Showing posts with label Against Heresies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Against Heresies. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

The Significance of the Desecration of the Tomb of St. Irenaeus by the Huguenauts

St. Irenaeus of Lyons, whom we have previously discussed, was a Greek (or Asian) and knew St. Polycarp. As a Priest in Lyons, he succceded the martyred Saint Pothinus as Bishop of Lyons. He was consulted by other Churchmen of his era about the refutation of the competing cults, such as the Gnostics and the Arians. His book, Against Heresies, was the result which was a taxonomy of the Gnostic Cults at the time. Though Against Heresies was a very necessary but tedious book, his work ultimately led to the Council of Carthage of 397, which selected the Books of the New Testament and discarded, once and for all, the Gnostic Gospels from the Scripture. An ardent proponent of Free Will, it is no accident that his remains were desecrated and totally destroyed by the Huguenot Calvinists in 1562 (two years before John Calvin's death in 1564, which makes Calvin at least an accomplice to this crime!), making the motive retaliation. Related to this Vandalism, I note in passing this fiery quote from A Church in Fort Colins in Colorado:

Dear Calvinist, do you think Romans 9 and other passages support predestination? The Gnostics did the same! This means that if your view of election and God's sovereignty is correct, then you have to be willing to admit that the early Christians -- those who gave you the Bible -- were all wrong about a major theological doctrine, and the Gnostics -- whom John rebukes as antichrists (2 John 1:7) -- were correct! Are you willing to admit this?

The "Theology" behind this Iconoclasm as summarized in The Epitome of the Definition of the Iconoclastic Conciliabulum held in 754 [which] declared:
Supported by the Holy Scriptures and the Fathers, we declare unanimously, in the name of the Holy Trinity, that there shall be rejected and removed and cursed one of the Christian Church every likeness which is made out of any material and colour whatever by the evil art of painters.... If anyone ventures to represent the divine image (χαρακτήρ, charaktēr) of the Word after the Incarnation with material colours, let him be anathema! .... If anyone shall endeavour to represent the forms of the Saints in lifeless pictures with material colours which are of no value (for this notion is vain and introduced by the devil), and does not rather represent their virtues as living images in himself, let him be anathema!

Iconoclasts, for Students of Byzantinology, were those who destroyed Icons for both Political (an appeal to the Freeholders of Asia Minor to join the Byzantine Army by catering to their religious inclinations) and Religious (retaliation from residual Manichaeans, Gnostics, Arians, and Monophysites left ofer from previous religious controversies) reasons. The Seventh Ecumenical Council of 787 in Nicea settled the issue once and for all, though some critics such as John Calvin did not accept it, as Calvin certainly condemned Icons. Naturally, this stand aligns John Calvin with the Iconoclasts, and along with them, the Manicheans and Gnostics.

On a personal note, I have purchased Archbishop Robert Dmitri Royster's Commentary on Epistle to the Romans. A quick perusal of this work tells me that this is going to be very deep reading, and I shall make reports on each chapter as I read it (That should take a year!). Second, as I scanned the critical passages in Romans 9, I noticed that St, Irenaeus was heavily quoted, along with St. John Chrysostom and Origen. Archbishop Dmitri, though a fair man, apparantly has no sympathy for the Calvinist interpretation of Romans. I've waited a lifetime for a work such as this, and I hope that I can finish it within my lifetime. I feel that I have had to prepare for this book for a lifetime.

Monday, December 15, 2008

A Book Report: Against Heresies by St. Irenaeus

Let us start with this book's most obvious fault: It is incredibly boring! Unless you get the point of the book, all you get is Bragging Rights from reading it. The plot is repetitive. Written in the pretensive diction required to fairly state the Doctrines of the Gnostics, the plot is that a god and a goddess make love, have a godling, and give their little godling a ridiculous name. The little godling grows up, finds another goddess to fall in love with and procreate with and another godling is born to recieve another ridiculous name. This goes on for 20-30 pages. In St. Irenaeus'es Obvious Defense with respect to boredom, he is quoting typical Gnostic Gospels, so that the Gnostics are the Real Bores!

Then, St. Irenaeus gets to the point. Why would gods and goddess procreate just to give their little godlings ridiculous names? Would not these gods and godessess, the dieties of the Gnostics, be of questionable Wisdom, and therefore not be dieties at all? This is the highlight of the book.

Then, the book gets REALLY BORING!!! St. Irenaeus states that this mindless procreation and baby-naming is the boilerplate of all of the varities of Gnostic Scripture. The rest of the book becomes a Taxonomy of the Gnostics, analogous to a Field Guide to the birds of a given area. St. Irenaeus goes into the various species of Gnostics and their holy books, in much the same manner that a Bird Watcher would go about writing a Field Guide. [There goes a Ruby Crested Gnostic now! Listen to his distinctive warble!]

Despite its obvious shortcomings, Against Heresies is a VERY NECESSARY book! It is the first guide to heterodox beliefs by a Christain author. Historically, this book became the driving force that prevented the Gnostics from hijacking Early Christianity in its Infancy by intermingling their Scripture with Christain Scripture. Against Heresies did its job in the only way it could, and its influence is as great as any other book on Christianity. Without this book, the Bible might not have been compiled for several hundred more years, if at all.