IRENEO, saint, martyr. – Bishop of Sirmium, he is commemorated on 6 April in the Hieronymian Martyrology, which gives the actual dies natalis.
There exists a very ancient Passio, worthy of credence and probably composed from the judicial records. According to it, I., still a young man, was bishop of Sirmium during the persecution of Diocletian. Brought before the tribunal of Probus, governor of Pannonia, and having refused to sacrifice despite the pleas of relatives and friends, he was subjected to torture. Imprisoned, after a further interrogation he was condemned to decapitation, and his body was thrown into the Sava. He died in 304. He is entered in the Roman Martyrology on 25 March.
I. LIFE
The historically certain data concerning the life of St. Irenaeus are few. In all likelihood, he was originally from Smyrna or its surroundings. Indeed, in his childhood, as he himself attests (Adv. haer., III, 3-4; Ep. ad Flor., in Eusebius, Hist. eccl., V, 20, 4-8), he saw and listened to St. Polycarp, the renowned bishop of that city and disciple of St. John. It is commonly held that, in his youth, still in Asia Minor, he established personal relationships with other eyewitnesses of the Apostles. In 177 or 178, during the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, he was in Lyons as a priest of that Church; and as such, he was entrusted by the martyrs with the task of delivering a letter to Pope Eleutherius concerning Montanism (Eusebius, ibid., V, 4, 1). After the martyrdom of the nearly nonagenarian bishop Pothinus, which occurred in 178, he succeeded him in the see of Lyons. In the Quartodeciman controversy, which gave rise to a heated dispute between Pope Victor (189-99) and the episcopate of Asia Minor, Irenaeus distinguished himself as a peacemaker (Eusebius, ibid., V, 24, 9).II. WORKS
Although he had learned to speak the "barbaric" language—Latin or Celtic—of his adopted country (Adv. Haer., I, praef. 3), I. remains a Greek-language writer of Hellenistic culture. His literary activity, quite varied, presents an exclusively polemical and apologetic character. Part of his works is lost (De cognitione adversus graecos, De schismate ad Blastum, and others). However, the following survive: 1) Detectio et eversio falso cognominatae gnoseos, better known as Adversus haereses. The work comprises five books: the first expounds the various Gnostic systems; the next three refute them, respectively, on the basis of reason, the tradition and teaching of the Apostles, and the sayings of the Lord and the prophets; the fifth determines the doctrinal points that highlight the meaning and destiny of the corporal world, especially of the flesh, which Gnosticism particularly targets. Of the Greek original, a considerable number of fragments are preserved. The work is then fully preserved in a strictly literal Latin translation, which perhaps dates to the 3rd century and is certainly prior to St. Augustine. Books IV and V also survive in a faithful Armenian translation, along with about twenty fragments in Syriac. 2) Demonstratio apostolicae praedicationis, preserved in an Armenian version. It is neither a polemical work nor, as is frequently said, a catechesis, but an apology for the principal Christian truths, based on the fulfillment of the prophecies of the Old Testament. 3) Fragments of various writings, principally: a letter addressed to his childhood friend, the Roman priest Florinus, who had converted to Gnosticism (Eusebius, op. cit., V, 20), and the letter to Pope Victor on the date of Easter (id., ibid., 24).(Ist. Ene. Catt.)
IRENEO, saint - Fragment of the Adversus haereses - Vatican Library, cod. Vat. grec. 423, f. 403 (10th century).
III. THOUGHT
Irenaeus provided the best and most original refutation of Gnosticism; in this lies his greatest importance for the era in which he wrote. However, his work far surpasses the circumstances that provoked it and retains a permanent value, both for the richness of its information and for the importance of its doctrine.Regarding the material gathered in the Adversus haereses, Irenaeus described the systems of the principal Gnostic leaders or related heresiarchs, such as Valentinus, Marcus, Simon, Menander, Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Cerinthus, Cerdo, Marcion, Tatian, and the doctrines of several sects, like the Ebionites, Nicolaitans, Ophites, Cainites, and others. This information does not all hold the same value: that concerning the origins and early stages of the evolution of the various sects must be taken with caution, while it becomes increasingly clear, in light of the discovery of authentically Gnostic documents, that Irenaeus was well informed about Gnostic doctrines as they presented themselves in the second half of the 2nd century.
The doctrinal expositions of the Adversus haereses, despite their rather weak form and often tedious digressions and repetitions, nonetheless reveal a firm and coherent, if not systematic, thought. Indeed, three fundamental themes emerge in Irenaeus: that of the Church, that of the corporal world and human flesh, and that of recapitulation. The first is connected to Irenaeus’ well-known views on the doctrinal authority of the Church, the rules of faith, the succession of bishops, the apostolicity of particular Churches, especially the Church of Rome; the famous text of Adv. haer. (III, 3, 1) on the «potentior principalitas» of the Church of Peter and Paul still tests the sagacity of exegetes. The theme of the corporal world inspires almost all of Irenaeus’ other doctrinal developments; indeed, it is precisely in relation to matter and especially human flesh that Book V of the Adv. haer. successively examines the doctrines of the uniqueness of the Creator, creation, the Incarnation, and the salvation of the whole man. But the master idea that truly guides and dominates all of Irenaeus’ speculations is that of the recapitulation of human flesh and the totality of the material world in Christ, the prototype of humanity and the initial exemplar of creation; this grand conception embraces both the hidden designs of God and their historical realization through the redemptive Incarnation of Christ. Within it are inserted the theses dear to Irenaeus: Christ as the new Adam, Mary as the new Eve, the divinization of the whole man through Grace, and his final salvation in a completely restored material world. Only one passage somewhat mars this beautiful synthesis, namely that on millenarianism proposed in Adv. haer. (V, 32-35); it is significant, however, that recent studies on this subject cast doubt on the authenticity of these chapters, which in any case do not perfectly align with the doctrine of recapitulation nor with Irenaeus’ usual style.