Critically evaluate the claim that Irenaeus polemic against heresy played a major role in its defeat [20]

Irenaeus was instrumental in the Churchs struggle against heresy. His famous book was a five-volume work against Gnosticism, usually known as Against Heresies and was based on research into some 20 distinct Gnostic Sects. This demonstrates Irenaeus determination and commitment to defeating heresies in the Early Church. Although he tried to refute heresies his success in playing a major role in their defeat is still questionable. Irenaeus argued that there should be an agreed list of Christian writings in order to show the truth about Jesus and these should have authority within the Church. This was important because there were a number of false Gnostic Gospels in circulation such as the Gospel of Truth. Irenaeus asserted strongly that only the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John should have authority in the Church. Soon after Irenaeus the Church in Rome produced the Muratorian Canon in response to Marcionism. The creation of a set list of Christian Scripture was useful in undermining heretical groups as it outlined true teaching and, therefore, any heretical teaching, which did not fit with what was said in the scriptures, could be easily identified. Another prominent contribution made by Irenaeus in the fight against heresy was his rule of faith. Irenaeus was one of the first fathers to understand the value of having a clearly defined list of true Christian (apostolic) teachings. He called this the rule of faith because it acted like a measuring stick for truth. If anyone disagreed with a teaching from this rule of faith they could be condemned as a heretic. This idea formed the basis for later creeds such as the Apostles Creed and made the identification of heretical beliefs easier. Many Gnostic leaders claimed that their secret knowledge came from Christ and had been passed to them by the apostles. Irenaeus disputes this highlighting that the apostles passed on the truth of Christ to the bishops they appointed and so this information would be found within the Church and not within the Gnostics. The strong argument of apostolic succession is particularly persuasive in refuting heretical beliefs and so could be seen to be a significant contribution. However, there were some flaws in Irenaeus polemic against heresy which could be seen to be detrimental to him contributing a major role to their defeat. Regarding apostolic succession many scholars would argue that there was no single Bishop of Rome in the first two centuries, instead many churches were run by a team ministry. Therefore, this weakens Irenaeus argument and makes it more debatable, meaning it probably didnt play a major role in the defeat of heresy. Also the Church had many different ways of dealing with heresy, Irenaeus role was not the major single contributing factor in its defeat. Other methods included alternative Christian writers such as Tertullian against Marcion. Furthermore, the Church met in councils to deal with heresy, for example the Council of

Constantinople in 381AD where it was agreed not to recognise Montanists as Christians. Finally the development of the hierarchical church government by Ignatius was vitally important in the fight against heresy, as the Church leaders were able to unite their followers and guard against the pervasion of heresy. This demonstrates that in relation to other aspects, whilst Irenaeus contribution to the fight against heresy was important, it probably was not the major role. Other factors were equally, if not more important. Overall, Irenaeus polemic against heresy was effective, however a negative side does exist. In trying to refute heretics the Church became a persecuting Church, for example Maximilla said she was driven like a wolf from the sheep. Irenaeus was also mainly concerned with the Gnostic heresy as this was the major problem for the Church at that time. Therefore, it may be more accurate to say that Irenaeus role was in fighting Gnosticism more specifically than heresy. Futhermore, heresy did not end at the end of the life of Irenaeus, Irenaeus died in 200AD but in the early 5 th century Theodoret of Cyrrhus claimed he had eradicated Marcionism from eight villages and people would claim heresy is still present in modern times. This shows that Irenaeus couldnt have played a role in the defeat of heresy as it still existed. He may have contributed to its later demise but I do not think that he played a major role.