"When, however, they [the heretics and Gnostics] are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn around and accuse these same Scriptures, as if they were not correct, nor of authority, and [assert] that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of TRADITION. For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but by VIVA VOCE." [Irenaeus: Against Heresies Book III, Chapter 2, Verse 1]
Sound familiar? Holy Father Irenaeus has just nailed the Roman Catholic Church and its historic use of these things called TRADITIONS that run counter to the Scriptures as being sourced not in the Church or its patriarchs, but in the Gnostics and Heretics and Marcionites of his day.
Uncle Chip, you do your argument a vast disservice by plucking sentences out of context and pretend they support your position without reading ALL of what Holy Father Irenaeus has to say. I hate doing quote dumps, but you have made it necessary. So let's look at the entire section in full (which is, tellingly, called: "The heretics follow neither Scripture nor Tradition")
. When, however, they are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn round and accuse these same Scriptures, as if they were not correct, nor of authority, and [assert] that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition. For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but viva voce: wherefore also Paul declared, "But we speak wisdom among those that are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world." And this wisdom each one of them alleges to be the fiction of his own inventing, forsooth; so that, according to their idea, the truth properly resides at one time in Valentinus, at another in Marcion, at another in Cerinthus, then afterwards in Basilides, or has even been indifferently in any other opponent, who could speak nothing pertaining to salvation. For every one of these men, being altogether of a perverse disposition, depraving the system of truth, is not ashamed to preach himself.You are 100% right that Irenaeus criticizes those who claim they received some "special understanding" by way of unwritten tradition. BUT, he says that when the orthodox answer the Gnostics by saying "Ok, let's look at tradition then", then suddenly the Gnostics say that the Catholic tradition is *valueless* and adulterated and false, and they and they alone "discovered" the pure, unalloyed doctrine that--presumably--had lain dormant in the Church till then.2. But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. For [they maintain] that the apostles intermingled the things of the law with the words of the Saviour; and that not the apostles alone, but even the Lord Himself, spoke as at one time from the Demiurge, at another from the intermediate place, and yet again from the Pleroma, but that they themselves, indubitably, unsulliedly, and purely, have knowledge of the hidden mystery: this is, indeed, to blaspheme their Creator after a most impudent manner! It comes to this, therefore, that these men do now consent neither to Scripture nor to tradition.
3. Such are the adversaries with whom we have to deal, my very dear friend, endeavouring like slippery serpents to escape at all points. Wherefore they must be opposed at all points, if perchance, by cutting off their retreat, we may succeed in turning them back to the truth. For, though it is not an easy thing for a soul under the influence of error to repent, yet, on the other hand, it is not altogether impossible to escape from error when the truth is brought alongside it.
You are only looking at one side of Irenaeus's argument--he used BOTH Scripture AND tradition to assert orthodoxy against the Gnostics--to "oppose them at all points".
Nice taking of Irenaeus out of context, there, Uncle.
Here's the next paragraph:
But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. For [they maintain] that the apostles intermingled the things of the law with the words of the Saviour; and that not the apostles alone, but even the Lord Himself, spoke as at one time from the Demiurge, at another from the intermediate place, and yet again from the Pleroma, but that they themselves, indubitably, unsulliedly, and purely, have knowledge of the hidden mystery: this is, indeed, to blaspheme their Creator after a most impudent manner! It comes to this, therefore, that these men do now consent neither to Scripture nor to tradition. (Book III, Chapter 2, verse 2)
LOL U can't be serious
Oh? Irenaeus establishes his own authority by referring to the testimony of men such as Polycarp. The tradition he is talking against is that of the archheretics. He follows the authority --the Catholic tradition --of the apostolic fathers and apologists. who tell WHICH scriptures are authoritative and which not.