ARTICLE IV.

IRENAEUS OF LYONS.

BY C. J. H. ROPES, RES. LIC., UNION SEM.

THE history of the second Christian century has always been the arena of theological controversy, never more than to-day. Critics and apologists of all opinions still find their views represented in this formative period. The present problem of church history is the rise of the old Catholic church. And in the last few years a party has arisen, calling itself by this time-honored name, and claiming to re-establish the old Catholic faith.

This, therefore, is a peculiarly appropriate time to invite attention to the most influential churchman of the second century, to the best representative of its doctrine and polity, to the champion of the old Catholic church in the hour of its greatest peril, to the first uninspired theologian who 66 on all the most important points conforms to the standard which has satisfied the Christian church ever since "1 — to Irenaeus of Lyons. And yet, when we seek the foundation for these statements in the character of Irenaeus, in his life, in his book which describes the home of the church as a fortress against the gnostics, we may meet with disappointment; for in him we find no trace of the rugged individuality of Ignatius, of the brilliant rhetoric of Tertullian, of the wide range of Origen's speculation, of the creative intellect of Augustine. The individuality of Irenaeus seems almost lost in his catholicity; his rhetorical armory is the Bible, his speculation moves in the plane of the Scriptures, and his creations in theology are almost unnoticed, because so familiar. In fact, the great difficulty in characterizing

1 Dr. Lightfoot, in Contemp. Rev., May 1875, p. 827, cf. Harvey's Irenaeus, i. p. clxxiii.

Irenacus springs from the naturalness of his expressions, which relaxes the critical attention.

The worth of Irenaeus lies in his peculiar position, and in the fact that he was the right man to fill it. Many lines meet in him. Two long lives, overlapping by nearly thirty years, link Irenaeus with the Founder of Christianity. Polycarp was a faithful disciple of John, but a zealous student of Paul; and in Irenaeus we find united the anthropological, practical tenets of Paul and the sublime theology of John.1

Again, the youth of Irenaeus was spent in Asia Minor, the cradle of theology; but his life-work was done in Gaul, under the practical influences of the Western church. So we find in him head, heart, and hand joined together in many-sided work. Lipsius has ably described the change which turned the attention of Christians in the second century from the heavenly to the earthly kingdom.2 They were no longer to "stand gazing up into heaven," but to extend and defend the faith. Here, again, Irenaeus unites both motives. He holds to the strong chiliastic hopes, and even to the gross realistic conceptions of the future; but he puts his hand vigorously to the work. We think of him as the great antagonist of gnosticism; and this he was. But while his book against the gnostics occupied a few of his later years, all his manhood's strength was given to his missionary work in Gaul. Trained in the school of John, and having all the advantages of a liberal education, growing up in the affluence of all Christian and intellectual privileges, he went in his prime as a missionary to the Celts of Lyons and Vienne. Before many years came the terrible persecution. of A.D. 177. He escaped; but the bishop was martyred, and Irenaeus took the dangerous position. The work went on uninterruptedly until the dawn of the third century. Then another persecution; and, if a late tradition does not speak

1 Such thoughts as these may be found more fully in the introductions to Duncker's Christologie des Irenaeus and Graul's Christliche Kirche an der Schwelle des Irenaeischen Zeitalters.

2 Von Sybel's Historische Zeitschrift, 1872. p. 241 sqq.

falsely, Irenaeus fell at his post, as Pothinus had done before him. Without touching on the wider personal influence of Irenaeus, let us notice some of the lines of doctrine which begin with this Father.

First, of the Bible. He first recognizes a definite canon, nearly co-extensive with ours, and rejects uncanonical writings. He first puts the same estimate that we put on the books of the New Testament. He first states, and in the main observes, a number of rules for exegesis. He even gives the first hint of text criticism, by deciding for the reading of "all the good and old copies."2 Irenaeus is a most important witness to the use and authority of the whole Bible. He makes a truly Protestant use of the Scriptures, though of course he falls into many mistakes from which we ought to be preserved.

Secondly, of theology. We find for the first time a biblical theology, every doctrine moving along a road on which texts of Scripture are the milestones. Irenaeus starts with the foundation thought that God and man are not naturally wide apart nor uncongenial; but "the glory of God is a living man, and the life of man is to see God." 3 He can from this meeting-point follow theology to the sublimity of John's conception, and anthropology to the depths of Pauline doctrine. Irenaeus has the first Christology, as distinct from a Logos theology, and the first clear signs of a doctrine of the person of Christ, derived from his fundamental principle. In him we first find any fulness of expression about the Holy Spirit.

Even more prominent is Irenaens as having the first scheme of anthropology. Irenaeus grasps firmly the organic unity of the race, the fall of Adam and its consequences to all, the redemption in Christ and its efficacy for all. These doctrines he elaborates with great minuteness, basing his teachings on the Pauline Epistles. His doctrinal influence 1 Cf. Harvey's Irenaeus, i. p. clxii sq. Jerome and the Quaestiones ad Orthodoxos are the carlicst witnesses for this tradition.

2 Massuet's ed., v. 30, § 1. Oxford Trans., p. 519. 3 Ibid., iv. 20. § 7. Oxford Trans., p. 369.

on later times may be illustrated from the fact that he first distinguishes between the image and the similitude of God in man, a distinction which lies at the root of the Roman Catholic doctrine of man's constitution, and that Luther quotes him in support of his own view of the sacrament.1

So much, in general,2 to hint at the claims of Irenaeus for attention and interest. We shall return to these topics in the examination of the theology of Irenaeus, which is the main object of our study.

It is usual to preface such an examination with a detailed account of the man himself. This, however, must be given either with new materials, or at least from a new point of of view. The latest editor of Irenaeus, Mr. Harvey, has supplied both, in that he defends with great plausibility the hypothesis that Irenaeus was a Syrian. Mr. Harvey argues that, while the name of Irenaeus does not at all necessarily show him to be a Greek, its rarity suggests the contrary. He further finds, in the Preface to the Adversus Haereses, a confession that Irenaeus is not at all at home with the Greek language. He discovers that Irenaeus was well versed in Hebrew; and, to crown all, he exhibits most extensive evidence that Irenaeus very frequently quotes from the Peschito. It must be confessed that this theory puts all the facts previously ascertained about Irenaeus in a new and, if it be true, a most perplexing light. Candid dealing compels us to consider it, before we can have any certain basis for the further examination of Irenaeus; and the discussion of it will give an incidental opportunity for noticing some interesting facts respecting the date and education of Irenaeus and the Bible he used, which have never hitherto been brought 1 In the Erlangen cd. (in 67 vols. 1826-1857), Vol. xxx. pp. 144, 166 sqq. 2 These first doctrines must be taken for what they are worth; although founded on a survey of the previous literature, and in most cases on other authority besides, yet some previous signs of these doctrines may have been overlooked.

8 Sancti Irenaci Episcopi Lugdunensis libros quinque Adversus Haereses edidit W. Wigan Harvey. Cantabrigiac, MDCCCLVII. 2 vols. 8vo. (References to this work being numerous, will be made only by numbers indicating volume, page, and note).

together under his name. As we have hinted, it would be unjust to pass Mr. Harvey's theory by as if it were to be classed with the opinion expressed by Oecumenius that Irenaeus was a Gaul, or with the assumption of Erasmus that he wrote in Latin.2 The learning and authority of Mr. Harvey, his other publications in the department of patristic study, the selection of him by the syndics of the Cambridge University Press to edit the works of Irenaeus, the amount of labor he expended on the preparation of the edition, the high commendation accorded to it, the countenance and even partial assent 7 given to this very theory, last, and principally, the arguments already mentioned in support of the theory -all combine to show that a candid examination of the question is necessary-all demand proof from us, if we are to hold that Irenaeus was not a Syrian.

In opposition to Mr. Harvey's theory it will be my purpose to prove that we need not abandon the opinion. that Irenaeus was a Greek. This purpose will be best accomplished by establishing the antecedent probability that Irenaeus was a Greek, and by showing that the arguments adduced on the other side do not destroy that probability.

In support of the antecedent probability that Irenaeus was a Greek, it is to be noticed that:

I. The facts and dates of the early life of Irenaeus, so far

1 Stieren, Hallische Encyklopaedie d. W. u. K., s. v. Irenaeus, note 2. 2 Ibid., n. 71. Massuet Diss. ii. § 51. Erasmi Epist. nuncupatoria.

3 Ecclesiae Anglicanae Vindex Catholicus, 1841. History and Theology of the Three Creeds, 1854. He has also published Prolusio Academica on Prov. viii. 22, and University Sermons.

* Athenacum, 1858, Vol. i. p. 117. Mr. Harvey speaks of the preparation of one of the appendices to the work as "having kept him at work for several weeks during the summer months from five, and even four, o'clock in the morning till eleven at night."

Bib. Sac. Vol. xvi. p. 250; Journal of Sac. Lit., Vol. xxi. p. 208; M'Clintock and Strong's Cyclopaedia, s. v. Irenaeus.

6 Journal of Sac. Lit., 1.c.; M'Clintock, etc., 1.c.; Ante-Nicene Christian Library, Irenaeus, Vol. i. p. xviii.

7 Ante-Nic. Lib. 1. c. p. 14, n. 8.

These arguments will be quoted in full when we come to examine them, they may be found, i. p. cliii sq.; cf. i. Preface, p. v.