Historical/Critical is at the root of the error of modernity. In fact, IMHO, historical/critical is to biblical studies what psychology is to science. As psychology became more speculation than fact, i.e. nothing wrong with homosexuality and the latest, Relational Disorder rather than sinful nature, I lost my taste for the art. It has its small place in the scope of human understanding. Historical/critical analysis is on the same par. When used properly (about 10%) it can be helpful. However, many HC exegetes are dumping the system for the Neo-patristic approach. see rtforum.org
I question the validity of this hypothesis based on Christ's own words, "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them." [ Matt 5:17]
Also, what about covenant theology? Can God go back on His word? Can the Eternal Law change?
I have an excellent collection at home. Mebbe someone will, someday, point out to me all these proetstant doctrines alleged to exist. I have been told that St.Augustine was a crypto-Calvinist, that others were sola scripturists etc etc tec. There seem sto be a burgeoning industry in reinterpreting Catholic Church Fathers to shoehorn them into posiitons advanced 16 centuries later. LOL I find it amusing that I know so little about my own Catholic Church's Theology:) I guess they forgot to include Chialistic Theology in the current Catechism:)
The good thing about the Church Fathers being cited is that an interest may develop in others - they may want to read what they actually said and places like, www.newadvent.com, features these Catholic Church Fathers for free and anyone can read for themselves what they believed<>