Get the CD Now!

Irenaeus of Lyons

Fragments of Irenaeus in Eusebius

The following selections are excerpted from Kirsopp Lake in The Ecclesiastical History (Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1926), volume one. If you cannot read the Greek letters, then look at my Unicode web page for information on installing the correct font.

Ecclesiastical History, V. XX. (pp. 495-499)

In opposition to those in Rome who were discarding the sound ordinance of the church, Irenaeus composed various letters. He addressed one to Blastus On Schism, another to Florinus, On the Sole Sovereignty[1] or That God is not the Author of Evil, for Florinus seemed to be defending this opinion. For his sake too, when he was attracted by the Valentinian error, a work was composed by Irenaeus On the Ogdoad,[2] in which he also indicates that he had himself received the first succession of the apostles, and in it, at the end of the work, we find a most acceptable notice from him which we are obliged to given in this book and it runs as follows: "I adjure thee, who shalt copy out this book, by the Lord Jesus Christ, by his glorious advent when he comes to judge the living and the dead, that thou compare what thou shalt transcribe and correct it with this copy whence thou art transcribing, with all care, and thou shalt likewise transcribe the oath and put it in the copy." May his words be spoken to our profit and be narrated in order that we may keep those primitive and truly sacred men as the best example of the most zealous care.

In the letter to Florinus, wihch we have spoken of above, Irenaeus again mentions his intercourse with Polycarp, and says: 'These opinions, O Florinus, that I may speak sparingly, do not belong to sound doctrine. These opinions are inconsistent with the church, and bring those who believe in them into the greatest impiety. These opinions not even the heretics outside the church ever dared to proclaim. These opinions those who were presbyters before us, who accompanied the apostles, did not hand on to you. For while I was still a boy I knew you in lower Asia in Polycarp's house when you were a man of rank in the royal hall and endeavoring to stand well with him. I remember the events of those days more clearly than those which happened recently, for what we learn as children grows up with the soul and is united to it, so that I can speak even of the place in which the blessed Polycarp sat and disputed, how he came in and went out, the character of his life, the appearance of his body, the discourses which he made to people, how he reported his intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord, how he remembered their words, and what were the things concerning the Lord which he had heard from them, and about their miracles, and about their teaching, and how Polycarp had received them from the eyewitnesses of the word of life, and reported all things in agreement with the Scriptures. I listened eagerly even then to these things through the mercy of God which was given me, and made notes of them, not on paper but in my heart, and ever by the grace of God do I truly ruminate on them, and I can bear witness before God that if that blessed and apostolic presbyter had heard anything of this kind he would have cried out, and shut his ears, and said according to his custom, 'O good God, to what time hast thou preserved me that I should endure this?' He would have fled even from the place in which he was seated or standing when he heard such words. And from his letters which he sent either to the neighboring churches, strengthening them, or to some of the brethren, exhorting and warning them, this can be made plain." So says Irenaeus.

[1] The μοναρχία became the technical term for the assertion of the Unity of the Godhead, without(as it was thought(due regard to the reality of the Persons of the Trinity, though "Person" (or ὑπόστασις) was not yet used in this sense.

[2] Some Gnostics regarded God as eightfold.

Ἐξ ἐναντίας δὲ τῶν ἐπὶ Ῥώμης τὸν ὑγιῆ τῆς ἐκκλησίας θεσμὸν παραχαραττόντων, Εἰρηναῖος διαφόρους ἐπιστολὰς συντάττει, τὴν μὲν ἐπιγραψας Πρὸς Βλάστον περὶ σχίσματος, τὴν δὲ Πρὸς Φλωρῖνον περὶ μοναρχίας ἢ περὶ τοῦ μὴ εἶναι τὸν θεὸν ποιητὴν κακῶν. ταύτης γάρ τοι τῆς γνώμης οὗτος ἐδόκει προασπίζειν· δἰ ὃν αὖθις ὑποσυρόμενον τῇ κατὰ Οὐαλεντῖνον πλάνῃ καὶ τὸ Περὶ ὀγδοάδος συντάττεται τῷ Εἰρηναίῳ σπούδασμα, ἐν ᾧ καὶ ἐπισημαίνεται τὴν πρώτην τῶν ἀποστόλων κατειληφέναι ἑαυτὸν διαδοχήν· ἔνθα πρὸς τῷ τοῦ συγγράμματος τέλει χαριεστάτην αὐτοῦ σημείωσιν εὑρόντες, ἀναγκαίως καὶ ταύτην τῇδε καταλέξομεν τῇ γραφῇ, τοῦτον ἔχουσαν τὸν τρόπον· " ὁρκιζω σε τὸν μεταγραψόμενον τὸ βιβλίον τοῦτο κατὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ κατὰ τῆς ἐνδόξου παρουσίας αὐτοῦ, ἧς ἔρχεται κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς, ἵνα ἀντιβάλῃς ὃ μετεγράψω, καὶ κατορθώσῃς αὐτὸ πρὸς τὸ ἀντίγραφον τοῦτον ὁμοίως μεταγράψεις καὶ θήσεις ἐν τῷ ἀντιγράφω." καὶ ταῦτα δὲ ὠφελίμως ὑπ' ἐκείνου λελέχθω πρὸς ἡμῶν τε ἱστορεἰσθω, ὡς ἂν ἔχοιμεν ἄριστον σπουδαιοτάτης ἐπιμελείας τοὺς ἀρχαίους ἐκείνους καὶ ὄντως ἱεροὺς ἄνδρας ὑπόδειγμα.

Ἐν ᾗ γε μὴν προειρήκαμεν πρὸς τὼν Φλωρῖνον ὁ Εἰρηναῖος ἐπιστολῇ αὖθις τῆς ἅμα Πολυκάρπῳ συνουσίας αὐτοῦ μνημονεύει, λέγων· "ταῦτα τὰ δόγματα, Φλωρῖνε, ἵνα πεφεισμένως εἴπω, οὐκ ἔστιν ὑγιοῦς γνώμης· ταῦτα τὰ δόγματα ἀσύμφωνά ἐστιν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ εἰς τὴν μεγίστην ἀσέβειαν περιβάλλοντα τοὺς πειθομένους αὐτοῖς· ταῦτα τὰ δόγματα οὐδὲ οἱ ἔξω τῆς ἐκκλησίας αἱρετικοὶ ἐτόλμησαν ἀποφήνασθαί ποτε· ταῦτα τὰ δόγματα οἱ πρὸ ἡμῶν πρεσβύτεροι, οἱ καὶ τοῖς ἀποστόλοις συμφοιτήσαντες, οὐ παρέδωκάν σοι. εἶδον γάρ σε, παῖς ἔτι ὤν, ἐν τῇ κάτω Ἀσίᾳ παρὰ Πολυκάρπῳ, λαμπρῶς πράσσοντα ἐν τῇ βασιλικῇ αὐλῇ καὶ πειρώμενον εὐδοκιμεῖν παρ' αὐτῷ. μᾶλλον γὰρ τὰ τότε διαμνημονεύω τῶν ἔναγχος γινομένων (αἱ γὰρ ἐκ παίδων μαθήσεις συναυξουσαι τῇ ψυχῇ, ἑνοῦνται αὐτῇ), ὥστε με δύνασθαι εἰπεῖν καὶ τὸν τόπον ἐν ᾧ καθεζόμενος διελέγετο ὁ μακάριος Πολύκαρπος, καὶ τὰς προόδους αὐτοῦ καὶ τὰς εἰσόδους καὶ τὸν χαρακτῆρα τοῦ βίου καὶ τὴν τοῦ σώματος ἰδέαν καὶ τὰς διαλέξεις ἃς ἐποιεῖτο πρὸς τὸ πλῆθος, καὶ τὴν μετὰ Ἰωάννου συναναστροφὴν ὡς ἀπήγγελλεν καὶ τὴν μετὰ τῶν λοιπῶν τῶν ἑορακότων τὸν κύριον καὶ ὡς ἀπεμνημόνευεν τοὺς λόγους αὐτῶν, καὶ περὶ τοῦ κυρίου τίνα ἦν ἃ παρ' ἐκαίνων ἀκηκόει, καὶ περὶ τῶν δυνάμεων αὐτοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῆς διδασκαλίας, ὡς παρὰ τῶν αὐτοπτῶν τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ λόγου παρειληφὼς ὁ Πολύκαρπος ἀπήγγελλεν πάντα σύμφωνα ταῖς γραφαῖς. ταῦτα καὶ τότε διὰ τὸ ἔλεος τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ ἐπ' ἐμοὶ γεγονὸς σπουδαίως ἤκουον, ὑπομνηματιζόμενος αὐτὰ οὺκ ἐν χάρτῃ, ἀλλ' ἐν τῇ ἐμῇ καρδίᾳ· καὶ ἀεὶ διὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ γνησίως αὐτὰ ἀναμαρυκῶμαι, καὶ δύναμαι διαμαρτύρασθαι ἔμπρασθεν τοῦ θεοῦ ὅτι εἴ τι τοιοῦτον ἀκηκόει ἐκεῖνος ὁ μακάριος καὶ ἀποστολικὸς πρεσβύτερος, ἀνακράξας ἂν καὶ ἐμφράξας τὰ ὦτα αὐτοῦ καὶ κατὰ τὸ σύνηθες αὐτῷ εἰπών 'ὦ καλὲ θεέ, εἰς οἵους με καιροὺς τετήρηκας, ἵνα τούτων ἀνέχωμαι,' πεφεύγει ἂν καὶ τὸν τὸπον ἐν ᾧ καθεζόμενος ἢ ἑστὼς τῶν τοιούτων ἀκηκόει λόγων. καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐπιστολῶν δὲ αὐτοῦ ὧν ἐπέστειλεν ἤτοι ταῖς γειτνιώσαις ἐκκλησίαις, ἐπιστηρίζων αὐτάς, ἢ τῶν ἀδελφῶν τισί, νουθετῶν αὐτοὺς καὶ προτρεπόμενος, δύναται φανερωθῆναι." ταῦτα ὁ Εἰρηναῖος.

Ecclesiastical History, V. XXIII, 3-4. (p. 505)

There is still extant a writing of those who were convened in Palestine, over whom presided Theophilus, bishop of the diocese of Caesarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem; and there is similarly another from those in Rome on the same controversy, which gives Victor as bishop; and there is one of the bishops of Pontius over whom Palmas presided as the oldest; and of the dioceses of Gaul, of which Irenaeus was bishop; and yet others of those in Osrhoene and the cities there; and patricularly of Bacchyllus, the bishop of the church of Corinth; and of very many more who expressed one and the same opinion and judgement, and gave the same vote.

φέρεται δ' εἰς ἔτι νῦν τῶν κατὰ Παλαιστίνην τηνικάδε συγκεκροτημένων γραφή, ὧν προυτέτακτο Θείφιλος τῆς ἐν Καισαρείᾳ παροικίας ἐπίσκοπος καὶ Νάρκισσος τῆς ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις, καὶ τῶν ἐπὶ Ῥώμης δ' ὁμοίως ἄλλη περὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ ζητήματος, ἐπίσκοπον Βίκτορα δηλοῦσα, τῶν τε κατὰ Πόντον ἐπίσκόπων, ὧν Πάλμας ὡς ἀρχαιότατος προυτέτακτο, καὶ τῶν κατὰ Γαλλίαν δὲ παροικιῶν, ἃς Εἰρηναῖος ἐπεσκόπει, ἔτι τε τῶν κατὰ τὴν Ὀσροηνὴν καὶ τὰς ἐκεῖσε πόλεις, καὶ ἰδίως Βακχύλλου τῆς Κορινθίων ἐκκλησίας ἐπισκόπου, καὶ πλείστων ὅσων ἄλλων, οἳ μίαν καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν δόξαν τε καὶ κρίσιν ἐξενηνεγμένοι, τὴν αὐτὴν τέθεινται ψῆφον.

Ecclesiastical History, V. XXIV, 11-18. (pp. 509-513)

Among them too Irenaeus, writing in the name of the Christians whose leader he was in Gaul, though he recommends that the mystery of the Lord's resurrection be observed only on the Lord's day, yet nevertheless exhorts Victor suitably and at length not to excommunicate whole churches of God for following a tradition of ancient custom, and continues as follows: "For the controversy is not only about the day, but also about the actual character of the fast; for some who think that they ought to fast one day, others two, others even more, some count their day as forty hours, day and night.[1] And such variation of observance did not begin in our own time,[2] but much earlier, in the days of our predecessors who, it would appear, disregarding strictness maintained a practice which is simple and yet allows for personal preference, establishing it for the future, and none the less all these lived in peace, and we also live in peace with one another and the disagreement in the fast confirms our agreement in the faith."

He adds to this a narrative which I may suitably quote, running as follows: "Among these too were the presbyters before Soter, who presided over the church of which you are now the leader, I mean Anicetus and Pius and Telesphorus and Xystus. They did not themselves observe it,[3] nor did they enjoin it on those who followed them, and though they did not keep it they were none the less at peace with those from the dioceses in which it was observed when they came to them, although to observe it was more objectionable to those who did not do so.[4] And no one was ever rejected for this reason, but the presbyters before you who did not observe it sent the Eucharist from other dioceses who did; and when the blessed Polycarp was staying in Rome in the time of Anicetus, though they disagreed a little about some other things as well, they immediately made peace, having no wish for strife between them on this matter. For neither was Anicetus able to persuade Polycarp not to observe it, inasmuch as he had always done so in company with John the disciple of our Lord and the other apostles with whom he had associated; nor did Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it, for he said that he ought to keep the custom of those who were presbyters before him. And under these circumstances they communicated with each other, and in the church Anicetus yielded the celebration of the Eucharist to Polycarp, obviously out of respect, and they parted from each other in peace, for the peace of the whole church was kept both by those who observed and by those who did not."

And Irenaeus, who deserved his name, making an eirenicon [peace offering - PK] in this way, gave exhortation of this kind for the peace of the church and served as its ambassador, for in letters he discussed the various views on the issue which had been raised, not only with Victor but also with many other rulers of churches.

[1] It appears to have been some time before the Church adopted the Lenten fast of forty days. Oddly enough, according to the historian Socrates (Hist. Eccl. v. 22) the Greek name for Lent (τεσσαρακοστή=fortieth) is older than the custom of fasting forty days. Forty hours was the traditional interval between the death and resurrection of Jesus. The present limits of Lent appear to have been fixed in the seventh century. See Smith's Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, s.v. Lent.

[2] The construction of the Greek is harsh: γεγονυῖα seems a mistake for γέγονε.

[3] That is, the Quartodeciman practice; see note on p. 503.

[4] The meaning appears to be that the previous generation of Romans had not made an issue out of the Quartodeciman practice, even when Asiatics visiting Rome observed it. The difficulty can be seen best if it be remembered that the Quartodeciman practice would someimtes mean that Asiatics traeated Easter day what the Romans regarded as Good Friday.

ἐν οἷς καὶ ὁ Εἰρηναῖος ἐκ προσώπου ὧν ἡγεῖτο κατὰ τὴν Γαλλίαν ἀδελφῶν ἐπιστείλας, παρίσταται μὲν τῷ δεῖν ἐν μόνῃ τῇ τῆς κυριακῆς ἡμέρᾳ τὸ τῆς τοῦ κυρίου ἀναστάσεως ἐπιτελεῖσθαι μυστήριον, τῲ γε μὴν Βίκτορι προσηκόντως, ὡς μὴ ἀποκόπτοι ὅλας ἐκκλησίας θεοῦ ἀρχαιου ἔθους παράδοσιν ἐπιτηρούσας, πλεῖστα ἕτερα παραινεῖ, καὶ αὐτοῖς δὲ ῥήμασιν τάδε ἐπιλέγων· "οὐδὲ γὰρ μόνον περὶ τῆς ἡμέρας ἐστὶν ἡ ἀμφισβήτησις, ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ τοῦ εἴδους αὐτοῦ τῆς νηστείας. οἱ μὲν γὰρ οἴονται μίαν ἡμέραν δεῖν αὐτοὺς νηστεύειν, οἱ δὲ δύο οἱ δὲ καὶ πλείονας· οἱ δὲ τεσσαράκοντα ὥρας ἡμερινάς τε καὶ νυκτερινὰς συμμετροῦσιν τὴν ηπμὲραν αὐτῶν. καὶ τοιαύτη μὲν ποικιλία τῶν ἐπιτηρούντων οὐ νῦν ἐφ' ἡμῶν γεγονυῖα, ἀλλὰ καὶ πολὺ πρότερον ἐπὶ τῶν πρὸ ἡμῶν, τῶν παρὰ τὸ ἁκριβές, ὡς εἰκός, κρατούντων τὴν καθ' ἁπλότητα καὶ ἰδιωτισμὸν συνήθειαν εἰς τὸ μετέπειτα πεποιηκότων, καὶ οὐδὲν ἔλαττον πάντες οὗτοι εἰρήνευσάν τε καὶ εἰρηνεύομεν πρὸς ἀλλήλους, καὶ ἡ διαφωνία τῆς νηστείας τὴν ὁμόνοιαν τῆς πίστεως συνίστησιν."

Τούτοις καὶ ἱστορίαν προστίθησιν, ἣν οἰκείως παραθήσομαι, τοῦτον ἔχουσαν τὸν τρόπον· "ἐν οἷς καὶ οἱ πρὸ Σωτῆρος πρεσβύτεροι, οἱ προστάντες τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἧς οὺ νῦν ἀφηγῇ, Ἀνίκητον λέγομεν καὶ Πίον Ὑγῖνόν τε καὶ Τελεσφόρον καὶ Ξύστον, οὔτε αὐτοὶ ἐτήρησαν οὔτε τοῖς μετ' αὐτῶν ἐπέτρεπον, καὶ οὐδὲν ελαττον αὐτοὶ μὴ τηροῦντες εἰρήνευον τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν παροικιῶν ἐν αἷς ἐτηρεῖτο, ἐρχομένοις πρὸς αὐτούς· καίτοι μᾶλλον ἐναντίον ἦν τὸ τηρεῖν τοῖς μὴ τηροῦσιν. καὶ οὐδέποτε διὰ τὸ εἶδος τοῦτο ἀπεβλήθησάν τινες, ἀλλ' αὐτοὶ μὴ τηροῦντες οἱ πρὸ σοῦ πρεσβύτεροι τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν παροικιῶν τηροῦσιν ἔπεμπον εὐχαριστίαν, καὶ τοῦ μακαρίου Πολυκάρπου ἐπιδημήσαντος τῇ Ῥώμῃ ἐπὶ Ἀνικήτου καὶ περὶ ἄλλων τινῶν μικρὰ Σχόντες πρὸς ἀλλήλους, εὐθὺς εἰρήνευσαν, περὶ τούτου τοῦ κεφαλαίου μὴ φιλεριστήσαντες εἰς ἑαυτούς. οὔτε γὰρ ὁ Ἀνίκητος τὸν Πολύκαρπον πεῖσαι ἐδύνατο μὴ τηρεῖν, ἃτε μετὰ Ἰωάννου τοῦ μαθητοῦ του κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν ἀποστόλων οἷς συνδιέτρυψεν, ἀεὶ τετηρηκότα, οὔτε μὴν ὁ Πολύκαρπος τὸν Ἀνίκητον ἔπεισεν τηρεῖν, λέγοντα τὴν συνήθειαν τῶν πρὸ αὐτοῦ πρεσβυτέρων ὀφείλειν κατέχειν. καὶ τούτων οὕτως ἐχόντων, ἐκοινώνησαν ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησία παρεχώρησεν ὁ Ἀνίκητος τὴν εὐχαριστίαν τῷ Πολυκάρπω, κατ' ἐντροπὴν δηλονότι, καὶ μετ' εἰρήνης ἀπ' ἀλλήλων ἀπηλλάγησαν, τάσης τῆς ἐκκλησίας εἰρήνην ἐχόντων, καὶ τῶν τηρούντων καὶ τῶν μὴ τηρούντων."

Καὶ ὁ μὲν Εἰρηναῖος φερώνυμός τις ὢν τῇ προσηγορίᾳ αὐτῷ τε τῷ τρόπῳ εἰρηνοποιός, τοιαῦτα ὑπὲρ τῆς τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν εἰρήνης παρεκάλει τε καὶ ἐπρέσβευεν, ὁ δ' αὐτὸς οὐ μόνῳ τῷ Βίκτορι, καὶ διαφόροις δὲ πλείστοις ἄρχουσιν ἐκκλησιῶν τὰ κατάλληλα δι' ἐπιστολῶν περὶ τοῦ κεκινημένου ζητήματος ὡμίλει.

Ecclesiastical History, V. XXVI. (pp. 513-515)

In addition to the published treatises and to the letters of Irenaeus, there is extant a concise and extremely convincing treatise of his against the Greeks, entitled Concerning Knowledge, and another which he has dedicated to a Christian named Marcian on the Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, and a little book of various discourses in which he mentions the Epistle to the Hebrews and the so-called Wisdom of Solomon, quoting certain passages from them. Such is the extent of our knowledge of the works of Irenaeus.

Ἀλλὰ γὰρ πρὸς τοῖς ἀποδοθεῖσιν Εἰρηναίου συγγράμμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιστολαῖς φέρεταί τις αὐτοῦ πρὸς Ἕλληνας λόγος συντομωτατος καὶ τὰ μάλιστα ἀναγκαιότατος, Περὶ ἐπιστήμης ἐπιγεγραμμένος, καὶ ἄλλος, ὃν ἀνατέθεικεν ἀδελφῷ Μαρκιανῷ τοὔνομα εἰς ἐπίδειξιν τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ κηρύγματος, καὶ βιβλίον τι διαλέξεων διαφόρων, ἐν ᾧ τῆς πρὸς Ἑβραίους ἐπιστολῆς καὶ τῆς λεγομένης Σολομῶνος Σοφίας μνημονεύει, ῥητά τινα ἐξ αὐτῶν παραθέμενος. καὶ τὰ μὲν εἰς ἡμετέραν ἐλθόντα γνῶσιν τῶν Εἰρηναίου τοσαῦτα.

Ante-Nicene Fathers

Above are the references to the works of Irenaeus in Eusebius. There is one more fragment of Irenaeus that is generally regarded as authentic, and that is a fragment of a letter sent by Irenaeus to Pope Victor preserved in a Syriac manuscript. The fragment is introduced: "And Irenaeus Bp. of Lyons, to Victor Bp. of Rome, concerning Florinus, a presbyter, who was a partisan of the error of Valentinus, and published an abominable book, thus wrote." Here is the Roberts-Donaldson translation in Ante-Nicene Fathers, volume one (fragment LI).

"Now, however, inasmuch as the books of these men may possibly have escaped your observation, but have come under our notice, I call your attention to them, that for the sake of your reputation you may expel these writings from among you, as bringing disgrace upon you, since their author boasts himself as being one of your company. For they constitute a stumbling-block to many, who simply and unreservedly receive, as coming from a presbyter, the blasphemy which they utter against God. Just [consider] the writer of these things, how by means of them he does not injure assistants [in divine service] only, who happen to be prepared in mind for blasphemies against God, but also damages those among us, since by his books he imbues their minds with false doctrines concerning God."

Four fragments published by Pfaff in 1715, numbered XXXVI through XXXIX, have been shown to be forgeries by Funk and Harnack. The other fragments published in Ante-Nicene Fathers are of dubious provenance, but it is worthwhile to mention a couple along with the notes of Roberts-Donaldson on their sources.

Fragment IV is footnoted: "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."

Here is fragment IV: "As long as any one has the means of doing good to his neighbours, and does not do so, he shall be reckoned a stranger to the love of the Lord."

Fragment V is footnoted: "Also quoted by Maximus Turinensis, Op. ii. 152, who refers it to Irenaeus's Sermo de Fide, which work, not being referred bo by Eusebius or Jerome, causes Massuet to doubt the authenticity of the fragment. Harvey, however, accepts it."

Here is fragment V: "The will and the energy of God is the effective and foreseeing cause of every time and place and age, and of every nature. The will is the reason of the intellectual soul, which [reason] is within us, inasmuch as it is the faculty belonging to it which is endowed with freedom of action. The will is the mind desiring [some object], and an appetite possessed of intelligence, yearning after that thing which is desired."

Go to the Chronological List of all Early Christian Writings

Please buy the CD to support the site, view it without ads, and get bonus stuff!

Early Christian Writings is copyright © Peter Kirby <E-Mail>.

Get the CD Now!

Kirby, Peter. "Historical Jesus Theories." Early Christian Writings. <>.