Reclaiming Lutheranism’s Love and Respect for the Church Fathers
An aspect of Lutheranism that is somewhat unknown, unfortunately, to many Lutherans, is the fact that we never renounced, rejected or otherwise denigrated a study of, and love for, the church fathers. In fact, it was a Lutheran who coined the word “patrology” to refer to the study of the writings of the church fathers. The “church fathers” are those theologians of both East and West, who lived and produced theological works from roughly 100-500 a.d. There is remarkable consistency across their writings, and Lutherans delighted particularly in showing their opponents in the Roman Catholic Church that the Lutheran confession of the ancient faith was thoroughly consistent with the teachings of the church fathers. While never elevating extra-biblical opinions of the church fathers above Scripture, as Rome did, Lutheranism has never rejected, but rather has embraced, the early church fathers as our own. It is a false and misleading claim that the Eastern Orthodox or Roman Church are the ones who are faithful to the early church fathers, in fact, it is Lutheranism that is the most authentic and faithful confession of the faith of the church fathers.
Carl Beckwith put matters well in an article published in an issue of Concordia Theological Quarterly, Vol. 68:3/4, July/October 2004, when he wrote:
“Lutherans have always recognized the value of studying the early church fathers. Whether Martin Luther or Johann Gerhard, C.F.W. Walther or Hermann Sasse, one finds a considerable familiarity with and appreciation of the church fathers. In his important study on post-Reformation Lutheranism, Robert Preus explains, “The Lutherans were convinced that the church fathers were worthy of being read directly, although critically, ‘dividing the straw from the gold.” ” The Lutherans appealed to the fathers, according to Jacob Preus, because they “were part of the ‘heavenly witnesses,’ men standing before the judgment seat of God and bearing witness to their faith.” By using the testimony of these heavenly witnesses, the Lutherans demonstrated the continuity of their teaching with the church catholic.”
How then can a person go about learning more about the church fathers and reading them, not uncritically, but with understanding and appreciation? For this task, I recommend a person read the works of Johann Gerhard and Martin Chemnitz, both of whom were very familiar with the early church fathers and made much use of them in their theological writings. Rather start to tackle, right away, entire works of the Church Fathers, an anthology of their writings, organized around topics, can be very helpful. The very best resource like this is rather new, it is the five volume series Ancient Christian Doctrine, offering quotes of the early church fathers around the Nicene Creed and its various points. It is very well done.
Finally, here is a nice summary of how Lutherans should regard, and make use of, the church fathers. Dr. Beckwith concludes his article:
“Martin Chemnitz’s approach to the fathers is one of esteem and discernment. He appreciates and makes use of their contribution to Christian doctrine, their guidance in theological terminology, and their many struggles to defend God’s word against the heretics. When the fathers fail to distinguish between law and gospel, distort the articles of justification and sanctification, or overemphasize works and discipline, Chemnitz seeks to understand why such statements were made. He does not see their shortcomings as an opportunity for ridicule but rather as a call for diligence that we not repeat their mistakes in our defense of God’s word. When we reverently and faithfully approach the fathers, we do so knowing they sought only to confess the faith that leads to everlasting life. Just as we pray today for brotherly correction when we stray from God’s word, so too we correct these heavenly witnesses when they stray from the only rule and norm for doctrine, God’s inspired and inerrant word.”


It was this critical, broad study of patristic literature that brought me to accept the Lutheran confession of faith. The overwhelming testimony of the surviving documents from the ancient church is hard to ignore. With a few novel exceptions, they point you back to the scriptures and lead you directly to to cross of Christ. Through their wise teaching, the Holy Spirit trains you to read Holy Scripture with greater discernment and opens your eyes to the errors of many modern churches.
The Church Fathers teach the efficacy of baptism for the forgiveness of sins and that it can and should be administered to infants. They constantly proclaim the real presence of Christ’s body and blood in the Lord’s Supper. They teach the universal atonement, salvation by faith alone, and the right use of the office of the keys. The consistancy of these doctrines combined by how early they appear (mere generations after the apostles!) in the archeological record blew my radical protestant mind.
If one wants to come as close as possible to the faith of the early church, becoming a Lutheran is a natural conclusion. The church fathers support that conclusion far more often than they detract from it.
“What merit, then does a man have before grace, by which he might receive grace, when our every good merit is produced in us only by grace, and, when God crowning our merits, crowns nothing else but His own gifts to us?” -St. Augustine, 412 A.D.
Is patrology and patristics the same thing? Can someone explain the distinction? Thank you.
One of the things I appreciate about Chemnitz and other Lutheran theologians is that they see “Here, this is what the Bible says and I’m not the first to understand it this way, these well-respected churchmen read it the same way.” In this way they take seriously Peter’s admonition that scripture is not a matter of private interpretation and they show that they stand in continuity with the ancient church.
I just love the Church Fathers. I am particularly interested in the Sub-Apostolic Fathers. Fascinating stuff. I wish more Lutherans would learn/be taught about them.
Its funny how some approach the “Fathers” uncritically, unlike how they approach modern authors – sometimes with critical alarms full strength.
This is after the “great conversation” and we must all listen, reason, and appeal to the Scriptures. Isn’t great over the centuries that we late comers can enter the great conversation to learn and to debate with the past and present, and ultimately to contribute – all the while God’s consistent voice moderating the discussion through Scripture. Its the blog of the ages!
Dr. Beckwith, a preeminent scholar and Lutheran theologian, wisely describes in his fine article Chemnitz’s methodology: “Martin Chemnitz’s approach to the fathers is one of esteem and discernment.”
We certainly can esteem the fathers’ insight and their endurance under persecution. Still, discernment is indeed important when reading them as they are not inspired and sometimes reflect or endorse false teachings that were creeping into the early church.