- Feb 5, 2002
- 182,896
- 66,331
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
https://open.substack.com/pub/erick...?utm_source=post&comments=true&utm_medium=web
Wesley Huff has written a post on the variegated beliefs among early Christians that contradict one another, making the point that we have to be critical and discern what we read among these early teachers. I have 3 points I'd like to make in response, numbered below.
As a preliminary remark, I'd ask my readers to bear with my flaws. I've often been accused of being long-winded, aside from being a slow talker. I will try my best to be brief, but keep in mind I'm bound to disappoint.
(1) It is true that if we survey all of the early Christian writers of the first 5 centuries of Christianity (both in theory and in what we have as a practical discipline), we will see a wide variety of contradictions. Of course, we must include in this writers such as your favorite Gnostic, Marcion, Paul of Samosata, Arius, Pelagius, Nestorius, your favorite scholar of the Cathars, and whoever... alongside men such as Polycarp of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus of Lyons, Ambrose of Milan, Augustine of Hippo, and so on. For anyone to think that there would have been an absolutely monolithic block is asinine and would have been, given human nature, impossible. Not even among Catholics or Orthodox today is there such a thing as this monolith. And so, observing this fact only serves to point to a fact that has been both known and understood by Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants for centuries. I am unsure if Wesley Huff intended this to be enlightening for Catholics. Perhaps he meant it for anyone who might be misled into thinking early Christianity is a monolith. In the latter case, his post is understandable and agreeable.
Continued below.
erickybarra.substack.com
Wesley Huff has written a post on the variegated beliefs among early Christians that contradict one another, making the point that we have to be critical and discern what we read among these early teachers. I have 3 points I'd like to make in response, numbered below.
As a preliminary remark, I'd ask my readers to bear with my flaws. I've often been accused of being long-winded, aside from being a slow talker. I will try my best to be brief, but keep in mind I'm bound to disappoint.
(1) It is true that if we survey all of the early Christian writers of the first 5 centuries of Christianity (both in theory and in what we have as a practical discipline), we will see a wide variety of contradictions. Of course, we must include in this writers such as your favorite Gnostic, Marcion, Paul of Samosata, Arius, Pelagius, Nestorius, your favorite scholar of the Cathars, and whoever... alongside men such as Polycarp of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus of Lyons, Ambrose of Milan, Augustine of Hippo, and so on. For anyone to think that there would have been an absolutely monolithic block is asinine and would have been, given human nature, impossible. Not even among Catholics or Orthodox today is there such a thing as this monolith. And so, observing this fact only serves to point to a fact that has been both known and understood by Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants for centuries. I am unsure if Wesley Huff intended this to be enlightening for Catholics. Perhaps he meant it for anyone who might be misled into thinking early Christianity is a monolith. In the latter case, his post is understandable and agreeable.
Continued below.
Responding to Wes Huff on Early Christian Unity
Wesley Huff has written a post on the variegated beliefs among early Christians that contradict one another, making the point that we have to be critical and discern what we read among these early teachers.
erickybarra.substack.com
