1.3 The Intertextual Nature of Irenaeus' Scripture Reading
chapter 1 As the Bishop of Lyons in the latter part of the second century, Irenaeus stands amid this confluence of intertextual pressures. He likely spent time with Justin in Rome, whose Hellenistic training is widely recognized. He came to Lyons from Asia Minor, where he heard the teaching of Polycarp. While his work is set against the theological and philosophical speculation of the Gnostics, he also mentions interactions with Jews, and a number of Hellenistic writers. At the same time, no single influence can explain the diversity of the intertextual performance in Irenaeus. Instead, as I will argue in the next section, textual integration for Irenaeus is based upon the theological notion of scripture harmonization or consonance derived from his understanding of a theology of history and revelation.
1.3
The Intertextual Nature of Irenaeus' Scripture Reading 1.3.1
Introduction The appreciation for Irenaeus' intertextual reading of scripture must begin with a more general discussion of the nature of Irenaeus' hermeneutic framework and his interest in scriptural consonance. Evaluations of Irenaeus' discussion of hermeneutics and his applied exegesis consistently observe that textual harmonization is central to his scriptural interpretation.32 For Irenaeus the scriptures, beginning with creation, is entirely consonant. Henning Reventlow even suggests Irenaeus' most significant contribution to the history of biblical interpretation is that "he laid the foundation for the concept of harmony for understanding individual passages of Scripture."33 Irenaeus also offers the earliest and most extensive integration of the prophets and apostles in the post-apostolic age.
32 See the studies: Herra, Irénée de Lyon Exégète (Etude Historique: Paris, 1920). M. Jourjon,
"Saint Irénèe lit la Bible," in Le monde grec ancien et la Bible, 153–70 (Paris: Beauchesne,
1984). De Andia, "Irénèe théologien de l' unité," NRT 109 (1987): 31–48. De Andia, "Modéles de l' unité des testaments Semon Irénée de Lyon," StuPat 21 (1989). Simonetti, "Per Typical as vera: Note sull' esegesi di Ireneo, VetChr 18 (1981): 357–82. Margerie, introduction, 69.
Norbert Brox, "Irenaeus and the Bible," in Handbook of Patristic Exegesis, vol 1, ed. Charles
Kannengiesser (Leiden: Brill, 2004): 483–506. Robert Grant and David Tracy, A Short
History of the Interpretation of the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 49–50.
33 Henning Graf Reventlow, History of Biblical Interpretation: Vol 1: From the Old Testament to Origen (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2009), 173. Originally published: Epochen der Bibelauslegung Band 1: Vom Alten Testament bis Origenes (Müchen: Verlag C.H. Beck,
1990).
INTRODUCTION
This proclivity for scripture consonance has some resonance with the concept of harmonia that developed in Greco-Roman rhetorical and philosophical traditions, but it is most at home in his doctrine of revelation, and more precisely his theology of creation. Irenaeus argues, on the one hand, that God the Father, by means of the Word and Wisdom, has created all things and this creation, though composed of many and various element, is uniformly harmonious. At the same time, the scriptures, which articulate the history of salvation beginning from creation, are given by the same God in varied and diverse forms, but likewise when interpreted properly all portions of scripture are found to be perfectly harmonious and theologically consistent. This perspective of scriptural consonance, moreover, authorizes Irenaeus to use any particular method of exegesis, so long as that method proves the consonance, and not the dissonance, of scripture. Irenaeus is not beholden to any standardized method, but instead fashions a variety of intertextual relationships largely based upon his own extensive knowledge of the scriptures. Naturally, Irenaeus is reading and engaging the writings of other thinkers, but his exegesis is highly intensive and draws on a wide range of scriptural passages. Thus, as he writes his theological polemic against Gnosis in Adversus Haereses, Irenaeus consistently integrates the scriptural witness as a means to express the apostolic teaching. While scripture consonance does not solve all the ambiguities in scripture, because some things must be left to God, it is the principal means by which Irenaeus makes sense of the diverse utterance of scripture.
1.3.2
Consonance in Irenaeus' Theology of Creation and Theology of Scripture The continuity between Irenaeus' theology of revelation and theology of creation is worked out most clearly in his polemical discussions against Gnosticism. In Haer. 1 he provides a detailed catalog the tenants of the various
Gnostic schools with a specific emphasis on the Gnostic views of cosmology and cosmogony. This is where the hermeneutical differences between Irenaeus and his opponents begin. Then in Haer. 2, he counters them on particularly crucial points of doctrine, or what Irenaeus calls "major heads" (magna capitula) of their theological system.34 Contrary to the Gnostics, the first "head" of doctrine is a theology of creation that confesses God as the Creator of all things.35 Irenaeus continually returns to this summary as the most basic statement of the apostolic faith. For example in Haer. 4.20.4 Irenaeus writes, "There
34 Haer. 2.pf.2.
35 Haer. 2.1.1.
chapter 1 is therefore one God, who by the Word and Wisdom created and arranged all things" (Unus igitur Deus, qui Verbo et Sapientia fecit et aptavit omnia).36
This view of a theology of creation is also the starting point for his theological exegesis and explains why Irenaeus take great pains in proving the errors of Gnostic cosmology. In Irenaeus' reasoning there is a necessary association between a theology of creation and scriptural interpretation. The true understanding of scripture is predicated upon a true confession of who God is and God's work in creation. This is also why Irenaeus focuses on the errors of the Gnostic exegetical practices of numerology and gematria in Haer. 2, which he sees as closely associated with their theology of creation. According to Irenaeus, the Gnostics employ a type of Neopythagorean numerology that attempts to validate their theology system through numbers and letters.37 Logically speaking Irenaeus argues that the good interpreter must acknowledge that the numbers derive from the system, not the system from the numbers. The Gnostics read creation from the wrong perspective. Their inductive reasoning creates divine realties from the numbers represented in creation. They should instead work deductively from the first premise that God is the Creator of all things, in order to give unity to the diversity in creation.
In Haer. 2, this hermeneutical continuity between creation and interpretation culminate in the key section of Haer. 2.25–28, which Schoedel terms a "small tractate on theological method."38 In response to Gnostic numerology,
Irenaeus restates his first premise that "all things have clearly been made by God harmonious and beautiful with great wisdom and care"39 Then he adds a few lines later: "There are many and varied things in creation, and they are well ordered and harmonious in relation to the whole creation, though considered individually they are opposed to each other and discordant."40 The Gnostics observe the discordant nature of creation and, moving from these realities to their system, assume a theological dualism that imagines a diversity of emanations or divine beings working in and through creation. In spite of this diversity, Irenaeus interprets that sensible world as a unified and organized arrangement, which is the product of God's creative wisdom. Connecting the 36 Similar statements surface in Haer. 1.10.1, Haer. 2.1.1, and Haer. 3.24.2. From this premise,
Irenaeus' theology of creation is described in terms of a "Trinitarian" act of God the Father creating all things by means of the Son and the Spirit.
37 Haer. 2.24.2 and Haer. 2.25.1.
38 William R. Schoedel, "Theological Method in Irenaeus (Adversus Haereses 2.25–28)," JTS
35 (1984), 31–49, 31.
39 Haer. 2.25.1.
40 Haer. 2.25.1.
INTRODUCTION
harmony of creation with the Wisdom and Spirit of God, Anthony Briggman writes, "the harmonic effect of the wise activity of God in creation is also the effect of the creative activity of Wisdom."41 The Spirit of God is the wisdom of God and the work of the Spirit naturally produces a wise and harmonious creation.
In the same context, Irenaeus argues that creation and the great diversity of the sensible world must be harmonized (apta) with a "fundamental system of truth" (subiacenti ueritatis argumento).42 He suggests the creation is not meaningless or empty, but points to the basic assumption that "all things have come from the one and same God" (Omnia enim ex uno et eodem Deo).43 The harmony in creation naturally raises questions about the origin of these coherent elements. In this regard Irenaeus and the Gnostics have competing theological systems that hinge upon their theology of creation and interpretation of the harmony or disharmony in creation.
To illustrate the creative harmony, he appeals to the instrument of a lyre, which has many different notes, but when it is played there is heard only "one harmonious melody" (consonantem unam melodiam).44 A few chapters latter he will apply the same identical phrase (thus seemingly implying the same illustration) to the diverse elements of scripture. Like the notes of the lyre, each element in creation worthy of its own individual analysis, and when studied individually Irenaeus readily admits that the elements may even appear discordant and contradictory. However, the only way forward is not disparity or confusion, or even seeking after some other god or system of truth to make sense of the enigmas, but instead holding fast to basic doctrine of God as Creator of all things. The nature of creatureliness necessitates a boundary on theological speculation, because only the Creator is without limits.45 This is, in the words of John Behr, the "unalterable fact of creation."46 God is always the same, but humankind must receive a "beginning, middle, and addition with increase" (initium et medietatem et adjectionem et augmentum).47 For Irenaeus,
God is completely self-sufficient, but the creature has unremitting need and 41 Anthony Briggman, Irenaeus of Lyons and the Theology of the Holy Spirit, 140. This is explicit in Haer. 4.20.4, where Irenaeus uses the wisdom texts of Prov 3:19–20, Prov 8:22–
25, and Prov 8:27–31 in connection with Gen 1:26 to explain the Trinitarian nature of God creating in Genesis.
42 Haer. 2.25.1.
43 Haer. 2.25.1.
44 Haer. 2.25.1.
45 Haer. 2.25.4.
46 Behr, Asceticism, 37.
47 Haer. 4.11.2.
chapter 1 will always be learning.48 To make his point clearer, he reflects upon Paul's statement in 1 Cor 8:1: "knowledge puffs up but love builds up."49 He elevates epistemological humility and asserts that it is better to know nothing about the created world and love God, than to fall into confusion by seeking out answers to speculative questions.
Given this disparity between the Creator and creature, Irenaeus draws a direct correlation between this theology of creation and his theology of scripture. The distinction is something of a rhetorical general-to-particular line of reasoning. Within the general realm of revealed knowledge in creation resides in the particular revelation of the scriptures. The scriptures are the particular revelation of God that comes, in the words of Irenaeus, "under our eyes" (ante oculos nostros, cf. Psalm 78(79):10).50 The scriptures demarcate the particular knowledge that "God gave" (dedit . . . Deus) to humankind in order that they might gain a certain degree of understanding of divine revelation. So Irenaeus writes:
The sound and safe and religious and truth-loving mind will readily apply itself to the things of God placed within the power of men and granted to our knowledge. It will make progress in them because by daily exercise it will make easy for itself the acquisition of knowledge. These are the things that come under our eyes and are expressed in the Sacred
Scriptures clearly and unambiguously by the words themselves.51
48 D. Jeffrey Bingham, "Christianizing Divine Aseity: Irenaeus reads John" in The Gospel of John in Christian Theology, eds. Richard Bauckham and Carl Mosser (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2008): 53–67, 55. Steenberg distinguishes between spatial, temporal, and cooperative self-sufficiency. Steenberg, Irenaeus, 73.
49 Haer. 2.26.1.
50 It may be that Irenaeus derives this phrase from Psalm 78(79):10. Harnack discusses this phrase. Harnack, History of Dogma, 2:232 n473.
51 Haer. 2.27.1. All translations of Adversus Haereses are made in consultation with a series of translations and critical editions including the English translations in Roberts, A., and J. Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers. Vol. 1. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), Unger,
Dominic J., John J. Dillon, St. Irenaeus of Lyons: Against the Heresies (Book 1), ACW 55 (New
York: Newman Press, 1992). Unger, Dominic J. John J. Dillon, Michael Slusser, St. Irenaeus of Lyons: Against the Heresies (Book 2), ACW 65 (New York: Newman Press, 2012), Unger,
Dominic J. John J. Dillon, Matthew Steenberg, St. Irenaeus of Lyons: Against the Heresies
(Book 3), ACW 64 (New York: Newman Press, 2012), Rousseau, A (et al.) Contre les hérésies, Livre I–V. 10 vols. Sources Chrétiennes, nos. 100.1–2, 152–3, 210, 211, 263–64, 293–4,
Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1965–1982). I also consulted Rousseau's French translation in Sources Chrétiennes. In some instances I have updated or altered the language of these
INTRODUCTION
Irenaeus' transition from a theology of creation to a theology of scripture is an epistemological distinction from the general aspects of revelation that are ambiguous to specific revelation that is plain. The scriptures, moreover, are revealed knowledge because they are expressed "in the words themselves"
(ipsis dictionibus). These scriptures, then, comprised in words, make up the "body of truth" (ueritate corpus), that continues to be "harmonious in its members and without disorder" (simili aptatione membrorum et sine concussione).52
In this line of reasoning, the writings of scriptures are the only sure means to attain true knowledge of God and creation. As Irenaeus writes, the scripture express plainly that God made all things through the Word including all things heavenly and earthly. The good and faithful interpreter will apply themselves humbly to the things of God that are plain and obvious in the scriptures, in order that they might grow in love for God.53
Irenaeus recognizes, however, that this argument raises the question of the enigmas contained in the scriptures themselves. What is the proper response when an interpreter encounters ambiguities in the plain revelation of scripture? In this instance, Irenaeus' posits the same epistemological tension. The scriptures are given by the Word of God and the Spirit and are "perfect" (perfectae), but even in the scriptures there are things that must remain unknown.
This is necessary because only the Creator is omniscient, while the creature is always learning. The creature may grow in their knowledge of God and gain some insight to enigmatic questions, but never comprehend all the mysteries of the faith.
In this context, Irenaeus describes his general approach to exegesis based upon his theology of creation and theology of scripture saying: all the scripture given us by God harmonizes, and the parables harmonize with the things that are expressly stated, and the plain statements explain the parables. Thus, through the many voices of the passages there will be heard among us one harmonious melody that hymns praises to God who made all things.54 translations based upon the Latin or the Greek retroversion, or in order to emphasize a particular aspect of Irenaeus' terminology.
52 Haer. 2.27.1. A few lines later he reiterates this basic point only in this instance actually specifies the scriptures as the writings of the prophets and Gospels. Haer. 2.27.2.
53 Haer. 2.28.1.
54 Haer. 2.28.3.
chapter 1 In the same way that creation is composed of a variety of elements working in harmony, so also is scripture composed of a variety of passages working in harmony. The clearer expressions in scripture explain the ambiguities, so that, once again like a lyre, they sound together into "one harmonious melody." To be sure, Irenaeus does not demarcate between the nature of revelation in creation and scripture; both are from God and both are perfectly consistent. This reasoning naturally also assumes a close association between text and reality, the narrative and events depicted in scripture are in every way continuous with the realties in creation about which they speak.
1.3.3
Scripture Consonance as Consistent Summary of Scripture Reading With the harmonious nature of scripture firmly in place, Irenaeus reiterates scriptural consonance throughout his work in various summary statements and various illustrations. Levesque has argued that there a clear "scheme" to the logic of his arguments that centers on consonance of the church's faith contrary to the disharmony of the Gnostic system.55 Irenaeus' theological appeal to consonance is most evident through the analysis of two key terms for harmony including: consonare and aptare, as well as their cognates. Irenaeus also uses a series of rhetorical illustrations that emphasize the church's unified reading of scripture over and against the Gnostic discord. These aspects communicate that Irenaeus' exegesis is an outworking of this theological perspective on scriptural harmony. Together his theology of scripture and descriptions of consonare form the basis of his approach to reading scripture intertextually.
1.3.3.1
Consonare and Aptare and the Harmony of Scripture Irenaeus' emphasis on scripture consonance is evident in the diversity of theological terms and concepts he uses to distinguish between the consistency of the faith of the church and the dissonance of the Gnostic system. While there are a number of terms, the most consistent terms are consonare ("to harmonize" or "to sound together") and aptare ("to fit" or "to adapt") and their cognates consonatia (harmonized) and apta (adapted).56 Irenaeus uses the two
55 G. Levesque, "Consonance chrétienne et dissonance gnostique dans Irénée Adversus haereses IV 18,4 à 19,3," StuPat. 16.2 (1985): 193–96, 193.
56 Words studies on these terms also show that he tends to employ the verbal forms consonare and aptare in Haer. 1–2 in order to describe the process of harmonization, while the nouns are concentrated in Haer. 3–5 where he composes his own theological framework.
The noun apta is found in the following sections: Haer. 1.8.1(3), Haer. 1.9.3, Haer. 1.9.4,
Haer. 1.20.3, Haer. 1.22.1, Haer. 2.4.1, Haer. 2.13.8, Haer. 2.14.1, Haer. 2.14.6, Haer. 2.24.4, Haer.
2.25.1, Haer. 2.30.9 (2), Haer. 2.35.4, Haer. 3.17.1, Haer. 3.20.5. The verb aptare is also found
INTRODUCTION
terms together (consonare and aptare) in a number of sections (Haer. 1.10.2, 2.15.2, 2.25.2, 2.28.2, 3.12.11, 4.14.2, 4.38.3, and 5.36.3), but they are directly linked in Haer. 4.38.3 when he describes how God's wisdom is expressed in having made all things "harmonious and consistent" (apta et consonantia). He uses these terms to convey both the sense of continuity among interpretations of scripture within the church and the continuity among the contents of scripture itself.57
In the classical sense, consonare (or consonantia) is a rhetorical term that comprises both "logical coherence and aesthetic fitness."58 It is closely related to the Greek concept of harmonia that means simply "joining together" and that indicated any king of equilibrium in Greco-Roman society including musical, social, political, and marital aspects.59 The term harmonia was employed by a variety of classical authors beginning with Homer. The works of Plato and Aristotle frequently used the term to describe the symphonic joining together of musical instruments.60 Briggman analyzes the background to Irenaeus' use of the illustration of the lyre in Haer. 2.25.2 and observes similar illustrations in Plato, Philo, and Heraclitus, whose use of the lyre imagery is also quoted by Hippolytus.61
At the same time, it seems that Irenaeus' appeal to consonare shows some dependence upon scripture. In Haer. 4.14.2, he emphasizes the importance for exegeting texts within the economic trajectory of salvation history, which he terms the "harmony of salvation" (consonantiam salutis). Rousseau references in the following sections: Haer. 1.pf.2, Haer. 1.8.3, Haer. 1.10.2, Haer. 1.19.4, Haer. 1.21.2, Haer.
1.31.3, Haer. 2.pf.2, Haer. 2.2.4, Haer. 2.5.1, Haer. 2.13.10, Haer. 2.15.2, Haer. 2.19.4, Haer. 2.25.1,
Haer. 2.30.4, Haer. 3.5.2, Haer. 3.11.1, Haer. 3.12.9, Haer. 3.12.11, Haer. 3.16.6, Haer. 3.16.7 (2),
Haer. 3.19.3, Haer. 4.11.1, Haer. 4.12.2, Haer. 4.13.3, Haer. 4.14.2 (2), Haer. 4.15.2, Haer. 4.15.2
(2), Haer. 4.16.5, Haer. 4.20.6, Haer. 4.25.1, Haer. 4.25.3, Haer. 4.30.3, Haer. 4.34.5, Haer.
4.38.3, Haer. 4.39.3, Haer. 4.40.2, Haer. 5.24.3, Haer. 5.26.1, Haer. 5.28.1(2), Haer. 5.28.4,
Haer. 5.36.5. References to consonare and its cognates include: Haer. 1.10.2, Haer. 2.10.1,
Haer. 2.15.2, Haer. 2.25.2, Haer. 2.28.2, Haer. 3.11.8, Haer. 3.12.11–12, Haer. 3.13.3, Haer.
4.14.2, Haer. 4.18.4, Haer. 4.38.3, Haer. 4.41.4, Haer. 5.35.1, and Haer. 5.36.3.
57 Haer. 1.10.2, Haer. 3.12.9, 11, Haer. 4.11.1, Haer. 4.25.1, 3, and Haer. 4.38.4. Irenaeus will also use apta and aptum to characterize his response and other aspects of the fitness of creatures and creation. Haer. 2.pf.2, Haer. 2.5.1, Haer. 4.11.1, Haer. 4.12.3, Haer. 4.13.3, Haer.
4.14.2, Haer. 4.15.2, Haer. 4.16.5, Haer. 4.20.6, Haer. 4.25.1, Haer. 4.30.3, Haer. 4.34.5, Haer.
4.49.3, Haer. 4.40.2, Haer. 5.24.3, Haer. 5.26.1, and Haer. 5.28.2, 4.
58 Osborn, Irenaeus of Lyons, 159.
59 Sheramy Bundrick, Music and Image in Classical Athens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 140.
60 Ibid. 140.
61 Briggman, Irenaeus of Lyons, 142–5.
chapter 1 this as an allusion to the parable of the Prodigal Son, where the son hears the "music" or "symphony" (συμφωνίας), a term closely associated with harmonia, and runs to his father's house.62 In the same context, Irenaeus also points to the language of φωνή or "voice" where it applies to the Spirit in Rev 1:15. The harmony of the music in the parable of the Prodigal Son is, for Irenaeus, representative of the harmony of the work of the Spirit orchestrating the progress of salvation within the divine economy. In Haer. 4.20.7 he also describes the manifold ways that God in Christ has directed salvation history, such as the various prophecies and theophanies, with a succession of rhetorical terms that illustrate the harmonious nature of all salvific events that are fittingly and properly arranged in and through Christ.
In addition to consonare, he also employs the term aptare meaning "to adapt" or "to fit," to describe the unity of scripture.63 Like consonare, there is a long history of "fitness" (aptum) in rhetorical traditions and classical thought.
The origins of the term extend back at least to a Pythagorean sense of harmony as it applies to cosmology and music. It is also used by Aristotle as an essential element of proper rhetorical speech.64 Like consonare, Irenaeus frequently uses this term in exegetical contexts and applies it to the "fitness" of the various elements of scripture.65 This is the "effect" of the work of Wisdom in creation. The significance of the terms "does not lie in the particular verbs
62 See also Luke 5:36. Other uses of the term symohoneo, which also means "to agree" and its cognates are found in Matt 18:19, Matt 20:2, 13, Luke 5:36, Acts 5:9, Acts 15:15, 1 Cor 7:5, and 2 Cor 6:15. In the LXX these terms appear in: Gen 14:3, 2 Kings 12:8, 4 Mac 7:7, 14:3, 6–7,
Eccl 7:14, Isa 7:2, and Dan 3:5. The terms harmozo and harmonia are not found in the New
Testament but in the LXX they appear in: 2 Sam 6:5, 2 Sam 6:14, 2 Mac 14:22, 3 Mac 1:19,
Psalm 151:2, Prov 8:30, Prov 17:7, Prov 19:14, Wis 16:20, Nah 3:8, Ezek 23:42, and Ezek 37:7.
These passages establish the possibility of scriptural basis for these terms.
63 Passages that use apta in this sense include: Haer. 1.pf.2, Haer. 1.8.1, Haer. 1.9.3–4, Haer.
1.20.3, Haer. 2.13.10, and Haer. 2.19.4. Passages that use consonare in this sense include:
Haer. 2.15.2, Haer. 4.18.4, and Haer. 5.35.1.
64 Aristotle, Rhet 3–7, especially Rhet 7.
65 Other related terms include: Textum (woven fabric, Haer. 1.8.1) Constans (consistent),
Congruum (agreeing), Coaptare (to fit), Aptare (to fit, Haer. 1.9.3, Haer. 1.18.1, Haer. 4.20.4,
Apta (adapted), Compingere (to join together), Consonare (to harmonize), Consonantia
(harmonized), Disponere (to arrange), unitatem (to unify), and transpose (Haer. 1.18.1).
The notion of harmony is also found in other terms such as the related concept of "order"
(ordo; ordinatio). Like consonare the term is ontologically oriented because it assumes
"God made all things with measure and order" (omnia enim mensura et ordine Deus facit).
The ordo of scripture supplies a temporal or chronological aspect to the nature of scriptural harmony.
INTRODUCTION
used, but rather in the common effect associated with the terms."66 Repeatedly Irenaeus circles back to these terms (consonare and aptare) in exegetical contexts (i.e. Haer. 1.8.1–10.2, 1.22.1–2, 2.25.1, 2.30.4–9, 3.11–12, 4.11–16) as a means to express the harmony of scripture. Farkasfalvy goes so far as to say that the consistent use of consonare in exegetical contexts gives the impression that it serves as a "technical term of his exegesis."67
When he deploys these terms, Irenaeus argues for the harmony among of the contents of scripture and also among the interpretations of scripture within the church. Beginning in Haer. 1.10.1 he describes how the church affirms the apostolic doctrine in one accord and hands it down in "harmony"
(consonanter).68 He acknowledges the diversity of nations and languages that comprise the church, but nevertheless affirms that throughout all this diversity there is unity in the church's doctrine of faith. In Haer. 3.12.11 he asserts that all the apostles agree (consonantes) in their confession of the Creator, and all are united in their understanding of the continuity between the Mosaic Law and the New covenant. Then, in Haer. 3.12.12 he extends his reflection on the covenants arguing that though they are distinct they all maintain "unity and harmony" (unitatem et consonantiam). In Haer. 3.11.8, he observes theological continuity between the Gospels and the four living creatures of Rev 4:7, saying that the Gospels "harmonize" (consonantia) with nature of the creatures around Christ's throne.69 Each of the faces of the living creatures characterizes one of the four Gospels: the Human face is Matthew, the Eagle is Mark, the Ox is Luke, and the Lion is John. In Haer. 3.13.3, Irenaeus claims that Paul's autobiographical statements in Galatians "harmonize" (consonantes) with Luke's account of the apostles in the Acts of the Apostles. In Haer. 3.12.9 Irenaeus reports that all Paul's epistles are "consonant" (consonant) with his declaration that there is one God who created all things (Acts 14:15–17).
Amid his commentary on Paul in Haer. 3.12, Irenaeus interjects a comment that epitomizes the general nature of his intertextual hermeneutic saying, "proofs in the Scriptures cannot be shown except from the Scriptures themselves" (ostensiones quae sunt in Scripturis non possunt ostendi nisi ex ipsis Scripturis). In other words, the interpretation of scripture necessitates
66 Briggman, Irenaeus of Lyons, 140.
67 Farkasfalvy, "Theology of Scripture," 328.
68 Haer. 1.10.2.
69 He connects this text with the description of the Cherubim in Psalm 79:2(80:1). He observes correspondence between "fourfold" objects, that is a unified object containing four distinct elements. He mentions that the earth is comprised of four zones with four directional winds.
chapter 1 scripture. Irenaeus has already informed the reader that in Haer. 3 he will confront his opponents with proofs from the scriptures, but in this case these proofs are based in scriptural harmony. These proofs from the scriptures yield lengthy arguments that condense the manifold witness of the scriptures, so that Irenaeus' intertextual argumentation frequently weaves texts into a complex set of intertextual networks. Considering the literary structure of Adversus
Haereses, Irenaeus' opening exegetical arguments in Haer. 3 also points to the importance of this textual networking for Irenaeus' own theological argumentation throughout Haer. 3–5.
Finally, in Haer. 4.41.4, Irenaeus references the words of the Lord in the Gospels and concludes that though the words of the Lord are numerous they are theologically harmonious since they all proclaim the same God and Father.
In the same context he describes how Paul proclaimed, "all things harmonious"
(omnia consonantia) with the preaching of the truth.70 Finally, in Haer. 5.36.3 he describes how the prophets "harmoniously" (consonanter) announce this resurrection of the faithful and restoration of creation.71 Therefore, both the summary of the faith of the church and his reading of the specific elements of scripture, including the covenants, prophets, Gospels, the words of the Lord, and the writings of Paul, are all harmonious among themselves.
On the other hand, he uses these terms in settings that contrasts the unity of the church's reading of scripture with the unharmonious and dissonant readings of the Gnostics. In Haer. 2.10.1 Irenaeus remarks that the Gnostics try to explain ambiguous passages of scripture by appealing to their myth.
Similarly, in Haer. 1.3.6, Irenaeus explains that the Gnostics "strive to adapt the good words [of scripture] to their own wicked inventions" (adaptare cupientes ea quae bene dicta sunt his quae male adinuenta sunt ab ipsis).72 The only resolution for enigmatic sayings is reading them alongside passages that are
"manifest, and harmonious, and clear" (manifestis et consonantibus et claris).73
According to Irenaeus, the Gnostic teaching deviates from the true path and the scriptural exegete becomes hopelessly lost as they wonder down various unmarked roads, so that their opinions have no agreement or connection
(inconsonanter et inconsequenter).74 Thus, while the church reads the distinct 70 Haer. 4.41.4.
71 Haer. 5.36.3.
72 For a more detailed discussion see: G.P. Luttikhuizen, Gnostic Revisions of Genesis Stories and Early Jesus Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2006).
73 Haer. 2.10.1.
74 Haer. 5.20.1.
INTRODUCTION
portions of scripture harmoniously, the Gnostic doctrines are dissonant and disrupt the theological consonance of the scriptures.
1.3.3.2
Polemical and Rhetorical Illustrations of Scriptural Consonance Alongside his emphasis on harmony and consonance, Irenaeus also provides several polemical and rhetorical illustrations of his exegesis that communicate, both directly and indirectly, a general perspective of the unity and harmony of the scriptures. His rhetorical illustrations are drawn from a variety of sources including art, music, kingship, and gymnastics.75 These illustrations place emphasis on the image or pattern of harmony, rather than the particular terminology, and each one communicates the importance of scriptural integration.
First, Irenaeus uses polemical illustrations to characterize the way Gnostic exegesis interposes dissonance into the fundamental unity of the scriptures.76
Instead of reading the scriptures coherently, the Gnostics adapt the various elements of scripture with other Gnostic sources. In Haer. 1.8.1 and 2.10.1,
Irenaeus compares Gnostic exegesis to braiding a rope of sand or weaving a patchwork of fables. He argues that the Valentinians "disregard the order and the connection of the Scriptures" (ordinem quidem et textum Scripturarum supergredientes).77 In the same context he offers his well-known example of the mosaic of the king in Haer. 1.8.1 and the Homeric cento in Haer.
1.9.4. Comparing scripture passages to tiles on a mosaic representing a king, Irenaeus describes how the Gnostic exegetes "transfer" (transferunt) passages and rearrange them to distort the image of the king and fashion the image of a fox or dog.78 The only fitting solution, for Irenaeus, is to return the tiles to their proper arrangement. Similarly, he cites a collection of Homeric verses arranged in a cento extracted from both the Iliad and the Odyssey. Just as this cento comprises an assortment of Homeric verses variously arranged to tell a different story that the author never intended, the Gnostics remove names and sayings of scripture and adapt them to their own narratives. According to Irenaeus, the faithful interpreter will recognize the words and verses, but not the themes of the storyline, and only when the verses are returned to their
75 Grant describes many of these rhetorical illustrations as well as others. Grant, "Irenaeus and Hellenistic Culture," in After the New Testament, 158–169 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1967), 167.
76 Haer. 1.pf.1, Haer. 1.3.6, Haer. 1.8.1 and Haer. 1.9.4. See also: Bingham, Irenaeus, 16–18. Behr,
The Way to Nicaea, 20.
77 Haer. 1.8.1.
78 Haer. 1.8.1.
chapter 1 proper order will the reader recognize the true story.79 Likewise only when the scriptures are framed within their proper order and connection and fitted "to the body of truth" (veritatis corpusculo) will the true meaning avail itself.
In another illustration, Irenaeus compares the isolated Valentinian interpretation of 1 Cor 15:50 to an amateur wrestler who latches onto one part (unam partem) of his opponent's body with a single move.80 Through a combination of moves, his opponent has no trouble pinning the unskilled wrestler to the ground. Not to be outdone, and to the amusement of all the spectators, the conquered wrestler foolishly maintains his hold on the one part of his opponent and tries to claim victory. In the same way, the Valentinians latch on to one verse (1 Cor 15:50) to support their anthropological dualism and, prefer to interpret the passages in isolation (ipsas, μόνον) from the actual sense of terms in relation to the rest of the Pauline corpus and salvation history.81 According to Irenaeus, by neglecting the true understanding of one passage (1 Cor 15:50) they misunderstand a multitude of others.82
Throughout his work, Irenaeus provides a variety of illustrations that communicate this same basic critique of the Gnostic division, separation, and isolation of scripture, which dissects the body of truth.83 The Gnostic reading of scripture (and Gen 1–3 in particular) purges the texts of any concept of temporality and alters the metaphors and characters in the opening drama in order to produce an original narrative. Gnostic interest in an epistemological approach to salvation, according to J. Williams, determines a variety of "exegetical changes," or careful alterations to the texts of scripture, in order to convey this theological perspective.84 In doing so, the Gnostics excise portions of scripture, isolate truths from various sources, and "redeploy them in new myths."85 The often repeated words of the author of the Apocryphon of John,
"Do not think it is as Moses said . . .," are particularly illuminating, especially in comparison to Irenaeus' defense of the authority of Moses in Haer. 2.2.5.86
79 Haer. 1.9.4.
80 Haer. 5.13.2. See also Haer. 5.14.4.
81 Haer. 5.13.2. Orbe, Teología V.1, 618–9.
82 Haer. 5.13.5.
83 Haer. 4.pf.4. See also Haer. 5.20.1–2.
84 Jacqueline Williams, Biblical Interpretation in the Gnostic Gospel of Truth From Nag
Hammadi (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988), 190.
85 Behr, The Way to Nicaea, 21.
86 ApocJohn, NHC II, 13:19–21, 22:22–24, 23:3–4, 29:6–7. See also Zlatko Pleše, Poetics of the Gnostic Universe: Narrative and Cosmology in the Apocryphon of John (Leiden: Brill,
2006), 67.
INTRODUCTION
Second, Irenaeus also describes his hermeneutics of scripture consonance with other general illustrations. I have already mentioned the use of the instrument of the lyre, where the various scriptures are the various notes of the instrument that sound together to make music. In another illustration he draws on Paul's imagery of the body in Eph 4:16/Col 2:19 to compare scriptures to the human form. He argues that the creation of all things by means of the Word as the "head" (caput) that orders the rest of the scriptural body.87 Only when an interpreter grasps this theological "head" will the remaining part of the body of scripture be fitted together properly. Those who confess the true
Creator will find themselves reading scripture in continuity with the apostolic teachings and, as a result, every word of scripture "will appear consistent" (constabit). So creation by means of the Word is a hermeneutical key that unlocks the door to unity of salvation history and the continuity of scripture. Finally, this summary also includes the methodological summaries mentioned earlier in Haer. 2.27.1. Following his summary of his theology of revelation and theology of scripture, he argues that ambiguous expressions ought to be interpreted in correspondence with the "body of truth" (veritatis corpus) in order to yield the "similar adaptation of its members" (simili aptatione membrorum) and avoid any "disturbance" (concussione) of its parts.88 In all these ways Irenaeus' description of the exegetical task, both directly and indirectly, is an emphasis on scriptural consonance and his intention to integrate scripture is essential to his reading of Gen 1–3.
1.3.4
Scripture Consonance in Irenaeus' Applied exegesis Therefore, in both word and image, Irenaeus' theological exegesis is shaped by a perspective of scriptural consonance. When the Bishop of Lyons turns to scripture he assumes that every passage is theologically consistent and he reads scripture as a coherent summary of the continuous work of God. The extension of this concept of scripture consonance to the level of his applied exegesis is evidenced by a willingness to use any particular method of exegesis that fosters textual correspondence. As he works scripture, Irenaeus' mind is actively engaged in integrating and interrelating the scriptural witness. Irenaeus shows willingness to use a variety of methods of textual correspondence including: literary reading, prophecy-fulfillment, typology, catchwords, organizational or structural function, narratival or creedal arrangements, prosopological interpretation, illustrative interpretation, and general-to-particular reasoning. In each case, Gen 1–3 is a pivotal piece of a larger exegetical puzzle that Irenaeus
87 Haer. 4.32.1.
88 Haer. 2.27.1.
chapter 1 is working to dismantle the theology of his opponents and express his own theological framework.
In order to preview these reading strategies, the following is a brief summary and description of each of these intertextual reading strategies that circumscribe the complexity and style of Irenaeus' reading of Gen 1–3 throughout his work. First, he provides a literary reading that appreciates the original literary context of Gen 1–3 and the genre of the creation accounts. He reads
Gen 1–3 as a coherent historical narrative accurately depicting the creation and formation of all things. Second, in conjunction to his literary reading,
Irenaeus also emphasizes prophetic texts that are fulfilled in Christ or the New Testament. His prophetic uses of Gen 1–3 are less focused on the original literary context, and give more attention to the correspondence between the referent discussed at a later stage of the divine economy. Third, Irenaeus' typological correspondence is closely related to the prophetic readings. His use of typology is diverse and intricate and he extends the typological framework established by Paul and others in the New Testament. Many of these connections are formed through verbal associated or patterns, while others are linked by more general conceptual or theological association. It is common for these connections to have some relation to decisive aspects of the Christ event. Fourth, Irenaeus will use verbal connections to link terms, concepts, and imagery between passages. The imagery of Gen 1–3 provides a fertile seedbed of images that produce a wide assortment of intertextual relationships are often assembled through a variety of philological associations or patterns. These catchwords frequently serve to qualify or define the meaning of related terms in other scriptural contexts. Fifth, Irenaeus will often organize or structure his work with the contents of Gen 1–3. In these instances the use of Genesis is shaped by the general arrangement of his argument and the way the Bishop of Lyons orders scriptural material in light of his polemical theology.
Sixth, Irenaeus also coordinates texts in narratival or chronological relationships. These are often presented in the form of a summary of the covenants or decisive events recorded in scripture. These narratival summaries can also assume a creedal form that provides more detailed theological explanation of the Trinitarian activity of God in creation. Seventh, Irenaeus also uses a style of reading called prosopological (or prosopographical) interpretation. This is a method that involves careful literary analysis that focuses on the interlocutors within the fabric of the textual dialogue. It gives attention to the specific characters, speakers, titles, pronouns, or persons, who are active in the narrative of Gen 1–3 and connects these specific individuals with persons of the Trinity.
Eighth, Irenaeus also applies the images and language of Gen 1–3 in an illustrative manner. These uses focus on the way the narratives and images in Gen 1–3