Reformers educated in the Fathers?

[ZoomerPreacher]

Hello everyone,

I was wondering if any of you knew of any reformed theologians who were highly educated in the early church fathers?

I know Heinrich Bullinger, Martin Bucer, and John Calvin would have been thoroughly educated in and aware of the Latin fathers (especially Augustine, Jerome, Tertullian, and Cyprian).

However, I can’t say the same for Luther, Melanchthon, Peter Martyr, and Cranmer.

I’m studying the fathers at the graduate level in a degree program separate from my MDiv. I’m also a lay minister in the Anglican Communion. I am a high church confessional/classical reformed Anglican. I’m studying the fathers to further develop my understanding of the doctrine and interpretation of scripture. I ask the question above with the intention to more fully understand how the reformers received and understood the fathers.

 

[Charles Johnson]

Hello everyone,

I was wondering if any of you knew of any reformed theologians who were highly educated in the early church fathers?

I know Heinrich Bullinger, Martin Bucer, and John Calvin would have been thoroughly educated in and aware of the Latin fathers (especially Augustine, Jerome, Tertullian, and Cyprian).

However, I can’t say the same for Luther, Melanchthon, Peter Martyr, and Cranmer.

I’m studying the fathers at the graduate level in a degree program separate from my MDiv. I’m also a lay minister in the Anglican Communion. I am a high church confessional/classical reformed Anglican. I’m studying the fathers to further develop my understanding of the doctrine and interpretation of scripture. I ask the question above with the intention to more fully understand how the reformers received and understood the fathers.

I think you would be hard-pressed to find a Reformer that was not intimately familiar with the fathers.
Luther, Melanchthon, and Peter Martyr knew the Fathers inside and out. Luther claimed that he took inspiration from Augustine's On Nature and Grace.
Among the Reformers, Zwingli and Oecolampadius took a greater academic interest in the study of Greek and Hebrew and the study of the Scripture in the original languages than in the Fathers, per se. In their writings one sees more of those kinds of references. But Oecolampadius, as part of his Greek study, was very familiar with the Greek fathers in particular, as was Beza. Beza had read all the works of Chrysostom dozens of times in the Greek.

 

[dsanch1120]

Part of the effectiveness of the reformation was just how well-educated the reformers were in the church fathers. The catholics claimed to have consistency with the fathers, the reformers proved their consistency with them.

 

[davejonescue]

I dont know if you would consider the Puritans reformers. But having worked with a few of their books, in almost every one they quote Church Fathers. If I am not mistaken, the most quoted (at least in the books I have worked with) are Augustine, Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Bernard.

 

[RamistThomist]

Most of them would have been familiar with Chrysostom, given the popularity of his sermons.

There is a temptation to read their intimate familiarity with Augustine into the overall familiarity they would have had with the Eastern Fathers, which wasn't necessarily the case.

There is also the problem of text criticism of the Fathers. Either the West (Reformed or Roman) didn't have all the relevant fathers (such as Maximus the Confessor's extended works) or they had them in less than perfect editions.

On the other hand, Thomas Torrance claimed Calvin had an intimate familiarity with Cyril of Alexandria, though I don't have the specifics of his argument.

 

[Adam GB]

Martin Chemnitz, a second generation Lutheran reformer, was incredibly well-versed in the Fathers, and cites them constantly for dozens of pages on end to defend Lutheranism in his Examination of the Council of Trent. He would be an excellent source for you.

 

[Guido's Brother]

Check out Guido (Guy) de Bres. His Le Baston de la Foy Chrestienne is a collection of (mostly) quotes from patristic sources, showing that he was intimately familiar with them. I have also translated and edited the debate he had with Francois Richardot -- in this debate, de Bres shows a remarkable facility with the fathers, particularly given that he's in prison during this debate. See here:

De Brès vs. Richardot: A Reformation Debate - Wes Bredenhof

If there’s one Reformation figure who deserves more attention, I would argue that it’s Guido de Brès. Since I wrote […]

bredenhof.ca

 

[jwright82]

I diddo Chemnitz. Also Melanchthon was, to my knowledge, pretty familiar with the father's. At least he quote's them in his Loci Communes.

 

[chicagophil]

I am currently reading Bullinger's Decades and am impressed about how much he quotes the church fathers and how many different ones he quotes. For what it's worth.

 

[ReformedChristian]

Francis Turretin in his 3 volumes on theology was well versed in their writings.

 

[ZoomerPreacher]

I think you would be hard-pressed to find a Reformer that was not intimately familiar with the fathers.
Luther, Melanchthon, and Peter Martyr knew the Fathers inside and out. Luther claimed that he took inspiration from Augustine's On Nature and Grace.
Among the Reformers, Zwingli and Oecolampadius took a greater academic interest in the study of Greek and Hebrew and the study of the Scripture in the original languages than in the Fathers, per se. In their writings one sees more of those kinds of references. But Oecolampadius, as part of his Greek study, was very familiar with the Greek fathers in particular, as was Beza. Beza had read all the works of Chrysostom dozens of times in the Greek.

I have a copy of On Nature and Grace at home that I ought to read (once I finish the other books on my ever-growing reading list).

Interesting Oecolampadius and Beza were studied in the Greek fathers. Chrysostom and the other Cappadocians have some divergences from Augustinian theology associated with the general movement of the reformation.

Part of the effectiveness of the reformation was just how well-educated the reformers were in the church fathers. The catholics claimed to have consistency with the fathers, the reformers proved their consistency with them.

Forever unconvinced of the claims of the Romish sect.

 

[ZoomerPreacher]

Most of them would have been familiar with Chrysostom, given the popularity of his sermons.

There is a temptation to read their intimate familiarity with Augustine into the overall familiarity they would have had with the Eastern Fathers, which wasn't necessarily the case.

There is also the problem of text criticism of the Fathers. Either the West (Reformed or Roman) didn't have all the relevant fathers (such as Maximus the Confessor's extended works) or they had them in less than perfect editions.

On the other hand, Thomas Torrance claimed Calvin had an intimate familiarity with Cyril of Alexandria, though I don't have the specifics of his argument.

I don’t think the Eastern fathers (Greek, Syriac, Egyptian, etc) were as deeply studied by Western theologians because of the way Augustine and other westerners were received into medieval Catholic theology (e.g. Ambrose, Tertullian, Cyprian, Jerome). That might be another reason for some of the things you mentioned, which are also valid.

I haven’t got a clue as to what Calvin read and quoted from St. Cyril. Maybe anti-Nestorianism? Maybe a defence of the councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon?

Martin Chemnitz, a second generation Lutheran reformer, was incredibly well-versed in the Fathers, and cites them constantly for dozens of pages on end to defend Lutheranism in his Examination of the Council of Trent. He would be an excellent source for you.

This is an interesting man and an interesting topic, to me. I especially like reading the magisterial reformers, the continental reformers, and the reformed scholastics.

I will immediately start searching for that book you mentioned, as I am currently working my way through understanding the Lateran councils so I will soon be confronting Trent. And of course, as an Anglican, rejecting Newman’s Tract 90 will be easier if I familiarize myself with anti-Trent reformation works.

I diddo Chemnitz. Also Melanchthon was, to my knowledge, pretty familiar with the father's. At least he quote's them in his Loci Communes.

I would like to know what those exact quotes were. Or an idea of Melanchthon’s usage of/methodology with them.

Check out Guido (Guy) de Bres. His Le Baston de la Foy Chrestienne is a collection of (mostly) quotes from patristic sources, showing that he was intimately familiar with them. I have also translated and edited the debate he had with Francois Richardot -- in this debate, de Bres shows a remarkable facility with the fathers, particularly given that he's in prison during this debate. See here:

De Brès vs. Richardot: A Reformation Debate - Wes Bredenhof

If there’s one Reformation figure who deserves more attention, I would argue that it’s Guido de Brès. Since I wrote […]

bredenhof.ca

Wow, thank you for blessing me with this new knowledge and these resources. I’ll look into these soon.

 

[jwright82]

I don’t think the Eastern fathers (Greek, Syriac, Egyptian, etc) were as deeply studied by Western theologians because of the way Augustine and other westerners were received into medieval Catholic theology (e.g. Ambrose, Tertullian, Cyprian, Jerome). That might be another reason for some of the things you mentioned, which are also valid.

I haven’t got a clue as to what Calvin read and quoted from St. Cyril. Maybe anti-Nestorianism? Maybe a defence of the councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon?


This is an interesting man and an interesting topic, to me. I especially like reading the magisterial reformers, the continental reformers, and the reformed scholastics.

I will immediately start searching for that book you mentioned, as I am currently working my way through understanding the Lateran councils so I will soon be confronting Trent. And of course, as an Anglican, rejecting Newman’s Tract 90 will be easier if I familiarize myself with anti-Trent reformation works.


I would like to know what those exact quotes were. Or an idea of Melanchthon’s usage of/methodology with them.


Wow, thank you for blessing me with this new knowledge and these resources. I’ll look into these soon.

I'll dig them out. I have 3 of his editions, he expanded on them.

 

[jwright82]

https://ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/preusjaouseofthechurchfathers.pdf

This may help.

 

[jwright82]

What Did the Reformers Think of the Church Fathers?

Luther and the Reformers looked to the church fathers and were shaped by them.

www.crossway.org

 

[jwright82]

The Church Fathers in Renaissance and Reformation Thought

"The Church Fathers in Renaissance and Reformation Thought" published on by null.

www.oxfordbibliographies.com

The best I can come up with for now. It seems my copies of Loci Communes only index particular fathers, so either good or bad is 50/50. Jerome, Augustine, and Ambrose came up. But this book promises to catalogue them, don't know. Sorry man.

 

[jwright82]

https://lionandlambapologetics.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Martin-Chemnitzs-Use-of-the-Church-Fathers-Beckwith.pdf

https://ctsfw.net/media/pdfs/BeckwithMartinChemnitsReadingoftheFathers.pdf

 

[jwright82]

Philip Melanchthon and the Cappadocians. A reception of Greek patristic sources in the sixteenth century. By H. Ashley Hall. (Refo500 Academic Studies, 16.) Pp. 272 incl. 1 fig. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. €74.99. 978 3 525 55067 0 | The

Philip Melanchthon and the Cappadocians. A reception of Greek patristic sources in the sixteenth century. By H. Ashley Hall. (Refo500 Academic Studies, 16.) Pp. 272 incl. 1 fig. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. €74.99. 978 3 525 55067 0 - Volume 66 Issue 3

www.cambridge.org

Last one for now. The two books you'll have to buy, sorry. I may find time to go through Melanchthon and get the quotes tonight or tomorrow.