Antidotes to Heretical Accusations Against Blessed Irenaeus

Book 5, chapter 16. Column 56. Genesis 6.

...sustains us, and those of our own age, unto life. He is present to his own creation and perfects it according to the image and likeness of God original: "imaginem & similitudinem Dei".

And those who grow worse in their malice add further charges. They bring up what he says in Book 4, chapter 30: that Enoch, a man pleasing to God, performed a mission from God to the angels. Indeed, you are blind and raging men who do not notice that he followed the Septuagint the Greek translation of the Old Testament. He called the sons of Seth "angels." Enoch was sent to these people and delivered sermons concerning the future judgment and the punishments of the wicked. He did this to call them back from the company, treachery, and crimes of the Cainites descendants of Cain, to which they were gradually becoming accustomed and corrupted, and to return them to the fear and worship of God. The most illustrious and solemn part of his preaching was included by the blessed Apostle Jude in his Epistle. We have explained these things in our commentaries and shown that the Pastor Hermas, Clement, Tertullian, Origen, and other ancients felt the same way.

Column 56. Genesis 6 and 17.

They go further, saying: The same error applies to what he affirms in Book 4, chapter 70, that men in the times of Noah could not bear fruit for God because the transgressing angels had mingled with them. What, however, is more certain or true than this? Is it not said with manifold and heavy emphasis concerning those times in Genesis, and repeatedly referenced, that the wickedness of men was great upon the earth? That every thought of the human heart was intent on evil? That all flesh had corrupted its way? That the earth was filled with iniquity? Who can doubt that so many and such great crimes were committed through the temptations and persuasions of the transgressing angels? But the Devil, they say, is the perpetual enemy of men, always watching and going about like a roaring lion, plotting snares for the human race. Furthermore, who denies this? Certainly not IRENAEUS, who equally and constantly preaches that our first parents were deceived by his action. He writes that near the end of the world, the Devil will assist the Antichrist and his ministers and satellites with all his power against the Catholic Church.

Book 3. Book 5.

They attack him because, in their judgment, he does not reason distinctly regarding the power of human strength. They claim he offers many things in that vein and twists the sayings of Christ and Paul, as can be seen in the whole of chapter 72 of Book 4. Not only there, but in chapters 9, 29, 71, and elsewhere throughout, he proves by the strongest testimonies of the Scriptures that man is endowed with libero arbitrio free will. He shows man is so exempt from all compulsion that he does not believe, hope, or love God or his neighbor unless he wills to. He does not blaspheme, fall away from the faith, kill, commit adultery, or steal unless he wills to. He most holily proves this against the Simonians followers of Simon Magus and Marcionites followers of Marcion, later against the Manichaeans and Priscillianists, and finally against you Lutherans, Calvinists, and Libertines who are reborn in this century. To this, he asserts that the protection and help of Divine grace is as necessary to this human free will as the heat of the sun and heavenly rain are to the earth so that it may produce its fruits. Since without grace we can do nothing good, nor even effectively think or will it, we are cooperatores co-workers with God. Is this not a sufficient explanation of the distribution of power?

John 15. 2 Corinthians 3. 1 Corinthians 3. Column 58, 59. John 6.

They take it with a very unfair mind that he says a free will, within his own power, was preserved for man by the Lord, not only in works but also in faith. But he proves this very thing from the words of the Son of God to the Apostles: "Do you also want to go away?" This was said when the unbelieving people of Capernaum and certain apostates were falling away from him. He openly shows that to believe or not to believe is most free. Next, he confirms it with these same words addressed to others: "Let it be done to you according to your faith," "Your faith has made you whole," and "Great is your faith." By these, we are taught that faith is ours because of the free consent of the will. Nevertheless, it is the clear gift of God, who offers, grants, and confirms it in our minds through his Spirit. I now add only this from Augustine: Anyone can enter the Church against his will; he can approach the altar against his will; he can receive the sacraments against his will; but he cannot believe unless he wills to. We have noted the rest in the marked chapters.

They are also greatly indignant at what he says: The Prophets and Apostles exhorted men to practice justice and to work for the good, because this lies within us. It is clearly placed there, with divine grace preceding and cooperating. As Paul affirms of himself: "I can do all things in him who strengthens me." "I labored more than them all." Not I alone, surely, but the grace of God with me. And elsewhere, enumerating good works, he says: "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith," etc. To others he says: "While we have time, let us do good to all." "Let us not fail in doing good," etc. For surely the Prophets erred when they said, "Learn to do well, help the oppressed, deliver the widow," etc. The Angels also erred when they said, "Prayer is good with almsgiving. Confess to the God of heaven," etc. Christ also erred, commanding, "Take heed that you do not perform your justice before men," etc. Finally, God, blessed forever, erred in commanding with such authority and weight, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart," etc., and "Honor your father and your mother," etc., if IRENAEUS fell into error by writing that the Prophets and Apostles exhorted men to justice and good works because that power is placed within us.

Revelation 22.

Again, they are disdainfully annoyed because they say he says in Book 4, chapter 30, that the Fathers before the Law was promulgated were righteous by the law of nature. First, they remarkably misrepresent the most holy Father. For he does not say they were righteous by the law of nature; he says they were righteous by the power of the Decalogue, which was written in their hearts. They loved the God who made them and abstained from injustice toward their neighbor. By this, he teaches that they, instructed by faith and Divine grace, kept the commandments of God. By this obedience, they were made more and more righteous, according to that oracle of the Spirit: "Let the righteous be justified still, and the holy be sanctified still." This process of being justified never ceases. He will increase the growth of your justice. To him who has, it shall be given, and he shall abound. Secondly, let us grant to the Centuriators that IRENAEUS said the Fathers were sanctified by the law of nature. What disadvantage or absurdity follows? Does he not prove in that place, by the authority of the express divine word, that Enoch pleased God before the Mosaic law? That Noah was a righteous and perfect man? That Abraham was called the friend of God? That Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Job were most dear servants to the living God? Is not the justice of Abel also commended by the Gospel? But these wicked and troublesome men will answer that they were righteous by faith alone, not by the observation of the law of nature. But they will never be able to prove the righteousness of faith alone by the express word of God. We, however, prove that faith alone is dead and ineffective for righteousness. Next, we prove by the testimonies of the ancients that the doctrine of faith alone was the most gross error of Simon Magus, the Valentinians, the Eunomians, and even the False Apostles. It was condemned by Peter, John, and James in their Epistles. Finally, both IRENAEUS and the theologians who followed him hold that the grace of Almighty God always precedes, accompanies, cooperates with, and crowns good works in the observation of the law of nature. Thus, these moody men have nothing about which they can justly complain.

But, lest they seem to always lie, they finally add something true, yet not entirely without manifest deception: He says Christ was baptized in his 30th year, but taught in his 40th, and was in his 50th year at various times. They mark Book 2, chapter 14, in which absolutely nothing of this sort is found. Furthermore, in chapter 19 of the same book, IRENAEUS does indeed say that Christ taught while having the age of a master, that is, his fortieth year. He strives to establish this there and in the next chapter with certain conjectures. But this escaped the most holy Father in the heat of that dispute in which he was refuting the Gnostics. The Gnostics allowed only one year for Christ's preaching, and Irenaeus was carried away too far into the opposite opinion. That this is not uncommon even for the most learned and prudent men is shown by the hyperboles and complex phrasing of blessed Paul, and also by some opinions of Augustine and Chrysostom. I pass over the opinion of one who thinks this was added to the books of IRENAEUS later, since all the manuscripts agree, and the style of speaking, with the subsequent proofs added, clearly shows that he felt this way.

Furthermore, they roar and are carried outside themselves because he speaks so properly and eloquently concerning the offering of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, as if he had to fight against their heresies even then. Concerning the offering original: "oblatione", they say, IRENAEUS in Book 4, chapter 32 (if the place is free from fraud and error), seems to speak quite inconveniently when he says: "He taught the new offering of the New Testament, which the Church, receiving from the Apostles, offers to God in the whole world." But IRENAEUS declares himself copiously in the following parts, and especially in chapter 34, that he by no means understands the offering of the consecrated bread, but of that which is yet to be consecrated for the use of the Lord's Supper, and otherwise for the use of priests and the poor. These are their words. In this, they primarily imagine through the highest fraud and malice that the passage is corrupted, so that they may diminish the weight of such great authority and render it suspect. But in truth, all the manuscripts as well as the published versions—even the copies recognized with great diligence by the heretics at Lausanne and Basel—read this way. Therefore, there is no fraud in this place, no lie, but the genuine and sincere text of Blessed IRENAEUS. Notice also the other mockery and slander of these men. They say he does not understand the offering of the consecrated bread, but of that which is to be consecrated for use. And from where is this concluded? For nothing of the sort is found in IRENAEUS; it is craftily and impiously invented by you. Next, if he understands the bread to be consecrated for the use of the supper, the priests, and the poor, then you are injurious and insulting to the most blessed Martyr, saying that he speaks inconveniently about this offering. Again, if he speaks of bread offered for the use of priests and the poor, how could he call it the "new offering of the New Testament," which had preceded in the Old Testament as something so common and public? How could he also say it is offered to God if it is distributed to the poor? Thus iniquity lies to itself from every side, and the deceits and frauds revolve back onto the necks of their authors.

Column 63.

But IRENAEUS truly speaks of the unbloody sacrifice and the sacrifice of the blood of Christ in the Eucharist. He demonstrates this against all Jewish offerings by many testimonies of the Prophets. These are his words: "Christ took that which is by nature bread, and gave thanks, saying, 'This is my body.' And the cup likewise, which is from that creation which is according to us, he confessed to be his blood, and he taught the new offering of the New Testament, which the Church, receiving from the Apostles, offers to God in the whole world," etc. Behold, an offering made to God, not to the poor; special to the New Testament, not common to both; offered by the Church, that is, the priests and pastors of the Churches, not by all people indiscriminately like alms are distributed. It is the offering of the body and blood of Christ, not a bloody one such as was made on the cross; therefore, it is an unbloody sacrifice, under the species of bread and wine already consecrated by the words of Christ, the Almighty God. All these things solidly refute and condemn the trifles and foul cavils of the heretics.

Book 4, chapter 32.

Because they strive to deceive the unlearned, saying that IRENAEUS declares himself copiously in the following sections and especially in chapter 34, let us also uncover this malicious deceit. At the very beginning of chapter 34, he writes: "Therefore the offering of the Church, which the Lord taught to be offered in the whole world, is reputed a pure sacrifice before God, and is acceptable to him," etc. Does this not openly confirm the Sacrifice of the Eucharist and convict its enemies? He adds immediately: "The Lord, willing us to offer in all simplicity and innocence, preached saying, 'When you offer your gift at the altar,'" etc. What do they say to this, those who have committed the sacrilegious and clearly Turkish a common 16th-century slur used to denote extreme infidelity or barbarism demolition of sacred altars everywhere through the Calvinists, Anabaptists, Lutherans, and new Arians? But back to IRENAEUS. "It behooves us," he says in the same place, "to make an offering to God, and in all things to be found grateful to God the Creator. The Church alone offers this pure offering to the Creator, offering to him with thanksgiving from his creation." Finally, he concludes: "The Word also offers, and we offer the word to the altar frequently and without intermission." This truly excellent and clear interpretation by IRENAEUS openly strengthens the Catholic doctrine concerning the unbloody sacrifice and does not weaken it. It altogether refutes and rejects the heresies contrary to it. Let the reader see the rest in their respective places.

Column 63.

The same Centuriators no less gnash their teeth against IRENAEUS because he asserts the invocation of Saints, saying: "The Virgin Mary was made the advocate of the virgin Eve." Book 5, chapter 19. But if she was truly made the Mother of God, than which nothing more excellent or distinguished can be imagined among created things, why should she not be a patroness for sinners before him, which is a far lesser thing? Or was she not interceding for those at the wedding feast during the shortage of wine?