ACCS vs Church Fathers Protestant and Catholic

What's the benefit and difference between Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture and the Church Fathers? I know there's not much difference between Church Fathers Catholic and Protestant, but I would like to know how ACCS differs from these two. Any information will be greatly appreciated.

DAL

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rosie Perera

ACCS is organized in canonical Scripture order, so it's easier to see what the church fathers said about this and that chapter and verse. The Church Fathers wrote a lot more than just commentary on Scripture, so you'll find those works in the Church Fathers collections. ACCS really is a unique resource though, because of how it is arranged. I find it very helpful.

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587107#Comment_587107

Thanks Rosie! Now, do you know if all 29 volumes are included in the Anglican Silver package or just 14 volumes?

I know it says 14 volumes in the description, but that's not always right as in Exegetical Summaries on Reformed (it says 24, but it's actually 27).

Thanks!

DAL

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587108#Comment_587108

I don't know. I had ACCS already (both OT and NT) when I bought Anglican Diamond, so it didn't show up in the list of "new to me" resources that the sales rep sent me. So my experience does not answer that question. You should ask a sales rep that question.

MJ. Smith

What's the benefit and difference between Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture and the Church Fathers? I know there's not much difference between Church Fathers Catholic and Protestant, but I would like to know how ACCS differs from these two. Any information will be greatly appreciated.

DAL

The Church Fathers is an anthology of the writings of some of the Early Church Fathers. The ACC is a modern catena (think Catena Aurea) over the non-LXX canon with modern translations of short excerpts chosen with a distinct modern (Protestant) bias although not in a negative sense.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587107#Comment_587107

I hope this is not too off-topic.

How does one measure the usefulness of having this resource in addition to either edition of the ECF?

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587117#Comment_587117

How does one measure the usefulness of having this resource in addition to either edition of the ECF?

I'll dump the ECF the moment I get the Fathers of the Church series. The past century has seen a real growth in knowledge regarding the early church fathers in the west. the Fathers of the Church Series is made up of translations by scholars translating within their field of expertise (compared to what they were assigned) often translating better manuscripts than were available to Schaff's crew.

Felix Brito

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587108#Comment_587108

DAL, only the 14 volumes are included.

Blessings!

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587121#Comment_587121

DAL, only the 14 volumes are included.

Blessings!

Thanks! I think I may just stay at Anglican Bronze. The two main highlights on Anglican Silver were "Feasting on the Word" and "ACCS (14 vols.), but I'm not too excited about the Feasting on the Word's format and though the format of ACCS is nice, I think I'll just refer to the ECF for any reference. They still show up on my passage guide anyway. I may just save that money for Lutheran Starter or Bronze or some other future BP from a different denomination since I already own Lenski (a Lutheran). Any thoughts on Augsburg Commentaries that come with Lutheran Bronze? Anyone? [:P] I already pre-ordered the SDA Starter package which is all I need, since I already own the SDA Commentary Expanded Edition.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587124#Comment_587124

The Cosmic-Historical Beginning (1:1–18)

John begins his narration of the ministry of Jesus only after first describing the cosmic origin of Jesus. This is striking when compared to the Synoptics. It pushes behind even the divine conception of Jesus told by Matthew and Luke (of which John seems to know nothing). John leaves us no room to doubt the importance of this Jesus—an importance that requires us to conceive of the “beginning.” Throughout his gospel he will stress that knowing who Jesus is, so that one can properly believe in him, necessitates knowing where he is from and to where he will return (e.g., 6:42; 16:5). Jesus’ origins are with God from the very beginning before creation, and it is only natural that he should return to his status with the Father after his earthly sojourn. The reader is privy to this knowledge from the first, and consequently knows what many of the characters in the plot of the gospel do not (e.g., 8:48ff.). This skillfully sets the stage for the evangelist’s use of irony.
The passage, usually called the prolog, has an undeniable poetic structure which has led many to speak of it as a “hymn” or a revision of what was originally a hymn (vv. 6–8 and 15, however, are prosaic insertions). It is possible that the prolog in some form did function as a hymn in the worship life of the Johannine community, but we cannot be sure how it was employed or what its precise form was before its use here to introduce the gospel. Several other questions also arise: First, what is the relationship of this passage to the remainder of the gospel? Some see it as a later addition, perhaps from a source outside the Johannine community. One reason for this suggestion is the appearance of several non-Johannine words, e.g., “grace” (charis) in vv. 14, 16, and 17. On the other hand, the motifs of the prolog fit too well the proposed setting for the gospel described above in the Introduction to ascribe it to any other than the Johannine community.6 It is more likely that the word grace here is from a very early creedal statement, parts of which were incorporated into the hymn. That such a creedal statement was originally a Jewish hymn to wisdom is possible but beyond proof. Second, there is the difficult question of the referents of the prolog. At what point does the passage begin to speak of the historical Jesus and his work—v. 14, v. 10, or v. 5? if v. 14, then everything before that would seem to describe the work of the Word in the created order and/or Israel’s history. In the outline below I suggest that vv. 5 and 9–13 refer to the work of the Word in the history of Israel, and that vv. 14–18 refer to the historical Jesus. This explains the appearance of the first person pronoun at v. 14 (“we beheld”). The Christian community can personally witness to the presence of the Word in the historical-Jesus.
A final question regards the meaning of logos (“Word,” applied to the preexistent Christ in 1:1, 14). In this limited space we can only suggest that it was a rich religious-philosophical word perhaps chosen for its diverse meanings and its wide use. First, it is clearly related to the “Word of the Lord” (dabar YHWH) in the OT where it is used of the creative power of God (Ps. 33:6; cf. Genesis 1) and the message of God for the human community (e.g., Hos. 1:1). But logos may also be related to Jewish concepts of wisdom (sophia) in the later periods of the OT and the intertestamental period. Many of the things ascribed to the logos in the prolog are parallel to statements made of wisdom. For example, Proverbs 8 gives wisdom a role in creation as v. 3 does to logos, and wisdom is said to take up her dwelling among humans in Sir. 24:8 as logos does in v. 14. Logos may then have been a Christian counterpart to wisdom and molded in the image of that Jewish motif. But in Hellenistic thought too logos was prominent. In Stoic thought logos was the reason of the universe, and parallels to the prolog can be found in the work of Heraclitus of Ephesus and elsewhere. It appears that the author of the hymn has deliberately chosen a Greek word with a full variety of associations. By doing this he implicitly claims that Christ fulfills the expectations of the whole of the human race, Gentile and Jew. The evangelist does a similar kind of thing elsewhere in the gospel, employing rich, multiple-meaning words in a creative way (e.g., “Paraclete,” cf. 14:15–17 below). We can do no more here than suggest a definition of the Johannine concept of logos: simply put, it represents the self-expression of God.
The prolog has four essential parts (aside from the two references to John the baptizer in vv. 6–8 and 15), each of which speaks of a period of divine revelation in the world:
    1.      The relation of the Word to God in the beginning, at creation (1–5).
    2.      The rejection and acceptance of the Word in the world and Israel’s history (9–12).
    3.      The humanization of the Word in Jesus (14).
    4.      The benefits of the humanization of the Word especially in relationship to the Hebraic tradition (15–18).

The Relationship of the Word with God and His Function in Creation (1:1–5)

1–2—In the beginning echoes Gen. 1:1, setting the description of the Word in relationship with that time before time when God created the universe. Beginning (archē) should be thought of not only in temporal terms, however, for it suggests first in importance (cosmic) as well as first in time (temporal). The Word was with God and the Word was God speaks of the mystery of the Word, for it asserts the identity of God and his Word (was God, theos ēn ho logos) along with the suggestion of individuality—the Word was with (pros) God. The absence of the definite article before God in the Word was God is not sufficient grounds to translate theos ēn “was divine.”) The relationship is intentionally stated in a paradoxical manner. That paradoxical relationship is further stated in what John affirms about the relationship of the Father and the Son (see below). Verse 2 restates a portion of v. 1 in poetic parallelism.
3–4—Here the Word is defined as the divine agent of creation, through whom God’s creative work is carried on, so that all existence depends upon the Word. But the Word is not only the source of life (v. 4) in a natural sense, for the meaning of life (zōē) here is more than existence. It is one of John’s several terms for salvation and the equivalent of “eternal life” (e.g., 3:36). Life is the true existence of humanity, the kind of existence intended for humanity at creation. Hence, that life can be called light (phōs), another of John’s words for the authentic life, the life of those who live in relationship with the Father as his children.
5—The dualism of the gospel is now introduced. The creative life-giving light of the Word intrudes into the darkness which represents the distortion of creation and the chaos of unbelief and alienation from God—the results of the fall. The word translated overcome (katalambanō) is ambiguous, for it can mean “mastered” or “comprehended” as well. Perhaps in the poetic style of the prolog all of those nuances are intended. The darkness of unbelief has neither understood nor mastered the Word. And yet the darkness continues even though the Word brings light into its midst. The revelation does not eliminate the reality of unbelief and evil.

The Distinction between the Light and Its Witness (1:6–8, 15)

The flow of the prolog is interrupted here at 6–8 and again at 15. That surely suggests how important it was for John that his readers properly understand the baptizer. He is not to be confused with Christ. Perhaps the Johannine community knew of those who followed the baptizer, claiming that he was the Messiah. The community had another reason for special interest in the identity of the baptizer, for some of its members were at one time his disciples, as 1:35–39 shows. The gospel has one thing to say about the baptizer and says it several times—he is a witness to Christ, no more, no less (1:6–8, 15, 19–34; 3:22–30). like Jesus John is sent from God (e.g., 3:17), and it is sometimes said that Jesus bears witness (e.g., 8:18). Believe through (pisteusōsin di’) is an expression also used of Jesus’ word (4:41) and works (14:11). So John is given an honored role, one which sets him in a unique position, even though he is not to be identified as Christ. Verse 15 declares that the one who came temporally second is the more important. The Greek prōtos (ranks before) may imply “first” in the sense of prior existence as well as significance.

The Rejection and Acceptance of the Word (1:9–13)

9–11—In this section attention is upon the presence and work of the Word in the history of Israel. Verse 9, a transition, presents a problem of translation. Does the phrase coming into the world refer to every person or to the light? As an introduction to the work of the Word in Israel, it might be best to understand v. 9 as the RSV renders it. This true light, as opposed to all the alleged revelations, “lights up every person,” giving enlightened existence. The goal of the revelation through the Word is to enlighten every life with divine love and thereby restore a right relationship with God. Verse 10 expresses the irony of the world’s blindness and especially Israel’s blindness to the very source of its existence. As to the question whether this verse refers to the presence of the light in the created order or in Israel’s history, it may be that both are implied. The light is rejected both in its form as God’s presence in the created order and as the revelation in Israel’s history. With this John begins his tragic commentary on the rejection of the revelation which plays such an important part throughout this gospel. Even in his own home (idia), his own people (idioi, i.e., Israel) rejected him (v. 11).
12–13—Some would say that v. 12 is the climax of the prolog, for it states the saving results of the appearance of the Word in human history.7 To those who believe he gives power (or “authority” or “right,” exousia) to become children of God. Faithful Israel knew that power which made them children of God. The Jewish origins of the Johannine Christians are evident here in what appears to be a statement of continuity between the presence and work of the Word in Israel’s history and in Jesus. The revelation communicates not only insight but also power for a new birth (cf. 3:3). Humanity itself is impotent to become what it was destined to be and must rely entirely on a transcendent power to change. The contrast in v. 13 between blood, flesh, and the human will, on the one hand, and of God, on the other, is not to be taken as a dualism of flesh and spirit but simply as a Semitic way of referring to the human as opposed to the divine.

The Humanization of the Word (1:14)

This verse sets the Word apart from all of its antecedents in religious thought, for here the Word becomes a concrete, flesh-and-blood human. As a human now, the logos resides among humans as one of them. The word translated dwelt (eskēnōsen) connotes the Hebraic history in which the glory of Yahweh lived among the people, encamping, tabernacling, or tenting among them (cf. Exod. 33). The first person plural we betrays the confession of the Christian community to firsthand knowledge. The verse poses the paradox of the incarnation. On the one side, the Word is flesh (sarx) and yet, on the other, the divine glory (doxa) is perceived in him. John will say more on this paradox, but the divine nature of the Word now enfleshed as a human is still visible through the eyes of faith. Glory (doxa) is a rich word which essentially means the presence of God experienced through mighty deeds. It is God’s presence the community sees in faith, a divine presence which could only be credited to the exclusive Son from the Father. This is the first of four times John refers to Christ not simply as the Father’s Son but as the monogenēs (“only” or “unique,” an only child) Son (cf. 1:18; 3:16, 18). The intent is to distinguish Jesus from any other claimants to divine sonship, such as attributed to the kings in the OT (e.g., Ps. 2:6–7). The prolog goes beyond identifying Christ with the Jewish Messiah who, like the king, could be called the Son of God. Now Christ is the only Son of the Father. This use of monogenēs may have apologetic roots, responding to protagonists who degrade Jesus’ sonship by reference to Israel as the sons and daughters of God.
Full of grace (charis) and truth (alētheia) means the saving, life-changing power of the presence of God in Christ. Truth is one of John’s favorite terms for the content of the revelation and its power in humans (cf. 8:32; 14:6). But grace is used in John only here and in v. 17. For those who are willing to take the risk of faith, this human Jesus is one in whom can be seen the presence of God which yields all the benefits of the divine presence.

Robert Kysar, John, Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1986), 27–33.

DMB

Just in case picky people are reading (me?), there's 32 volumes (at least on the Libronix CD). A lot of people (again me), forget ACCS also covers the apocrypha, which can be handy sometimes when you're wanting opinions from 2nd century, especially on Wisdom/Paul.

I remain a fan of using a CitedBy tool in Logos attached to the Fathers. As I understand it, ACCS includes some writings the Fathers don't (and vis versa?). But the CitedBy pulls a lot of comments that ACCS can't possibly include due to space. ACCS, as its name indicates, is a commentary ... selected passages.

I haven't checked, on the resource Matthew asks about, I sure hope it's Bible reference tagged also.

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587114#Comment_587114

The Church Fathers is an anthology of the writings of some of the Early Church Fathers. The ACC is a modern catena (think Catena Aurea) over the non-LXX canon with modern translations of short excerpts chosen with a distinct modern (Protestant) bias although not in a negative sense.

So, could you safely say that owning Catena Aurea would/is the same thing as owning ACCS? My other option was getting Verbum Basic + which is cheaper than upgrading to Anglican Silver; but I'm still trying to decide - mainly because Feasting on the Word is not that appealing to me and if ACCS is very similar to Catena Aurea, then I'd rather go for the much cheaper base package.

Thanks!

DAL

Edit: Never mind. Catena Aurea only covers the gospels. I may have to eat Feasting on the Word and just keep it and try to learn how to use it or may just wait and see what other new line of base packages Logos will launch in the near future. Of course, the other cheaper way to all would be to upgrade to Anglican Silver and then Verbum Basic + both would give me Catena Aurea and ACCS along with other cool stuff. Upgrading to Anglican Gold would give all of those and more, but it's more expensive.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/587119#Comment_587119

I'll dump the ECF the moment I get the Fathers of the Church series

So the Fathers of the Church series is worth the higher asking price?

Is there any content in the Early Church Fathers that is not covered in the Fathers of the Church series?