knowledge, it is
evident that the usual arguments for the existence of God would have but
little weight. For they either attempt to attain their end by formal
thought alone, and thus result in mere "syllogizing;" or, starting from
valid enough premises, they try to extend the conclusion beyond the
limits imposed by the laws of "demonstration." For St. Clement, then,
God is not "apprehended by the science of demonstration." If the Deity
is to be known, there must be some place in which a union of the
material and formal elements of "demonstration" of His existence is to
be found. This he places in the life and teaching of Jesus Christ, who,
as God incarnate, furnishes the "evidence" which "is common to
Understanding and Sensation," and thus translates the "Infinite" and
"Ineffable" into terms of the finite and comprehensible. In this paradox
Christian theology has ever since been content to rest as one of the
fundamental mysteries of the Faith.
But even with all the aids of revelation, the Fathers would not claim
that man can advance to a full or adequate knowledge of God--we can
simply know so much _about_ God as is necessary for _practical_
purposes--for ascertaining our proper end and duties. God is, from the
very limitations of the human mind, "ineffable," "incomprehensible,"
"the unknown;"[58] and St. Clement of Alexandria expressly states even
the best knowledge of God that man can by any means attain is only
negative.[59]
These general positions, which in their broad lines are common to
practically all of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, serve to confirm the
historical interpretation of the place occupied by early Christian
theistic thought, and will pave the way to an appreciation of their use
of the arguments for the existence of God.
FOOTNOTES:
[28] _Enchiridion_, 49.
[29] _Adversus Grammaticos_, I, 44.
[30] Hatch: _Hibbert Lectures_, 1888, Lect. II, where a full account is
given of the education of the time, and what it signified.
[31] I, 7.
[32] _Philosophy and Theology_, p. 164.
[33] See e.g., St. Justin Martyr: _Dialogue with Trypho_, II.
[34] _Second Apology_, VI.
[35] _Dialogue with Trypho_, IV (end).
[36] _Stromata_, V, 14.
[37] _Against Marcion_, I, 10.
[38] _Resurrection of the Flesh_, III.
[39] _Apology_, XVII.
[40] _Against Celsus_, II, 40.
[41] _Treatise_ VI, Sec. 9. See, also, Tertullian: _Apology_, XVII; "And
this is the crowning guilt of men that they will not re
|