Does Homily Work as a Theory of Truth? A Possible Bridge for Patristics and Philosophy of Language

Which sort of spin joins today contemporary philosophy to Greek Patristics and vice versa? Which trigger does spread many professionals of science and mind 2 to locate themselves into so far removed world, often imagined as populated by monks, bishops, preachers and mystics? Noticeably, the world of Greek Fathers, as it emerges to wise students frequenting it, is not so boring as it appears to common people looking from outside. However, that may be, since six or seven decades we are surveying an overwhelming engagement of two such commonly unconnected fields of study. In what follows I will suggest that a key point for this alliance is the notion of language-game, for it is the better way to compare uses of languages with the forms of life they commit to. In my opinion, an often-missing point by theory builders is the role of the Significant in the characterisation of truth for a given patristic language. I will try to propose a new account termed a homiletic theory of truth relative to some fourth century’s Greek fathers.