Appearance      Marker   

 

<<  Contents  >>

Irenæus

Footnotes

Show All Footnotes

Show All Footnotes & Jump to 4810

Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies

[4800] See pp. 31 and 312, of this volume. We are indebted again to Eusebius for this valuable fragment from the Epistle of Irenæus to Victor Bishop of Rome (Hist. Eccl., v. 24; copied also by Nicephorus, iv. 39). It appears to have been a synodical epistle to the head of the Roman Church, the historian saying that it was written by Irenæus, “in the name of (ἐκ προσώπου) those brethren over whom he ruled throughout Gaul.” Neither are these expressions to be limited to the Church at Lyons, for the same authority records (v. 23) that it was the testimony “of the dioceses throughout Gaul, which Irenæus superintended” (Harvey).

[4801] According to Harvey, the early paschal controversy resolved itself into two particulars: (a) as regards the precise day on which our Lord’s resurrection should be celebrated; (b) as regards the custom of the fast preceding it.

[4802] Both reading and punctuation are here subjects of controversy. We have followed Massuet and Harvey.

[4803] “The observance of a day, though not everywhere the same, showed unity, so far as faith in the Lord’s resurrection was concerned.”—Harvey.

[4804] Following the reading of Rufinus, the ordinary text has μετ’ αὐτούς, i.e., after them.

[4805] This practice was afterwards forbidden by the Council of Laodicea [held about a.d. 360].

[4806] It was perhaps in reference to this pleasing episode in the annals of the Church, that the Council of Arles, a.d. 314, decreed that the holy Eucharist should be consecrated by any foreign bishop present at its celebration.

IV.

[4807] Quoted by Maximus Bishop of Turin, a.d. 422, Serm. vii. de Eleemos., as from the Epistle to Pope Victor. It is also found in some other ancient writers.

[4808] One of the mss. reads here τοῦ Θεοῦ, of God.

V.

[4809] Also quoted by Maximus Turinensis, Op. ii. 152, who refers it to Irenæus’s Sermo de Fide, which work, not being referred to by Eusebius or Jerome, causes Massuet to doubt the authenticity of the fragment. Harvey, however, accepts it.

VI.

[4810] We owe this fragment also to Maximus, who quoted it from the same work, de Fide, written by Irenæus to Demetrius, a deacon of Vienne. This and the last fragment were first printed by Feuardentius, who obtained them from Faber; no reference, however, being given as to the source from whence the Latin version was derived. The Greek of the Fragment vi. is not extant.

VII.

[4811] Taken from a work (Quæs. et Resp. ad Othod.) ascribed to Justin Martyr, but certainly written after the Nicene Council. It is evident that this is not an exact quotation from Irenæus, but a summary of his words. The “Sunday” here referred to must be Easter Sunday. Massuet’s emendation of the text has been adopted, ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ for ἐπ’ αὐτῶν.

VIII.

[4812] Cited by Leontius of Byzantium, who flourished about the year a.d. 600; but he does not mention the writing of Irenæus from which it is extracted. Massuet conjectures that it is from the De Ogdoade, addressed to the apostate Florinus.

IX.

[4813] This fragment and the next three are from the Parallela of John of Damascus. Frag. ix. x. xii. seem to be quotations from the treatise of Irenæus on the resurrection. No. xi. is extracted from his Miscellaneous Dissertations, a work mentioned by Eusebius, βιβλίον τι διαλεξέων διαφόρων.

X.

[4814] Ps. 130:7.

XII.

[4815] This sentence in the original seems incomplete; we have followed the conjectural restoration of Harvey.

XIII.

[4816] “This extract is found in Œcumenius upon 1 Pet. c. iii. p. 198; and the words used by him indicate, as Grabe has justly observed, that he only condensed a longer passage.”—Harvey.

XIV.

[4817] From the Contemplations of Anastasius Sinaita, who flourished a.d. 685. Harvey doubts as to this fragment being a genuine production of Irenæus; and its whole style of reasoning confirms the suspicion.

[4818] Matt. xv. 17.

[4819] Gen. iii. 19.

[4820] The Greek reads the barbarous word ἀθριξίᾳ, which Massuet thinks is a corruption of ἀθανασίᾳ, immortality. We have, however, followed the conjecture of Harvey, who would substitute ἀπληξίᾳ, which seems to agree better with the context.

XV.

 

 

 

10 per page

 

 

 Search Comments 

 

This page has been visited 0428 times.

 

<<  Contents  >>