Minns—The Parable of the Two Sons in Irenaeus and Codex Bezae 57- The Wicked Husbandmen (Matt. 21:33-45) Haer. IV.36.1-4;
- The Great Supper (Matt. 22:1-14) Hae r. IV.36.5-6;
- The Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32) Hae r. IV.36.7;
- The Laborers in the Vineyard (Matt. 20:1-16) Hae r. IV.36.7;
- The Pharisee and the Publican (Luke 18:9-14) Hae r. IV.36.8;
- The Two Sons (Matt. 21:28-32) Hae r. IV.36.8;
- The Barren Fig Tree (Luke 13:6-9) Hae r. IV.36.8;
- The Tares (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43) Hae r. IV.40.2—41.1.
In the first three parables, Irenaeus finds a clear progression from the Old Testa-
ment to the New. Thus, in the first, the tenants who killed the servants of the house-
holder and his son are those to whom the vineyard was entrusted “by the lawgiving
through Moses” (Hae r. IV.36.2), while the other tenants to whom the vineyard is
handed over represent the Church, the Gentiles who were outside the vineyard. In the
second parable the king who gives the great feast is identified with God, whose city is
Jerusalem. Those he invites first are the inhabitants of his city. When these repeatedly
disobeyed the summons, the king destroyed their city and “called to the wedding feast
of his son those from every path, that is, from all the Gentiles” (Hae r. IV.36.5). In the
third parable, the father does not give even a kid to his elder son but kills the fatted calf
for the younger one, who had squandered his wealth among prostitutes, and bestows
on him the best robe. Elsewhere, Irenaeus sees the killing of the fatted calf as a type
of Christ’s death, and the best robe as the gift of eternal life, or incorruptibility, lost in
Adam but restored to humankind by Christ.^11
In the fourth parable, a contrast between the people of the old dispensation and
those of the new is not explicit, and the emphasis falls more heavily on the idea of suc-
cessive invitations from the same God. Nevertheless, a progression from old dispensa-
tion to new can still be traced. Thus the sending of the workers into the vineyard at the
middle hour (μετὰ τὴν μεσοχρονίαν) can be taken to represent the old dispensation,
for at Hae r. IV.25.1 Irenaeus says that circumcision and the law of works occupied the
times intermediary (media... tempora) between the two ages of faith (Abraham and
Christ), while those workers sent to the vineyard at the last hour are those to whom
Christ was revealed in the last times.
In the fifth parable, Orbe suggests that the Pharisee is representative of those who
rely on the Law, while the tax collector’s exhomologesis is suggestive of Christian bap-
tism.^12 In support of this, we might note that the prayer of the Pharisee is character-
ized by “self-glorification”—extollentia—and “boasting”—iactantia—which links him
with the wicked laborers of the first parable, who are described as “contumacious and
proud”—contumeliosos et superbos. In the seventh parable, the man who comes for
three years to seek fruit from the fig tree signifies Christ’s appeal to Israel through the
prophets for the fruit of righteousness.
Why has Irenaeus included the Parable of the Two Sons in this series? It shows, he
says, that there is one and the same God. It seems beyond doubt that he is assuming
an allegorical interpretation in which the father typifies God and the two sons typify
Israel and the Church. Earlier in Book IV (21.2-3), Irenaeus had, for exactly the