Best Church Fathers Collection?

Christopher powers · 2025-01-24T20:12:49+00:00

There was an error rendering this rich post.

Hi all.

So, I'm just wondering if someone could enlighten me as to the difference between the ECF 37 volume collection, the ANF / NPNF collections, and the Fathers of the Early Church collection (and any others I'm missing). I'd Imagine that there is a lot of overlap between these (For instance, I'd assume you'll find the writings of Clement, Justin, Irenaeus, Ignatius etc. in all three…?). Its just, the prices vary so widely so something must be different.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on which of these is best and why, and—for those who have multiple collections—what the most notable differences may be.

Thanks for your time!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

MJ. Smith

ANF / NPNF collections - old and biased translations, some condensed without in text markings e.g. Augustine's Psalms.

Fathers of the Church - modern, excellent translations; more titles than most series

Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church - decent older translations; limited coverage

Popular Patristics Series - well-chosen works in very readable translations - a great starting point

Christopher powers

That's very helpful! And what about this "Early Church Fathers" collection? Its 37 volumes and is currently $60?

(https://www.logos.com/product/5771/early-church-fathers-protestant-edition)

Jan Krohn

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1355197#Comment_1355197

You might get them much cheaper.

Lew Worthington

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1355192#Comment_1355192

I'm pretty sure MJ didn't mean to omit the word "biased" off of the last 3 collections. 😊

I'm also pretty sure an unbiased collection isn't offered by Logos… or anyone else.

(Sorry. Just some gentle — I hope — teasing.)

MJ. Smith

@Lew Worthington

I wouldn't disagree - its a matter of how much bias one can tolerate before complaining. I have no patience for Schaff as the translation is old and unreadable even if your biases match. I prefer translations that make you want to read more church fathers.

DMB

Just opining, I think it really depends on what use of the Fathers is proposed. And also how the sets are tagged. Just to illustrate, I was in Smith's Monotheism volume, which was discussing various deities referenced in Hab 3:5. A CitedBy of the Fathers sets quite often speaks to the problem at hand (I also included Quinta's apparatus below, to demonstrate the 'working together' in Logos.

Adam

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1355211#Comment_1355211

I completely agree. With translations of the fathers a single word choice or omission of the translator can change sentiment greatly. My recommendation is anything translated by Michael Holmes. He isn't a Catholic like me, but his translation is as unbiased as I believe is possible.

His work is available on Logos:

The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, 3rd ed.

https://www.logos.com/product/227912/the-apostolic-fathers-greek-texts-and-english-translations-3rd-ed?queryId=9c5c185bcd048f8cc482cec3f719d3ef

MJ. Smith

@Adam

I agree Holmes is a decent read.

John

@MJ. Smith

I have no patience for Schaff as the translation is old and unreadable

My first experience reading church history was the textbook https://www.logos.com/product/2248/church-history-in-plain-language by Bruce Shelley.

I forced myself to read it cover to cover, but it was the most dry and boring book I have ever read.

It was full of dates, names and facts. And was very lifeless and uninspiring.

When I discovered Schaff's History https://www.logos.com/product/575/history-of-the-christian-church it was a breath of fresh air.

He did not just give you dry facts of history, but he explained the how and the why of what took place.

I do not find the language to be a problem. Its a lot more modern than the KJV Bible I began with.

If I were to study church fathers today, I might want to look at the best modern translation.

MJ. Smith

Fortunately, there is no reason to come to an agreement - my brother loves 19th century British novels; I love 20th century European novels. By the time I entered college we were quite sure our reading would rarely overlap.

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1355192#Comment_1355192

MJ , how useful would you say Schaff is as a whole? I know there are lots of problems with it, but it's very affordable and accessible in comparison to other sets. My general practice has been to glance at it for casual reading or to get the general idea of a passage but to look elsewhere if I need greater precision. The problem is that I, like I'm sure most people, don't have ready/full access to the more modern translations, so it's a making do with what's available.

MJ. Smith

I had purchased dead tree Schaff years ago because it was what I could afford - but reading him was never a pleasure. I passed them on to a friend who couldn't afford it. It is definitely better than nothing for the average user but I would never quote it in an academic paper if I had a choice.