Chapter 13 of 163

An Overview of the Patristic Period

The patristic period was one of the most exciting and creative periods in the history of Christian thought. This period is also of importance for theological reasons. Every mainstream Christian body – including the Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, and Reformed churches – regards the patristic period as a definitive landmark in the development of Christian doctrine. Each of these churches regards itself as continuing, extending, and, where necessary, criticizing the views of the early church writers. For example, the leading seventeenth-century Anglican writer Lancelot Andrewes (1555–1626) declared that mainstream Christianity was based upon one canon, two testaments, three creeds, four “general councils,” and the first five centuries of Christian history.

A Clarification of Terms

The term “patristic” comes from the Latin word pater, “father,” and designates both the period of the church fathers and the distinctive ideas that came to develop within this period. The term is noninclusive; no generally acceptable inclusive term has yet to emerge in the literature. For this reason, some prefer to talk about “early church theologians” rather than “patristic theologians.” We shall retain the term “patristic” in this work, as it is still widely used to refer to the theology of this formative period. The following related terms are still frequently encountered, and should be noted.

The patristic period: This is a vaguely defined entity, often taken to be the period from the closing of the New Testament writings (c.100) to the definitive Council of Chalcedon (451).

Patristics: This term is usually understood to mean the branch of theological study which deals with the study of “the fathers” (patres).

Patrology: This term once literally meant “the study of the fathers,” in much the same way as “theology” meant “the study of God” (theos). In recent years, however, the word has shifted its meaning. It now refers to a manual of patristic literature, such as that of the noted German scholar Johannes Quasten (1900–87), which allows its readers easy access to the leading ideas of patristic writers and to some of the problems of interpretation associated with them.

The Theological Agenda of the Period

The patristic period was of major importance in clarifying a number of issues. One issue that had to be sorted out at an early stage was the relationship between Christianity and Judaism. The letters of Paul in the New Testament point to the importance of this question in the first century of Christian history, as a series of doctrinal and practical issues came under consideration. Since circumcision was obligatory for Jews, should Gentile (that is, non-Jewish) Christians be obliged to be circumcised? Did Christians have to observe Jewish food laws? And how was the Old Testament to be correctly interpreted?

However, other issues soon came to the fore. One which was of especial importance in the second century was that of apologetics – the reasoned defense and justification of the Christian faith against its critics. During the first period of Christian history, the church was often persecuted by the state and people were forced to worship secretly, often in private homes. Apologists such as Justin Martyr (c.100–c.165) tried to explain and defend the beliefs and practices of Christianity to a hostile pagan public. Although this early period produced some outstanding theologians – such as Irenaeus of Lyons (c.130–c.202) in the west and Origen (c.185–c.254) in the east – serious theological debate really began once the church had ceased to be persecuted.

Figure 1.2 The Roman emperor Constantine (272–337; reigned 306–37).

Source: photo: akg-images.

These conditions became possible during the fourth century, with the conversion of Constantine (272–337; reigned 306–37), who went on to become Roman emperor. During his period as emperor (306–37), Constantine succeeded in reconciling church and empire, with the result that the church no longer existed under a siege mentality. In 321, he decreed that Sundays should become public holidays. As a result of Constantine's influence on the empire, constructive theological debate became a public affair. Apart from a brief period of uncertainty during the reign of Julian the Apostate (330–63; reigned 361–3), the church could now count upon the support of the state.

Theology now emerged from the hidden world of secret church meetings to become a matter of public interest and concern throughout the Roman empire. Increasingly, doctrinal debates became a matter of both political and theological importance. Constantine wished to have a united church throughout his empire, and was thus concerned that doctrinal differences should be debated and settled as a matter of priority. One of the most important outcomes of this was the convening of the Council of Nicea (325) to resolve potentially divisive debates within the church over the best way of express the identity and significance of Jesus Christ.

As a result, the later patristic period (from about 310 to 451) may be regarded as a high-water mark in the history of Christian theology. Theologians now enjoyed the freedom to work without the threat of persecution and were able to address a series of issues of major importance to the consolidation of the emerging theological consensus within the churches. Establishing that consensus involved extensive debate and a painful learning process, in which the church discovered that it had to come to terms with disagreements and continuing tensions. Nonetheless, a significant degree of consensus, eventually to be enshrined in the ecumenical creeds, can be discerned as evolving within this formative period.

The patristic period is obviously of considerable importance to Christian theology. It is, however, found to be very difficult by many modern students of theology. There are four main reasons for this.

Some of the debates of the period seem hopelessly irrelevant to the modern world. They were viewed as intensely important at the time, but it is often very difficult for the modern reader to empathize with the issues and to understand why they attracted such attention. It is interesting to contrast the patristic period in this respect with the Reformation era, during which many issues were addressed which are of continuing concern for the modern church. Many teachers of theology find that their students are able to relate to the concerns of this later period much more easily.

Many of the patristic debates hinge upon technical philosophical questions and only make sense if the reader has some familiarity with the philosophical debates of the period. Whereas at least some students of Christian theology have some familiarity with the ideas found in Plato's dialogues, these ideas were subject to considerable development and criticism in the Mediterranean world during the patristic period. Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism differ significantly from one another, and from Plato's original ideas. The strangeness of many of the philosophical ideas of this period makes it difficult for students beginning in theology to fully appreciate what is going on in some of the patristic debates.

The patristic period was an age of flux, during which landmarks and standards – including documents such as the Nicene Creed and dogmas such as the two natures of Christ – emerged gradually. The fixing of the canon of Scripture, of major importance to theological debates, dates from the fourth century. Students familiar with the relative stability of Christian doctrine in other periods (such as the Reformation, in which the person of Christ was not a major issue) often find this feature of the patristic period disconcerting.

The period saw a major division arise, for both political and linguistic reasons, between the eastern Greek-speaking and the western Latin-speaking churches. Many scholars discern a marked difference in theological temperament between theologians of the east and west: the former are often philosophically inclined and given to theological speculation, whereas the latter are often hostile to the intrusion of philosophy into theology and regard theology as the exploration of the doctrines set out in Scripture.

↑ Back to top