1. Trinity

Although his contemporary Theophilus of Antioch had already employed the term triaV (trias), Irenaeus does not make use of it in defining the one God in three Persons. He prefers rather to emphasize another aspect of the Divinity in his battle with the Gnostics: the identity of the one true God with the creator of the world, with the God of the Old Testament, and with the Father of the Logos. Although Irenaeus does not discuss the relationships of the three Divine Persons within God, he is convinced that the existence of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is clearly proved in the history of mankind. They existed before the creation of man, because the words, "Let us make man after our image and likeness" are addressed by the Father to the Son and the Holy Spirit, whom St. Irenaeus allegorically calls the "hands of God" (Adv. Haer. 5.1.3; 5.5.1; 5.28.1) Again and again Irenaeus explains how the Holy Spirit in the service of the Logos fills the prophets with the chrism of inspiration, and how the Father gave the orders for all this. Thus the whole economy of salvation in the Old Testament is an excellent instruction regarding the three Persons in one God.

2. Christology
a. Concerning the relation of the Son to the Father Irenaeus says clearly and plainly:

If anyone says to us "how then was the Son produced by the Father?" we reply to him, that no man understands that production or generation or calling or by whatever name one may describe his generation, which is in fact altogether indescribable…but the Father only who begat and the Son who was begotten. Since, therefore, his generation is unspeakable, those who strive to set forth generations and productions cannot be right in their mind, inasmuch as they undertake to describe things which are indescribable (2.28.6).

Moreover, we find in Irenaeus the first attempt to grasp the relationship between the Father and the Son in a speculative manner: "God has been declared through the Son, who is in the Father and has the Father in himself" (3.6.2).

With these words, Irenaeus teaches the perichoresis or circumincessio. Just as he defends the identity of the Father with the creator of the world against the Gnostics, so he teaches that there is only one Christ, although we give him different names. Therefore Christ is identical with th eSon of God, with the Logos, with the God-man Jesus, with our Savior and Lord.

b. Recapitulation: The heart of Irenaeus’ Christology and indeed of his entire theology is the theory of recapitulation (anakefalaiwsiV). Although he borrowed this idea from the Apostle Paul, he developed it considerably. Recapitulation is for Irenaeus a taking up in Christ of all since the beginning. God rehabilitates the earlier divine plan for the salvation of mankind which was interrupted by the fall of Adam, and gathers up his entire work from the beginning to renew, to restore, to reorganize it in his incarnate Son, who in this way becomes for us a second Adam. Since by the fall of man the whole human race was lost, the Son of God had to become man in order to effect as such the re-creation of mankind:

The things which had perished possessed flesh and blood. For the Lord, taking dust from the earth, molded man; and it was upon his behalf that all the dispensations of the Lord’s advent took place. He had himself, therefore, flesh and blood, recapitulating in himself not a certain other, but that original handiwork of the Father, seeking out that thing which had perished (5.14.2).
By this recapitulation of the original man, not only Adam personally but the whole human race was renovated and restored:

When he became incarnate and was made man, he recapitulated in himself the long history of man, summing up and giving us salvation in order that we might receive again in Christ Jesus what we had lost in Adam, that is, the image and likeness of God (3.18.7)

At the same time the evil effects of the disobedience of the first Adam are destroyed: "God recapitulated in himself the ancient formation of man, that he might kill sin, deprive death of its power and vivify man" (3.18.7). In this manner the second Adam had renewed the ancient conflict against the devil, and conquered him.

Now the Lord would not have recapitulated in himself that ancient and primary enmity against the serpent, fulfilling the promise of the creator, if he had come from another Father. But as he is one and the same who formed us at the beginning and sent his Son at the end, the Lord did perform his command, being made of a woman, by both destroying our adversary and perfecting man after the image and likeness of God (5.21.2).

Thus Christ renewed everything by this recapitulation.

What then did the Lord bring at his coming? Know that he brought all newness, by bringing himself, who had been foretold. For this was announced, that a newness would come, to renew and give life to man (4.34.1)

3. Mariology

This idea of recapitulating has strongly influenced Irenaeus’ doctrine regarding Mary. Justin was the first to show the parallelism between Eve and Mary, as Paul had done between Adam and Christ. Irenaeus extends this parallelism:

In accordance with this design, Mary the Virgin is found obedient, saying "Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it done unto me according to thy word." But Eve was disobedient; for she did not obey when as yet she was a virgin. And even as she, having indeed a husband, Adam, but being nevertheless as yet a virgin, having become disobedient, was made the cause of death both to herself and the whole human race; so also did Mary, having a man betrothed (to her) and being nevertheless a virgin, by yielding obedience, become the cause of salvation, both to herself and the whole human race. And on this account does the law term a woman betrothed to a man the wife of him who had betrothed her, although she was as yet a virgin; thus indicating the back reference from Mary to Eve, because what is joined together could not otherwise be put asunder than by inversion of the process by which these bonds of union had arisen, so that the former knots be cancelled by the latter, that the latter set the former again at liberty. And it has in fact happened, that the first compact looses from the second tie, but that the second tie takes the position of the first, which had been cancelled. For this reason did the Lord declare that the first should in truth be the last, and the last first. And the prophet too indicates the same, saying, "Instead of fathers, children have been born unto thee." For the Lord, having been born, "the First-begotten of the dead" and receving into his bosom the ancient Fathers, has regenerated them unto the life of God, he having been made himself the beginning of those that live, as Adam became the beginning of those who die. Wherefore also Luke, commencing the genealogy with the Lord, carried it back to Adam, indicating that it was he who regenerated them into the gospel of life, and not they him. And thus also it was that the know of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith (3.22.4).
According to Irenaeus, therefore, the procedure of redemption follows exactly the course of events of the fall of man. For every faulty step which man took, having been seduced by Satan, God exacts from him a compensation in order to make his victory over the seducer complete. Mankind receives a new progenitor in place of the first Adam. But since the first woman was also implicated in the fall by her disobedience, the healing process starts also by the obedience of a woman. Giving life to the New Adam, she becomes the true Eve, the true mother of the living and causa salutis (cause of salvation). In this way Mary becomes the advocata Evae (the advocate for Eve):

And if the former (Eve) did disobey God, yet the latter (Mary) was persuaded to be obedient to God, in order that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so it is rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience (5.19.1).

Moreover, Irenaeus extends the parallelism between Eve and Mary even further. He is so convinced that Mary is the new mother of mankind that he calls her the womb of mankind. Thus he teaches the universal Motherhood of Mary. He speaks of the birth of Christ as "the pure one opening purely that pure womb which regenerates men unto God" (4.33.11).

4. Ecclesiology

Even the ecclesiology of Irenaeus is linked up with his theory of recapitulation. God sums up in Christ not only the past but also the future. Therefore he made him the head of the entire Church, in order to perpetuate through her his work of renovation until the end of the world:

Thus there is one God the Father, as we have shown, and one Christ Jesus our Lord, who comes by a universal dispensation and recapitulates all things in himself. But in "all things" man also is comprised, a creature of God; therefore he recapitulates man in himself. The invisible become comprehensible, and the impassible passible; and the Logos is become man, recapitulating all things in himself. Thus, just as he is the first among heavenly and spiritual and invisible things, so also is he the first among visible and corporal things. He takes the primacy to himself and by making himself the head of the Church, he will draw all things to himself at the appointed time (3.16.6)

Irenaeus is firmly convinced that the teaching of the Apostles continues to live on unaltered. This tradition is the source of the norm of the faith. It is the canon of truth. For Irenaeus this canon of truth seems to be the baptismal creed, for he says that we receive it in baptism (adv. Haer. 1.9.4).

Only the Churches founded by the Apostles can be relied upon for the correct teaching of the faith and for the truth, because the uninterrupted succession of bishops in these churches guarantees the truth of their doctrine:

Anyone who wishes to discern the truth ma see in every church in the whole world the Apostolic tradition clear and manifest. We can enumerate those who were appointed as bishops in the curches by the Apostles and their successors to our own day, who never know and never taught anything resembling their (that is, the Gnostics’) foolish doctrine. Had the Apostles known any such mysteries, which they taught privately and sub rosa to the perfect, they would surely have entrusted this teaching to the men in whose charge they placed the Churches. For they wished them to be without blame and reproach to whom they handed over their own position of authority (3.3.1).

For this reason the heretics lack an essential qualification; they are not the successors of the Apostle and they do not have the charism of truth:

Wherefore it is incumbent to obey the presbyters who are in the Church, those who as I have shown possess the succession from the Apostles; those who, together with the succession of the episcopate, have received the certain gift of truth, according to the good pleasure of the Father (4.26.2).

5. The Eucharist

Irenaeus is so convinced of the real presence of the body and blood of the Lord in the Eucharist, that he derives the resurrection of the human body from the fact that this body has been nourished by the body and blood of Christ:

When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receives the Word of God (epidexetai ton logon tou Qeou) and the Eucharist becomes the blood and body of Christ, from which tings the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they affirm that the flesh is incapable of receiving the gift of God, which is life eternal, which is nourished from the body and blood of the Lord and is a member of him? …that flesh which is nourished by the cup which is his blood and receives increase from the bread which is his body. And just as a cutting from the vine planted in the ground fructifies in its season, or, as a grain of wheat falling into the earth and becoming decomposed rises with manifold increase by the Spirit of God, and becomes the Eucharist, which is the blood and blood of Christ, so also our bodies, being nourished by it, and deposited in the earth, and suffering decomposition there, shall rise at their appointed time (5.2.3)

And how say they that the flesh passes into corruption and partakes not of life, which is nourished by the Lord’s body and blood. Either let them change their opinion, or decline to make the offerings which I have mentioned. But our opinion is in harmony with the Eucharist, and the Eucharist again confirms our opinion. And we offer to him the things which are his own, showing forth accordingly our communion and union, and professing a resurrection of the flesh and spirit. For as bread from the earth, receiving the invocation of God (prolabomenoV thn epiklhsin tou Qeou) is no longer common bread but a Eucharist composed of two things, both an earthly and a heavenly one, so also our bodies, partaking of the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of eternal resurrection (4.18.5)

6. Scripture

The New Testament Canon of Irenaeus comprises the four Gospels, the Epistles of St. Paul, the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of St. John and the Apocalypse, the First Epistle of St. Peter, and the recent prophetic writings of the Shepherd of Hermas, but not the Epistle to the Hebrews. He does not yet have a definite designation for the whole complex of these writings, although he regards them as a complete collection. Irenaeus calls the books of the New Testament Scripture (grafh) because they have the same character of inspiration as the writings of the Old Testament.

In determining the canonicity of a writing, Irenaeus insists that not only apostolicity but also ecclesiastical tradition must be considered. The Church has the decisive voice also in the interpretation of Scripture, for the individual writings of the Old and the New Testament are like trees in the garden of the Church.

7. Anthropology

Following the Platonic idea that man consists of fusiV (physis – bodily nature), yuch (psyche – soul), nouV (nous – spirit):

Everyone will allow that we are composed of a body taken from the earth, and a soul which receives the spirit from God (3.22.1)

Therefore, a human body which is animated by a natural soul only is a complete and perfect man. It seems tat most of the time Irenaeus, like St. Paul, considers the third essential part, pneuma (pneuma – spirit), which completes and crowns human nature, to be the personal Spirit of God. Christ had promised this Spirit as a gift to his Apostles and believers, and St. Paul admonishes the Christians again and again that they carry this Spirit in themselves as in a temple; but in some passages it is difficult to decide whether Irenaeus understands the third essential part of man to be the spirit of man or the Spirit of God.

The reception and the preservation of the third part, the spirit, on which the essential perfection of man depends, is conditioned by actions of the will and by moral conduct. Even the eternal existence of the soul depends on her conduct here on earth, because she is not immortal by nature. Her immortality is a matter of moral development. She is able to become immortal if she is grateful to her Creator:

For as the heaven which is above us, the firmament, the sun, the moon, the rest of the stars and all their grandeur, although they had no previous existence, were called into being, and continue throughout a long course of time according to the will of God, so also anyone who thinks thus respecting souls and spirits, and, in fact, respecting all created things, will not by any means go far astray, inasmuch as all things that have been made had a beginning when they were formed, but endure as long as God wills that they should have an existence and continuance…For life does not arise from us, nor from our own nature; but is bestowed according to the grace of God. And therefore he who shall preserve the life bestowed upon him, and give thanks to him who imparted it, shall receive also length of days forever and ever. But he who shall reject it, and prove himself ungrateful to his Maker, inasmuch as he has been created, and has not recognized him who bestowed, deprives himself of the continuance forever and ever (2.34.3)

Irenaeus thought it necessary to refute the assertion of the Gnostics that the soul is immortal by nature independently of her moral conduct, and thus he was led to these false ideas.

8. Soteriology

The pivot of Irenaeus’ doctrine of redemption is the fact that every man has need of redemption and is capable of redemption. This follows from the fall of the first parents, through which all their descendants are subject to sin and death and have lost the image of God. The redemption brought by the Son of God has liberated mankind from the slavery of Satan, sin, and death. Moreover, it has summed up the whole of mankind in Christ. It has effected the reunion with God, the adoption by God, and the assimilation to God. But Irenaeus avoids the word "deification" qeopoihsiV in this connection. He uses the terms "to be attached to God", "to adhere to God", …but he avoids effacing the boundaries between God and man, as was customary in the pagan religions and in the Gnostic heresies. Irenaeus makes a distinction between imago Dei (the image of God) and similitudo Dei (the likeness of God). The similitudo Dei is the similarity to God of a supernatural kind, which Adam possessed by a voluntary act of God’s goodness. This similitudo Dei is effected by the divine Pneuma.

The redemption of the individual is effected by the Church and her sacraments in the name of Christ. The sacrament is to nature what the new Adam is to the old. A creature receives its perfection in the sacraments. The sacrament is the climax of the recapitulation of creation in Christ. By baptism man is born again to God. On this occasion Irenaeus testifies for th efirst time in ancient Christian literature to infant baptism:

For He came to save all through means of himself – all, I say, who through Him are born again to God – infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men (2.22.4).



9. Eschatology

Even in his eschatology the influence of Irenaeus’ theory of recapitulation is clearly visible. The anti-Christ is the demoniac counterpart of Christ, because he is the summing up of all apostasy, injustice, malice, false prophecy, and treachery, from the beginning of the world to its end:

And there is therefore, in this beast, when he comes, a recapitulation, made of all sorts of iniquity and of every deceit, in order that all apostate power, flowing into and being shut up in him, may be sent into the furnace of fire. Fittingly, therefore, shall his name possess the number six hundred and sixty-six, since he sums up in his own person all the commixture of wickedness which took place previous to the deluge due to the apostasy of the angels…Thus then the six hundred years…do indicate the number of the name of that man in whom is concentrated the whole apostasy of six thousand years, and unrighteousness, and wickedness, and false prophecy, and deception, for which things’ sake a cataclysm of fire shall also come (5.29.2).

Irenaeus demonstrates even his chiliastic view by his theory of the rehabilitation of the world:

They are both ignorant of God’s dispensation and of the mystery of the resurrection of the just and of the kingdom which is the commencement of incorruption, by means of which kingdom those who shall be worthy are accustomed gradually to comprehend God; and it is necessary to tell them respecting those things that it behooves the righteousness first to receive those things that it behooves the righteous first to receive the promise of the inheritance which God promised to the fathers, and to reign in it when they rise again to behold God in this creation which is renovated, and that the judgment should take place afterwards. For it is just that in that very creation in which they toiled or were afflicted, being proved in every way by suffering, they should receive the reward of their suffering; and that in the creation in which they were slain because of their love to God, in that they should be revived again; and that in the creation in which they endured servitude, in that they should reign. For God is rich in all things and all things are his. It is fitting therefore, that the creation itself being restored to its primeval condition, should be without restraint under the dominion of the righteous (5.32.1).

© <%=year(date)%> Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America www.goarch.org