A five-book account and refutation of competing Christian movements that also develops Irenaeus’s positive theology of creation, Scripture, apostolic tradition, incarnation, salvation, and recapitulation in Christ.
Author
Irenaeus of Lyons
Date
c. AD 175–185
Origin
Lyons, Gaul
Genre
Heresiology
The Propator was known to Monogenes alone. Ambition, disturbance, and danger into which Sophia fell; her shapeless offspring: she is restored by Horos. The production of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, in order to the completion of the Æons. Manner of the production of Jesus.
Alluding to the Gnostic notion that, in generation, the male gives form, the female substance. Sophia, therefore, being a female Æon, gave to her enthymesis substance alone, without form. Comp. Hippol., Philosop., vi. 30.
17
Some render this obscure clause, “lest it should never attain perfection,” but the above seems preferable. See Hippol., vi. 31, where the fear referred to is extended to the whole Pleroma.
18
“The reader will observe the parallel; as the enthymesis of Bythus produced intelligent substance, so the enthymesis of Sophia resulted in the formation of material substance.”—Harvey.
19
Some propose reading these words in the dative rather than the accusative, and thus to make them refer to the image of the Father.
20
The meaning of these terms is as follows: Stauros means primarily a stake, and then a cross; Lytrotes is a Redeemer; Carpistes, according to Grabe, means an Emancipator, according to Neander a Reaper; Horothetes is one that fixes boundaries; and Metagoges is explained by Neander as being one that brings back, from the supposed function of Horos, to bring back all that sought to wander from the special grade of being assigned them.
21
The common text has ἀποστερηθῆναι, was deprived; but Billius proposes to read ἀποσταυρωθῆναι, in conformity with the ancient Latin version, “crucifixam.”
22
That is, had not shared in any male influence, but was a purely female production.
23
Literally, “fruit.” Harvey remarks on this expression, “that what we understand by emanations, the Gnostic described as spiritual fructification; and as the seed of a tree is in itself, even in the embryo state, so these various Æons, as existing always in the divine nature, were co-eternal with it.”
24
This is an exceedingly obscure and difficult passage. Harvey’s rendering is: “For, say they, Christ taught them the nature of their copulæ, (namely,) that being cognisant of their (limited) perception of the Unbegotten they needed no higher knowledge, and that He enounced,” etc. the words seem scarcely capable of yielding this sense: we have followed the interpretation of Billius.
25
Both the text and meaning are here very doubtful. Some think that the import of the sentence is, that the knowledge that the Father is incomprehensible secured the continued safety of the Æons, while the same knowledge conferred upon Monogenes his origin and form.
26
The Greek text inserts ἕν, one, before “Holy Spirit.”