Irenaeus: Against Heresies, Books I–V

The Greek original of the work of Irenæus is from time to time recovered through the numerous quotations made from it by subsequent writers, especially by the author’s pupil Hippolytus, and by Epiphanius. The latter preserves ( Hær. xxxi. secs. 9–32) the preface of Irenæus, and most of the first book. An important difference of reading occurs between the Latin and Greek in the very first word. The translator manifestly read ἐπεί , quatenus , while in Epiphanius we find ἐπί , against . The former is probably correct, and has been followed in our version. We have also supplied a clause, in order to avoid the extreme length of the sentence in the original, which runs on without any apodosis to the words ἀναγκαῖον ἡγησάμην , “I have judged it necessary.”

1 Tim. i. 4 . The Latin has here genealogias infinitas , “endless genealogies,” as in textus receptus of New Testament.

As will be seen by and by, this fancied being was, in the Valentinian system, the creator of the material universe, but far inferior to the supreme ruler Bythus.

There are frequent references to Irenæus to some venerable men who had preceded him in the Church. It is supposed that Pothinus, whom he succeeded at Lyons, is generally meant; but the reference may sometimes be to Polycarp, with whom in early life he had been acquainted. [On this matter of quotations from anonymous authors of the apostolic times, not infrequently made by Irenæus, consult the important tractate of Dr. Routh, in his Reliquiæ Sacræ , vol. i. 45–68.]

Comp. Matt. vii. 15 .

The original is ἐγκέφαλον ἐξεπτύκασιν , which the Latin translator renders simply, “have not sufficient brains.” He probably followed a somewhat different reading. Various emendations have been proposed, but the author may be understood by the ordinary text to be referring ironically to the boasted subtlety and sublimity of the Gnostics.

Matt. x. 26 .

As Cæsar informs us ( Comm. , i. 1), Gaul was divided into three parts, one of which was called Celtic Gaul, lying between the Seine and the Garonne. Of this division Lyons is the principal city.

[The reader will find a logical and easy introduction to the crabbed details which follow, by turning to chap. xxiii., and reading through succeeding chapters down to chap. xxix.]

This term Æon ( Αἰών ) seems to have been formed from the words ἀεὶ ὤν , ever-existing . “We may take αἰών , therefore,” says Harvey ( Irenæus , cxix.), “in the Valentinian acceptation of the word, to mean an emanation from the divine substance, subsisting co-ordinately and co-eternally with the Deity, the Pleroma still remaining one.”

Sige, however, was no true consort of Bythus, who included in himself the idea of male and female, and was the one cause of all things: comp. Hippolytus, Philosop. , vi. 29. There seems to have been considerable disagreement among these heretics as to the completion of the mystical number thirty. Valentinus himself appears to have considered Bythus as a monad, and Sige as a mere nonentity. The two latest Æons, Christ and the Holy Spirit, would then complete the number thirty. But other Gnostic teachers included both Bythus and Sige in that mystical number.

It may be well to give here the English equivalents of the names of these Æons and their authors. They are as follows: Bythus, Profundity ; Proarche, First-Beginning ; Propator, First-Father ; Ennœa, Idea ; Charis, Grace ; Sige, Silence ; Nous, Intelligence ; Aletheia, Truth ; Logos, Word ; Zoe, Life ; Anthropos, Man ; Ecclesia, Church ; Bythius, Deep ; Mixis, Mingling ; Ageratos, Undecaying ; Henosis, Union ; Autophyes, Self-existent ; Hedone, Pleasure ; Acinetos, Immoveable ; Syncrasis, Blending ; Monogenes, Only-Begotten ; Macaria, Happiness ; Paracletus, Advocate ; Pistis, Faith ; Patricos, Ancestral ; Elpis, Hope ; Metricos, Metrical ; Agape, Love ; Ainos, Praise ; Synesis, Understanding ; Ecclesiasticus, Ecclesiastical ; Macariotes, Felicity ; Theletos, Desiderated ; Sophia, Wisdom .

Luke iii. 23 .

Matt. xx. 1–16 .

Some omit ἐν πλήθει , while others render the words “a definite number,” thus: “And if there is anything else in Scripture which is referred to by a definite number.”

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.

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.

“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 .

Some propose reading these words in the dative rather than the accusative, and thus to make them refer to the image of the Father .

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.

The common text has ἀποστερηθῆναι , was deprived ; but Billius proposes to read ἀποσταυρωθῆναι , in conformity with the ancient Latin version, “crucifixam.”

That is, had not shared in any male influence, but was a purely female production.

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.”

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.

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.

The Greek text inserts ἕν , one , before “Holy Spirit.”

The reading is here very doubtful. We have followed the text of Grabe (approved by Harvey), ἐξ ἀγῶνος σύμπηξις .

These are all names of the same person: see above, ii. 4. Hence some have proposed the reading ἑξαιώνιος instead of ἐξ ἀγῶνος , alluding to the sixfold appellation of the Æon Horos.

Billius renders, “from the repentance of the Father,” but the above seems preferable.

Harvey remarks, “Even in their Christology the Valentinians must have their part and counterpart.”

Or, “to all the generations of the ages of the age.” See Eph. iii. 21 . The apostle, of course, simply uses these words as a strong expression to denote “for ever.”

Literally, “at the thanksgiving,” or “eucharist.” Massuet, the Benedictine editor, refers this to the Lord’s Supper, and hence concludes that some of the ancient liturgies still extant must even then have been in use. Harvey and others, however, deny that there is any necessity for supposing the Holy Eucharist to be referred to; the ancient Latin version translates in the plural, “in gratiarum actionibus.”

Luke ii. 42 .

Luke vi. 13 .

This opinion is in positive contradiction to the forty days mentioned by St. Luke ( Acts i. 3 ). But the Valentinians seem to have followed a spurious writing of their own called “The Gospel of Truth.” See iii. 11, 8.

The numeral value of Iota in Greek is ten, and of Eta , eight.

Matt. v. 18 .

Mark v. 31 .

The Latin reads “filii,” which we have followed. Reference is made in this word to Nous, who was, as we have already seen, also called Son , and who interested himself in the recovery of Sophia. Aletheia was his consort, and was typified by the hem of the Saviour’s garment.

Her individuality ( μορφή ) would have been lost, while her substance ( οὐσία ) would have survived in the common essence of the Æons.

That is, the “second Christ” referred to above, sec. 1. [It is much to be wished that this second were always distinguished by the untranslated name Soter .]

Ex. xiii. 2 ; Luke ii. 23 .

Not as being born of it, but as fecundating it, and so producing a manifold offspring. See below.

Col. iii. 11 .

Rom. xi. 36 .

Col. ii. 9 .

Eph. i. 10 .

Luke xiv. 27 . It will be observed that the quotations of Scripture made by Irenæus often vary somewhat from the received text. This may be due to various reasons—his quoting from memory; his giving the texts in the form in which they were quoted by the heretics; or, as Harvey conjectures, from his having been more familiar with a Syriac version of the New Testament than with the Greek original.

Matt. x. 21 .

Matt. x. 34 .

Luke iii. 17 .

Hence Stauros was called by the agricultural name Carpistes, as separating what was gross and material from the spiritual and heavenly.

1 Cor. i. 18 .

Gal. vi. 14 . The words ἐν μηδενί do not occur in the Greek text.

Billius renders, “of their opinion.”

The punctuation and rendering are here slightly doubtful.

This term, though Tertullian declares himself to have been ignorant of its derivation, was evidently formed from the Hebrew word חָכְמָה —chockmah, wisdom .

The reader will observe that light and fulness are the exact correlatives of the darkness and vacuity which have just been mentioned.

As above stated (ii. 3), the Gnostics held that form and figure were due to the male, substance to the female parent.

The Valentinian Stauros was the boundary fence of the Pleroma beyond which Christ extended himself to assist the enthymesis of Sophia.

The peculiar gnosis which Nous received from his father, and communicated to the other Æons.

Probably corresponding to the Hebrew יהוה , Jehovah.

This sentence is very elliptical in the original, but the sense is as given above. Sophia fell from Gnosis by degradation; Achamoth never possessed this knowledge, her nature being from the first opposed to it.

“The Demiurge derived from Enthymesis an animal, and not a spiritual nature.”— Harvey .

Matt. x. 8 .

“Jesus, or Soter, was also called the Paraclete in the sense of Advocate, or one acting as the representative of others.”— Harvey .

Both the Father and the other Æons constituting Soter an impersonation of the entire Pleroma.

Col. i. 16 .

That is, as in the case of her mother Sophia, who is sometimes called “the Sophia above,” Achamoth being “the Sophia below,” or “the second Sophia.”

Thus Harvey renders ἀσώματον ὕλην : so Baur, Chr. Gnos. , as quoted by Stieren. Billius proposes to read ἐνσώματον , corporeal .

Though not actually, for that was the work of the Demiurge. See next chapter.

“In order that,” says Grabe, “this formation might not be merely according to essence , but also according to knowledge , as the formation of the mother Achamoth was characterized above.”