a contradiction in terms, for Christianity < le— idly
derives its first principles from revelation, and not from simple reason; but there is no less a true philosophy of Christianity, which aim- to -how how completely these, by their form, their substance, and their consequences, meet the instincts and aspirations of all ages. The ex- position of such a philosophy would be the work of a modern < trigen.
See llainT. Philosophic der Kirchenvater (Munch. 1869); Mock!. PhUos. d, patristischen Zeit (Wuraburg, 1859); Moller, Kosmologu in d. griech. Kirch (Halle. 1868).
IN'. Patristic Recognition of the Propaedeutic Offia •</ Greek Philosophy*— The divine discipline of the Jews
was in nature essentially moral. See PHILOSOPHY,
Hi bbew. The lessons which it was designed to teach
were embodied in tin- family and the nation. i , t this was not in itself a complete discipline of our nature.
PHILOSOPHY
137
PHILOSOPHY
The reason, no less than the will and the affections, had an office to discharge in preparing man for the incarna- tion. The process and the issue in the two cases were widely different, but they were in some sense comple- mentary. Even in time this relation holds good. The divine kingdom of the Jews was just overthrown when free speculation arose in the Ionian colonies of Asia. The teaching of the last prophet nearly synchronized with the death of Socrates. All other differences be- tween the discipline of reason and that of revelation are implicitly included in their fundamental difference of method. In the one, man boldly aspired at once to God; in the other, God disclosed himself gradually to man. Philosophy failed as a religious teacher practi- cally (Rom. i, 21, 22), but it bore noble witness to an inward law (ii, 14, 15). It laid open instinctive wants which it could not satisfy. It cleared away error, when it could not found truth. It swayed the foremost minds of a nation, when it left the mass without hope. In its purest and grandest forms it was " a schoolmaster to bring men to Christ" (Clem. Alex. Strom, i, § 28).
This function of ancient philosophy is distinctly rec- ognised by many of the greatest of the fathers. The principle which is involved in the doctrine of Justin Martyr on " the Seminal Word" finds a clear and sys- tematic expression in Clement of Alexandria (comp. Re- depenning, Origenes, i, 437-439). " Every race of men participated in the Word. And they who lived with the Word were Christians, even if they were held to be godless (dStoi), as, for example, among the Greeks, Socrates and Heraclitus, and those like them" (Just. Mart. Ap. i, 46 ; comp. i, 5, 28, and ii, 10, 13). " Phi- losophy," says Clement, "before the coming of the Lord, was necessary to Greeks for righteousness; and now it proves useful for godliness, being in some sort a preliminary discipline (trpo—aihia tiq ovna) for those who reap the fruits of the faith through demonstration. . . . Perhaps we may say that it was given to the Greeks with this special object (7rpo»jyo?>/tH'ujc), for it brought (i/raiCaywyu) the Greek nation to Christ, as the law brought the Hebrews" (Clem. Alex. Strom, i, 5, § 28 ; comp. 9, § 43, and 16, § 80). In this sense he does not scruple to say that " Philosophy was given as a peculiar testament (SiaBi]Kt]v) to the Greeks, as form- ing the basis of the Christian philosophy" (ibid, vi, 8, § 67 ; comp. 5, § 41). Origen, himself a pupil of Ammo- nius Saccas, speaks with less precision as to the educa- tional power of philosophy, but his whole works bear witness to its influence. The truths which the philos- ophers taught, he says, referring to the words of Paul, were from God, for "God manifested these to them, and all things that have been nobly said" (c. Cels. vi, 3 ; Philoc. 15). Augustine, while depreciating the claims of the great Gentile teachers, allows that "some of them made great discoveries, so far as they received help from heaven, while they erred so far as they were hindered by human frailty" (August. Be Civ. ii, 7 ; comp. Be Boctr. Chr. ii, 18). They had, as he else- where says, a distant vision of the truth, and learned from the teaching of nature what prophets learned from the Spirit (Serm. lxviii, 3 ; cxl, etc.).
But while many thus recognised in philosophy the free witness of the Word speaking among men, the same writers in other places sought to explain the par- tial harmony of philosophy and revelation by an orig- inal connection of the two. This attempt, which in the light of a clearer criticism is seen to be essentially fruit- less and even suicidal, was at least more plausible in the first centuries. A multitude of writings were then current bearing the names of the Sibyl or Hystaspes, which were obviously based on the O.-T. Scriptures, and as long as they were received as genuine it was impossible to doubt that Jewish doctrines were spread in the West before the rise of philosophy. On the other hand, when the fathers ridicule with the bitterest scorn the contradictions and errors of philosophers, it must be remembered that they spoke often fresh from
a conflict with degenerate professors of systems which had long lost all real life. Some indeed there were, chiefly among the Latins, who consistently inveighed against philosophy. But even Tertullian, who is among its fiercest adversaries, allows that at times the philoso- phers hit upon truth by a happy chance or blind good- fortune, and yet more by that " general feeling with which God was pleased to endow the soul" (Tertull. Be An. 2). The use which was made of heathen specula- tion by heretical writers was one great cause of its dis- paragement by their catholic antagonists. Irenseus en- deavors to reduce the Gnostic teachers to a dilemma : either the philosophers with whom they argued knew the truth or they did not; if they did, the incarnation was superfluous; if they did not, whence comes the agreement of the true and the false? (Adv. Hair, ii, 14, 7). Hippolytus follows out the connection of different sects with earlier teachers in elaborate detail. Tertul- lian, with characteristic energy, declares that " Philoso- ophy furnishes the arms and the subjects of heresy. What (he asks) has Athens in common with Jerusa- lem? the Academy with the Church? heretics with Christians? Our training is from the Porch of Solo- mon. . . . Let those look to it who bring forward a Stoic, a Platonic, a dialectic Christianity. We have no need of curious inquiries after the coming of Christ Je- sus, nor of investigation after the Gospel" (Tertull. Be Prtescr. liter. 7).