Jesus and Christ

In a lengthy argument, due to the seriousness of the heresy with which he is dealing, Irenaeus seeks to provide an exhaustive rebuttal of those who would draw a cleavage between the human Jesus and the divine Christ, descending from the Pleroma.

Irenaeus demonstrates that the united NT witness is of the unity of the person of Jesus Christ. One of the most interesting quotes of chapter 16 is the following:

"His only-begotten Word, who is always present with the human race, united to and mingled with His own creation, according to the Father’s pleasure, and who became flesh, is Himself Jesus Christ our Lord, who did also suffer for us, and rose again on our behalf, and who will come again in the glory of His Father, to raise up all flesh, and for the manifestation of salvation, and to apply the rule of just judgment to all who were made by Him. There is therefore, as I have pointed out, one God the Father, and one Christ Jesus, who came by means of the whole dispensational arrangements [connected with Him], and gathered together all things in Himself. But in every respect, too, He is man, the formation of God; and thus He took up man into Himself, the invisible becoming visible, the incomprehensible being made comprehensible, the impassible becoming capable of suffering, and the Word being made man, thus summing up all things in Himself: so that as in super-celestial, spiritual, and invisible things, the Word of God is supreme, so also in things visible and corporeal He might possess the supremacy, and, taking to Himself the pre-eminence, as well as constituting Himself Head of the Church, He might draw all things to Himself at the proper time."

Chapters 9-11: Christology

How does Christ fit in to Irenaeus' strong monotheism:

Well, on the negative side Irenaeus denies the adoptionist and the docetic Christologies of his opponents, rather he affirms that

(1) "The word of God...was made Jesus Christ...For inasmuch as the Word of God was man from the root of Jesse, and son of Abraham, in this respect did the Spirit of God rest upon Him, and anoint Him to preach the Gospel to the lowly. But inasmuch as He was God, He did not judge according to glory, nor reprove after the manner of speech." (ch 9)
(2) "John relates His original, effectual, and glorious generation from the Father"

Apostolic tradition

Irenaeus sees the church as the true guardian of not only the writings but also the teaching and the tradition of the apostles. He illustrates this by indicating the existence of "barbarian" Christians who unable to read the Scriptures, nonetheless hold on to orthodox Christianity. (ch 4) Irenaeus then draws on the tradition to deny heretic speculation regarding the demiurge. (ch 5-6)

Amidst his refutation of the heretics we get a glimpse of Irenaeus' trinitarian theology:

"For the Spirit designates both [of them] by the name, of God—both Him who is anointed as Son, and Him who does anoint, that is, the Father."

And as he refutes the heretics we have the following prayer:

Wherefore I do also call upon thee, Lord God of Abraham, and God of Isaac, and God of
Jacob and Israel, who art the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God who, through the abundance of Thy mercy, hast had a favour towards us, that we should know Thee, who hast made heaven and earth, who rulest over all, who art the only and the true God, above whom there is none other God; grant, by our Lord Jesus Christ, the governing power of the Holy Spirit; give to every reader of this book to know Thee, that Thou art God alone, to be strengthened in Thee, and to avoid every heretical, and godless, and impious doctrine.

On Scripture (Book 3)

Irenaeus begins Book 3 by outlining his understanding of Scripture. For him the Written Scripture is linked to the oral proclamation of the Gospel and is granted through the power of the Holy Spirit.

On the Gospels Irenaeus claims that

• Matthew wrote a "written Gospel among the Hebrews"

• Peter and Paul were laying the foundations of the Church in Rome.

• Mark wrote down Peter's preaching

• Luke wrote down Paul's preaching

• John wrote his Gospel whilst in Ephesus.

In contrast Heretics downplay the value of the Scriptures and of the apostolic tradition.

[chs 1-2]

Transmigration of Souls

In chapter 33 Irenaeus seeks to refute the doctrine of the transmigration of the soul based on the point that the soul does not remember its existence in other bodies other than its own.

Nonetheless, Irenaeus shares certain common ideas with his opponents which not all Christians would agree with. He definitely sees the soul as distinct from the body and to a certain extent superior to the body. Thus the body is the instrument, although the skilful working of God, is still the "instrument" with the soul being the artist which possesses it and has power over it.

Irenaeus also believes that the number of souls are forordained by God and that when this number is reached, then the end will come.

Humble epistemology continued

In chapter 28 we see Irenaeus continue in his defence of a humble epistemology. That which is not clear in Scripture should be entrusted to God and not lead to idle speculation. From this perspective the problem with heretics is that they seek to know too much.

Is Irenaeus' christology subordinationist? Certainly this chapter seems to lead us in that direction.

Esoteric Hermeneutics

In chapters 21-24 Ireneaus protests against the habit of his opponents of reading references to the Aeons in the NT. He also objects to their focus on numbers, syllables and letters in the Biblical text.

Chapter 22 is the most curious in this section. Ireneaus is arguing against the claim that Jesus exerted his ministry for one year. Against what he sees as a literalistic interpretation of Isaiah 61:2 he claims:
(i) That "the prophets have very often expressed themselves in parables and allegories, and [are] not [to be understood] according to the mere sound of the words."
(ii) The year of the Lord is to be understood as the whole period of time during which men here and receive the Gospel in faith.
(iii) That Jesus celebrated the Passover on more than one occasion, according to the Gospel of John and therefore his ministry lasted more than one year.
(iv) In a more bizarre fashion that Jesus died at the age of 50. Amongst his arguments for this are:
(a) That to redeem mankind Jesus had to go through all the ages up to old age [50 in his context]. Yet by that argument Jesus would also have to be a woman to redeem women.
(b) That when his opponents complained that Jesus was not yet 50 but claimed to have seen Abraham this suggests that he was over 40, otherwise they would have said that Jesus was not yet 40. In this argument he also declares that Jesus was not "a mere phantasm, but an actual being of flesh and blood"
(c) That to be considered a Master and a Teacher Jesus could not have been 30.
(d) That there was a tradition going back to John and other apostles that Jesus was crucified at 50.

Not so new

In chapters 8-14 Irenaeus continues his process of deconstructing his gnostic opponents, including pointing out how some of their "novel" ideas were in fact present in Greek poets, philosophers and other types.
Nonetheless, there are a few moments when his own theology shines, as the following quotations illustrate:

"yet God is in this point pre-eminently superior to men, that He Himself called into being the substance of His creation, when previously it had no existence."
"He is a simple, uncompounded Being, without diverse members, and altogether like, and equal to himself, since He is wholly understanding, and wholly spirit, and wholly thought, and wholly intelligence, and wholly reason, and wholly hearing, and wholly seeing, and wholly light, and the whole source of all that is good."

Book 1 Closes

Book 1 closes its anatomy of heresy. Here we also have the doctrine of the Cainites, where Irenaeus refers to the mysterious "fictitious Gospel of Judas", where Judas is made into the hero. [Scholars are still debating whether this is the same Gospel of Judas recently discovered/published].

Although there is little way of knowing how accurate Irenaeus is in his description of his opponents, he certainly is exhaustive. He also seems to have read them in their original writings, even going as far as to claim that he compiled a collection of their teachings. His belief is that if one exposes their teaching, than truth will come through.

Adoptionist Christology

One of the interesting things that can be gauged from the overview of heresies is how the adoptionist Christologies that Irenaeus had to deal with (e..g. the Ebionites) were the fruit of a negative understanding of material, bodily existence. As such it was considered unacceptable that the Christ had become truly incarnate, and especially unacceptable that the same Christ had suffered and died. Hence, some explanation, in which Jesus is reduced to being the son of Joseph and Mary and the "Spirit" of Christ abandoned him when he went to the cross had to be developed.

Unless of course one claims like one of these groups that it was actually Simon Cyrene who died on the cross, and Jesus took on the corporeal form of Simon in the mean time and laughed at those who believed that it was him on the cross.

Somethings remain the same

As heresy after heresy is listed, I felt the following comment by Irenaeus had some contemporary parallel:

"These men, even as the Gentiles, have been sent forth by Satan to bring dishonour upon the Church, so that, in one way or another, men hearing the things which they speak, and imagining that we all are such as they, may turn away their ears from the preaching of the truth; or, again, seeing the things they practise, may speak evil of us all"

Or even the following:
"Many offshoots of numerous heresies have already been formed from those heretics we have described. This arises from the fact that numbers of them — indeed, we may say all — desire themselves to be teachers, and to break off from the particular heresy in which they have been involved. "

Marconites

To take craziness to frontiers it has never reached before, seems to have been the motto of the followers of Marcus. Irenaeus describes him as a gnostic magician, who used his tricks to seduce and take advantage of rich women, single or married. Marcus' follows the Valentinus system, adding in a greater concern with numerology, especially Gematria.

In his rebuke of Marcus, it is important to note that Irenaeus does not refute his prophecy by claiming that the gift of prophecy had ceased, rather he refers to it as a fraud or demon-inspired.

Valentinus' ideas

Having encountered sectarian and esoterically fundamentalist groups, I must admit I saw traces of their approach in the outline of Valentinus' complex, and bizarre ideas. To get a grasp of these ideas, of 30 different Aeons with multiple names and intersecting offspring one needs to be a Sudoku lover on Red Bull and caffeine pills. Some comments, however:

(1) The very incomprehensibility of the system seems to be part of its mystique, attracting people as a revelation of heavenly, esoteric mysteries.
(2) A key theme is that "material substance had its beginning from ignorance and grief, and fear and bewilderment." This has implications for soteriology, christology, and ethics.

Soteriology: Salvation comes from knowledge of the "spiritual nature." They further hold that the consummation of all things will take place when all that is spiritual has been formed and perfected by Gnosis (knowledge); and by this they mean spiritual men who have attained to the perfect knowledge of God, and been initiated into these mysteries by Achamoth."

Christology: Jesus, who is somehow related to one of 2 Christs and somewhere fits into the whole system, did not assume a material nature, only a spiritual nature.

Ethics: For the "spiritual man" what one does with the material body is of no use.

(3) Hermeneutics: Valentinus' gang's hermeneutics is of "Bible Code" methodology, seeking secret symbols and numerical codes in Scripture.
(note --for the really enthusiastic--Achamoth is mother of the demiurge, she is also known Ogdoad, Sophia; Terra, Jerusalem, Holy Spirit, and, with a masculine reference, Lord, she herself is not an Aeon, but daughter of Sophia an Aeon who in turn was the youngest of 12 aeons coming from Anthopos and Ecclesia, and who fell due to an attack of passion...told you it was bizarre!)

Irenaeus: Against Heresies Book 1

Arguably the most complicated to spell of church fathers, is also one who is becoming increasingly popular. Could be an interesting ride.

In his preface he expresses concern over "blasphemous and impious opinions respecting the Demiurge" which he links to "disciples of Ptolemaeus" coming from Valentinus.

What is of interest is that Irenaeus seeks to study his opponents in their primary sources and seek personal interaction with them. He has studied enough of their material to recognise the plausibility of their system, as well as its dangers.

The role of heresy

For Justin, the existence of heresy, in a funny sort of way, confirms the truth of the Gospel, as the coming of heretics was predicted by Jesus and the New Testament. (Ch 35)

Ignatius to Polycarp

In his epistle to Polycarp, Ignatius provides a lengthy list of exhortations to Polycarp concerning Christian leadership. Great emphasis is placed upon the need for the bishop preserving unity, especially by showing love and patience towards the more awkward disciples.

Once again we see in Ignatius a tension concerning how false teachers are to be dealt with. Whilst their heresy is not to be tolerated, they are to be resisted in a loving way, as the bishop himself becomes the one who is wounded and hurt for Christ's sake.

Why is docetism wrong?

For Ignatius docetism is wrong for the following reasons:

(1) The docetics deny that Christ genuinely had a human body.
(2) The docetics deny the suffering, the passion and the resurrection of Christ. As we have seen before, this is particularly a sore point for Ignatius as he saw his own suffering as being linked to the suffering of Christ. Also, the heretics in this way exclude themselves from the salvation Christ achieved.
(3) Docetics deny the Eucharist, as they deny Christ had a real body.
(4) Docetics deny prayer--although Ignatius does not explain this.
(5) Docetics do not care for the widows, the orphans and others who are in need.

There is tension in Ignatius' attitude towards the heretics. On the one hand, he instructs his readers not to associate with them so as not to be contaminated by their teaching. Yet they are to pray for the docetics that they may be saved. In fact, Ignatius refuses to name the heretical teachers, expressing a hope that they might still repent.

Ignatius' Epistle to the Smyrnaeans

As one reads through these epistles by Ignatius, common themes start to emerge. Once again in this letter we have emphasis on the authority of the bishop and the need for submission to him. In fact, it is considered wrong to celebrate the Eucharist without the bishop, or at least someone authorised by him.

However, in this letter the authority of the bishop is set in the context of conflict over the docetic heresy. As I have suggested earlier, prior to a NT canon it is the authority of the bishop which guarantees continuity within the apostolic tradition, hence the need to avoid heretic celebrations of the Eucharist.

Docetism

Chapters 9-11 attack the specific heresy that Ignatius is concerned with: Docetism, the belief that Christ was not really human and did not really suffer, but only appeared to. Ignatius attacks this heresy with a passionate defense of the humanity of Christ, who "did eat and drink".

There is a pastoral reason for the vehemence of Ignatius' argument, even referring to the heretics as the "offshoot of Satan." Ignatius is suffering for the gospel, on the way to face martyrdom. He makes sense of this suffering by seeing it as a participation in the suffering and the passion of Christ. Yet, if Christ was not truly human, and his suffering not real, this makes a mockery of Ignatius' own suffering and faithfulness.

The letter concludes with the customary concern with love and unity.

Warning against heresy

In chapters 6-8 Ignatius warns his readers against heresy. Here we have a clue for why Ignatius is so concerned that his readers submit themselves to their bishop. The reason is that it is through their bishop that they have access to the teachings handed down by the apostles.

One has to remember that this is prior both to the formulation of the creeds and the finalization of the NT canon. If Ignatius had been writing at a later date, I wonder whether the creeds and the NT canon may have taken over some of the authority that he invests in the bishop?