|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
It would be interesting if we could have a entry on the specialized topic of patristic consensus, which is a method to determining orthodox doctrine in the writings of the Church Fathers. ADM (talk) 15:20, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Early Church Saints
In the article page, Patrology is introduced as a study of the early church founders or leaders. This I disagree with as Patrology is the Study of Modern and Early Church Saints and particulary the doctors of the church including saint Theresa of Avila and saint Theresa of Lisieux.
Relations with Judaism
This section should be either revised or removed entirely. If it is to be maintained, then its misinformation concerning St. John Chrysostom should surely be amended. The passage I reference :
"Saint John Chrysostom used Jesus' words in Luke 19:27 to call for the murder of Jews in Chrysostoms Eight Homilies Against the Jews:
'The Jewish people were driven by their drunkenness and plumpness to the ultimate evil; they kicked about, they failed to accept the yoke of Christ, nor did they pull the plow of his teaching. Another prophet hinted at this when he said: “Israel is as obstinate as a stubborn heifer.” … Although such beasts are unfit for work, they are fit for killing. And this is what happened to the Jews: while they were making themselves unfit for work, they grew fit for slaughter. This is why Christ said: “But as for these my enemies, who did not want me to be king over them, bring them here and slay them.'”
This is a terrible misrepresentation of what St. John believed/wrote. While no friend of Judaism, he is certainly not called for murder. Nowhere does St. John say that Jews are "fit for the slaughter and therefore we must kill them", no, he states simply that "they are fit for the slaughter" and later "This is why Christ said: 'But as for these my enemies, who did not want me to be king over them, bring them here and slay them."
The later part is reference to a well known parable in St. Luke's Gospel. This must not be understood as call for murder, but rather a decree that death and judgment would come upon the Jews at the Final Judgment. If you want to leave this passage, that is fine, but the way it is presented is very deceptive and the description should be changed at the least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
The claim that St. Augustine called for allowing Jews to live for the sake of suffering needs a citation.
I think the passage, even in the now-current amended form is off topic and so should be either moved or removed:
The article is about the field of patristics--which certainly is not antisemitic itself nor principally concerned with antisemitism (antisemitism would be but one of many topics patristics would consider in studying the fathers)--, it is NOT directly about the Church Fathers (their thoughts, opinions, lives, etc.).
Not only does the section not claim to speak about the topic of the article, but as it stands it doesn't even claim to speak about the fathers in general or even a large set of them; it only speaks about two of them (so it doesn't belong on the page for Church Fathers either).
If someone wants to retain this material, it seems like it should be divided up between the pages for the individual fathers mentioned. It is worth noting, however, that the controversies here mentioned are already treated in their own sections on the pages for the relevant fathers: Chrysostom, and Augustine. Chrysostom's Sermons against the Jews (and their historical influence) are also mentioned in Church Fathers. Wmdiem (talk) 18:49, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Merger of Patrologia
The Patrologia is a stub-length article that seems to be a misguided attempt to start an article on patristics under another title. However, it might instead be a reasonable (if still poorly-executed) article about the specific works called "Patrologia" that it mentions. Can anyone see if it has any merit alone or anything worth merging here? -- Perey (talk) 13:51, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Obstacles to 21st century understanding
I think the recent change in format of the four items from Alister McGrath's work from sentence format to list format is fine. However, even before that change was made, I thought the lack of grammatical consistency in the four items makes the list poorly written. The first item is a complete sentence. The second and third items are short phrases. The fourth item is a phrase followed by a long re-phrasing. The phrases, particularly the second and third ones, are too sparse to be helpful to the average reader. Perhaps someone who has access to McGrath's work could fill out these items so that they make a bit more sense. CorinneSD (talk) 01:11, 13 March 2014 (UTC)