes, but is eclipsed by the more complete series produced by Philip Schaff. Nevertheless, many of the volumes appear to be free from copyright and have become publicly available. A list of the volumes, including further information, such as the number of pages of each volume, may be found at the following link (link).

1. Saint Augustine. The confessions. (1838) Translated by Pusey. (Google)(Archive)

2. Saint Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem. The catechetical lectures. (1838) Translated by R. W. Church. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

3. Saint Cyprian. The treatises. (1839). Translated by Charles Thornton & J.H. Newman. (Google)(Google 2) (Archive)

4. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies ... on the first epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians. (Part 1 - Homilies 1-24)(1839) Translated by Hubert Kestell Cornish & John Medley. (Google)(Archive)

5. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. (Part 2 - Homilies 25-44)(1839) Translated by Hubert Kestell Cornish & John Medley. (Google)(Archive)

6. Saint John Chrysostom. Commentary on Galatians, and homilies on Ephesians. (1840). Tr William John Copeland. (Google)(Archive)

7. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on Romans. (1841). Translated by C. Marriott. (Google)(Archive)

8. Saint Athanasius. Select treatises in controversy with the Arians, Pt. 1 (1842). Translated by J.H. Newman. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

9. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on the statues. (1842). Translated by Edward Budge. (Google)(Archive)

10. Tertullian. (Volume 1, Apologetic and Practical Treatises) (1842). Translated by C. Dodgson. (Google)(Archive)

11. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on Matthew, pt. 1 of 3. Homilies 1-25 (1843) Translated by George Prevost. (Google)(Archive)

12. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. (1843) Translated by James Tweed. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

13. Saint Athanasius. Historical tracts. (1843) Translated by Miles Atkinson. (Google)(Archive)

14. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. (1843) Translated by W.C.Cotton & James Tweed. (Google)(Archive)

15. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on St. Matthew, pt. 2 of 3. Homilies 26-58 (1843) Translated by George Prevost. (Google)(Archive)

16. Saint Augustine. Sermons on selected lessons of the New Testament, v.1. Matthew, Mark, and Luke (1844). Translated by R.G. Macmullen. (Google)(Archive)

17. Saint Cyprian, and Saint Pacian. The epistles of S. Cyprian...with the Council of Carthage, on the baptism of heretics. With the extant works of S. Pacian: 3 Epistles to Sympronian, Exhortation to Repentance, On baptism. (1844) Translated by H. Carey & C.H. Collyns. (Google)(Archive)

18. Saint Gregory the Great. Morals on the book of Job. Pt. 1 of 4. Parts I and II/Books 1-10 (1844). Translated by Anonymous (Charles Marriott?). (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

19. Saint Athanasius. Select treatises in controversy with the Arians, Pt. 2 (1844). Translated by J.H. Newman. (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

20. Saint Augustine. Sermons on selected lessons of the New Testament, v.2. John, Acts, Romans, I Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, I Thessalonians, I Timothy, Titus, James, and 1 John (1845). Translated by R.G. Macmullen. (Google)(Archive)

21. Saint Gregory the Great. Morals on the book of Job. Pt. 2 of 4. Parts III and IV and Books 11-22 (1845). Translated by James Bliss (?). (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Google 4)(Archive)

22. Saint Augustine. Seventeen short treatises. (1847) Translated by C.L.Cornish & H. Browne. (Google)(Archive)

23. Saint Gregory the Great. Morals on the book of Job. Pt. 3 of 4. vol. 3. pt. 1. Part V Books 23-29 (1847). Translated by C. Marriott (and James Bliss?). (Google)(Google 2)(Archive)

24. Saint Augustine. Expositions on the Book of Psalms. v. 1 of 6. Psalms 1-36 (1847) Translated by E.B.Pusey, H. Walford, Charles Marriott. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

25. Saint Augustine. Expositions on the Book of Psalms. v. 2 of 6. Psalms 37-52. (1847) Translated by E.B.Pusey, H. Walford, Charles Marriott. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Google 4)(Archive)

26. Saint Augustine. Homilies on the Gospel according to St. John, and his first Epistle. Pt. 1 of 2. Homilies 1-43, John 1-8. (1848) Translated by H. Browne. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

27. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on the Second Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians (1848) Translated by J. Ashworth. (Google)(Archive)

28. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on the Gospel of St. John. Pt. 1 of 2. Homilies 1-41. (1848). Translated by G.T. Stupart. (Google)(Archive)

29. Saint Augustine. Homilies on the Gospel according to St. John, and his first Epistle. Pt. 2 of 2. Homilies 44-124, John 9-21 and Homilies 1-10, 1 John (1849) Translated by H. Browne. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Google 4)(Archive)

30. Saint Augustine. Expositions on the Book of Psalms. v. 3 of 6. Psalms 53-75. (1849) Translated by E.B. Pusey, H. Walford, Charles Marriott. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

31. Saint Gregory the Great. Morals on the book of Job. Pt. 4 of 4. vol. 3. pt. 2. Books 30-35 (1850). Translated by ??? (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

32. Saint Augustine. Expositions on the Book of Psalms. v. 4 of 6. Psalms 76-101. (1850) Translated by E.B. Pusey, H. Walford, Charles Marriott. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Google 4)(Archive)

33. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on the Acts of the Apostles. Pt. 1 of 2. Homilies 1-28. (1851) Translated by Charles Marriot. (Google)(Archive)(Archive 2)

34. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on St. Matthew, pt. 3. Homilies 59-90 (1851) Translated by George Prevost. (Google)(Archive)

35. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on the Acts of the Apostles. Pt. 2 of 2. Homilies 29-55. (1851) Translated by Charles Marriot. (Google)(Archive)(Archive 2)

36. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies on the Gospel of St. John and his first epistle. Pt. 2 of 2. Homilies 42-88. (1848). Translated by G.T.Stupert. (Google) (Google 2)(Archive)

37. Saint Augustine. Expositions on the Book of Psalms. v. 5 of 6. Psalms 102-125 (1853) Translated by E.B.Pusey, H. Walford, Charles Marriott. (Google)(Google 2)(Google 3)(Archive)

38. Saint Athanasius. The festal epistles. (1854) Translated by Henry Burgess. (Google)(Archive)

39. Saint Augustine. Expositions on the Book of Psalms. v. 6 of 6. Psalms 126-150. (1847) Translated by E.B.Pusey, H. Walford, Charles Marriott. (Google) (Google 2) (Google 3)(Google 4)(Archive)

40. Saint Justin Martyr. The works now extant. (1861) Translated by G.J. Davie. (Google)(Archive)

41. Saint Ephrem the Syrian. Select works. (Rhythms of S. Ephrem the Syrian) (1847) Translated by J.B. Morris. (Google)(Archive)

42. Saint Irenaeus. Five books ... against heresies. (1872) Translated by John Keble. (Google)(Archive)

43. Saint Cyril of Alexandria. Commentary on the Gospel according to S. John. Pt 1 of 2 (1874) Translated by P.E. Pusey. (Google)(Archive)

44. Saint John Chrysostom. The homilies ... on the Epistle of S. Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews. (1877). Translated by P.E. Pusey and John Barrow. (Google)(Archive)

45. Saint Ambrose. Letters. (1881). Translated by Anon. (Google)(Archive)

46. Saint Athanasius. Later treatises of S. Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria, with notes: and an appendix on S. Cyril of Alexandria and Theodoret (1881). Translated by William Bright. (Google)(Archive)

47. Saint Cyril of Alexandria. Five Tomes against Nestorius; Scholia on the Incarnation; Christ is One; Fragments against Diodore of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, The Synousiasts. (1881) Translated by Anon. (E.B.P.?) (Apparently not yet in Google)(Archive)

48. Saint Cyril of Alexandria. Commentary on the Gospel according to John. Pt 2 of 2 (1885) Translated by T. Randell (Apparently not yet in Google)(Archive)

I should point out that the translations, especially in the first volumes tend to have an apologetic aim, and consequently should be taken with a grain of salt. (see also Schaff's comments) In particular, Newman's translations are suspect, as he shortly afterward left the Anglican church for that of Rome. Nevertheless, these 48 volumes may provide at least something from which an English-speaking reader can supplement Schaff's patrology on some points.

I should also note that the Archive pdf documents are generally better than the Google pdf documents, in that the Archive pdf documents often include searchable text. So, if you plan to download, you may want to consider using the Archive links.

Hopefully, this list will serve as a handy index for readers who wish to check on what the early Christian writers had to say in the selected works that were included in the "Library of Fathers" series.

Enjoy!

-TurretinFan

Misquoting Gregory the Wonderworker

In a previous series (link to series index), we documented Steve Ray (and others) misquoting Athanasius (i.e. citing a spurious, or (at best) dubious, work as though it were authentic). Mr. Ray's inaccurate citations, though, are not limited to Athanasius. Mr. Ray also misquotes Gregory Thaumaturgus (Thaumaturgus means Wonderworker).

In particular, Mr. Ray quotes from a spurious Gregory Thaumaturgus work as though it were a genuine work. As recently as September 2008, Mr. Ray was promoting a word document that he put together a while back, in which he provides a list of alleged patristic quotations regarding "Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant." (source - note how the quotation he provides in the blog entry is that spurious Athanasius quotation that we already debunked - direct link to Ray's document).

This work has been known to be spurious for over a hundred years. The major translations of the church fathers, such as Schaff's compilation, include it in the "Dubious and Spurious" works section, and Schaff provides the following commentary on this work:

This very homily has been cited to prove the antiquity of the festival of the Annunciation, observed, in the West, March 25. But even Pellicia objects that this is a spurious work. The feast of the Nativity was introduced into the East by Chrysostom after the records at Rome had been inspected, and the time of the taxing at Bethlehem had been found. See his Sermon (a.d. 386), beautifully translated by Dr. Jarvis in his Introduction, etc., p. 541. Compare Tertullian, vol. iii. p. 164, and Justin, vol. i. p. 174, this series. Now, as the selection of the 25th of March is clearly based on this, we may say no more of that day. Possibly some Sunday was associated with the Annunciation. The four Sundays preceding Christmas are all observed by the Nestorians in commemoration of the Annunciation.

(emphasis added)

The "Pellicia" referenced is Alexius Aurelius Pelliccia/Pellicia (spelling was more fluid in those days), an 18th century patristics scholar. It was the scholarly consensus of that day that this is spurious writing, and nothing has changed to make us think that this work is authentic.

So, is Mr. Ray alone in quoting this way? No, it appears that this spurious citation has been used by many folks who appear to have picked it up from Mr. Ray. For example, I saw it used by Mr. Jay Dyer (link), who probably simply did not realize that his source of quotations was not trustworthy (and I assume he will correct this, once it has been brought to his attention, as he did in the past). A number of other people have likewise picked up the quotation, several giving attribution to Mr. Ray.

But where did Mr. Ray get it? Was it original research on Mr. Ray's part? No, of course not. Mr. Ray himself took it from a secondary source, Livius' quote-book, "The Blessed Virgin in the Fathers of the First Six Centuries" (link to relevant page). I know this because Mr. Ray cites his source, and states at the beginning of his document, "Most of these quotations were found in a book long out of print: The Blessed Virgin in the Fathers of the First Six Centuries written by Thomas Livius and published by Burns and Oakes in 1893."

Now, it is commendable that Mr. Ray identified his source, and it is understandable that Mr. Ray (not knowing the original languages or the Fathers' own writings) would rely on secondary sources. Nevertheless, Mr. Ray is promoted by organizations such as "Catholic Answers" as an apologist and as someone to be trusted. Thus, I hope Mr. Ray will take a cue from Mr. Dyer and fix his citations when it is brought to his attention that his source is spurious so that no more people will be misled.

Hopefully he will not again link his readers to some video that purports to defend(!) the mis-citation. Perhaps he will have the courage, in this instance, to admit that he simply cited to the work based on his misplaced trust in Livius, just as previously he cited to the spurious work attributed to Athanasius based on his misplaced trust in Gambero.

But, of course, it is not that simple. Mr. Ray should be aware that Livius himself, at page 2 of the author's preface, notes that he (Livius) will be citing in some instance from dubious and/or spurious works:

Another difficulty in the works of the early Fathers is that many of them are held to be spurious and unauthentic, whilst the genuineness of others is disputed. I leave the discussion in all cases to the judgment of learned critics. My general rule has been to make my quotations from writings the authenticity of which is commonly acknowledged. Sometimes, however, I have cited works of doubtful genuineness, or which, at any rate, were not written as we now have them by the Fathers to whom they are attributed, but whose date, as assigned to them by critics, falls within the first six centuries, to which period I confine myself. When I quote from a doubtful or unauthentic work, or depart exceptionally from this general rule, I note the fact.

(source)

Furthermore, Livius did (at page 47 - source) admit that "These homilies are of doubtful genuineness." (referring to the four homilies on the annunciation, of which the one Mr. Ray is citing is the first. Livius also tried to remind the reader of this lack of authenticity through the use of the fairly obscure indicator "Int. Opp." (presumably short for inter opera - among the works) that Mr. Ray copied when Mr. Ray copied the citation, but whose significance Mr. Ray does not appear to have appreciated, and certainly the average reader would not reasonably be expected to recognize that "Int. Opp." is a reference to the fact that Gregory the Wonderworker is not the real author of the quotation.

I realize this might have been hard for someone like Mr. Ray, untrained in patristics and unfamiliar with the church fathers, to figure out. I also understand that Mr. Ray is not a scholar, and I'm not trying (necessarily) to ask him to stop his pilgrimage profiteering to become familiar with the church fathers. I'm just exhorting him to be at least as honest as the "Women Priests" group who accurately cited Pseudo-Gregory as Pseudo-Gregory (link).

Surely Mr. Ray should be ashamed to be less accurate in his citations than one of the more liberal groups within his own sect. Will he fix his citation now that this has been brought to light? We will have to wait and see.

I had previously brought this issue to light in a blog entry on my own blog in May 2008 (link), and Mr. Ray continues to this day to cite the work as he does. And this cite appears to be his second favorite citation to make to the church fathers on the subject - it appears right after the Pseudo-Athanasius quotation in his paper on "Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant," (link to Word document version of paper).

I guess we can only hope that someone who knows Mr. Ray will persuade him to improve his scholarship at least to match the liberal segments of his sect. But - it could be worse! Mr. Danny Garland, Jr. misattributes this quotation to Jerome(!) (source), although his footnote does lead one back to the same place in Livius (where Jerome is the father cited immediately previously) as Mr. Ray has erroneously cited it.

-TurretinFan