Tertullian's Praescriptione = Irenaeus's προστάγμασι

[Secret Alias]

A repository for arguments or citations in favor of a relationship between Irenaeus and Tertullian's Prescription:

The intraecclesial controversy on orthodoxy, the ascertainment of which, from the end of the last decade of the second century and into the third century, was based on the proof of the apostolicity of a church (Tertullian, De praescriptione; Irenaeus Adv Haer 3), produced a focus on the role of the founder apostles of a church. Though fruit of the trunk of the Christian tree, heresy was not a doctrine to be pursued, as it did not derive from the apostolic furrow (Tertullian, Praescr. 32.8). This argument increased the need to guarantee the development of the seeds of doctrine received by Christ, and transmitted by the apostles to the churches, through the apostolic succession, from one bishop/presbyter to another. The heretics argued Tertullian, cannot offer such a proof (Praescr. 32.5, 7–8) Peter (together with Paul in Irenaeus) was the apostle recognized as the founder of the church of Rome, to whom Clement was linked, as was likewise Polycarp to John for the church of Smyrna. Tertullian wrote in De praescriptione (32.2), , “Hoc enim modo ecclesiae apostolicae census suos deferunt, sicut Smyrnaeorum ecclesia Polycarpum ab Iohanne collocatum referet, sicut Romanorum Clementem a Petro ordinatum est.” Making the same case, Irenaeus also mentions Linus and Anacletus as bishops/presbyters prior to Clement, whereas Peter and Paul are apostles (Adv. haer. 3.3.3: “Fundantes igitur et instruentes beati apostoli Ecclesiam, Lino episcopatum administrandae Ecclesiae tradiderunt....Succedit autem ei Anacletus. Post eum tertio loco ab apostolis episcopatum sortitur Clemens, qui et vidit apostolos ipsos”; the text is preserved also in Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 5.6.1).https://books.google.com/books?id=3mxbj ... 22&f=false

[Secret Alias]

On ch.36 of the De Praescriptione... which sets forth the claims of the apostolic churches, d'Alès comments: "This eloquent page is visibly inspired by St Irenaeus, III,3" (p.210). Cf. S.L. Greenslade in LCC, vol.5, "Early Latin Theology", pp.31ff; also Appendix 1: "Irenaeus", pp.65ff https://books.google.com/books?id=NhhNA ... MQ6AEIVTAI

[Secret Alias]

Tertullian developed the principle of tradition within this intellectual framework.59 Scripture itself is regarded just as something that is upheld by the tradition in this sense. In its conceptual expression of Christian truth, scripture is not something that is so necessary for the totality of Christian consciousness that this consciousness could not do without it. Irenaeus envisaged the possibility of the apostles not even having left anything written behind, in which case also one would have had to adhere just to the ordo traditionis, the order of the tradition, that was handed on by them to those presiding over the community. The Gnostics attacked this [exoteric] concept of tradition regarding not only the intermediaries but also the apostles standing at their head, who in any case seemed to the Gnostics not to be a pure and absolutely unanimous agency of truth.61

59 Chiefly in De praescriptione haereticorum, 13 ff. of the lifeless writing of the past. The tradition was.
60 Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, 3.4.
61 Tertullian, De praescriptione haereticorum, 22, 26; Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, 3.2.

https://books.google.com/books?id=NA5VB ... 22&f=false

[Secret Alias]

S.L. Greenslade in LCC, vol.5, "Early Latin Theology" Appendix 1: "Irenaeus", pp.65ff demonstrating passages in Adversus Haereses which influenced the Prescription

https://books.google.com/books?id=130YT ... QQ6AEIIzAA

[Secret Alias]

Tertullian was, with Irenaeus, the major opponent of Gnosticism. He wrote a number of treatises against it, the best- known being his Prescription of Heretics. He used the same arguments as Irenaeus but, characteristically, took them further. This is seen, for example, in his denial that the heretic has any right even to use the church's Scriptures. https://books.google.com/books?id=IXDWA ... UQ6AEIJzAA

[Secret Alias]

(On the Prescription) The origin and nature of heresy is discussed, and the point made (elaborating Irenaeus) that only the legitimate owners of the scripture - the churches founded by the apostolic writers and holding their views - have any right to use it in argument. http://www.tertullian.org/works/de_prae ... icorum.htm

[Secret Alias]

Again, using Irenaeus in a summary rejection of Gnosticism in Concerning the Prescription of Heretics (De praescriptione haereticorum) he employs a legal argument to rule any consideration of Gnostic views of the scriptures out of court since Gnostics do not believe the rule of faith (Praes. 15-19). https://books.google.com/books?id=ognCK ... 22&f=false

[Secret Alias]

Finally, like Irenaeus before him, Tertullian even more forcefully rejects the interpretations of Scripture offered by his opponents, the “heretics.” He is doubtful that mere arguing about the way Scripture is to be interpreted will produce thoroughly satisfying results. Rather, the interpretations of those who have not maintained continuity with the apostolic churches can and should be rejected a priori. Where the faith of the apostles is present there also is the correct interpretation of Scripture. And this is to be found in the apostolic Church. In his earlier writings, this Church is that which can show its line of descent from the apostles, although it includes also more recent churches which maintain consanguinity of doctrine with those churches and, hence, with the faith of the apostles. His later writings loosen and, indeed, seem to repudiate the connection between apostolicity and the churches which can establish their ministerial succession from the time of the apostles. Thus Tertullian's later, Montanist position does not seem to be entirely consistent with the argument in The Prescription of Heretics. https://books.google.com/books?id=hOWfn ... cQ6AEIIzAA

[Secret Alias]

Tertullian (in the Prescription) presents a radical version of the argument of Irenaeus with regard to hermeneutical authority. Because the apostles taught the entire rule to the churches and this rule is both public and well known, the rule itself not only comprises truth but provides the definite boundaries within which one can legitimately seek knowledge, determine the biblical canon, and interpret that canon. Tertullian acknowledges with his Gnostic opponents that believers must seek knowledge, but he asks, "[Where] ought our search to be made?" (Prescr. 12). After denying that truth can be found "amongst the heretics," he argues that believers should seek "in that which is [their] own, - that is, within the catholic rule of faith. He argues that even the woman of Luke 15 sought for her lost coin "within her own house" (Prescr. 12). https://books.google.com/books?id=bk8gR ... oQ6AEIJzAA

[Secret Alias]

In Adversus Valentinianos (c 6) Tertullian says that he intends to follow among others ‘Irenaeus, that very exact inquirer into all doctrines, and a comparison of that treatise with the A dversus Omnes Haereses (I , cc 1—12) shows that the extent of his indebtedness is considerable It is little more, in fact, than a translation of the work of Irenaeus. In addition, the following points may be noted. The account of Simon Magus and Helen (Tertullian, De Anima, c. 34) is evidently copied from Irenaeus (I., c. 23). The account of Menander (Tertullian, De Anima, c. 50) is also obviously inspired by the same chapter of Irenaeus. Both complain that the heretics follow neither Scripture nor tradition (Irenaeus, III. 3; Tertullian, De Praes. Haer., 17, 32). Both mention the continuous |p59 succession of bishops in the Churches (Iren., III. 3; Tert., De Praes. Haer., 32). That the Church alone has the true doctrine is asserted by both (Irenaeus, III. 4; Tertullian, De Praes. Haer., 26—29), that heresies are of recent growth (ibid.), and that Christ and the apostles delivered the truth without deception (Ireneaus, III. 5; Tertullian, De Praes. Haer., 27). The systematic use of Scripture in Tertullian’s later works is along the lines followed by Irenaeus throughout. Both state that the heretics derived their opinions from the philosophers (Irenaeus, II. 14 Tertullian, De Praes. Haer., c. 7, Apol., c. 47). Both also refer to the Homerocentones (Irenaeus, I. 9); Tertullian, De Praes. Haer., c. 39). https://books.google.com/books?id=xUkXA ... EQ6AEIIzAA