Originally posted by poimen
I was talking to a RC priest in training a month ago and he said that he would not believe anything that was inconsistent with the ECF. Since they were closest to the apostles era, they should know best what they taught and believed.
The discussion was in relation to a talk I gave to some young peoples on regeneration (John 3) where I claimed that Jesus was not talking about water baptism in John 3:5.
So I was wondering if anyone has examined the ECF to see if they all taught the same doctrine uniformally or if there are those who dissented from this opinion.
DTK? Anyone?
Thanks.
Daniel,
I'm somewhat busy right now, several irons in the fire, not the least of which an article that is due Saturday.
But I would like to address this more in-depth regarding John 3:5 later. Perhaps for starters, to make a brief statement, and then discuss a particular case. Generally speaking, the one thing that comes near to any kind of unanimous consent among the ECFs is their adherence to one form or another of baptismal regeneration, though there are some very early fathers (e.g. Clement of Rome) who are silent on this matter, and who offer statements which seem to suggest the contrary. But for the most part, baptismal regeneration was taught by them.
Now, for a particular case. Augustine believed in baptismal regeneration. But like so many in his day, he did not view regeneration as an act, but as a process which began at baptism. In fact, the ECFS (Augustine included) tended to view all components of salvation (regeneration, justification, sanctification, etc.) as a process, and all of these (i.e., the components of salvation) were usually viewed together, rather than distinct from one another. Augustine believed that all the regenerate (speaking here in the past tense) would be saved, for the simple reason that he didn't believe that the process was completed until life this side of eternity ended. Thus, with regeneration being completed only at the end of one's life, all the regenerate were saved. Of course, Augustine also taught that all the elect would persevere in faith to the end of life this side of eternity.
Someone mentioned Ambrosiaster (fl. c. 366-384). We do not know for sure the real name of this individual. He is an anonymous ECF. He was at first confused with Ambrose, i.e., some of his writings were attributed to the ECF Ambrose (c. 339-97). It was later determined that this man was someone other than Ambrose, and it was the humanist, Desiderius Erasmus, who tagged him with the name, "Ambrosiaster," which consequently stuck as a designation/name for him ever since. He is a rather interesting church father. He offers us several very clear statements on
sola fide, but had Pelagian leanings.
I'll try to reply to this further at a later date.
Blessings,
DTK
[Edited on 9-30-2005 by DTK]
