Irenaeus of Lyons: Identifying Christianity

by John Behr

This book provides a full, contextual study of St Irenaeus of Lyons, the first great theologian of the Christian tradition. John Behr sets Irenaeus both within his own context of the second century, a fundamental period for the formation of Christian identity, elaborating the distinction between orthodoxy and heresy and expounding a comprehensive theological vision, and also within our own contemporary context, in which these issues are very much alive again. Against the commonly-held position that 'orthodoxy' was established by excluding others, the 'heretics', Behr argues that it was the self-chosen separation of the heretics that provided the occasion for those who remained together to clarify the lineaments of their faith in a church that was catholic by virtue of embracing different voices in a symphony of many voices and whose chief architect was Irenaeus, who, as befits his name, urged peace and toleration.
The first chapter explores Irenaeus' background in Asia Minor, as a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna, his activity in Gaul, and his involvement with the Christian communities in Rome. The theological and institutional significance of his interventions is made clear by tracing the coalescence of the initially fractionated communities in Rome into a united body over the first two centuries.
The second chapter provides a full examination of Irenaeus' surviving writings, concentrating especially on the literary and rhetorical structure of his five books Against the Heresies , his 'refutation and overthrowal' of his opponents in the first two books, and his establishing a framework for articulating orthodoxy.
The final chapter explores the theological vision of Irenaeus itself, on its own terms rather than the categories of later dogmatic theology, grounded in an apostolic reading of Scripture and presenting a vibrant and vigorous account of the diachronic and synchronic economy or plan of God, seen through the work of Christ which reveals how the Hands of God have been at work from the beginning, fashioning the creature, made from mud and animated with a breath of life, into his own image and likeness, vivified by the Holy Spirit, to become a 'living human being, the glory of God'.

Genres: Theology, Christianity, Church History, Christian

236 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2013

About the author

Fr John Behr is Regius Professor of Humanity at the University of Aberdeen. He previously taught at St Vladimir’s Seminary, where he served as Dean from 2007-17; he is also the Metropolitan Kallistos Chair of Orthodox Theology at the Vrije Universiteit of Amsterdam and the Amsterdam Center for Orthodox Theology.

Fr John hails from England, though his family background is Russian and German – and clerical on both sides. From the Russian side, his great-grandfather was sent to London by Metropolian Evlogy to serve there as a priest in 1926; his father was also a priest, ordained by Metropolitan Anthony (Bloom), as are his brother (at St Paul’s Monastery on Mt Athos) and his brother-in-law (Sts Cyril and Methodius, Terryville, CT). His maternal grandparents met at Karl Barth’s graduate seminar in Basel, and served in the Lutheran Church in Germany, where his grandfather was a Lutheran pastor.

After completing his first degree in Philosophy in London in 1987, Fr. John spent a year studying in Greece. He finished an M.Phil. in Eastern Christian Studies at Oxford University, under Bishop Kallistos (Ware), who subsequently supervised his doctoral work, which was examined by Fr. Andrew Louth and Rowan Williams, the former Archbishop of Canterbury. While working on his doctorate, he was invited to be a Visiting Lecturer at St Vladimir’s Seminary in 1993, where he has been a permanent faculty member since 1995, tenured in 2000, and ordained in 2001. Before becoming Dean in 2007, he served as the editor of St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, and he still edits the Popular Patristics Series for SVS Press.

His doctoral work was on issues of asceticism and anthropology, focusing on St Irenaeus of Lyons and Clement of Alexandria, and was published by Oxford University Press (2000). After spending almost a decade in the second century, Fr John began the publication of a series on the Formation of Christian Theology (The Way to Nicaea, SVS Press 2001, and The Nicene Faith, SVS Press 2003). Synthesizing these studies, is the book The Mystery of Christ: Life in Death (SVS Press, 2003). In preparation for further volumes of his Formation series, Fr John edited and translated the fragments of Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia, setting them in their historical and theological context (OUP 2011). More recently Fr John published a more poetic and meditative work entitled Becoming Human: Theological Anthropology in Word and Image (SVS Press, 2013) and a full study of St Irenaeus: St Irenaeus of Lyons: Identifying Christianity (OUP, 2013). Most recently he has completed a new critical edition and translation of Origen’s On First Principles, together with an extensive introduction, for OUP (2017), and John the Theologian and His Paschal Gospel: A Prologue to Theology (OUP 2019). He is currently working on a new edition and translation of the works of Irenaeus.

His other passion is cycling, especially restoring and riding vintage bicycles including a historic Hetchins and a Dursley Pedersen. The Tour de France dominates the Behr family life during July, dictating the scheduling of important family events. Fr John’s wife, a Tour de France enthusiast and armchair cyclist, teaches English at a nearby college, and their two sons and daughter are being taught to appreciate the finer points of French culture: the great “constructeurs” of the last century, La Grande Boucle, and … cheese.

Reviews

[Peter Bradley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Irenaeus of Lyons: Identifying Christianity (Christian Theology in Context) by John Behr

Please give my Amazon review a helpful vote - https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-re...

I had always thought of Irenaeus as a cataloger of heresies. After reading John Behr's book, I gained an appreciation for Irenaeus as a theologian. The chief effect of this book has been to make me resolve to attempt to read Irenaeus's works.

Behr's book seems to fall into three parts. In the first part, Behr seems to be interested in retrieving the reputation of Irenaeus from that of being a heresy hunter. Behr's thesis seems to be that the Great Church was tolerant of other versions of Christianity, but it was the heretics, such as the Gnostic Valentinians and the Marcionites, who withdrew from contact with the Great Church.

I'm sure there was a lot of that going on, but the idea that orthodox Christians were comfortable with sects that wanted to eliminate the Old Testament, identify the Creator God with evil, or read the Bible as a total metaphor for various quasi-divine emanations seems like a tough sell in light of the willingness of orthodox Christians to anathematize heretics both before and after the second century AD when Irenaeus was active.

Behr spends a lot of time promoting the Lampe thesis that there was no monoepiscopacy in Rome until literally the historic 12th bishop, Eleutherus (174/5-189), the immediate predecessor of Pope Victor, about whom no one doubts were the bishop of Rome. Behr's arguments in adopting the Lampe thesis are weirdly backfiring. Thus, he points out that Ignatius of Antioch wrote his epistle to "the church in Rome" and not to a particular church in Rome, and that the Church of Rome - again, not a particular church in Rome - wrote to Corinth. Lampe argues that since no bishop is named, this means that there was no single bishop of Rome, but Behr acknowledges that this is evidence that the Christians of Rome understood that they were in some sense of single community (p. 22) (which would be consistent with some kind of hierarchy among possibly fractionated communities, involving a leader.) Likewise, Behr acknowledges that the Corinthians had a tradition of reading the Letter of Clement as "the letter of Clement" who was the bishop of Rome. Did they just make up that tradition after Eleutherius? That seems doubtful.

Behr also gives value to Lampe's argument that the list of bishops provided by Irenaeus was falsified because the sixth bishop bore the name "Sixtus." (p. 48) One has to wonder why the forgery didn't include "Septimus" as the seventh bishop and "Octavius" as the eighth bishop? These were, after all, not uncommon names in Rome.

On such evidence, Behr states with certainty, the basis for which was not clear, that Irenaeus's list cannot be older than Eleutherius, not only because it includes the name of Eleutherius as the final bishop on the list but because Eleutherius was using the list to justify an "emerging understanding of the office of bishop." (p. 48) Thus, Eleutherius omits Peter as a bishop and makes himself 12th, with a totally fictional "Sixtus" as sixth, to support his claim to fullness of the apostolic office. (p. 48-49.)

What a con job. One has to wonder why they gave the show away by naming the sixth bishop "Sixtus"? A lack of imagination? They couldn't have used "Septimus," "Primus," "Octavius" or "Gaius."

Also, Irenaeus was literally in Rome during this period. Wouldn't he have learned when he went asking about prior bishops that there really hadn't been prior bishops? This seems odd. Irenaeus shares that he listened to the teachings of both Polycarp and Polycarp's teacher, John, the Beloved Disciple, who knew Jesus Christ. Irenaeus knew what it was like to get information from the source.

It's not clear what this discussion means to a book about Irenaeus. Irenaeus obviously believed in the credibility of the list. In fact, its credibility is a major part of his argument for the validity of the Great Church. So, why the effort to discredit Irenaeus's apologetics? Behr is an Orthodox priest, which may have something to do with why he finds Lampe's thesis so compelling.

I will give one part of this part of the book major props. I had known about Pope Eleutherius fight over the dating of Easter. I knew that he proposed to excommunicate those who held to the Jewish-based dating of Easter. I had always thought this meant most of the churches in Asia. Behr explains that this probably referred to immigrant communities in Rome that continued to follow the traditions of their home country. Eleutherius was persuaded by Polycarp not to go down this road, although later the entire Great Church adopted the Roman position.

This makes a lot of sense. Rome was a great city with a lot of immigrants. Immigrants tend to stay within their own communities. They don't adopt the customs of their host community for a long time, sometimes never. It seems reasonable that people from Antioch or Alexandria in Rome might have continued to go to churches in Rome that had ties to, and recognized the authority, of the bishops back home. That, in fact, is what we still see in many American cities today.

This also might explain some of the conflicting evidence on Lampe's "fractionation thesis." There were immigrant communities in Rome, who might have their own leaders, with ties to their prior homes. There were also native Christian churches with a native Roman bishop. As the host community with connections to Roman society, the Roman church would have been understood as the leading church, which is why Pope Clement of Rome could write a letter to Corinth on behalf of Rome. It also explains what church would be getting the mail from Ignatius and Polycarp, although the mail might have been lateralled in via connections between the home church in Antioch and the colony church in Rome, which is how things are usually done. In any event, it would have been understood that these colony churches were on Roman territory. Finally, it would explain how "fractionation" ended without any record of the usual human conflict associated with such realignments - the immigrant churches always understood that they were on Roman territory subjected ultimately to the Roman bishop.

The second part of the book involves a deeper look into Irenaeus. I may have known it before, but it stuns me that Irenaeus knew someone who knew Jesus. The conventional datings of their lives do not make them contemporaries, but if you adjust the dating on both slightly and they could have overlapped, and Irenaeus says he listened to John.

Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp and affirmatively testifies that Polycarp was a student of John. This is far more likely under conventional dating. It also suggests how broad a sweep of history can be encompassed by three lives. An example: the man who taught me saber fencing in my teens remembered seeing Czarist cavalry in the streets of Warsaw. Let's put that at 1910. My daughter will be able to tell her children when she is 80 in 2080 that she knew someone who knew someone with first-hand knowledge of Czarist troops in the streets of Warsaw. That will be 170 years in the past by that time.

It also indicates why Irenaeus accounts of Christian teachings may contain a fair bit of the understanding of the early church.

The final and lengthiest part of the book is a minute analysis of Irenaeus's writings. Behr really flourishes in this part. I will not attempt to recap any part of it, but I will say that it is valuable for getting an introduction to Irenaeus's thoughts, which I will say again that I had no idea were so deep and important.

[Wyatt Graham · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful overview of Irenaeus's theology in his 2nd-century context.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

The best up-to-date research on a massively important figure for the development of 2nd century Christianity. Tightly summarizes the current work on alternative Christianities ("Gnostics," Marcionites, etc.), including the ongoing movement towards seeing these various "sects" less as sects and more as interrelated dialogical attempts to discern what Christian identity means. Over the course of the second century, in various ways, these perspectives became sects - some quite rapidly and intentionally (Marcion), some more subtly and gradually (Valentinus).

The careful, attentive work done by Fr. Behr in looking at the sources of Irenaeus (including his reconstruction of the person of Polycarp) is masterful, as is his thorough analysis of the internal structure of the books of Irenaeus's main work, Against the Heresies.

A pleasant cure for 20th century scholarship on Gnosticism and Irenaeus, which tended to diminish the brilliance of Irenaeus (either for generally Protestant concerns with the later development of a powerful episcopacy, or for a secular concern to repair our impression of the Gnostics).

[Matt]

Irenaeus of Lyon has, in modern scholarship, faced some serious criticism. The discovery of recent manuscripts of Irenaeus's opponents have opened up the possibilities of Christianities which never were. Blame has been placed at Irenaeus's feet as one of the early leaders of the patriarchal bishops who declared what was orthodox and what was heresy. Irenaeus also presents challenges for modern readers because of the nature of his surviving work. Against Heresies is a long and formidable work of theology containing the exposition of many gnostic teachings and Irenaeus's refutation of them. Even when Irenaeus turns to give a positive account of the Christian faith, he gives this exposition in a way which will seem familiar to modern Christians who are on the other side of the great Christological controversies. Most of our Christian orthodoxy runs through Irenaeus and that means we have already encountered his ideas before we get to them in his writings.

Both of the above points present challenges to any potential reader of Irenaeus, and John Behr's Irenaeus of Lyons: Identifying Christianity (IoL) is an attempt to provide an introduction to Irenaeus in his historical context. He will show that the charge leveled by modern critics is misguided, and he will also give an exposition of Irenaeus's work which shows that, while it may be hard going to get through, his work is not as familiar as we may assume on a quick read.

IoL has three main chapters, along with an introduction and a conclusion. Chapter 1 covers the historical background leading up to Irenaeus along with a background of what we know of his life, which isn't much. Chapter 2 is an overview of the structure and content of Against the Heresies. Chapter 3 is the longest chapter and it contains an exposition of Irenaeus's theology developed in chapters 3-5 of Against the Heresies.

Situating Irenaeus in his historical context helps provide some background on the various teachings of the gnostics as well as the nature of heresy. Contrary to many modern scholars, Behr shows that heresy wasn't defined by someone in power around a particular truth, but the heretics instead separated themselves. Heresy was also "not simply talking about slightly iffy ideas they're talking about people who don't want to belong with the whole spectrum of the people God has chosen. They prefer to choose their company." (Rowan Williams) Marcion and Valentinius, two of the heretics Irenaeus engaged with both separated themselves from the Christain community determined to form their own communities. Heretics decided they wanted to choose their own people instead of the people God had chose for them.

This understanding of heresy is helpful and allows for us to read Irenaeus and church history with a different look than we may have previously.

After performing some historical exoneration of Irenaeus, Behr spends a significant chunk of the book examining the theology of Irenaeus and what makes Irenaeus a significant theologian. The historical importance of Irenaeus can hardly be overstated. With Irenaeus we have for the first time, "an account of the 'canon' or 'rule' of truth, not as a list of abstract doctrines supposedly given as an apostolic deposit, but as the coherence of the Scriptures (that is the Old Testament) seen as a mosaic of Christ as preached by the apostles." Because of this, Irenaeus can use almost all of the writing we now know as the NT to reveal this mosaic of Christ in the Scriptures.

Irenaeus is also arguably the first real Christian theologian, and his understanding of the nature and task of theology has been hugely significant. For Irenaeus, theology is a coherent task which articulates a single economy of God. Theology was a coherent whole with no specialties existing until much later in history. Theology, according to Irenaeus, is not primarily about thinking the right thoughts about God, but instead is a new and different way of seeing reality. This has implications and is expounded in much depth by Irenaeus. One way, and perhaps the most significant way we see Irenaeus expounding on this is in his understanding of the flesh. For Irenaeus, to think of the garden as plan A and the Incarnation as plan B is to misunderstand theology. Adam was created as a child and the Incarnation was always needed for humanity to grow to perfection and maturity. The Incarnation is less a reduction of the Word to the level of flesh than it is a raising of the flesh to the level of the Word. Even to consider asking the question of whether the Incarnation would have happened if Adam didn't sin is to engage in speculation. To ask questions of God other than what He has revealed to us is to think about an imaginary god, an idol of our own making. This is what Irenaeus's opponents were doing, (as well as much of medieveal and modern theology as well).

Much more could be said (and John Behr does in his book), but the above contain some of the highlights of the book. I am not enough of a patristics or Irenaeus scholar to be able to criticize this book or rate it properly. It was dense, but Behr succeeded in giving us a portrait of Irenaeus in context, and he also succeeded in showing Irenaeus's work as not merely modern theology recast in a slightly naive way. Instead Irenaeus is a theologian worth studying and engaging with in his own right and not merely for those interested in church history or past heresies. Irenaeus's thought, though it may seem familiar on the surface to us, is different enough that valuable insight can be gained by studying Irenaeus, even though the work may be hard.

[Christian Barrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a technical book that walks through the great works of Irenaeus. Behr provides a brief biographical account before walking through how the patristic added in the foundation of Orthodoxy as it is known today through his work “Against Heresies.” Behr accomplishes his task of point this out by walking through who Irenaeus was arguing against, what he was arguing for, and how the arguments excluded early forms of Christianity that appeared throughout the known world. This is a great primer to Irenaeus’s masterpiece and gives great insight into the history of Christianity. The arguments presented here are not in direct conflict with Andreas Kostenberg’s “The Heresy of Orthodoxy.” However, it does give some weight to the arguments put forth by the Bauer-Erhman thesis.

[w gall · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fr. John convincingly shows how St. Irenaeus provides THE foundation for Christian parameters for all those following after. But by identifying groups who separated themselves from the main body of Christians in the late 2nd Century. In a time when there was a cultural aversion to the flesh (the body) he focuses on it, beginning with Adam and death toward a restoration of human beings to both the image AND likeness of God which comes from the incarnation of the Son of God and His defeat of death by dying on the Cross. Readably scholarly.

[Tyler Collins · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read the Intro, Chap. 1, and Conclusion (37%) of this book for my Theology of Irenaeus course under Dr. Steve McCormick at Nazarene Theological Seminary. Of what I read, this was the best book on Irenaeus that we were assigned for class. While an excellent scholar, Behr also writes in a way that is interesting and engaging.

[Cody Barnhart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderful overview of the historical contexts within which Irenaeus lived, alongside a great summation of the major arcs within Against the Heresies

[Jon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book, by a great author, about a great person.

[Aaron Lewis · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Irenaeus is par excellence the theologian of the flesh” (209).

[Zach Korthals · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think every modern Christian, unfamiliar with the first real theologian in church history, could stand to learn much through Behr’s immensely helpful work

[Tyson Guthrie · Rating 5 out of 5]

I wasn't sure there was a real need for another introductory volume on Irenaeus. That said, this may be my new favorite.
His most helpful contribution is his alternative historiography of 2nd century orthodoxy and heresy. Behr also gives the most detailed biography of Irenaeus to date. What remains is a helpful summary of the bishop's thought.

[Ted · Rating 3 out of 5]

Somewhat a book for the more scholarly type. It was OK but I appreciated other works by Behr even more.