For Students of Theology: Irenaeus’ Recapitulation
Maria encouraged me to post "Irenaeus' Recapitulation," a term paper I wrote at Melodyland School of Theology (MST) back in 1976. I finally climbed up to the shelf in the garage and dug it out of my box of class papers and notes. Reading it again, I marvel how everything Irenaeus said about recapitulation is still spot-on with everything I now believe, forty-three years later, even though I understand everything differently.
Except for one thing. I wonder now if I misunderstood Irenaeus, if Irenaeus misunderstood the Scriptures, or if I misunderstand the what they meant. The basic premise of recapitulation as I understood Irenaeus's thought was that Christ's recap of Adam's life REVERSED the effects of Adam's fall. I now am not sure that either the Scriptures or Irenaeus ever meant Christ's life to be a subsequent, sequential "in-line" recapitulation of Adam's life. Could it be that the two poles of Christ's being YHWH and the Jews being Adam's ignorance are simply being contrasted? That the whole of the Season of Grace itself was the recapitulation of the Beginning? I think that was what was going on, whether Irenaeus ever got it or not.
Recapitulation is a very basic Christian doctrine very few Christians have ever heard of, though they count on it heavily. The verb 'recapitulate' simply means "to say again in brief." A recapitulation is "an act or instance of summarizing and restating the main points of something" (Google.com). Note that recapitulation is a REPETITION, not a CHANGE. Change is not an expected effect. In my research of Irenaeus' doctrine of recapitulation, I understood Irenaeus to have believed that the results of Christ's life reversed the results of Adam's life, thus I wrote as recapitulation's definition: "Recapitulation is a repeat of what has happened before but with the reversal of the result." That was what I saw and how I understood it. What I see now in scripture are two different foci that were recapitulated in the Season of Grace whose constants were being contrasted: YHWH as the Beginning/Jesus verses Adam's fall/man's rejection of Jesus.
Of course I am aware of substitution. But was it substitution of Jesus for Adam, or substitution of Life for Ignorance? What was the Beginning is the question to look at. I believe it was the Imagination of the Ineffable, the Consciousness which is our eternal God, which in humble contriteness to the Ineffable laid itself down to dream the dream of BEING the Ignorance, so becoming us ... to save us.
Below is my paper. Please note that the professor had limited us to three, maybe three and a half pages max length, double spaced. I tried to fit in everything of the doctrine:
November 18, 1976
Church History I
Recapitulation is a repeat of what has happened before but with the reversal of the result. The basic idea was drawn from 1 Corinthians 15:45-49 and Romans 5:17-19. (Footnote: Irenaeus took the idea from Paul, not Justin's typology.)
For as by one man's disobedience
many were made sinners,
so by the obedience of the one
shall many be made righteous.
Romans 5:19
By recapitulation there is restoration of what was lost as a result of the prior events; i.e., there is a new start. The prior happenings in this case were Creation, Adam's life, and the mess it resulted in.
For Irenaeus, creation was the beginning of a potential. Adam was created "as a child" with the potential of growing and maturing into (as unto) the Image of God, which is the Son of God. The Image was not what man was, but rather the direction man was to develop. The idea of growth is important.
Being created, man existed later than God and was inferior to Him, i.e., immature. (Footnote: Well handled by Dr. Brown in "The Necessity of the Imperfection of Creation.") To be drawn up to the stature of the Image, Adam was to follow a plan of development set up by and achieved by God. Adam was not to do the achieving. He was to b guided through it and be shaped by the Holy Spirit, the Hand of God. (Footnote: Irenaeus was indefinite about the Trinity.) But his immaturity made him susceptible to Satan's temptation, which was that he accelerate God's program. Succumbing to Satan's greater maturity, Adam rejected God's plan and enjoined the opposition's plan. God honored man's decision. Adam was alienated from the Image and was made subject to Sin and Death, a life of transgression and apostasy. His growth was interrupted.
God had set His will. The Fall hindered its fulfillment, but God maintained His single plan, in love, in spite of the Fall. The plan manifests in several progressive steps identified by covenants and eras: Adam, Noah, Moses, and Christ in particular. (Footnote: Also Abraham, the prophets, and second advent.) Each represents a step of growth. Each new one ends the last, incorporates what progress has been made, and reveals a new step, all the while maintaining a promise of future restoration. The progress is slow because of man's fallen condition, yet each new revelation is a declaration of man's progress.
Christ's coming in the flesh was the fulfillment of the promise, the event all history had been pointing to. The incarnation was the real death blow to Satan. Adam had been created and weak. Now the uncreated mighty Son of God was joined with creation. Satan could get by without afflicting a docetic god, but the body of flesh meant a claim to his domain. The only way to maintain his lordship was to turn Jesus aside from God's plan even as he had turned Adam. This is what recapitulation is all about: he couldn't. Satan lost his claim. By the Son of God becoming man, He made it possible for men to become the sons of God.
To establish His claim and win our freedom, Christ had to live a human life (fully so) retracing the history of man (footnote: "Summing up in Himself the whole human race from beginning to end"), specifically, Adam's. Only this time God's plan was perfectly adhered to. (Side note: I originally used "cloven to," as in cleaved unto, clung to, stuck to, conformed to. I.e., Jesus did it.) Rather than trying to achieve God’s purpose on His own, the job was entrusted to the Holy Spirit. Adam lived by the sweat of his brow, but Christ rested in God. For disobedience there was now obedience; for weakness, strength. Sorely tempted and tried, Christ was victorious (and if He, then we also). By His crucifixion He killed sin, by resurrection He deprived Death its power, and by His ascension He may now vivify man. Whereas Satan had bound man, he himself is now bound.
In the perspective of God, Christ was the last Adam, Creation’s completion. Yet He is the Second Man, the birth of a new race, an incarnation race. No wonder Satan rages against “Christ come in the flesh.” I must stress, as does Irenaeus, the continuity of the Old Testament Creation and the New Testament Redemption. The same God who made man now offers him salvation. As the Word which God addresses to man and the man who is obedient to the Word (footnote: In this dynamic concept of union between divinity and humanity Irenaeus sidestepped the Christological controversy which soon followed), Christ joins the beginning with the end and is Lord over both covenants.
The Church is the body of Christ. It is in the Church that Christ recapitulates us, i.e., it is the redeemed of the Church who have been restored to growth. Christ is effecting His victory on the cross in His body by the work of the Holy Spirit. We have resumed growing, and human growth is through conflict and ethical struggle. There is no truce with Satan. He actually can upset God’s plans, but God uses his attempts to shape man. As the Body of Christ the Church has rule over Satan, just as the Head does. Christ rules out of Zion — the Church.
The advance of recapitulation in creation is through baptism and the eucharist. In baptism we follow Christ in His death as the last Adam and His rising as the Second Man. It is our seal of eternal life and rebirth unto God. In the eucharist the new life is continued and nourished by being united to Him and sharing His life and blood. It is a real encounter with the Lord through means of the creation, the bread and the wine.
The end of recapitulation is humanity’s attaining maturity in the Image. We become like God. It isn’t something we achieve, it is the free gift of God which He accomplishes by quickening His energies to man. Presented to the Father by Christ, the Father confers incorruptibility to the bearers of the Spirit. Retaining full human identity, man, having partaken of the divine nature on earth, is glorified in the heavenly kingdom by communion with God. The completion of recapitulation is, I pray, close at hand.
__________________
Bibliography
Banstra, A. J., Paul and an Ancient Interpreter: A Comparison of Redemption in Paul and Irenaeus. Calvin Theological Journal #5, April 1970. 43-63.
Brown, Robert F., On the Necessary Imperfection of Creation: Irenaeus' Adversus Haereses IV, 38. Scottish Journal Theology #28, 1, 1975. 17-25.
Gonzalez, Justo L., A History of Christian Thought. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1970, Vol. I, 160-174.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies. Translated by A. Cleveland Coxe. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds.. The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, 307-567.
Kim, Dai Sil, Irenaeus of Lyons and Teilhard De Chardin: A Comparative Study of "Recapitulation" and "Omega." Journal of Ecumenical Studies, #13, Winter 1976. 69-93.
Maxwell, C. Mervyn, The Theology of Irenaeus. Pamphlet.
_________________
Here are the relevant passages from Victor Alexander's translation from the ancient Aramaic:
Romans 5:
17. For if because of the foolishness of one person, death was passed on [to all,] more over then that they should receive much grace and endowment and righteousness, that they would pass to eternal life through only one person, Jesus Christ.
18. In similar manner thus, because of the foolishness of one person, all humanity was under obligation, likewise because of the righteousness of one person, there will be victory with respect to eternal life for all humanity.
19. For whereas because of one person's heedlessness many sins occurred, likewise also because of the adherence of one, many would become righteous.
1 Corinthians 15:
45. Likewise it is written [in Scriptures,] "Adam was the first human being to draw the breath of life, and the last Adam is the life giving spirit."
46. Except [that breath] was not beforehand of the spirit, except of the soul, and thereafter of the spirit.
47. The first human being was soil from the earth; the second human being was the Lord from heaven.
48. He that was of soil was to those that were also from soil, just as He that was from heaven was to those who were from heaven.*
49. And as we bore the likeness of the one from the soil, likewise we shall bear the likeness of the One from heaven (Lit Ar. idiomatic construction: 'Whereas he was of the soil, also like the others from the soil; and whereas he that was of the heaven, also like the others heavenly').
Except for one thing. I wonder now if I misunderstood Irenaeus, if Irenaeus misunderstood the Scriptures, or if I misunderstand the what they meant. The basic premise of recapitulation as I understood Irenaeus's thought was that Christ's recap of Adam's life REVERSED the effects of Adam's fall. I now am not sure that either the Scriptures or Irenaeus ever meant Christ's life to be a subsequent, sequential "in-line" recapitulation of Adam's life. Could it be that the two poles of Christ's being YHWH and the Jews being Adam's ignorance are simply being contrasted? That the whole of the Season of Grace itself was the recapitulation of the Beginning? I think that was what was going on, whether Irenaeus ever got it or not.
Recapitulation is a very basic Christian doctrine very few Christians have ever heard of, though they count on it heavily. The verb 'recapitulate' simply means "to say again in brief." A recapitulation is "an act or instance of summarizing and restating the main points of something" (Google.com). Note that recapitulation is a REPETITION, not a CHANGE. Change is not an expected effect. In my research of Irenaeus' doctrine of recapitulation, I understood Irenaeus to have believed that the results of Christ's life reversed the results of Adam's life, thus I wrote as recapitulation's definition: "Recapitulation is a repeat of what has happened before but with the reversal of the result." That was what I saw and how I understood it. What I see now in scripture are two different foci that were recapitulated in the Season of Grace whose constants were being contrasted: YHWH as the Beginning/Jesus verses Adam's fall/man's rejection of Jesus.
Of course I am aware of substitution. But was it substitution of Jesus for Adam, or substitution of Life for Ignorance? What was the Beginning is the question to look at. I believe it was the Imagination of the Ineffable, the Consciousness which is our eternal God, which in humble contriteness to the Ineffable laid itself down to dream the dream of BEING the Ignorance, so becoming us ... to save us.
Below is my paper. Please note that the professor had limited us to three, maybe three and a half pages max length, double spaced. I tried to fit in everything of the doctrine:
Irenaeus' Recapitulation
November 18, 1976
Church History I
Recapitulation is a repeat of what has happened before but with the reversal of the result. The basic idea was drawn from 1 Corinthians 15:45-49 and Romans 5:17-19. (Footnote: Irenaeus took the idea from Paul, not Justin's typology.)
For as by one man's disobedience
many were made sinners,
so by the obedience of the one
shall many be made righteous.
Romans 5:19
By recapitulation there is restoration of what was lost as a result of the prior events; i.e., there is a new start. The prior happenings in this case were Creation, Adam's life, and the mess it resulted in.
For Irenaeus, creation was the beginning of a potential. Adam was created "as a child" with the potential of growing and maturing into (as unto) the Image of God, which is the Son of God. The Image was not what man was, but rather the direction man was to develop. The idea of growth is important.
Being created, man existed later than God and was inferior to Him, i.e., immature. (Footnote: Well handled by Dr. Brown in "The Necessity of the Imperfection of Creation.") To be drawn up to the stature of the Image, Adam was to follow a plan of development set up by and achieved by God. Adam was not to do the achieving. He was to b guided through it and be shaped by the Holy Spirit, the Hand of God. (Footnote: Irenaeus was indefinite about the Trinity.) But his immaturity made him susceptible to Satan's temptation, which was that he accelerate God's program. Succumbing to Satan's greater maturity, Adam rejected God's plan and enjoined the opposition's plan. God honored man's decision. Adam was alienated from the Image and was made subject to Sin and Death, a life of transgression and apostasy. His growth was interrupted.
God had set His will. The Fall hindered its fulfillment, but God maintained His single plan, in love, in spite of the Fall. The plan manifests in several progressive steps identified by covenants and eras: Adam, Noah, Moses, and Christ in particular. (Footnote: Also Abraham, the prophets, and second advent.) Each represents a step of growth. Each new one ends the last, incorporates what progress has been made, and reveals a new step, all the while maintaining a promise of future restoration. The progress is slow because of man's fallen condition, yet each new revelation is a declaration of man's progress.
Christ's coming in the flesh was the fulfillment of the promise, the event all history had been pointing to. The incarnation was the real death blow to Satan. Adam had been created and weak. Now the uncreated mighty Son of God was joined with creation. Satan could get by without afflicting a docetic god, but the body of flesh meant a claim to his domain. The only way to maintain his lordship was to turn Jesus aside from God's plan even as he had turned Adam. This is what recapitulation is all about: he couldn't. Satan lost his claim. By the Son of God becoming man, He made it possible for men to become the sons of God.
To establish His claim and win our freedom, Christ had to live a human life (fully so) retracing the history of man (footnote: "Summing up in Himself the whole human race from beginning to end"), specifically, Adam's. Only this time God's plan was perfectly adhered to. (Side note: I originally used "cloven to," as in cleaved unto, clung to, stuck to, conformed to. I.e., Jesus did it.) Rather than trying to achieve God’s purpose on His own, the job was entrusted to the Holy Spirit. Adam lived by the sweat of his brow, but Christ rested in God. For disobedience there was now obedience; for weakness, strength. Sorely tempted and tried, Christ was victorious (and if He, then we also). By His crucifixion He killed sin, by resurrection He deprived Death its power, and by His ascension He may now vivify man. Whereas Satan had bound man, he himself is now bound.
In the perspective of God, Christ was the last Adam, Creation’s completion. Yet He is the Second Man, the birth of a new race, an incarnation race. No wonder Satan rages against “Christ come in the flesh.” I must stress, as does Irenaeus, the continuity of the Old Testament Creation and the New Testament Redemption. The same God who made man now offers him salvation. As the Word which God addresses to man and the man who is obedient to the Word (footnote: In this dynamic concept of union between divinity and humanity Irenaeus sidestepped the Christological controversy which soon followed), Christ joins the beginning with the end and is Lord over both covenants.
The Church is the body of Christ. It is in the Church that Christ recapitulates us, i.e., it is the redeemed of the Church who have been restored to growth. Christ is effecting His victory on the cross in His body by the work of the Holy Spirit. We have resumed growing, and human growth is through conflict and ethical struggle. There is no truce with Satan. He actually can upset God’s plans, but God uses his attempts to shape man. As the Body of Christ the Church has rule over Satan, just as the Head does. Christ rules out of Zion — the Church.
The advance of recapitulation in creation is through baptism and the eucharist. In baptism we follow Christ in His death as the last Adam and His rising as the Second Man. It is our seal of eternal life and rebirth unto God. In the eucharist the new life is continued and nourished by being united to Him and sharing His life and blood. It is a real encounter with the Lord through means of the creation, the bread and the wine.
The end of recapitulation is humanity’s attaining maturity in the Image. We become like God. It isn’t something we achieve, it is the free gift of God which He accomplishes by quickening His energies to man. Presented to the Father by Christ, the Father confers incorruptibility to the bearers of the Spirit. Retaining full human identity, man, having partaken of the divine nature on earth, is glorified in the heavenly kingdom by communion with God. The completion of recapitulation is, I pray, close at hand.
__________________
Bibliography
Banstra, A. J., Paul and an Ancient Interpreter: A Comparison of Redemption in Paul and Irenaeus. Calvin Theological Journal #5, April 1970. 43-63.
Brown, Robert F., On the Necessary Imperfection of Creation: Irenaeus' Adversus Haereses IV, 38. Scottish Journal Theology #28, 1, 1975. 17-25.
Gonzalez, Justo L., A History of Christian Thought. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1970, Vol. I, 160-174.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies. Translated by A. Cleveland Coxe. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds.. The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, 307-567.
Kim, Dai Sil, Irenaeus of Lyons and Teilhard De Chardin: A Comparative Study of "Recapitulation" and "Omega." Journal of Ecumenical Studies, #13, Winter 1976. 69-93.
Maxwell, C. Mervyn, The Theology of Irenaeus. Pamphlet.
_________________
Here are the relevant passages from Victor Alexander's translation from the ancient Aramaic:
Romans 5:
17. For if because of the foolishness of one person, death was passed on [to all,] more over then that they should receive much grace and endowment and righteousness, that they would pass to eternal life through only one person, Jesus Christ.
18. In similar manner thus, because of the foolishness of one person, all humanity was under obligation, likewise because of the righteousness of one person, there will be victory with respect to eternal life for all humanity.
19. For whereas because of one person's heedlessness many sins occurred, likewise also because of the adherence of one, many would become righteous.
1 Corinthians 15:
45. Likewise it is written [in Scriptures,] "Adam was the first human being to draw the breath of life, and the last Adam is the life giving spirit."
46. Except [that breath] was not beforehand of the spirit, except of the soul, and thereafter of the spirit.
47. The first human being was soil from the earth; the second human being was the Lord from heaven.
48. He that was of soil was to those that were also from soil, just as He that was from heaven was to those who were from heaven.*
49. And as we bore the likeness of the one from the soil, likewise we shall bear the likeness of the One from heaven (Lit Ar. idiomatic construction: 'Whereas he was of the soil, also like the others from the soil; and whereas he that was of the heaven, also like the others heavenly').
posted by Daniel C. Branham-Steele at
12:12 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home