By Benjamin J. King
John Henry (later Cardinal) Newman is usually identified to were dedicated to analyzing the Church Fathers. during this quantity, Benjamin King attracts on archive in addition to released fabric to discover how Newman interpreted particular Fathers at diversified sessions of his lifestyles. King attracts connections among the Alexandrian Fathers Newman used to be examining and the improvement of his concept. This research indicates that it was once occasions in Newman's lifestyles that modified his interpretation of the Fathers, now not the translation of the Fathers that brought on Newman to alter his existence. King argues that Newman adapted his analyzing, 'trying on' the tips of alternative Fathers to slot his personal wishes. An cutting edge comparability of Newman's translations of Athanasius of Alexandria, from 1842-44 and 1881, demonstrates that through 1881 the Cardinal was once swayed via the theology favourite by way of Pope Leo XIII. King unearths that even though Newman was once a debatable determine in his personal day, ultimately his view of the Fathers and their doctrines got here to be authorised through many students. This new exploration of his paintings, notwithstanding, indicates that the Cardinal's interpretation of the Fathers should be arguable this present day.
Quick preview of Newman and the Alexandrian Fathers: Shaping Doctrine in Nineteenth-Century England (Changing Paradigms in Historical and Systematic Theology) PDF
Eighty three He had already used this analogy (preserved within the Athanasian Creed) in Lent 1835: ‘Just right this moment of seeing our associates, even though we don't see their souls yet in basic terms their our bodies, so the Apostles, Disciples, clergymen, and Pharisees, and the multitude, all who observed Christ within the Xesh, observed, because the complete earth will see on the final day, the Very and everlasting Son’ (PS iii. 12: 588). eighty four See Thomas Weinandy, Does God SuVer? (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2000), esp. 199 206. 1834–1840 161 path, is the diVerence that stops one announcing that the human Xesh assumed through the trademarks is the mere device or garment posited by means of Apollinarianism.
102). in spite of everything, Newman argues, Origen wouldn't truck with a philosophy that attacked Christian doctrine (as proven while Origen refused to listen to Paul of Samosata, with whom he shared a client (ibid. 98)). he's certain Origen might don't have anything to do with the philosophy of a lapsed Christian. even though it could be noticeable that his English predecessors defended Origen from a lot of his critics, they didn't paintings as demanding as Newman to retell the tale of pre-Nicene Alexandria. The reasons of Arianism: confusion of philosophy and theology in Antioch?
Rose endured to print Newman’s nameless articles, writing in December 1835 that ‘your Church of the Fathers sequence has performed extra sturdy than virtually something which has come forth of past due’ (LD v. 178 n. 1). He additionally stood up for the Wery rhetoric of the Tracts while Palmer attempted to take them over by way of committee; Newman pronounced in December 1833 that Rose ‘had remonstrated with him [Palmer] for thwarting the Tracts’ (LD iv. 141). In September 1834, it was once to Rose that Newman wrote for tips in his controversy with Abbe´ Jager, a French Catholic admirer of the early Tracts.
Copeland, three could 1836, Copeland MSS (Pusey House), quoted by way of Nockles, The Oxford stream in Context, 28). 28 It was once republished in 1872 as ‘How to complete it’ in DA. For Froude’s frustration, see, e. g. , LD v. 192. advent 15 spoken of the Church of britain as ‘‘safe’’ and not anything more’. 29 within the letter quoted above, from may perhaps 1836, Rose addressed the query of Newman’s ardour for the early Church. Rose notion it harmful for Newman to be turning the readers [among the clergy], equivalent to they're, out to grass within the spacious pastures of Antiquity with out very strict tether.
G. , p. 341 nn at Ari 208). 17 Ibid. He cites neither within the publication whilst quoting Athenagoras: ‘Let nobody ridicule the concept that God has a Son . . . the daddy and the Son being one. The 78 1831–1833 between early-moderns, Petavius used to be particularly severe of the early Alexandrians. that allows you to refute him Newman hired the Gallican students who reacted opposed to Petavius and the Socinian Christoph Sand, or Sandius (1644–80), who appropriated the Jesuit’s arguments. those Gallicans—Pierre Daniel Huet (1630–1721), Louis Ellies Du Pin (1657–1719), Jean-Franc¸ois Baltus (1667–1743), and Re´my Ceillier (1688–1763)—were all beneficial of their judgement of Clement and Origen, Du Pin claiming that the final ‘provided fabric for all of the Greek and Latin Fathers who him, who approximately did not more than reproduction him’.