Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

St. Irenaeus on Free Will (Adversus Haereses IV,37)
The Catholic Encyclopedia ^ | AD 150-202 | St. Irenaeus

Posted on 09/26/2006 3:48:44 PM PDT by annalex

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last
The earliest condemnation of Calvinist double predestination is also the fullest and the clearest.
1 posted on 09/26/2006 3:48:46 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: HarleyD; jo kus; Campion; Forest Keeper; Dr. Eckleburg; AlbionGirl; wmfights; blue-duncan; ...
A companion for our venerable Luther and Erasmus: The Controversy Concerning the Bondage of the Will thread.
2 posted on 09/26/2006 3:54:41 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex; HarleyD; jo kus; Campion; Forest Keeper; Dr. Eckleburg; AlbionGirl; wmfights; ...

I do so like +Irenaeus!


3 posted on 09/26/2006 4:27:37 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis; annalex
I remember posting a snippet from this chapter on that behemoth of a thread, so long ago...

Pretty much ignored. Poor St. Irenaeus gets no respect among the reformers.

Regards

4 posted on 09/26/2006 4:46:05 PM PDT by jo kus (Humility is present when one debases oneself without being obliged to do so- St.Chrysostom; Phil 2:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kolokotronis
Kolokotronis, why are you pinging me to this? I am, according to your St John Chrysostom, an 'enemy of God.'

"Chrysostomos loudly declares not only heretics, but also those who have communion with them, to be enemies of God." St. Theodore the Studite, Epistle of Abbot Theophilus

Contentions," he means, with heretics, in which he would not have us labor to no purpose, where nothing is to be gained, for they end in nothing. For when a man is perverted and predetermined not to change his mind, whatever may happen, why shouldest thou labor in vain, sowing upon a rock, when thou shouldest spend thy honorable toil upon thy own people, in discoursing with them upon almsgiving and every other virtue? How then does he elsewhere say, "If God peradventure will give them repentance" (2 Tim. ii.25); but here, "A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that he that is such is subverted and sinneth, being condemned of himself"? In the former passage he speaks of the correction of those of whom he had hope, and who had simply made opposition. But when he is known and manifest to all, why dost thou contend in vain? why dost thou beat the air? What means, "being condemned of himself"? Because he cannot say that no one has told him, no one admonished him; since therefore after admonition he continues the same, he is self-condemned." St John Chrysostom, Homily 6 on Titus

What has a 'friend' of God to do with an 'enemy of God?'

5 posted on 09/26/2006 4:55:31 PM PDT by AlbionGirl (Salvation is free, ... but discipleship will cost you your life.-- Dietrich Bonhoeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Not directly a condemnation of Calvinism, of course... since Irenaueus lived about a millennium and a half before Calvin! :^D


6 posted on 09/26/2006 5:12:08 PM PDT by dangus (Pope calls Islam violent; Millions of Moslems demonstrate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlbionGirl; annalex

"Kolokotronis, why are you pinging me to this? "

Ummmmmmm, cause Alex did and you were part of the Luther thread discussion, AG. Frankly it didn't occur to me that you are heretic; in fact, had I thought of it I'd have assumed you aren't.


7 posted on 09/26/2006 5:33:56 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: annalex; HarleyD; jo kus; Campion; Forest Keeper; Dr. Eckleburg; AlbionGirl; wmfights
Last Sunday a lady came to my church for the first time. She was from out of town and it took over 45 minutes to get there. She trusted Christ for salvation during the service. When she was talking with us during the fellowship hour she wanted to meet "Charlotte". When asked why, she said someone from the church had been calling for "Charlotte" on her cell phone and leaving the church's name and number. After the second or third wrong number she thought someone was telling her to come to the church. She did and was saved. You can imagine the excitement that went through the church on hearing this. Now there is a Charlotte in the church but her cell phone number is nowhere near this ladies and no one in the church would could remember calling for Charlotte last week.
8 posted on 09/26/2006 6:13:02 PM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: annalex; dangus
The earliest condemnation of Calvinist double predestination is also the fullest and the clearest.

Apart from the fact that it does not mention predestination per se, how can any biblcial discussion of free will fail to take into account the fall and our sin nature? And not a mention of Romans 9.

Just goes to show you that old Irenaeus put his toga on one leg at a time.

9 posted on 09/26/2006 6:37:10 PM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
It is a large treatise.

the fall and our sin nature?

Adversus Haereses (Book IV, Chapter 38)

Why man was not made perfect from the beginning.

1. If, however, any one say, "What then? Could not God have exhibited man as perfect from beginning?" let him know that, inasmuch as God is indeed always the same and unbegotten as respects Himself, all things are possible to Him. But created things must be inferior to Him who created them, from the very fact of their later origin; for it was not possible for things recently created to have been uncreated. But inasmuch as they are not uncreated, for this very reason do they come short of the perfect. Because, as these things are of later date, so are they infantile; so are they unaccustomed to, and unexercised in, perfect discipline. For as it certainly is in the power of a mother to give strong food to her infant, [but she does not do so], as the child is not yet able to receive more substantial nourishment; so also it was possible for God Himself to have made man perfect from the first, but man could not receive this [perfection], being as yet an infant. And for this cause our Lord in these last times, when He had summed up all things into Himself, came to us, not as He might have come, but as we were capable of beholding Him. He might easily have come to us in His immortal glory, but in that case we could never have endured the greatness of the glory; and therefore it was that He, who was the perfect bread of the Father, offered Himself to us as milk, [because we were] as infants. He did this when He appeared as a man, that we, being nourished, as it were, from the breast of His flesh, and having, by such a course of milk nourishment, become accustomed to eat and drink the Word of God, may be able also to contain in ourselves the Bread of immortality, which is the Spirit of the Father.

2. And on this account does Paul declare to the Corinthians, "I have fed you with milk, not with meat, for hitherto ye were not able to bear it." That is, ye have indeed learned the advent of our Lord as a man; nevertheless, because of your infirmity, the Spirit of the Father has not as yet rested upon you. "For when envying and strife," he says, "and dissensions are among you, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?" That is, that the Spirit of the Father was not yet with them, on account of their imperfection and shortcomings of their walk in life. As, therefore, the apostle had the power to give them strong meat -- for those upon whom the apostles laid hands received the Holy Spirit, who is the food of life [eternal] -- but they were not capable of receiving it, because they had the sentient faculties of the soul still feeble and undisciplined in the practice of things pertaining to God; so, in like manner, God had power at the beginning to grant perfection to man; but as the latter was only recently created, he could not possibly have received it, or even if he had received it, could he have contained it, or containing it, could he have retained it. It was for this reason that the Son of God, although He was perfect, passed through the state of infancy in common with the rest of mankind, partaking of it thus not for His own benefit, but for that of the infantile stage of man's existence, in order that man might be able to receive Him. There was nothing, therefore, impossible to and deficient in God, [implied in the fact] that man was not an uncreated being; but this merely applied to him who was lately created, [namely] man.

3. With God there are simultaneously exhibited power, wisdom, and goodness. His power and goodness [appear] in this, that of His own will He called into being and fashioned things having no previous existence; His wisdom [is shown] in His having made created things parts of one harmonious and consistent whole; and those things which, through His super-eminent kindness, receive growth and a long period of existence, do reflect the glory of the uncreated One, of that God who bestows what is good ungrudgingly. For from the very fact of these things having been created, [it follows] that they are not uncreated; but by their continuing in being throughout a long course of ages, they shall receive a faculty of the Uncreated, through the gratuitous bestowal of eternal existence upon them by God. And thus in all things God has the pre-eminence, who alone is uncreated, the first of all things, and the primary cause of the existence of all, while all other things remain under God's subjection. But being in subjection to God is continuance in immortality, and immortality is the glory of the uncreated One. By this arrangement, therefore, and these harmonies, and a sequence of this nature, man, a created and organized being, is rendered after the image and likeness of the uncreated God, -the Father planning everything well and giving His commands, the Son carrying these into execution and performing the work of creating, and the Spirit nourishing and increasing [what is made], but man making progress day by day, and ascending towards the perfect, that is, approximating to the uncreated One. For the Uncreated is perfect, that is, God. Now it was necessary that man should in the first instance be created; and having been created, should receive growth; and having received growth, should be strengthened; and having been strengthened, should abound; and having abounded, should recover [from the disease of sin]; and having recovered, should be glorified; and being glorified, should see his Lord. For God is He who is yet to be seen, and the beholding of God is productive of immortality, but immortality renders one nigh unto God.

4. Irrational, therefore, in every respect, are they who await not the time of increase, but ascribe to God the infirmity of their nature. Such persons know neither God nor themselves, being insatiable and ungrateful, unwilling to be at the outset what they have also been created -- men subject to passions; but go beyond the law of the human race, and before that they become men, they wish to be even now like God their Creator, and they who are more destitute of reason than dumb animals [insist] that there is no distinction between the uncreated God and man, a creature of to-day. For these, [the dumb animals], bring no charge against God for not having made them men; but each one, just as he has been created, gives thanks that he has been created. For we cast blame upon Him, because we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods; although God has adopted this course out of His pure benevolence, that no one may impute to Him invidiousness or grudgingness. He declares, "I have said, Ye are gods; and ye are all sons of the Highest." But since we could not sustain the power of divinity, He adds, "But ye shall die like men," setting forth both truths -- the kindness of His free gift, and our weakness, and also that we were possessed of power over ourselves. For after His great kindness He graciously conferred good [upon us], and made men like to Himself, [that is] in their own power; while at the same time by His prescience He knew the infirmity of human beings, and the consequences which would flow from it; but through [His] love and [His] power, He shall overcome the substance of created nature. For it was necessary, at first, that nature should be exhibited; then, after that, that what was mortal should be conquered and swallowed up by immortality, and the corruptible by incorruptibility, and that man should be made after the image and likeness of God, having received the knowledge of good and evil.

(Book IV, Chapter 38)

not a mention of Romans 9

Adversus Haereses (Book IV, Chapter 29)

Refutation of the arguments of the Marcionites, who attempted to show that God was the Author of sin, because he blinded Pharaoh and his servants.

1. "But," say they, "God hardened the heart of Pharaoh and of his servants." Those, then, who allege such difficulties, do not read in the Gospel that passage where the Lord replied to the disciples, when they asked Him, "Why speakest Thou unto them in parables?" -- "Because it is given unto you to know the mystery of the kingdom of heaven; but to thorn I speak in parables, that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not hear, understanding they may not understand; in order that the prophecy of Isaiah regarding them may be fulfil leading, Make the heart of this people gross and make their ears dull, and blind their eyes. But blessed are your eyes, which see the things that ye see; and your ears, which hear what ye do hear. For one and the same God [that blesses others] inflicts blindness upon those who do not believe, but who set Him at naught; just as the sun, which is a creature of His, [acts with regard] to those who, by reason of any weakness of the eyes cannot behold his light; but to those who believe in Him and follow Him, He grants a fuller and greater illumination of mind. In accordance with this word, therefore, does the apostle say, in the Second the] to the Corinthians: "In whom the this world hath blinded the minds of them that believe not, lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ should shine [unto them]." And again, in that to the Romans: "And as they did not think fit to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up to a reprobate mind, to do those things that are not convenient." Speaking of antichrist, too, he says clearly in the Second to the Thessalonians: "And for this cause God shall send them the working of error, that they should believe a lie; that they all might be judged who believed not the truth, but consented to iniquity."

2. If, therefore, in the present time also, God, knowing the number of those who will not believe, since He foreknows all things, has given them over to unbelief, and turned away His face from men of this stamp, leaving them in the darkness which they have themselves chosen for themselves, what is there wonderful if He did also at that time give over to their unbelief, Pharaoh, who never would have believed, along with those who were with him? As the Word spake to Moses from the bush: "And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, unless by a mighty hand." And for the reason that the Lord spake in parables, and brought blindness upon Israel, that seeing they might not see, since He knew the [spirit of] unbelief in them, for the same reason did He harden Pharaoh's heart; in order that, while seeing that it was the finger of God which led forth the people, he might not believe, but be precipitated into a sea of unbelief, resting in the notion that the exit of these [Israelites] was accomplished by magical power, and that it was not by the operation of God that the Red Sea afforded a passage to the people, but that this occurred by merely natural causes (sed naturaliter sic se habere). (Book IV, Chapter 29)


10 posted on 09/26/2006 7:41:52 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dangus
Not directly a condemnation of Calvinism

Since Calvin had no original ideas, there was no need for St. Irenaeus to wait that long.

11 posted on 09/26/2006 8:20:12 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: annalex
That thread still going in circles? Hmm, might need to check into it again.
12 posted on 09/26/2006 9:16:38 PM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan

Hi, this is Charlotte. Do I have any messages?

8~)


13 posted on 09/26/2006 11:38:25 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

Oh, Charlotte,

I'm so glad you got back to me. If you would just send in your winning lottery ticket by 11:00P.M. Tuesday September 26, 2006 you will receive the first prize of 4 gazillion dollars otherwise just leave a sobbing message in the voice mail. Have a nice day!!


14 posted on 09/27/2006 5:48:29 AM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jo kus

What did he know? He hadn't benefited from the insights of the Heresiarchs :)


15 posted on 09/27/2006 6:16:32 AM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Indeed. I also like this portion from Irenaeus:

If Irenaeus was correct in his assertion, then there is no reason for a redeemer. Man has received the knowledge of good and evil. He has the ability. That should be good enough.

While I appreaciate the early church fathers, it is a mistake to pull snippets (or even whole blocks) of their statements out. This is a good example. Irenaeus is really more Orthodoxy in his view than Catholic. I doubt if you'll find many in the Church back then that would say man knows good and evil and all he has to do is will himself. Irenaeus is in error on this point. But can you blame him? Nobody knew what the scriptures were until 200 years later. ;O)

16 posted on 09/27/2006 6:18:30 AM PDT by HarleyD ("Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures" Luke 24:45)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan; annalex; jo kus; Campion; Forest Keeper; Dr. Eckleburg; AlbionGirl; wmfights

That is a great story b-d and one that illustrates how God "calls" people-in this case literally. ;O)


17 posted on 09/27/2006 6:19:43 AM PDT by HarleyD ("Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures" Luke 24:45)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: self

self ping


18 posted on 09/27/2006 8:07:37 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
then there is no reason for a redeemer.

This is strictly by your own fallible reasoning. St. Irenaeus sees the reason perfectly well:

it was possible for God Himself to have made man perfect from the first, but man could not receive this [perfection], being as yet an infant. And for this cause our Lord in these last times, when He had summed up all things into Himself, came to us, not as He might have come, but as we were capable of beholding Him. He might easily have come to us in His immortal glory, but in that case we could never have endured the greatness of the glory; and therefore it was that He, who was the perfect bread of the Father, offered Himself to us as milk, [because we were] as infants. He did this when He appeared as a man, that we, being nourished, as it were, from the breast of His flesh, and having, by such a course of milk nourishment, become accustomed to eat and drink the Word of God, may be able also to contain in ourselves the Bread of immortality, which is the Spirit of the Father.

[...]

Now it was necessary that man should in the first instance be created; and having been created, should receive growth; and having received growth, should be strengthened; and having been strengthened, should abound; and having abounded, should recover [from the disease of sin]; and having recovered, should be glorified; and being glorified, should see his Lord. For God is He who is yet to be seen, and the beholding of God is productive of immortality, but immortality renders one nigh unto God.

[...]

through [His] love and [His] power, He shall overcome the substance of created nature. For it was necessary, at first, that nature should be exhibited; then, after that, that what was mortal should be conquered and swallowed up by immortality, and the corruptible by incorruptibility, and that man should be made after the image and likeness of God, having received the knowledge of good and evil.

(IV, 38 quoted at #10)

Nobody knew what the scriptures were until 200 years later

All his reasoning is from scripture, either by direct quotations or is close paraphrase. There are two direct quotations forming the bulk of the argument, and a paraphrase in (1); a reference to many parts of the scripture in (2); seven quotes in (3), seven in (4). Contrast that with Calvin's contortions.

more Orthodoxy in his view than Catholic

Here you go again telling Catholics what their views are.

19 posted on 09/27/2006 5:20:11 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: annalex
This is strictly by your own fallible reasoning.

It is not my reasoning along. You, of course, understand this puts Irenaeus squarely at odds with Augustine's, A Treatise on Predestination which you reject. Shall I start quoting that. We might as well pull this or that out of every writer. It won't matter because NONE of it is inspired writings.

Irenaeus statements are interesting but it really doesn't change anything. It only validates my point that in the western church two views were held. Irenaeus comments would not square with the Council of Oranges decrees.


20 posted on 09/28/2006 1:32:15 AM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson