Category: Western Fathers
Let’s discuss Irenaeus of Lyons and Origen of Alexandria!
Irenaeus of Lyons
As I mentioned yesterday it is time to refresh my understanding of several subjects I will be asked to discuss during my forthcoming oral defense at Western Seminary. The first topic will be the personalities of Irenaeus of Lyons and Origen of Alexandria. Though not technically ”Greek Fathers” themselves we studied them as “precursors” to Eastern Christianity.
Irenaeus is sometimes discussed as the first person to “systematize” Christian doctrine. In his Against Heresies he addressed his opponents on various topics that we may today classify as Theology Proper, Christology, Eschatology, and the like. Some say Augustine of Hippo was the transition into the medieval period, so Ireneaus is seen as the transition out of the “apostolic” period. Irenaeus shapes and orders Christianity like no one before him. He defends the “four-fold Gospel” with much vigor. He understands himself to be loyal to the “Rule of Faith” handed to him from Polycarp who received it from John the Elder (or Apostle). Many critics see him as the beginning of the “catholicizing” of Christianity.
If we are to discuss Irenaeus the Theologian we must talk about Irenaeus the Pastor. He became the pastor of Lyons after the former pastor had been martyred. What makes Irenaeus passionate is not that he defended orthodoxy as he saw it, but that he defended orthodoxy while his parishioners faced persecution. Some like to imagine orthodoxy coming to formation as a bunch of theologians sat around doing primarily a political task. It is hard to argue this with Irenaeus. Rather, he wanted for what one should be willing to die, literally! If he was going to preach the Gospel to people who may be killed as Christians he seems to have been driven to give them a religion worth their lives.
Origen of Alexandria
Origen reminds me of modern academics more than a pastor. While he did teach in churches his main gifting was his amazingly sharp mind and his philosophical skills. In the tradition of the apologists Origen was able to defend Christianity against pagan detractors on their own terms. He seems to have been influential in the development of Logos Christology, though the church did not know what to do with him later. He interpreted Scripture allegorically, even arguing that some troublesome parts of Scripture are present because God wants it to slow us down and make us think. Many know him for what seems to be an openness to a universalism of sorts.
As I examine some of the Greek Fathers I see Athanasius of Alexandria in the tradition of Irenaeus, i.e.the pastor-theologian. Basil the Great may be this type as well. The Gregories seem to follow the line of Origen.
These are my brief thoughts on these two characters, please comment and tell me what else you think I should prioritize when discussing Irenaeus of Lyons and Origen of Alexandria.
Irenaeus of Lyons according to Denis Minns.
Early Christian Thinkers edited by Paul Foster.
It has been a while since I posted since I wrote a response to reading a chapter from Early Christian Thinkers: The Lives and Legacies of Twelve Key Figures edited by Paul Foster. I wrote on Justin Martyr on January 5th (see here) and Tatian on January 6th (see here). I apologize for the delay!
In this book Denis Minns discusses Irenaeus of Lyons. I have like Irenaeus for a while now. I don’t know if it is because he is from Lyons which is in modern day France, the land of my ethnic heritage, his emphasis on the four-fold Gospel, his snappy wit when combating heretics, his pastoral care for a suffering church, or his wonderful, timely earth-honoring eschatology toward the end of Against Heresies. This chapter added to my respect for this great man.
Minns describes Irenaeus as a man likely from Asia Minor who spoke and wrote in Greek. He knew Polycarp and Polycarp has been connected to John the Elder (Apostle?) so there seems to be quite a heritage there (p. 37).
Most of Irenaeus’ surviving works combat forms of gnosticism, like the aforementioned Against Heresies. Minns explores how Irenaeus lumped several heretical groups together seeing them as sharing “the denial that the Creator is the God and Father of all.” This is the common mistake shared by everyone from Marcion to the Valentinians (pp. 38-39). Irenaeus fought the heretics with Scripture, but more so with the “rule of faith”. He understood his views to trace back to the apostles and he thought the heretics had no such claim (pp. 41-44). Remember, the canon wasn’t finalized in his day so the “canon of faith” were the passed along traditions of the church.
Irenaeus contributed to Christian Christology, Soteriology, Eschatology, and some may argue forms of proto-Trinitarianism. Minns notes that in recent years Irenaeus has been rediscovered. Some of his views weren’t popular for the church for many years, especially his eschatology, but this has changed as has his status (pp. 49-50).
Next chapter covers Theophilus of Antioch.
In the Mail: Literature in Latin
I had the chance to take an intensive Latin course over the summer. After a good few months of my getting a grasp on the language, my Latin instructor felt it was time for me to go beyond the more simple readings in the Oxford Latin Course. So here are my picks:
Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine. This is a parallel Bible with Nestle-Aland’s Greek New Testament and Latin New Testament side-by-side. I am aware that the Latin here is the second edition of the New Latin Vulgate. Because of this, the Nestle-Aland Latin NT has received some criticism, but at this point it makes no difference to me.
Confessions Books I-IV. This one is published by Cambridge University Press. Although the font and typesetting of the book are a little less than perfect for me, this looks to be the best Latin Confessions I have found.
At this point and in addition to the Oxford Latin Course, I am equipped with Wheelock’s Latin (7th ed.) and Collins Latin Concise Dictionary.
Lenten Prayer: St. Augustine of Hippo
The following prayer of St. Augustine, like that of St. Ephraim, is in accord with the spirit of Lent. Enjoy!
O Lord,
the house of my soul is narrow;
enlarge it that you may enter in.
It is ruinous, O repair it!
It displeases your sight.
I confess it, I know.
But who shall cleanse it,
to whom shall I cry but to you?
Cleanse me from my secret faults, O Lord,
and spare your servant from strange sins.
(This prayer is taken from the section “Prayer and Hymns for Lent” from the iPhone application iBreviaryPro.)
Augustine on Why God Allowed Adam to be Tempted
Often I read people who wonder why God made humanity if he knew they would disobey. Augustine provides this answer:
“If someone asks, therefore, why God allowed man to be tempted when he foreknew that man would yield to the tempter, I cannot sound the depths of divine wisdom, and I confess that the solution is far beyond my powers. There may be a hidden reason, made known only to those who are better and holier than I, not because of the merits but simply by the grace of God. But insofar as God gave me the ability to understand or allows me to speak, I do not think that a man would deserve great praise if he had been able to live the good life for the simple reason that nobody tempted him to live a bad one.”
Augustine, On the Literal Interpretation of Genesis II.4.6. in Andrew Louth (ed), Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Old Testament I: Genesis 1-11. p. 80
It sounds like the modern “if God made robots then there would be no real love between God and creation”.
Sunday Quote: Irenaeus of Lyons on the Principles of the Gospel
Irenaeus of Lyons
Irenaeus is often quoted arguing for the fourfold gospel on the basis of things like the four wind and four pillars of the earth. For those that would like to see an expanded canon the ridiculousness of such an assertion is quickly highlighted. What is most unfair about this maneuver is that it gives much attention to a secondary argument rather than the primary one (the icing rather than the cake, per se). Immediately prior to these arguments the great Bishop begins by noting something altogether different: the principles of the Gospel. It is this shared “canon of faith” that distinguishes genuine gospels from false gospels. Likewise, it is that which holds the four together that demands that no one gospel be elevated above the other three. Even the heretics use favorite gospels to prove their errors yet Irenaeus contends that this canon of faith can be found in each gospel. Let me quote him now:
These, then, are the principles of the gospel. They declare one God, the maker of the universe, who was proclaimed by the Prophets, and who through Moses established the dispensation of the Law, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and besides him they know no other God, nor any other Father. So firmly established is this position in the Gospels that the heretics themselves bear witness to them, and starting from them each one of them tries to establish his teaching. So the Ebionites, who use only the Gospel According to Matthew, are show by that very document not to have right views about the Lord. Marcion cut up that According to Luke, yet is clearly, by the passage he still keeps, shown to be a blasphemer of the one existing God. Those who separate Jesus from Christ, and say that Christ remained impassible while Jesus suffered, and try to bring forward the Gospel According to Mark, can be corrected out of that, if they will read it with a love for the truth. The followers of Valentinus, who make great use of that According to John to demonstrate their conjunctions, can be demonstrated from them to be wholly mistaken….Since even out opponents bear witness to us and make use of these, our demonstration based on them is firm and true.
Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresis, Book III, Chapter XI quoted in Cyril C. Richardson, ed., Early Church Fathers, 381-382.
Greek Fathers Annotated Bibliography
As previously mentioned I was in a class on the Greek Fathers this spring. Each student had to contribute to an annotated bibliography made for the class. Well, it is finished and available here.
Papers on the Greek Fathers
Over at Scienta et Sapientia several papers written by my classmates for our class on the Greek Father have been (or soon will be) posted. If you enjoy patristics, especially Greek patristics, you should see if anything seems interesting. Thus far the list includes a paper on John of Damascus and iconoclasm (here), the image of Irenaeus [1] in recent scholarship (here), Gregory Nazianzen’s understanding of Trinitarian relationship (here), and my aforementioned introduction to Athanasius’ Letters to Serapion on the Holy Spirit (here). There should be another half-dozen or so coming down the pipe.
_____________
[1] Yes, Irenaeus was not technically a “Greek Father” but we studied him because along with Origen he was highly influential on their theology.
Augustine or Chesterton?
Augustine on the Destiny of the Good and the Evil in Ecclesiastes
A long discussion has taken place on James McGrath’s blog regarding the words of Ecclesiastes 9.2-6 as relates to the doctrine of inerrancy (here). In my opinion it has reached a stalemate with some denying its compatibility with the rest of the references to eternal life and death, eschatological judgement, and resurrection. Other, like myself, have suggested there are various approaches that can be taken to Ecclesiastes that allow for the claims to stand while being interpreted in a canonical context that frames these claims differently. For those unfamiliar with the passage it reads:
All share a common destiny—the righteous and the wicked, the good and the bad, the clean and the unclean, those who offer sacrifices and those who do not. As it is with the good man, so with the sinner; as it is with those who take oaths, so with those who are afraid to take them.
This is the evil in everything that happens under the sun: The same destiny overtakes all. The hearts of men, moreover, are full of evil and there is madness in their hearts while they live, and afterward they join the dead. Anyone who is among the living has hope—even a live dog is better off than a dead lion!
For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even the memory of them is forgotten.
Their love, their hate and their jealousy have long since vanished; never again will they have a part in anything that happens under the sun. (NIV)
It seems apparent to me that the context is “life under the sun”. This is not a declaration against later doctrines concerning the after life, per se, but rather a truthful examination of our destiny from this side of the grave. In addition, we must read Ecclesiastes from several various perspectives: (1) to reiterate, a commentary on existence “under the sun”; (2) poetry from a pessimistic person who truthfully presents the view of someone in this life; (3) in the context of the words of the “Preacher” being quoted by a commentator in 12.13-14 where there is some disagreement with the Preacher who clarifies “The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgement, with every secret thing, whether good or evil”;(4) canonically (see John Hobbins comment here); and (5) before the resurrection of Christ which is the only things that changes once-dead-always-dead into resurrection to eternal life or judgement.
That being said, while reading Augustine in search of something else, I noticed his statements on Ecclesiastes which I will share though I am unsure of their worth:
Solomon, the wisest king of Israel, who reigned in Jerusalem, this commences the book called Ecclesiastes, which the Jews number among their canonical Scriptures: “Vanity of vanities, said Ecclesiastes, vanity of vanities; all is vanity. What profit hath a man of all his labour which he hath taken under the sun?” (1.2-3). And after going on the enumerate with this as his text, the calamities and delusions of this life, and the shifting nature of the present time, in which there is nothing substantial, nothing lasting, he bewails, among the other vanities that are under the sun, this also, that though wisdom excels folly as light excels darkness (2.13-14), and though the eyes of the wise man are in his head, while the fool walks in darkness, yet one events happens to them all, that is to say, in this life under the sun, unquestionably alluding to those evils which we see befall good and bad men alike.He says, further, that the good suffer the ills as if they were evil-doers, and the bad enjoy the good of life as if they were good. “There is a vanity which is done upon the earth; that there be just men unto whom it happens according to the work of the wicked: again there are wicked men, to whom it happens according to the work of the righteous. I said, that this also is vanity.” (8.14) This wisest man devoted this whole book to a full exposure of this vanity, evidently with no other object than that we might long for that life in which there is no vanity under the sun, but verity under Him who made the sun. In this vanity, then, was it not by the just and righteous judgment of God that man made like to vanity, was destined to pass away?
But in these days of vanity it makes an important difference whether he resists of yields to the truth, and whether he is destitute of true piety or a partaker of it, –important not so far as regards the acquirement of the blessings of the evasion of the calamities of this transitory and vain life, but in connection with the future judgment which shall make over to good men good things and to bad men bad things in permanent, inalienable possession. In fine, this wise man concludes this book of his by saying, “Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is every man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every despised person, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.” (12.13-14)
What truer, terser, more salutary announcement could be made? “Fear God”, he says, “and keep His commandments: for this is every man.” For whosoever has real existence, is this, is a keeper of God’s commandments; and he who is not this, is nothing. For so long as he remains in the likeness of vanity, he is not renewed in the image of truth. “For God shall bring into judgment every work.” –that is, whatever a man does in this life–”whether is be good or whether it be evil, with every despised person,”–that is, with every man who here seems despicable, and is therefore not considered; for God sees even him, and does not despise him nor pass him over in His judgment.
The proofs, then, of this last judgment of God which I propose to adduce shall be drawn first from the New Testament and then from the Old. For although the Old Testament is prior in point of time, the New has the precedence in intrinsic value; for the Old acts the part of herald to the New. (City of God, 20.4-5a)
It seems Augustine understand the place of Ecclesiastes through two lens (1) it is in the context of this life and (2) it is secondary as concerns progressive revelation. Therefore, we can adduce from Augustine that the place Ecclesiastes has in the Scriptures must be that of a short-sided commentary on this life. There is no different ending for the good and the wicked. Neither come back as far as this life is concerned.
Those who want to pit Ecclesiastes against the rest of Scripture ignore that Ecclesiastes seems to lack, altogether, an eschatological perspective. Those passages of Scripture that move beyond the message of Ecclesiastes likely do incorporate an eschatological perspective that supersedes the “under the sun” vantage point of the Preacher.
After Death: Do You Imagine ‘Heaven’ or ‘Resurrection’ as Primary?
I read an article recently written by James P. Ware titled “Paul’s Hope and Ours: Recovering Paul’s Hope of the Renewed Creation”. [1] In this article he chastises his fellow Lutherans for giving too much attention to ‘heaven’–which he understands to be a mere intermediary state for the Apostle Paul (I agree)–to the exclusion of preaching and teaching about the renewed creation. In this article he appeals to a Irenaeus and Augustine whose eschatology focused on renewed creation against the Gnostics and Manicheans respectively (who emphasized the cessation of the created order).
Irenaeus writes in Against Heresies Book V. XXXVI.1:
For since there are real men, so must there also be a real establishment, that they vanish not away among non-existent things, but progress among those which have an actual existence. For neither is the substance nor the essence of the creation annihilated (for faithful and true is He who has established it), but “the fashion of the world passeth away;” that is, those things among which transgression has occurred, since man has grown old in them. And therefore this [present] fashion has been formed temporary, God foreknowing all things; as I have pointed out in the preceding book, and have also shown, as far as was possible, the cause of the creation of this world of temporal things. But when this [present] fashion [of things] passes away, and man has been renewed, and flourishes in an incorruptible state, so as to preclude the possibility of becoming old, [then] there shall be the new heaven and the new earth, in which the new man shall remain [continually], always holding fresh converse with God. And since (or, that) these things shall ever continue without end, Isaiah declares, “For as the new heavens and the new earth which I do make, continue in my sight, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain.” And as the presbyters say, Then those who are deemed worthy of an abode in heaven shall go there, others shall enjoy the delights of paradise, and others shall possess the splendour of the city; for everywhere the Saviour shall be seen according as they who see Him shall be worthy.
Here we see a high view of the created order. Irenaeus understands that the creation will not be destroyed. If humans are real and resurrected our creation must also be restored. Furthermore, since the whole of heaven and earth is reunited this is our abode in heaven. We must note that he sees abiding in the new creation, seemingly, as a fulfillment of Jesus’ words that in Jn 14.2 that “in my Father’s house are many spaces”, as taking place in renewed creation.
Likewise Augustine writes in The City of God 20.14:
For when the judgement is finished this heaven and earth shall cease to be, and there will be a new heaven and a new earth. For this world shall pass away by transmutation, not by absolute destruction. And therefore the Apostle says, “For the figure of the world is passing away. I would have you to be without anxiety.” The figure, therefore, passes away, not the nature.
Both Irenaeus and Augustine cite Paul in 1 Cor. 7.31 which reads, “For the present form of this world is passing away.” Both read Paul’s statement here as referring to the current state of creation (cf. 2 Pet. 3.10-13). Sadly, in agreement with Ware, I must say that most Christians I know have thought contrary to Paul, Irenaeus, and Augustine seeing the created order as something to be annihilated in favor of “heaven”. In response to this I agree with N.T. Wright that we should emphasize not life after death but “the life after the life after death”.
In all honesty, when you read the words of Irenaeus and Augustine do you shrug and think “of course!” or does it come to a surprise to think that our final destiny is primarily about bodily resurrection rather than disembodied bliss?
_____________
[1] Concordia Journal 35, no. 2 Spr (2009). 129-139.
