background image
32
Saturninus, nor Basilides, nor angels, nor archangels, nor principalities, nor powers [possess this knowledge],
but the Father only who begat, and the Son who was begotten. Since therefore His generation is unspeakable
(inenarrabilis), those who strive to set forth generations and productions cannot be in their right mind,
inasmuch as they undertake to describe things which are indescribable.
The Word eternally co-exists with the Father,
215
was with God apart from and at the commencement
of creation (cf. John 1:1),
216
and communed with the Father prior to his incarnation.
217
The Son is
therefore greater than angels and all other created powers. Irenaeus made it clear that it was not angels,
some power "remotely distant from the Father," nor even some "other God" (a[llon QeoVn) who made
us, but the Word of God (A.H. 4.20.1; 4.32.1; 5.18.2).
On numerous occasions Irenaeus referred to the Son with language suggesting ontological equality
with the Father (A,H, 3.11.6; 3.11.8). He is emphatically not a power separate from God (2.11.1; 2.28.5),
but Father and Son are said to indwell each other,
218
and relate to each other in a reciprocal relationship
(4.6.3; 4.14.1). We are also told that the Son has fellowship with the Father in all things (2.28.8), and,
drawing from the language of John's Gospel, to see the Son is to see the Father (3.13.2). Besides these,
the Father and Son receive identical titles and are mutual objects of faith, worship, and preaching.
219
Irenaeus also noted that Father and Son share in the rule over all things (4.1.1).
In Demonstration 47, Irenaeus even used language that foreshadowed later discussions concerning
divine substance: "And so in the substance and power of His being there is shown forth one God; but
there is also according to the economy of our redemption both Son and Father. Because to created things
the Father of all is invisible and unapproachable, therefore those who are to draw near to God must have
their access to the Father through the Son." Thus, Father and Son, though equal in power and substance,
have distinct roles in God's work of creation and salvation. Regarding God's eternal existence apart
from the creation of time and space, Irenaeus described the relationship between Father and Son in terms
of reciprocal glorification: "For not alone antecedently to Adam, but also before all creation, the Word
glorified His Father, remaining in Him; and was Himself glorified by the Father, as He did Himself
declare, `Father, glorify Thou Me with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was'" (A.H.
4.14.1
220
; cf. 4.35.2).
Although the Father and Son appear to enjoy a mutual equality apart from creation, when God takes
action in creation there is distinct and consistent order among the persons of the Godhead (Dem. 47), so
Irenaeus could say categorically that "the Son performs the good pleasure of the Father" (A.H. 4.6.3;
4.38.3). In the initial creation of the world, the Father is the primary will, while the Son is the
mediator.
221
Irenaeus indicated that all things were created by the Father through the Son (Gk diav / Latin
215
A.H. 2.25.3; 3.18.1; 4.20.1; 4.20.3; Dem. 10. In one passage Irenaeus suggests there was a different relationship between
Father and Son prior to the generation of the Son. He notes that the Gospel of John refers to the Word's "original, effectual, and
glorious generation from the Father" (= thVn ajpoV tou' PatroV" hJgemonikhVn aujtou' kaiV praktikhVn kaiV e[ndoxon geneaVn
dihgei'tai). In this passage praktikhVn ("effectual") seems to suggest the generation was related to divine activity. Prior to this, the
Son is conceived of as simply co-existing with the Godhead in the bosom of the Father (A.H. 3.11.5; 4.14.1). Thus, one could say
that while the Son is eternally God of God, he had two generations related to creation--the first from the Father in order to serve as
mediator of creation (A.H. 3.11.8), the second from Mary to serve as mediator of salvation (Dem. 40).
216
A.H. 3.11.2; 3.18.1; 4.14.1; 5.1.1; 5.15.4; Frag. 39, 53, 54; Dem. 43, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56.
217
Dem. 49, 50, 51, 53, 55.
218
A.H. 3.6.2; 3.11.5; 3.11.6; 4.14.1.
219
A.H. 1.3.6; 1.9.2; 1.10.1; 3.6.1; 3.6.2; 3.8.3; 3.9.1; 3.12.7; 3.12.13; 3.15.3; 4.1.1; 4.5.2; 4.6.2; 4.6.4; 4.6.6; 4.6.7; 4.13.1;
5.8.4; Dem. 47.
220
Although some may point to this passage as demonstrating that the Father and Son had both ontological and functional
equality prior to creation, this goes beyond what the passage actually says. Although strongly supporting a notion of what we call
ontological equality, all actions of the persons of the Godhead are seen as acts of the Son and Spirit in submission to the will of the
Father. In an eternal state apart from activities in creation, there is no actual function (a term with implies activity). The most we can
say is that the functions of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are consistent with the indescribable eternal relationships between the
Father, Son and Spirit (A.H. 4.7.4).
221
A.H. 4.38.3; 5.15.3; 5.18.2; Dem. 39; 5; 6; 43; 53. While the Son as mediator of the Father's act of creation is the norm, on
several occasions Irenaeus used language regarding the Son as the direct agent of creation. Thus, he can be called the Maker
(Poihthv") Creator (Ktivsth") and Framer (Dhmiourgov") and Artificer (Tecnivth") of creation (A.H. 1.9.2; 1.15.5; 3.11.8; 3.22.3;