Homilies 1-14 on Ezekiel

113 Pages·2010·10.393 MB·English

by  Origen, Thomas P. Scheck (trans.,ed.)

ce
AIIJl IIJl tt
CC R
lrR§
C h ttRcaLIIJl
OIDGIEN:
HOMliJLliIE§ 1=14 ON IEZIEJKJIJEJL
WlrR ttcelr§
THE WORKS OF THE FATHERS IN TRANSLATION
TRANSLATION AND INTRODUCTION
BY
MANAGING EDITOR THOMAS P. SCHECK
Dennis D. McManus
EDITORIAL BOARD
John Dillon
No. 62
~
THE NEWMAN PRESS
New York/Mahwah, NJ
The Scripture quotations contained herein are from the Holy Bible, Revised
St,a~1~ard Versi~I~, CathOliC, Edition, Co~yright 1965 (NT), 1966 (OT) by
DIvIsIOn of Chnstlan Educatlon of the Natlonal Council of Churches of Christ
in the United States of America,
COPYRIGHT © 2010 CONTENTS
BY
THOMAS p, SCHECK
General Introduction" ......... , .... , .... , .... , .... , .... , ..... , ..... ,', .. ,"""" ..... " .. "" .. 1
All rights reserved, No part of this book may be reproduced or tl'ansmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
Preface of Jerome, .... " .... " .. ,', .. " .... " .. " .... " .. ,', .... , ...... , .... " .......... ", .... , .. 23
re~o~'din.g, Ol~ ?y any information storage and retrieval system without per-
mISSIOn 111 wrItlng from the Publisher, Homily 1, The Vision of the Prophet
(Ezekiel 1:1-6; 2:1ff,) .. " .. " .... , .... " ..... ,', .. ,', ......... ,", .... " .. 25
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Homily 2, Against the False Prophets (Ezekiel 13:1-19) ............. .46
Origen,
[Homilies 1-14 on Ezekiel. English] Homily 3, Against the False Prophets and Elders
Origen : homilies 1-14 on Ezekiel/translation and introduction by (Ezekiel 13:1, 17-22; 14:1-8) ......................................... 54
Thomas p, Scheck.
p, em, - (Ancient Christian writers, the works of the Fathers in tl'ans- Homily 4, The Famine and the Ferocious Beasts
lation ; no, 62) (Ezekiel 14:12-22) , .... , .... , ........ ,', .. ,", ..... , .... ,""', ..... ", .. ",64
This is the first English translation of Origen's 14 Homilies on Ezekiel,
made from the Latin translation of St. Jerome, Homily 5. Sword, Death, Vine (Ezekiel 14:13-21; 15:1-4) ........... 78
Includes bibliographical references and indexes,
ISBN 978-0-8091-0567-0 (alk, paper) Homily 6. Iniquities ofJ erusalem (Ezekiel 16:2-16) ..................... 86
1. Bible, O,T, Ezekiel-Sermons-Early works to 1800, 2, Sermons, Latin-
Translations into English, I. Scheck, Thomas p" 1964- II, Jerome, Saint, d, Homily 7, The Beneficial Effects of God's Turning Away
419 or 20, III. Title, (Ezekiel 16:16-30) ... , .. ,', .... , .. " .... ,', .. , .. " ............... ,', ........ 99
BSI545,54,07513 2010
224'.406-dc22 Homily 8, Brothels, Head and Base of Streets, Gifts
(Ezekiel 16:30-33) ", ........ , .... , .. ,', .... ,', ..... , .... ,""", ..... " .. 110
2009023465
Published by The Newman Press Homily 9, Iniquities, Pride, Relative Justification
an imprint of Paulist Press (Ezekiel 16:45-52) , .... , .... " .. , .... " ............ , .. ,"""', ....... , .. ,116
997 Macartlmr Boulevard
Mahwah, New Jersey 07430 Homily 10, Shame, Return, Restoration
(Ezekiel 16:52-63) .... , .... , .... , .... , ........... , ..... , ........... " ..... 128
www.paulistpress.com
Homily 11, The Two Eagles, the Cedar, the Flourishing
Vine (Ezekiel 17:1-7) ................................................... 137
Printed and bound in the United States of America
V
vi CONTENTS ABOUT THE TEXT
The present translation is based on the Latin text printed in
Sources chretiennes (SC) 352, which is a reproduction of the critical
Homily 12. Interpretation (Ezekiel 17:12-24) ............................... 147
text established by W. A Baehrens, Origenes Wedw VIII: Homiliae in
Homily 13. The Prince of Tyre, Pharaoh Regn., Ez., et al., Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller (GCS) 33
(Ezekiel 28:12-23) ........................................................ 154 (Leipzig: Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften,
1925),318-454. Unless otherwise indicated, I have followed the tex-
Homily 14. The Closed Gate (Ezekiel 44:1-3) ............................... 166 tual corrections listed in SC 352, p. 23. Marcel Borret's French trans-
lation was a source of immeasurable help to me. The subheadings are
Notes .................................................................................................... 171
from this edition. I have aimed to conform the Scripture citations to
the RSV as far as possible.
Bibliography ........................................................................................ 191
Scripture Index ................................................................................... 195 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DEDICATION
I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. Ralph McInerny, director of
General Index ..................................................................................... 206 the Jacques Maritain Center at the University of Notre Dame, who gra-
ciously awarded me a postdoctoral fellowship for the 2004-5 aca-
Index of Origen's Works .................................................................... 209
demic year, which enabled me to complete this project. I also wish to
acknowledge my indebtedness to Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466-1536),
to whose writings and theological work I attribute my return to the
Catholic Church. May the Church that he endeavored to serve and
purify one day recognize the greatness and sanctity of this remarkable
priest-scholar.
This translation is dedicated to my two youngest children, Anne
and Matthew.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Origen of Alexandria (185-254) was the son ofa martyr, St.
Leonides of Alexandria (d. 202), to whom he refers in the present
work in Homily 4.8.1 in these words: "Having a father who was a martyr
does me no good, if I do not live well myself and adorn the nobility of
my descent." This admission well captures the humility and religious
seriousness of the priest whose Homilies on Ezekiel are being published
in the present volume for the first time in English translation. In spite
of his humble demurs, Origen in fact so "adorned the nobility of his
descent" from Leonides, through his own good life and holy death,
that his heroic virtue was all but universally acknowledged. Origen
died in his sixty-ninth year after he had experienced imprisonment
and severe torture. This is described in gruesome detail in Eusebius,
HE 6.39. Although Origen has never been canonized and is not for-
mally considered a father of the church, since the church has never
revoked the anathemas placed on his errors, he is listed as an ecclesi-
astical writer and hence as a "partial witness of the Tradition."1 The
esteem in which he is still held in the Catholic Church is shown by the
fact that his writings are cited at least nine times in the recent
Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Origen was probably the most learned and influential theolo-
gian of the third century. Among his many scholarly productions, he
wrote the most important Christian apologetic treatise of antiquity,
Contra Celsum, a work that has lost little of its relevance, even in the
present day. There is a fresh vitality in this work that still bears pon-
dering, and many of its doctrinal defenses are still valid.2 From
Origen's pen also came important Scripture commentaries and theo-
logical treatises, many of which were either translated into Latin (by
St. Jerome and Rufinus of Aquileia) or assimilated into the Greek and
Latin theological tradition by subsequent Christian theologians who
infused Origen's insights into their own works.3 Three very significant
1
2 ORTGEN: HOMILIES 1-14 ON EZEKIEL GENERAL INTRODUCTION 3
examples are St. Jerome 's commentaries on Galatians, Ephesians, and
between tllese and Origen's other homilies, Marcel Borret gives a date
Matthew.4 Henri de Lubac wrote of Origen's legacy to the Middle
between 239 and 242, to which we give our tentative support.l1
Ages: "More than any other figure in the fields of hermeneutics, exe-
The Latin translation of Origen's Greek sermons was made by
gesis, and spirituality, he would be the grand master."5
St. Jerome (347-420), ca. 379-381, after he came to Constantinople
Origen's homilies constitute the oldest body of Christian sermons to study under Gregory Nazianzen.12Jerome was undoubtedly one of
in existence. In their Latin garb, they were a rich source of spiritual the most learned of the Latin fathers; his Scripture scholarship was
inspiration to Christians throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance. warmly commended at the Council of Trent and in the twentieth cen-
Saints and mystics felt an irresistible attraction to Origen's writings, as tury by Popes Benedict XV and Pius XII.13 Francis X. Murphy has cor-
did exegetes and theologians. Though Origen's theological reputa- rectly observed that Jerome is still "an indispensable witness to the
tion remained tainted because of the condemnation of "Origenism" mind of the Church in dealing with the Word of God."14 During his
at the Second Council of Constantinople (553), this did not prevent early career, Jerome was one of Origen's most vocal defenders; he
him from being studied, revered, and even loved. His fate in the West described Origen as the "greatest teacher of the Church after the
was similar to that of the layman Tertullian, who, however, unlike apostles,"15 a man endowed with "immortal genius,"l6 who was of
Origen, died outside the bosom of the church, having joined the "incomparable eloquence and knowledge."l7 Origen "surpassed all
Montanist sect. In contrast, the priest Origen died in the church, and previous writers, Latin or Greek."l8 Later, during tlle Origenist con-
some of his views were condemned some three centuries after his troversies, Jerome reversed his public standpoint concerning Origen
death. In any case, what was sought in Origen was not so much his without really altering his fundamental endorsement of Origen's
19
doctrine as his mentality and spirit, and most of all, his way of inter- exegetical genius. This matter cannot be discussed in detail here.
preting Holy Scripture." Origen's fiery soul, which is revealed in his Jerome's dedicatee is tlle priest Vincentius of Constantinople,
writings, and his Spirit-filled exegesis ignited a spark of divine love in with whom he had become acquainted in Constantinople. In 382
the hearts of countless Christians.7 The source of this fire was sympa- Jerome also dedicated to Vincentius his translation of Eusebius's
thy for the central feature of Origen's spirituality, namely, his "absolute Chronicle. 20 Jerome reports that he has just completed a translation of
and passionate love for the Logos, which has taken on personal lin- Origen's fourteen homilies onJeremiah.21 In the preface to the trans-
eaments for us in Jesus Christ, suffusing the total cosmos of men and lation of the sermons on Ezekiel, he says he has striven for simplicity
angels."8 of language and has renounced every form of rhetorical splendor, for
he wants the content to be praised, not the style of the words. He fur-
ther assures Vincentius that he plans to translate many of Origen's
works, a promise he never fulfilled. This task was largely taken over by
PROVENANCE OF ORIGEN'S HOMILIES AND OF
Rufinus of Aquileia.22
JEROME'S LATIN TRANSLATION
According to Eusebius HE 6.36, Origen did not permit his homi-
ORIGEN'S EXEGETICAL METHOD
lies to be transcribed until he was over sixty years of age. This would
place the original delivery of Origen's homilies, including tllese on
Origen's method of expounding Ezekiel's text can best be
Ezekiel, in the year 245 at the earliest. The Eusebian tradition has been
described by saying that Origen strives with all his might to imitate St.
set aside in modern times, first by Jean Scherer and more radically by
Paul's method of interpretation of the Old Testament Scriptures. In
Pierre Nautin, who dates tlle delivery of Origen's Homilies on Ezekiel at
Romans 15:4 Paul says: "For whatever was written in former days was
the church of Caesarea in Palestine around 240.9 Nautin has been fol- written for our instrllction, that by steadfastness and by the encourage-
lowed by Joseph Wilson Trigg.lO Mter making a detailed comparison
ment of the scriptures we might have hope." Paul repeats this idea in
5
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
4 ORIGEN: HOMILIES 1-14 ON EZEKIEL
~Cf:Ss:inly the norm for our exegesis today."28 For Origen, the apos-
1 Corinthians 10:11: "All these things happened to them figuratively,23
faith, doctrine, and exegetical practice go together; to adopt only
but they were written down for us,24 upon whom the end of the ages has
of these three inheritances he would have deemed arbitrary and
arrived." Along similar lines Hebrews 8:5 and 10:1 speak of the Old
This is not to dispute the right of modern exegetes to
Testament as a copy and shadow of the good things to come (cf. Col
otller methods of interpretation, but to show that Origen's
2: 16-17). Origen builds upon these apostolic principles. He presup-
is conscious imitation of the New Testament writers and that
poses that the Holy Spirit inspired the Old and New Scripture to ben-
global attack on Origen's method is an implicit critique of the
efit the souls of Christians.25 The goal of Origen's exegesis is to
explicate, or unfold, christologically and ecclesiologically, the fullness Testament.
and reality foreshadowed in the Old Testament. This exposition takes In practice Origen uses a two-level approach to interpreting the
place during the daily liturgies. of the Old Testament: tlle literal/historical meaning and the
For Origen, Paul's practice of exegesis, as well as that found in allegorical/mystical meaning. With very few insignificant excep-
the Letter to the Hebrews, is programmatic for Christians. Paul's what modems call the "literal meaning" of the Bible (in this case
method can be observed, for example, in 1 Corinthians 10:1-11; text of Ezekiel) is always assumed to be factually true. A good sam-
Galatians 4.21-31; 1 Corinthians 9.9; and so on. Thus, the New Testa- of Origen's exposition of the literal/historical level of interpreta-
ment itself provides Origen with a basic model for how to do exegesis is seen in 11.2.5-6, where he explains tlle details of Ezekiel 17.1-7
and how to conduct homiletical exhortation. He wants to perpetuate identifYing their historical referents. But in Origen's judgment, these
the form of exegesis that the New Testament itself had inaugurated. Old Testament texts were not preserved for tlle church primarily to sat-
As he says in Peri A'I'chon 4.2.4: "We believe that the correct way to isfy the Christian's curiosity about history. Rather, thel:e is need f~r a
understand the Scriptures and to investigate the ideas they contain is level of interpretation that addresses the devotlOnal, practlcal,
that which Scripture itself teaches us to employ." and ecclesiastical needs of the readers. Whereas tlle literal explanation
Modem scholars increasingly recognize Origen's fidelity to the is precise and does not permit arbitl'ary deviations, the al~egorical inter-
New Testament patterns of interpretation. In his classic work NIedieval pretation is freer and subject only to tlle one law that lt must have a
Exegesis, Henri de Lubac says that some of the modern attacks on
pious meaning in view.
patristic exegesis are in fact veiled criticisms of the New Testament In accordance with these principles, Origen interprets these
itself. For example, what is called "Philonism" in the work of Origen same historical details as containing symbolic meaning for the Clllistian ..
and others is often in reality fidelity to the teaching of the Letter to Thus, Nebuchadnezzar represents the devil (11.5.2). Ezekiel's experi-
the Hebrews.26 Along similar lines, John A. McGuckin writes: "Time ences foreshadow Christ and the church: Ezekiel's captivity really hap-
after time the source of Origen's particularly nuanced biblical inter- pened in accordance with the reliable testimony of history (l.3.6); but
pretations of the Old Testament text can be explained on the basis of
it happened as a sign pointing to Christian mysteries. Ezekiel's title
the Pauline or Johannine text through which he is reading the old
"son of man" prefigures the name Christ took to himself, as does
narratives. "27 However distasteful these methods have become to mod- Ezekiel's age (thirty) and the opening of the heavens (l.4.1-3; l.7.1).
em scholars, it is difficult for anyone to deny Origen's fidelity to the
Indeed, for Origen every detail of Ezekiel's text has some sort of mys-
New Testament patterns of interpretation. Doubtless Origen would
tical application to Christ and the church. Origen's aim in unfolding
have been puzzled by the arbitrariness of Richard N. Longenecker's
this application is principally homileFical exhortation, which accords
judgment, to the effect that modem Christians need not feel obli-
with tlle genre of this work.
gated to emulate the apostles' practice of scriptural exegesis: "Our
Origen's method of interpretation was maligned during his own
commitment as Christians is to the reproduction of the apostolic faith
lifetime and continues to be much misunderstood today. He himself
and doctrine, and not necessarily to the specific apostolic exegetical
reports in 6.8.3:
practices .... we cannot assume that the explication of their methods is
6 ORIGEN: HOMILIES 1-14 ON RZRKIEL GENERI\L INTRODUCTION 7
It is said to me: Do not allegorize, do not explain things fig- history is taken seriously only when the Christian exegete grapples
uratively. Let them answer: Jerusalem has breasts, and with the symbolic and christological meaning of the Old Testament.
there is a time when they are bound up, there is a time On the other hand, even scholars who are largely sympathetic to
when they are set, and she has an umbilical cord, and she Origen's exegetical endeavors have criticized his system of interpreta-
is convicted because 'it was not cut.' How, pray, can these tion on two points:33 (1) Although reacting against Gnosticism, he
remained under its influence, as seen by the way he invests meaning
things be understood without an allegorical exposition?
in biblical expressions that is foreign to the authentic sense. (2) He
was too much under the influence of the allegorism of Philo, which
He then fully expounds the symbolism of these details.
led him to propose the idea that all passages of the Old Testament
At the beginning of the fourth century, Methodius of Olympus
29 have a symbolic sense. These criticisms seem to me to be largely valid.
attacked Origen for his method. The German Reformers also dis-
30 In my opinion, however, they do not diminish the overall achievement
missed him in the sixteenth century, 'but for different reasons. These
of Origen's Old Testament exegesis. Origen compensates for these
criticisms have been perpetuated in the modern period by the influ-
faults by what]. Lienhard has identified as the principal achievement
ential scholarship of R. P. C. Hanson, who accuses Origen of not tak-
of his homiletical endeavor: by working his way through the entire
ing history seriously.3! Henri Crouzel responds to this critique by
Old Testament, book by book, sentence by sentence, and word by
reminding us: "In spite of the spontaneous reactions of many modern
word, Origen would guarantee "the proper and rightful place of the
scholars it must not be concluded from the fact that Origen allego-
Old Testament jn the Christian canon."34 This is no small feat and
rizes a story that he does not believe in the historicity of the literal
helps account for Origen's popularity in the later tradition. In con-
account, which is perfectly compatible with the quest for a spiritual trast to Origen's approach, much modern exegesis and theology den-
meaning."32 The recent appearance in English of de Lubac's classic 35
igrate the Old Testament.
study History and SPi'rit: The Understanding of Scripture according to Origen
is most welcome and will, one hopes, contribute to the further clarifi-
cation of Origen's method of biblical interpretation. De Lubac shows,
SURVEY OF THE THEOLOGICAL THEMES OF
among other things, that in Origen's hermeneutics, the scholarly
interpretation of Scripture is a specifically Christian exercise. Origen ORlGEN'S HOMILIES ON EZEKIEL
defines many hermeneutical terms differently from modern theorists.
For example (as the above citation aboutJerusalem's "breasts" shows), Polemic against the Heretics: Ma'ry;ion and Valentinus
Origen's understanding of "allegory" is far more extensive than that
AsJean Danielou has noted, Origen never aimed at anything but
of modern scholars; it is virtually the equivalent of "figurative."
defending the faith against heretics, particularly against the teaching
Moreover, Origen's notion of "literal" was diminutive in comparison of Marcion and the Gnostic Heracleon, whom he engages in his Com
with ours. This creates a barrier between Origen and modern schol- mentary on John. "Some of his [Origen's] opinions were afterwards
ars at the level of linguistic definitions. In response to Hanson's criti- rejected by the teaching authority, but he had always acknowledged
cism that Origen was interested in history only as parable, one might the Church's right to condemn them and had brought them forward
ask whether it really follows that restricting a passage's meaning to its only as tentative suggestions."36 In this present group of homilies,
historical referent is the equivalent of taking history seriously. Since Marcion and Valentinus are prominent among the heretics who are
Origen aims to take the full symbolic potential of Old Testament refuted.
events into consideration, and not to restrict the meaning of passages Marci~n of Sinope in Pontus founded a heretical sect in Rome
to what their human author intended for their audience at that time, in the 140s. His doctrinal system was based on his conviction that jus-
it seems that he took history extremely seriously. Indeed, for Origen tice and grace are irreconcilable, as are law and gospel, Judaism and
8 ORlGEN: HOMILIES 1-14 ON EZEIUEL GENERAL INTRODUCTION 9
Christianity, the God of the Old Testament and the Father of Jesus. elation, and grace. They all accept Christ but introduce plurality into
Marcion, like Valentinus, was a docetist.37 He denied that Jesus was a the divinity. In contrast to the heretical approach to the Scriptures,
real human being born of the Virgin Mary. Rather, he only appeared the basic principle of Origen's exegesis is the unity of the Godhead
to be human. Marcion posited two supra-temporal and uncreated and of the Scriptures. In 1.3.8 Origen speaks of the "consonance"
principles: an aloof and improvident "good" God (the Father that between the words of the prophets and the words of the Gospel. This
Jesus speaks of), who, before the advent ofJ esus, in the manner of the term has been shown to be an important one in patristic theology,
38
god of Epicurus, had nothing to do with matter or with the gover- particularly that of St. Irenaeus. Origen's whole theology also reflects
nance of the world; and a just but wicked god, who, as a product of a the prominence of this central patristic idea.
defective emanation from the higl~est god, created the material uni- Origen engages Marcion's religious system throughout these
verse and became the god of the Jews. Marcion repudiated the Old homilies, descending into mockery only in 8.2.3, where he says:
Testament in its entirety and denied that it predicted the coming of "Heretics build a brothel on every way, as for example the teacher of
Jesus. He also taught his followers that the received form of the New Valentinus's training school, the teacher of Basilides' band, the
Testament had been cQrrupted by Judaizing Christians, whom he teacher of Marcion's tavern, and of the other heretics." Origen tends
identified as the Catholics of his day. Thus, he "edited," that is, muti- to group the trilogy of Marcion, Valentin us, and Basilides together
lated and disfigured, the Gospel of Luke and ten of Paul's letters and (see 3.4.2; 7.4.2; 8.2.3). Crouzel observed that the objections Origen
made these documents the canon of his new church. By removing makes to this trio and the ideas that he attributes to them are "some-
Luke's name from the Gospel material, and by cutting away texts even what stereotyped and do not reflect a very deep first-hand knowledge
within these writings that he found incompatible with his antecedent of them."39 On the other hand, Origen's principal concern is with the
theology, he attempted to sever the link between his new, allegedly contemporary forms of heretical religion, which were extremely
"Pauline" religion and the religion of the Creator God, that is, Old diverse, and not necessarily with the original forms, which are, in any
TestamentJudaism and traditional Catholic Christianity. case, not easily recoverable.40
Valentinus was an Egyptian heretic of the second century who According to Origen, Marcion misunderstands the nature of
spread Alexandrian Gnosticism in Rome between 135 and 160. He God's wrath when he accuses it of being limitless (1.1.2). Origen states
exerted a considerable influence and was refuted in turn by Justin, that Marcion completely invalidated the incarnation (1.4.2), cor-
Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian, and Origen. In addition to his basic rupted the Scripture in order to dissociate Jesus from the Creator
Gnostic teaching, which rejected the identity between the Creator (1.6.2), and aspersed both the Creator God and his prophets (1.11.2).
God of the Old Testament and the Father ofJ esus, Valentinus taught Origen notes the polytheistic tendency of Marcion in 1.9.1. In 2.5.3
a sort of natural predestination, which divided human beings into Origen observes that Marcion's followers accept his authority as a
three categories based on the inborn natures of their souls. The teacher. Origen allows that some of Marcion's followers are chaste
redeemer, Jesus, saves humans from the world by giving them saving and meek (7.3.1). In a very effective passage that is based on a careful
knowledge, or gnosis (from which Gnosticism derives its name). The reading of the biblical text (1.9.1), Origen notes that those like
gnosis is available only to the spiritual (jJneu1llatilwi). The second kind Marcion who accuse the God of the Old Testament of being inhu-
of nature is that of the "soulish" ones (ps),chilwi), ordinary members of mane fail to observe that some Old Testament passages actually show
the Catholic Church, who can achieve some kind of salvation by faith greater humanity than their counterpart texts in the New Testament.
and good works. The third group is the rest of humankind, or the The genius of Origen's refutation of Marcion is found in the way he
"natural" (h),lilwi), who have no chance at redemption. exposes the inconsistency and duplicity of Marcion's attacks on the
For Origen, the common denominator of all Gnostic systems, Old Testament and the Creator. That is to say, Origen argues that if
including Marcion's special form, is their polytheistic or dualistic ten- Marcion were consistent in the application of his critical principles,
dency. They all deny the one God as unique source of all creation, rev- his program would necessarily condemn Jesus and Paul as well.
10 ORTCFN HOMILIES 1-14 ON EZEKIEL GENERAL INTRODUCTION 11
With respect to Valentinus, Origen explicitly notes that his fol- tllat is, disciplined, spirituality, which advocates that Christians main-
lowers are often dissolute in morals (3.4.2), tllOugh some are admit- tain an appropriate measure of voluntary self-denial.
tedly chaste (7.3.1). Valentinus's principal error is his predestinarian-
type belief that some men have been created for destruction (13.2.1). Purification
Origen regarded this doctrine as fatal, since it amounts to a denial of
A central theme of Homily 1 is that God's punishments in the Old
tlle goodness of God and of the scriptural teaching on the free choice
Testament as well as the New are "disciplinary rather than punitive and
of the will. Origen's words in 1.3.8 make clear that the denial of free-
are invariably mixed with mercy."4[, It might be more accurate to say
dom of will leads to laziness and negligence.
that, for Origen, God's punishments are both disciplinary and puni-
46
tive. Origen teaches that when Christians sin, they store up dishonor
But you, 0 man, why do you wish to be deprived of your
and shame for tllemselves in the future (10.5.3). We should tllerefore
choice? Why do you resent striving, working, struggling,
embrace the opportunity given in this earthly life to obtain disciplinary
and by good works becoming yourself the cause of your sal-
purification from the hand of God. Otherwise, we may need to undergo
vation? Or will it please you more to rest in eternal happi-
a much more painful purification in tlle afterlife. In brief, Origen is a
ness in a state of slumber and idleness? "My Fathel~" he
key ancient witness to tlle church's belief that most Christians will stand
says, "is working until now, and I am working" Uohn 5:17].
in need of purgatorial fire before final salvation can be attained. In
And you who were created to work [ef. Gen 2:15] do not
1.3.3 Origen interprets this fire in a nonliteral fashion and stresses that
like to work? Do you not want your work to become justice,
after deatll one cannot enter the sanctuary (heaven) with the works of
wisdom, and chastity? Do you not want your work to be for-
sin, since this would contaminate God's kingdom. Sinful works must
titude and the other virtues?
therefore be atoned for by the fire of God's remedial judgment.
It is worth noting that Origen stresses in 10.2.3 that priests and
Origen's religious ideals were the reverse of Gnostic determinism.
church leaders who sin have the most to fear from these punishments:
They even proved to be quite disturbing to Martin Luther, who made
"For the nearer we have been to God and the closer we have been to
the total satanic enslavement of the human will the central tenet of
beatitude, the farther we put ourselves from it when we sin, and the
his theology!! In fact, Luther formulated his theology explicitly
closer we put ourselves to terrible and very great punishments. For
against the theology of freedom represented by Origen and St.
God'sjudgment isjust, and 'the powerful suffer powerful torments.'"
42
Jerome. In De servo aTbitrio, Luther says with reference to their inter-
But the warnings apply to all Christians who sin in a state of belief, as
pretation of Romans 9 (the hardening of Pharaoh's heart) that "no
he says in 12.1.2:
writers have handled the Divine Scripture more ineptly and absurdly
than Origen andJerome."43 Erasmus of Rotterdam (d. 1536) wrote a
And indeed, as for us who are saying these things and who
lengthy defense of the CatholiC doctrine of free will against Luther's have once believed in God, if we sin, we are said to exas-
44
attacks.
perate his words; but the one who has completely fallen
In contrast to such ideas, Origen sees human beings as actively away from faith in him and those who have not entered the
cooperating in the process of their own salvation. Human sanctifica- Church, they do not make the words of God bitter. For
tion is the outcome of union with God, and holiness is an ascent to how can they exasperate the sweetness of words in which
God that is accomplished by steps or degrees. Origen stresses that the they have not yet believed? And therefore the torments
Christian's heavenly rewards depencJ. not on an inborn nature but on that are reserved for us who seem to believe and who sin in
earthly merit, on a good and responsible use of one's free will, and on that state of belief are different from the penalty that will
achieving a spiritual victory over the devil. It is no wonder that Origen come to those who did not even have a commencement in
became a patron theologian for monasticism and its ideal of ascetic, the state of belief.
12 ORTGEN: HOMILIES 1-14 ON EZEKIEL GENERAL INTRODUCTION l3
In the development of Catholic theology, the Western church, at
Origen affirmed the logical possibility of restoration of all rational
least, largely endorsed Origen's purgatorial understanding of the
creatures and also the possibility of failure of such a hope, but he did
afterlife, but the church rejected certain aspects of it, such as Origen's
not assert its inevitability. Danielou shows the difference between
openness to the possibility of remission of mortal sins in the future Origen's thought and Gregory of Nyssa's in the following passage:
life. Origen's optimism, which seems to have embraced the possibility
of restoration of impious men and of fallen angels, was condemned at Origen saw clearly enough, then, that there were two
the Fifth General Council in 553.47 St. Thomas Aquinas identified as things involved-God's love and man's freedom. But his
Origen's principal eschatological error not his purgatorial conception attempts to reconcile them led him to put forward two the-
of the afterlife but his misapprehension of the volitional powers of the ses, one of which-the metaphysical necessity of the ulti-
damned.48 In his work De haeresibus, St. Augustine makes clear what he mate elimination of evil-safeguards God's love but
believes to be the errors in Origen that no Catholic can deny: destroys man's freedom, while the other-the perpetual
instability of the free-safeguards man's freedom but
But there are other teachings of this Origen which the destroys God's love. Gregory of Nyssa was humbler in the
Catholic Church does not accept at all. On these matters, face of the mystery of the apocatastasis; he was content with
she does not accuse him unwarrantably, and cannot herself admiring it as the supreme work of love that would do no
be deceived by his defenders. Specifically, they are his violence to freewill. To him it stood for the certitude that
teachings on purgation, liberation, and the return of all in Christ salvation had been acquired for man's nature
rational creation to the same trials after a long interval. without any possibility of loss, but that the individual still
Now what Catholic Christian, learned or otherwise, would had the power of dissociating himself from it by his own
51
not shrink in horror from what Origen calls the purgation free choice.
of evils? According to him, even they who die in infamy,
crime, sacrilege and the greatest possible impiety, and at Danielou's apparent endorsement of Gregory of Nyssa's form of uni-
last even the devil himself and his angels, though after very versalism strikes me as a questionable theological conclusion in light
long periods of time, will be purged, liberated and of the church's repudiation of such a view.
restored to the kingdom of God and oflight.49
The Suffering of God
Augustine refers to his recently written City of God, where he says he
One of the axioms of Greek philosophy was that the supreme
has discussed these matters thoroughly, as well as Origen's error about
divinity is immutable and not capable of suffering. Plato said that it is
the preexistence of souls (City of God 21.17).
impossible for the god to desire to alter himself, because every god
In Origen's defense, one might insist against Augustine's asser-
abides forever in his own form (Republic 381c). According to Aristotle,
tions that it appears that with the exception of his doctrine of preex-
one must posit as the first origin of all things an unmoved mover that
istence of souls, Origen did not dogmatically assert any other of these
stands above all change and remains forever pure actuality witllOut any
defective views, but instead he tentatively put them forward for the
potentiality (Metaphysics 1072a25; 1073a27; 1072b25).52 Mter Aristotle,
sake of discussion as interpretive possibilities in his attempt to refute
the metaphysical principle prevailed that tlle divine being does not suf-
the arguments of his Gnostic opponents. Origen surely does not seem
fer and does not change. In light of the alleged influence of Greek phi-
to have had any intention of consciously violating the church's rule of
losophy upon Origen, one would expect that the doctrine of divine
faith, and there was no obstinacy in his erroneous views. There are
impassibility would ring forth clearly in his theological writings. What
even scholars who deny that Origen held these views in the form in
we in fact find in Homily 6.6.3 is a most remarkable passage where
which Augustine lists them.50 It would seem more accurate to say that
Origen speaks eloquently of the suffering of God and the suffering of