vist and traditionalist, he seems in
these chapters disposed to admit nothing but obedient and acquiescent
faith in the words of Holy Scripture, and even to reject speculations
like those of Tatian, Orat. 5. Cf. the disquisitions II. 25. 3: "Si
autem et aliquis non invenerit causam omnium quae requiruntur, cogitet,
quia homo est in infinitum minor deo et qui ex parte (cf. II. 28.)
acceperit gratiam et qui nondum aequalis vel similis sit factori"; II.
26. 1: [Greek: Ameinon kai symphoroteron idiotas kai oligomatheis
huparchein, kai dia tes agapes plesion genesthai tou Theou e polymatheis
kai empeirous dokountas einai, blasphemous eis ton heauton heuriskesthai
despoten], and in addition to this the close of the paragraph, II. 27.
1: Concerning the sphere within which we are to search (the Holy
Scriptures and "quae ante oculos nostros occurrunt", much remains dark to
us even in the Holy Scriptures II. 28. 3); II. 28. 1 f. on the canon
which is to be observed in all investigations, namely, the confident
faith in God the creator, as the supreme and only Deity; II. 28. 2-7:
specification of the great problems whose solution is hid from us, viz.,
the elementary natural phenomena, the relation of the Son to the Father,
that is, the manner in which the Son was begotten, the way in which
matter was created, the cause of evil. In opposition to the claim to
absolute knowledge, i.e., to the complete discovery of all the processes
of causation, which Irenaeus too alone regards as knowledge, he indeed
pointed out the limits of our perception, supporting his statement by
Bible passages. But the ground of these limits, "ex parte accepimus
gratiam," is not an early-Christian one, and it shows at the same time
that the bishop also viewed knowledge as the goal, though indeed he
thought it could not be attained on earth.]
[Footnote 473: The same observation applies to Tertullian, Cf. his point
blank repudiation of philosophy in de praese. 7, and the use he himself
nevertheless made of it everywhere.]
[Footnote 474: In point of form this standpoint is distinguished from
the ordinary Gnostic position by its renunciation of absolute knowledge,
and by its corresponding lack of systematic completeness. That, however,
is an important distinction in favour of the Catholic Fathers. According
to what has been set forth in the text I cannot agree with Zahn's
judgment (Marcellus of Ancyra, p. 235 f.): "Irenaeus is the first
ecclesiastical teacher w
|