Replies

This is how decrepit I am: I have to go look in the index of my apocryphal NT. If it's in there, I read it. I just don't remember it. Is it the one where Jesus makes the clay birds and they come to life, and Joseph cuts a plank too short so Jesus stretches it?

Oh, it's the Joachim and Anna stuff, right?

I bought this book in the early '70's. It cost $7!!!!! YOU can scarcely get a good paperback for that kind of money these days.

But to get back to Irenaeus - in what sense is what he says "authoritative"? That is, to me this is not strictly speaking theology or systematic theology.

I guess I'm still not seeing what the problem is with that passage. It just seems evident and pleasant to me. It think this is important when viewed in the old way:

For in the same way the sin of the first created man (protoplasti) receives amendment by the correction of the First-begotten,

Here's what I think he's saying: We can think of Jesus as the second Adam. The first Adam seals the deal on the Fall. The second Adam seals the deal on our redemption.

So
The first woman took the first human step in the Fall. The Fall was, um, perfected when Adam ate the apple. Up until he wussed out, we had a chance.

So an analogy is that the first human step in our redemption could be said to have been taken by Mary (in all the ways Irenaeus says) but of course it takes the second Adam to perfect it.

I feel unclear in my expression and fuzzy in my alleged mind. Sorry. But I still don't see what there is in this passage to be upset about.