5. Redemption. — Of all the Church fathers, Irenaeus was the first who gave a careful analysis of the Avork of redemption, "and his view," says Dr. Schaff {Ch. Jlist. i, 297), "is by far the deepest and soundest we find in- the first three centuries. Christ, he teaches, as the sec- ond Adam, repeated in himself the entire life of man, from birth to death and hades, from childhood to man- hood, and, as it were, summed up that life and brought it under one head (this is the sense of his frequent ex- pression, 'AvnKt^aXatovv, avaKKpaXatwatr, rccapitu- lare, recapitulatio), with the double purpose (;f restoring humanity from its fall and carrying it to jjcrfeclion. Ivedemi)tion comprises the taking away of sin by the perfect obedience of Christ, the destruction of death by victory over the devil, and the communication of a new divine life to man. To accomplish this work, the Re- deemer must unite in himself the divine and human natures; for only as God could he do what man could not, and only as man could he do, in a legitimate way, what man should. By the voluntary disobedience of Adam the devil gained a power over man, but in an un- fair way, by fraud {dtssuasio). By the voluntary obe- dience of Christ that power was wrested from him by lawful means (by svadela, ])ersuasion, annomicement of truth, not overreaching or deception). This took place first in the temptation, in which Christ renewed or re- capitulated the struggle of Adam with Satan, but de- feated the seducer, and thereby liberated man from liib thraldom. But then the whole life of Christ was a con-
i
IREN^US
651
IREN^US
tinned victorious conflict with Satan, and a constant obedience to God. This obedience was completed in the suffering and death on the tree of the cross, and thus blotted out the disobedience which the first Adam had committed on the tree of knowledge. It is, however, only the negative side. To this is added the commu- nication of a new divine princijjle of life, and the per- fecting of the idea of humanity tirst effected by Christ." See Kede>ii»tion ; Okigkn. ,
G. The Sacraments. — On this subject, perhaps more than upon any other on which Irenwus has written, we meet with a vagueness of expression wliich hardly ena- bles us definitely to determine what he actually believed. But even '• Romanists tacitly admit that he says noth- ing of confirmation, ordination, marriage, or extreme unction favorable to the sacramental character which they assign to these rites. And this is ^ very strong negative testimony against the correctness of their opin- ions. If such an early writer as Iromvus, in the course of a lengthened theological work, which naturally led him to the ordinances as well as doctrines of the Church, has not a word to say in regard to the above so-called sacraments, the inference is pretty clear that they were not recognised as such in his day. . . . IMassuet makes a very lame attempt to prove from the writings of Ire- nseus that the sacrament of penance was practised in the Church of his day. There can be no doubt tliat the passages to which he refers (i, 6, 3 ; 13, 5) prove that public confession of flagrant sins was common in the Church of the "id century. This was called exoniologe- sis, and seems to have been indispensable for the removal of the censures of the Church. But there is nothing to indicate its sacramental character, and not a shadow of support can be derived from it for the popish practice of auricular confession" {Brit, and For, Ecung. Rev, Jan. 1869, p. 18). See Confession.
Oi Infant Baptism the first clear trace is found in the writings of our author, who thus writes of the sacrament of baptism (ii, 22, 4) : " Christ came to save all who are regenerated by him, infants and little children, and boys, and youths, and elders." Ho thus applies it to all ages, Christ having passed through all the stages of life f >r this purpose. Neander says of this passage (^tlist. Christian Dogmas, i, 230) : " If by the phrase re- nasci in Beam (in the Latin transl.) baptism is intend- ed, it contains a proof of infant baptism. Infantes and parvuli are distinguished; the latter possess a devel- oped consciousness, hence to them Christ is a pattern cf piety, while to the infantes he merely gives an objec- tive sanctification ; we must therefore understand the latter to mean quite little children." But the statement of Iren;i3us leads us to infer that he believed in the doc- trine of baptismal regeneration, which is strengthened by another passage (iii, 17, 1) : " And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration unto God, he said to them, ' Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'" (Compare an article on this subject in the A merican Presbijterian Review, April, 1867, p. 239 sq. ; Schaff, Church History, i, 402.)
On the Lord's Supper, also, the indefinite statements of Irenieus have given rise to much dispute. Roman- ists stoutly affirm that he declares in favor of their doc- trine of transubstantiation, and the real presence ; but this arises from a variable reading of one passage, of which Neander says (p. 238), '• According to one read- ing it is said, Verbum quod offertur Deo, which must mean the Logos which is presented to God ; therefore, the sacrifice would refer to the jjresentation of Christ himself. Yet we can hardlj' make up our minds to ac- cept this as the opinion of Irena?us, who always says that Christians must consecrate all to God in Christ's name ; for example, Eccksia offert jjer Jesum Christum. We cannot doubt that the other reading is the correct one, Verbum jjer quod efftrfur Deo." Dr. Schaff also de- clines to give the Romanists a hearing on this point, and argues fiu-ther, that Irena?us "in another place (iv,